AMD's ISSCC presentation on Zen5.
Please share that - I can't find such a statement.
AMD's ISSCC presentation on Zen5.
Never underestimate how greedy applications can be.I never see it mentioned by others and I think it's a major key point:
computing requirements are plateauing.
Never underestimate how greedy applications can be.
(TechTechPotato video at 00:56:52)AMD said:The "Zen 3" and "Zen 4" L3 "ring" fabric topology [5] is replaced by a mesh topology which reduces latency and increases bandwidth, especially for configurations with higher core counts.
He probably meant N2X compared to vanilla N2 ??
Agreed, IPC won’t be the focus but I still expect above average single-core gains. Zen 4 was a very similar situation. Built on Zen 3’s new core and ramped everything up to 11. The final result was 25% higher single-core performance and only half of that was IPC (13%.) Huge clock-speed bumps and of course faster ram (DDR5.)I think AMD will Keep It Simple with Zen 6. 24 cores and ~10% IPC increase, maybe a few hundred MHz frequency increase under load due to lower power with the new node. Put it all together and you've got a solid bump from Zen 5.
Why wouldn’t they? Silicon cost isn’t an issue for a ~70mm2 die and 2nm shouldn’t cost much more than N3P while offering bigger performance improvements. IIRC it may offer better yields longterm as well. N3 pushes FinFet to the absolute limit. Which is why it had issues and offers below-average improvement for a new node.Ahh.
I am still betting that the Zen 6 DC dense version (whatever they call it) will have several 32c Zen 6c CCD's ... made on N2 of course.
I am still not convinced that AMD will use N2 for desktop and laptop though. We will see.
Why wouldn’t they? Silicon cost isn’t an issue for a ~70mm2 die and 2nm shouldn’t cost much more than N3P
I really hope 18A is going to put Intel back on the map from a fab point-of-view. It's been so long since they've had a fab win. Needless to say, they need it.With Intel Foundries back on track and 18A looking to match or exceed 2nm, AMD should be more aggressive with nodes. Surely Intel Products will figure out how to design a competent core eventually? Banking on that handicap long-term would be unwise.
Stop with the delusional takes, it gets tiresome. Zen6 might very well be the better product (I hope so) but there is absolutely no evidence suggesting N2X will have 20% better performance (not density) than 18A.my guess N2X gonna be ~20% more speed at same power
adjustable on runtime between perf/power or its fab design choices?
combine IPC increase with big node jump and bigger CCDs and you have Zen 60%
I think that was in comparison to N3E not 18A perhaps?Stop with the delusional takes, it gets tiresome. Zen6 might very well be the better product (I hope so) but there is absolutely no evidence suggesting N2X will have 20% better performance (not density) than 18A.
It might be in the ballpark but suggesting it's flat out better by 20% is ignorant fanboyism. Will we se you publicly eat crow, when this instead turns out to be accurate?
More likely you'll just shift some goalposts
Stop with the delusional takes
As optimistic as I would like to be on this one, I think you are likely correct. This is doubly true if I am right about AMD sticking to N3P for desktop Zen 6.I think AMD will Keep It Simple with Zen 6. 24 cores and ~10% IPC increase, maybe a few hundred MHz frequency increase under load due to lower power with the new node. Put it all together and you've got a solid bump from Zen 5.
Anything N2 is going to be significantly lower power than the current N4P Zen 5. Not sure where you are coming from here.I don't think N2X is, uh, "lower power".
I don't think it is about absolute performance anymore. If AMD wants absolute performance, it will be filled by Threadripper, not with their standard desktop offerings (or laptop offerings). From a strategic point of view, AMD is beating the crap out of Intel by making competitive products that are much less expensive for them to make.Why wouldn’t they? Silicon cost isn’t an issue for a ~70mm2 die and 2nm shouldn’t cost much more than N3P while offering bigger performance improvements. IIRC it may offer better yields longterm as well. N3 pushes FinFet to the absolute limit. Which is why it had issues and offers below-average improvement for a new node.
With Intel Foundries back on track and 18A looking to match or exceed 2nm, AMD should be more aggressive with nodes. Surely Intel Products will figure out how to design a competent core eventually? Banking on that handicap long-term would be unwise.
Also, Mike Clark said designing Zen 5/5C for two nodes in parallel was a nightmare. Strongly doubt they wanna repeat that experience. For what benefit? An N3P CCD that’s $10 cheaper?
(Latest TechTechPotato livestream they estimated an N2 CCD costs $45-54 at a wafer cost of $25K-30K. That’s a worst case scenario using early yields and worse pricing than AMD probably pays. N3 wafers are rumored to cost $18K-20K so the same size die would be $33-36. However, that ignores the fact that the N3 die would have to be bigger due to worse transistor density.)
No it wouldn't lol, it's all speed gainz all the way thru.Anything N2 is going to be significantly lower power than the current N4P Zen 5. Not sure where you are coming from here.
Calling N3B vs N4P/N4X (or whatever AMD really uses) is also quite a stretch. It's maybe a low single digit advantage for N3B at best, and with DTCO AMD might even have the better process. You could also argue that AMD has 33% more threads and so on.Saying Arrow Lake is on top of Zen 5 is quite a stretch, especially when you consider it has a full node advantage and 50% more cores,
lmao no N3b is far far better when you're doing anything power-constrained.It's maybe a low single digit advantage for N3B at best, and with DTCO AMD might even have the better process.
@naukkis, I am too cheap to look up the original slide set. But here is some 2nd hand info:
(TechTechPotato video at 00:56:52)
The subsets of slides which some 3rd parties published do not detail the exact topology of the Zen 5c server CCX.
So, AMD speak explicitly of a mesh. On the other hand, they kept speaking of a ring WRT Zen 3 and 4's CCX, while it is actually a ring with undisclosed extras.
(Dr. Ian Cutress: Does an AMD Chiplet Have a Core Count Limit?)
It does. It's in the article they show at the provided timestamp. First paragraph in the second (right) column.AMD does not describe Zen5 L3 fabric as a mesh anywhere in their slides.
yeah they do.AMD does not describe Zen5 L3 fabric as a mesh anywhere in their slides