LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksRead more.Two 10 core, three 12 core, two 14 core, and two 16 core models are in the works.
Read more.Two 10 core, three 12 core, two 14 core, and two 16 core models are in the works.
I have an i7 but certainly interested in these processors. Depending on the price can see one in my next build.
Jon
Loving those TDPs
Pretty sure due to how each Zen CCX can be configured, that only even cores are possible. Since Threadripper is basically two Ryzen 7 (i.e. four CCX altogether), the only possible core counts are 16 (4x4) and 12 (4x3) and possibly 8 (4x2). Others options are not 'possible' (or at least AMD decided that asymmetrical CCXs are not practical). So this news is highly suspect at least as 10 and 14 core-count CPUs are concerned.
I believe the R3 chips and APUs will have a single CCX, so odd numbers can work. I wonder if we could see a Threadripper APU with 3 CCX and a GPU?Originally Posted by kompukare
AMD is actually going to release a product named "Threadripper"... *sigh*
I was sincerely hoping that was just a code name, because, performance aside, that naming sounds just plain stupid. As in "moar g4mz0r" stupid. Wasn't there talk of Ryzen R9 at some point?
It's a marketing buzzword for sure, but really is it any worse than "hyperthreading"? Buzz words sell. It's sad but it's true.
Well, yes odd numbers in each CCX which is what I meant by 12 (4 x 3 cores). Even 4 (4 x 1 core) might be possible. Point being they all need be multiples of 4.
But unless they redesign it so each CCX is 8 cores (not likely before 7nm as the shared design is what has enabled them to roll out so many CPUs on a limited budget), 10 and 14 are not going to happen. In the future assuming the socket, SP3r2, is going to enjoy similar longevity as they have promised for AM4, they should then be able to release multiples of 2 like 14 (7 + 7) and 10 (5+5).
Those are one of the main thing keeping me away from enthusiast CPU... AMD or Intel.
I thought that when the original leak came out, but AMD keep doing things I wasn't expecting, and I suspect that technically there's no reason they can't sell chips with mixed fully-enabled and partly-enabled CCXes. However it's not the way they've been doing things so far, and it's worth bearing in mind that downcore control on AM4 boards doesn't appear to allow configurations like 3 cores (2+1) or 6 cores (4+2) - only symmetric configurations or one CCX disabled entirely. I find it very unlikely that they'd start playing with asymmetric configurations now: I expect Threadripper to come in 16, 12 and 8 core variants (and, as an aside, EPYC to come in 32, 24 and 16 core variants).
Having looked at Hexus' "source" for this information it is itself completely unsourced, and appears to be no more than a restating of the earlier rumours. That said, the Ryzen rumour mill so far has been pretty accurate, so I'm actually very interested to see what AMD have pulled out of the bag here...
I actually meant it as a positive, they're quite low all things considered and AMDs recent history of running warm
Yeah the names a bit touch and go, threadripper sounds like something you would use in needlework. Saying that they could have used "Bobbinpuller" or "Needlethreader". Personally UltraHelixSuperThreadingConvexTitaniumReinforcedCore would have sold it for me.
Jon
Don't forget their server chip, EPYC
It hurts.
Isn't anyone going to comment about how hilariously large these CPUs are?
Nope. I am going to applaud this part though;
At least AMD are not segmenting their CPUs based on some arbitrary changes like Intel.full 64-lane PCIe gen 3.0
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
