15% will be decent considering recent developments...
Timing is going to be interesting though... cycles have been getting longer.
Timing is going to be interesting though... cycles have been getting longer.
Which comes from natural process enhancements. The rest of the performance is due to efficient uarch design not prioritizing on clocks like the x86 camp.Because you're literally like a year away from aa64 camp putting out 5Ghz chips.
No it comes from opting for performance cells and relaxing the metal stack.Which comes from natural process enhancements
Yes they in fact do prioritize clocks. Next.The rest of the performance is due to efficient uarch design not prioritizing on clocks like the x86 camp.
?Saying AMD/Intel is falling behind because of the x86 ISA is a convenient excuse for how badly both are doing, since it's just a self-fulfilling prophecy - the only difference is one is mediocre and the other is falling flat on it's face every year.
How are you justifying 20% clock difference with 2x pipeline stage difference?Because you're literally like a year away from aa64 camp putting out 5Ghz chips.
2x?How are you justifying 20% clock difference with 2x pipeline stage difference?
Put Zen5 on N3e 3-2 and watch pigs fly.The fact that there's a 3-4x power difference with a generational single thread advantage is an indicator that the x86 vendors are on a wrong road - they just happen to be swerving between the lanes
I don't think frequency is going to be going up unless there is some breakthrough in terms of either transistor heat generated or cooling solutions.
Zen 5 can run up to 5.7GHz on 2 cores and then it ramps down from there as more cores are loaded. The issue isn't so much there are only 2 "good" core that can do the frequency, but the fact that we are trying to dissipate 200+ Watts out of a very small area. Either you spread out the "hot" surface, which is unlikely, decrease the heat generated at high frequencies, which is also very difficult, or increase the heat transfer between the CPU and the cooling solution. Generally that means direct-to-die or sub ambient cooling.
If you look at both ARL and Zen 5, they are both frequency limited by heat, not the process or architecture per se.
Some innovative redesign of the heat spreader/TIM would be a good start on increasing frequencies for higher core counts. We are simply hitting a heat transfer barrier with the enormous heat flux all of these tiny transistors are creating.
'heat' is a function of your process node lmao.If you look at both ARL and Zen 5, they are both frequency limited by heat, not the process or architecture per se.
The clock increases quoted for process nodes are never talking about maximum clocks, so don't expect them to translate into processor products' maximum rated boost clocks this time either.Whole lot more than that.
Going to N2p nets them like 20% speed with nano-flex usage.
That's why fabs provide freq plots for new nodes besides just blanket statements. There's one for N2 too.The clock increases quoted for process nodes are never talking about maximum clocks
Who cares about that TDP in desktop. No one.Yea, and the TDP went up from 105W to 170W despite moving to a new process. Pretty sure that has nothing to do with significant clock increase. If they can get significantly above 6GHz(which I have doubts), then they can have their own Raptorlake.
Who cares about that TDP in desktop. No one.
It's completely normal.Well, if Zen 6 knocks me off the chair with 15% boost clock bump (6.6 GHz?), I'll be... extremely pleasantly surprised
Zen4 wasn't repepipelined at all? It was a completely by the numbers Zen3 derivative.Now I gotta hope they won't do another Zen4-like repipelining/architectural speeddemonizing this time
you literally get 50% moar L3.And for gamers I'm not sure the 12 core CCD will be an improvement for most games as core-to-core latency will be stable or possibly worse.
It may help the base models. But that's not what gamers are buying.you literally get 50% moar L3.
V$ also gets to be 50% (or whatever) bigger, since your SRAM macro extends with the slice count.But that's not what gamers are buying.
Well no future core on the market will be good without an fmax bump. Which is what everyone is doing anyway.Anyone who thinks Zen 6 can be good without a clock rate increase will be disappointed
Some more than others.Well no future core on the market will be good without an fmax bump. Which is what everyone is doing anyway.
Uh, nope.Some more than others.
They're also out of options wrt core bloat. Too bad!Apple needs a whopping 0% clock increase to be ahead of Zen 6 at 5.7GHz
Apple hasn't even been designing desktop CPUs. Only for laptops.Some more than others.
Apple needs a whopping 0% clock increase to be ahead of Zen 6 at 5.7GHz. So those on AM5 better face the music and realize Zen 6 needs a clock rate increase. The other option is AMD under hyping and over delivering (and they haven't done that in half a decade).
ehh, they can add smt for MT gainsThey're also out of options wrt core bloat. Too bad!
a) neverehh, they can add smt for MT gains
It doesn't matter. The point is that AMD needs to increase clock rates with Zen 6. The characteristics of the Zen 6 core are not sufficient except with a clock rate increase.Apple hasn't even been designing desktop CPUs. Only for laptops.
ehh, they can add smt for MT gains