Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 16 of 17

Thread: Purported AMD Epyc Genoa info points to 96C/192T chip

  1. #1
    HEXUS.admin
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    31,020
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    2,000 times in 706 posts

    Purported AMD Epyc Genoa info points to 96C/192T chip

    Source adds that the Zen 4 server CPU will have 12 channel DDR5 support, 320W TDP.
    Read more.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    784
    Thanks
    9
    Thanked
    29 times in 21 posts
    • Gentle Viking's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte Aorus extreme X399
      • CPU:
      • TR 1920 X
      • Memory:
      • G Skill 64GB ( 8 X 8 ) PC3600 @ 3400
      • Storage:
      • Samsung evo 500GB nvme - 256GB Kingston SSD - 4TB spinning disk
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Powercolor 5700 XT red devil
      • PSU:
      • Corsair RM850I
      • Case:
      • Working on it, done summer 2020
      • Operating System:
      • windows 10 Ulti
      • Monitor(s):
      • 27" iiyama GB2788HS
      • Internet:
      • docis 3.1 cable 1000/100 mbit

    Re: Purported AMD Epyc Genoa info points to 96C/192T chip

    Daum

  3. #3
    trillo_del_diavolo
    Guest

    Re: Purported AMD Epyc Genoa info points to 96C/192T chip

    Ah, this explains why Intel is finally allowing AVX-512 in desktop parts with Rocket Lake. It's unlikely AMD is fusing it off for desktop parts.

    I just don't understand why we need several iterations of vector extensions instead of implementing variable-length vectors, Cray style. Less silicon area wasted, less issues with hot spots etc. The trouble with not owning the instruction set is that AMD has to repeat Intel's poor engineering practices to remain attractive.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,993
    Thanks
    145
    Thanked
    257 times in 186 posts

    Re: Purported AMD Epyc Genoa info points to 96C/192T chip

    96-cores (192 threads)
    12-channel DDR5-5200
    128 PCIe gen 5.0 lanes (160 for 2P systems)
    320W TDP (configurable TDP to 400W)
    This is just absolutely nuts, especially the 160 gen 5.0 lanes for 2P systems...that's over 600GB/S (or over 5tbps) of PCIe bandwidth.

    Also, the power consumption is crazy, the Zen 3 were 64/128 at 280W giving around 4.5W per core whereas these new Genoa chips will be 320W over 96/192 which is around 3.4W per core! Even upping to the cTDP of 400W that's still 4.2W per core. That 5nm die shrink is working some serious magic.

    On top of that, DDR5 at those speeds is absolutely needed, on a lighter touch when linus encountered the storage speed issue he explained quite well that the total PCIe bandwidth was almost all of the DDR4 bandwidth of the CPU.

    Oh man, I can't wait to see these announced, demoed then tested, these are Ker-razy!

    The only thing left for Intel after AMD adds AVX3 and BFLOAT16 support is NVDIMM support, hopefully AMD will be bringing something like that in.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    252
    Thanks
    10
    Thanked
    16 times in 14 posts

    Re: Purported AMD Epyc Genoa info points to 96C/192T chip

    Quote Originally Posted by Tabbykatze View Post
    Also, the power consumption is crazy, the Zen 3 were 64/128 at 280W giving around 4.5W per core whereas these new Genoa chips will be 320W over 96/192 which is around 3.4W per core! Even upping to the cTDP of 400W that's still 4.2W per core. That 5nm die shrink is working some serious magic..
    Anand's 3990x review measured 3.0w/core at maximum load: 200w for the cores and 80w for the IO and IF, so there's an obvious place to make real efficiency gains without touching the CCXs. DDR5 might be lower power, PCIe5 probably isn't. Lots of variables at work.

    Hard to say how much of an net efficiency gain there is without the rated frequencies.

  6. Received thanks from:

    Tabbykatze (01-03-2021)

  7. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    2,012
    Thanks
    12
    Thanked
    100 times in 89 posts

    Re: Purported AMD Epyc Genoa info points to 96C/192T chip

    hubber hubber...far too costly for most of us though.

    It does make you think what could happen with next gen ryzen, could we potentially end up getting more than 16c/32t at the top end, ddr5 already gives the potential to double the ram capacity and adds ecc....

    I wouldn't be shocked to see ryzen and threadripper merge into one platform.


    Maybe this lack of stock is a good thing because the next version looks like it might be taking things up another notch (assuming next ryzen supports ddr5 etc)

  8. #7
    Registered+
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    49
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    5 times in 4 posts

    Re: Purported AMD Epyc Genoa info points to 96C/192T chip

    Quote Originally Posted by LSG501 View Post
    hubber hubber...far too costly for most of us though.

    It does make you think what could happen with next gen ryzen, could we potentially end up getting more than 16c/32t at the top end, ddr5 already gives the potential to double the ram capacity and adds ecc....

    I wouldn't be shocked to see ryzen and threadripper merge into one platform.


    Maybe this lack of stock is a good thing because the next version looks like it might be taking things up another notch (assuming next ryzen supports ddr5 etc)
    In fairness, these parts are designed for servers/data centers... not consumers.
    Although, if AMD follows similar to Zen 2, then they will probably make a Threadripper version of this exact chip as well... and you can bet it will be expensive (definitely on par or MORE expensive than 64c TR).

    I think for Warhol (Zen3+) which we will see this year will continue with same core counts as Zen 2 and Zen 3 (and possibly on AM5 - unless AMD decides to keep it at existing AM4 - which wouldn't be too bad).

    Since 5nm node allows for 80% higher density vs 7nm, and assuming 8 core chiplet design will be retained... then I think the top end consumer CPU to replace 16c/32th will be 24c/48th CPU.

  9. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    627
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    6 times in 6 posts

    Re: Purported AMD Epyc Genoa info points to 96C/192T chip

    Not seen this much tech upgrades and more since AMD got back on the line, and it also show that companies like intel has been holding back onb purpose, which makes me a bit angry... but oh well, we will see what we get next year same time, hopefully can have next super build on DDR5

  10. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    784
    Thanks
    9
    Thanked
    29 times in 21 posts
    • Gentle Viking's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte Aorus extreme X399
      • CPU:
      • TR 1920 X
      • Memory:
      • G Skill 64GB ( 8 X 8 ) PC3600 @ 3400
      • Storage:
      • Samsung evo 500GB nvme - 256GB Kingston SSD - 4TB spinning disk
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Powercolor 5700 XT red devil
      • PSU:
      • Corsair RM850I
      • Case:
      • Working on it, done summer 2020
      • Operating System:
      • windows 10 Ulti
      • Monitor(s):
      • 27" iiyama GB2788HS
      • Internet:
      • docis 3.1 cable 1000/100 mbit

    Re: Purported AMD Epyc Genoa info points to 96C/192T chip

    I am on threadripper now, that will stop in next upgrade, in general a unsustainable approach for mortal PC users, today even more power users should still consider of TR are really worth it.

    My response was merely from a technical standpoint as i remember all the years with just 1 core, and when they said 90 nm and i was nearly blown off the chair.

  11. #10
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2020
    Posts
    14
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    2 times in 2 posts

    Re: Purported AMD Epyc Genoa info points to 96C/192T chip

    Quote Originally Posted by LSG501 View Post
    It does make you think what could happen with next gen ryzen, could we potentially end up getting more than 16c/32t at the top end, ddr5 already gives the potential to double the ram capacity and adds ecc....

    I wouldn't be shocked to see ryzen and threadripper merge into one platform.
    While going beyond 16c/32t might happen, they are not going to rush towards doing so if the net result was to harm the margins of their lower-end threadrippers in the process and similarly, merging the platform seems very unlikely for similar reasons that it wouldn't actually make them more money.

  12. #11
    Registered+
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    30
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    1 time in 1 post

    Re: Purported AMD Epyc Genoa info points to 96C/192T chip

    Noctua currently are ripping their hair out
    Insane platform.

  13. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    ATLANTIS
    Posts
    1,125
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked
    25 times in 23 posts

    Re: Purported AMD Epyc Genoa info points to 96C/192T chip

    BEST explanation of AVX512 ever: It should be noted that Graphics Cards employ this SIMD scheme except on STEROIDS. NVidia cards have been processing things 32-at-a-time for years now, while AMD cards process at 64-at-a-time. So AVX512 is still "catching up" in some respects to what GPU hardware can do.

    Still, its way easier to program for a CPU only rather than transferring CPU data to the GPU and trying to coordinate two different machines, with two different coding structures, at the same time. So the AVX512 feature is definitely very welcome.

  14. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Central Scotland
    Posts
    519
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    17 times in 12 posts
    • jnutt's system
      • Motherboard:
      • MSi X570
      • CPU:
      • AMD Ryzen 3700X
      • Memory:
      • 32gig DDR 3600
      • Storage:
      • Samsung 1tb NVME M.2 SSD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVGA 2070Super
      • PSU:
      • Stock
      • Case:
      • Cooler Master
      • Operating System:
      • Windows10 64bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • Samsung 32" and 24"
      • Internet:
      • Cable 350mb

    Re: Purported AMD Epyc Genoa info points to 96C/192T chip

    This is just absolutely off the chart

  15. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    11,311
    Thanks
    720
    Thanked
    431 times in 301 posts

    Re: Purported AMD Epyc Genoa info points to 96C/192T chip

    Erm, how many pins?!?

  16. #15
    root Member DanceswithUnix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    In the middle of a core dump
    Posts
    11,838
    Thanks
    663
    Thanked
    1,313 times in 1,118 posts
    • DanceswithUnix's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus X470-PRO
      • CPU:
      • 3700X
      • Memory:
      • 32GB 3200MHz ECC
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Linux, 1TB Games (Win 10)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Asus Strix RX Vega 56
      • PSU:
      • 650W Corsair TX
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Fedora 33 + Win 10 Pro 64 (yuk)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Benq XL2730Z 1440p + Iiyama 27" 1440p
      • Internet:
      • Zen 80Mb/20Mb VDSL

    Re: Purported AMD Epyc Genoa info points to 96C/192T chip

    Quote Originally Posted by [GSV]Trig View Post
    Erm, how many pins?!?
    50% more pins, that must be on a marketing graph somewhere

  17. #16
    Registered+
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    49
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    5 times in 4 posts

    Re: Purported AMD Epyc Genoa info points to 96C/192T chip

    Quote Originally Posted by trillo_del_diavolo View Post
    Ah, this explains why Intel is finally allowing AVX-512 in desktop parts with Rocket Lake. It's unlikely AMD is fusing it off for desktop parts.
    AVX-512 has no practical use on desktops. In fact, it has an extremely limited uses in general seeing how its nowhere near in widespread use. Its rarely (if ever) actually used.
    Its also a power hog.

    I just don't understand why we need several iterations of vector extensions instead of implementing variable-length vectors, Cray style. Less silicon area wasted, less issues with hot spots etc. The trouble with not owning the instruction set is that AMD has to repeat Intel's poor engineering practices to remain attractive.
    Pardon?
    I was under the impression that AMD invented x86/x64 and has patents on techniques used in AM64 which have to be licensed from AMD... and that actually seems to be the case.

    Speaking of Cray, have you seen this:
    https://www.theverge.com/2019/5/7/18535078/worlds-fastest-exascale-supercomputer-frontier-amd-cray-doe-oak-ridge-national-laboratory

    Also, this might help
    https://www.linleygroup.com/mpr/article.php?id=11753

    GPU's seem to have those capabilities, but most software isn't written to take advantage of hw acceleration and requires older methods.
    Aka, it could be a software stagnation issue.

    Just look at how long it takes devs to incorporate support for AMD gpu's in terms of hw acceleration in pro software, despite the fact that Open CL and other open standards work just as good (or better) than CUDA.

  18. Received thanks from:

    Pleiades (03-03-2021)

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •