Thursday, May 5th 2016

AMD "Summit Ridge" Silicon Reserved for 8-core CPUs Initially

Sources tell Bits'n'Chips that AMD could use a common 8-core CPU die based on its upcoming "Zen" architecture over multiple CPU SKUs, at least initially. AMD will have two distinct kinds of processors, those with integrated graphics (APUs) based on the "Bristol Ridge" silicon, and those without integrated graphics (CPUs), based on the "Summit Ridge" silicon. Since products based on both the dies will use a common socket on the desktop (socket AM4), consumers looking for 2-4 CPU cores will be presented with APU options, while those looking for more powerful CPU solutions will be made to choose 8-core CPUs based on the "Summit Ridge" silicon.
Source: BitsnChips.it
Add your own comment

76 Comments on AMD "Summit Ridge" Silicon Reserved for 8-core CPUs Initially

#1
Caring1
So the possibility of more than 8 cores yet to come?
Interesting, I can't wait to see one reviewed.
Posted on Reply
#2
ZoneDymo
well even for high performance CPUs it can be nice to have an integrated graphics module for something like livestreaming right?
Intel got that quicksync people use with their dormant intel IGPU's for some streaming with barely a performance hit.
Posted on Reply
#3
PP Mguire
ZoneDymo, post: 3453250, member: 66089"
well even for high performance CPUs it can be nice to have an integrated graphics module for something like livestreaming right?
Intel got that quicksync people use with their dormant intel IGPU's for some streaming with barely a performance hit.
I get the same thing while using an Nvidia GPU.
Posted on Reply
#4
NC37
Caring1, post: 3453247, member: 153156"
So the possibility of more than 8 cores yet to come?
Interesting, I can't wait to see one reviewed.
Consumer is unknown right now but if you check back a bit, you'll find info on the server CPUs running Zen. Enough cores to make you drool.

Plus remember, they'll be SMT this time. So 16+ thread monsters.

Really like this move by AMD to just go with 1 socket. Gives good flexibility for people to upgrade to later. AMD tends to gimp APUs as much as they possibly can. Is a real shame we never got to see FX after Piledriver. We can kinda guess a little bit but, it would be helpful now to determine how much 40% is going to look like from the final BD chips. Is AMD basing that off Excavator's APU form or internal FX builds that were never released? It makes a difference as the CMT design was always utter crap in quad core formats that the APUs use. Only in 6+ setups was there any tangible benefits.
Posted on Reply
#5
FordGT90Concept
"I go fast!1!11!1!"
I hope AMD prices these to force 8-core processors on Intel's mainstream socket.
Posted on Reply
#6
FlanK3r
FordGT90Concept, post: 3453278, member: 60463"
I hope AMD prices these to force 8-core processors on Intel's mainstream socket.
No, noone give you something good for low money...If 8C/16T Zen will be similar in performance as 6c/12t Intel, the price will be close also. So aournd 400-500 dollars for top product
Posted on Reply
#7
TheLostSwede
FlanK3r, post: 3453283, member: 70865"
No, noone give you something good for low money...If 8C/16T Zen will be similar in performance as 6c/12t Intel, the price will be close also. So aournd 400-500 dollars for top product
IF they perform that well, then people are most likely going to be willing to pay that kind of money as well. AMD hasn't always been the budget choice and people used to pay good money for their top-of-the-range chips, just as people are doing for Intel, so I don't see the issue here.

Let's just hope AMD can deliver something that performs well enough so it sells, as that's what AMD needs more than anything else right now.
Posted on Reply
#8
entropic
FlanK3r, post: 3453283, member: 70865"
No, noone give you something good for low money...If 8C/16T Zen will be similar in performance as 6c/12t Intel, the price will be close also. So aournd 400-500 dollars for top product
as long as they keep their current philosophy of every fx cpu being unlocked there will be some low clocked cheaper model that will overclock decently and it will become the go to budget option from the new lineup
Posted on Reply
#9
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
Caring1, post: 3453247, member: 153156"
So the possibility of more than 8 cores yet to come?
Interesting, I can't wait to see one reviewed.
I think, at least on the desktop side, 8 is the most we will see. What they mean is the cores they produce will only be 8 cores, not 6 and 4 and 2 to fill the lower tiers yet. Eventually they will be producing native 4 core dies to replace Bristol Ridge.
Posted on Reply
#10
HisDivineOrder
AMD showing up with a mainstream genuine 8-core CPU (16 threads maybe?) is really about the only way Intel will be compelled to give us a GPU-less, mainstream 8-core CPU.

Which DirectX 12 is making increasingly more needed. It's like Intel doesn't want to make more money in a world where Gaming is one of the extremely few growth markets left to the PC industry.
Posted on Reply
#11
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
newtekie1, post: 3453295, member: 20670"
I think, at least on the desktop side, 8 is the most we will see. What they mean is the cores they produce will only be 8 cores, not 6 and 4 and 2 to fill the lower twins yet. Eventually they will be producing native 4 core dies to replace Bristol Ridge.
It would be nice if they allowed overclocking on a couple server grade chips
Posted on Reply
#12
FlanK3r
OC will be enabled at 99%, cause Summit RIdge are FX and FX was always unlocked chips :)
Posted on Reply
#13
medi01
Just facts:
  • Glofo/Samsung 14nm is inferior to Intel's. (Intel can put more stuff onto die of the same size).
  • This is AMDs first try with this process, while Intel been rolling it for quite a while.
  • IPC gap between Intel and AMD is... monstrous and is NOT caused by fab process alone: my i5 750 (45nm piece of shit launched in Q3 2009) has better perf/watt and is on par if not faster than AMDs top chips at most stuff, bar supermultithreaded.
  • AMD is again singing "Moar Coars" song.
Concusions:
  • Most likely we'll get something that sits between i3 and i5, is cheaper, has more cores and consumes more power than competition.
  • We are lucky if Zen can beat even i3 at single perf task
  • Competing head to head not only vs i7, but even vs mid range i5s is highly unnlikely, even if AMD's "all consoles are mine => 6-7 cores for ya!!!" stragety is successful.
Posted on Reply
#14
ZoneDymo
PP Mguire, post: 3453264, member: 57732"
I get the same thing while using an Nvidia GPU.
Well yeah, Nvenc and AMD has AMD VEC, but thats not entirely the same, maybe yeah if its so efficient that you dont feel any performance hit I guess it makes the gpu on cpu point moot.
But it does seem logical your gpu is putting in extra work to render video for a stream, while with a gpu on a cpu, that thing does nothing (if you are using a dedicated gpu) so you could just make it work for the stream rendering.

Maybe its nothing more then just a nice pleasing idea on my end, using hardware that otherwisedoes nothing.
Posted on Reply
#15
PP Mguire
ZoneDymo, post: 3453309, member: 66089"
Well yeah, Nvenc and AMD has AMD VEC, but thats not entirely the same, maybe yeah if its so efficient that you dont feel any performance hit I guess it makes the gpu on cpu point moot.
But it does seem logical your gpu is putting in extra work to render video for a stream, while with a gpu on a cpu, that thing does nothing (if you are using a dedicated gpu) so you could just make it work for the stream rendering.

Maybe its nothing more then just a nice pleasing idea on my end, using hardware that otherwisedoes nothing.
Yea, it has no performance hit that I have seen and I even use it with OBS. The only thing I'd use an IGP for is probably other monitors so main and VR is connected to my GPUs.
Posted on Reply
#16
uuuaaaaaa
medi01, post: 3453308, member: 158537"
Just facts:
  • Glofo/Samsung 14nm is inferior to Intel's. (Intel can put more stuff onto die of the same size).
  • This is AMDs first try with this process, while Intel been rolling it for quite a while.
  • IPC gap between Intel and AMD is... monstrous and is NOT caused by fab process alone: my i5 750 (45nm piece of shit launched in Q3 2009) has better perf/watt and is on par if not faster than AMDs top chips at most stuff, bar supermultithreaded.
  • AMD is again singing "Moar Coars" song.
Concusions:
  • Most likely we'll get something that sits between i3 and i5, is cheaper, has more cores and consumes more power than competition.
  • We are lucky if Zen can beat even i3 at single perf task
  • Competing head to head not only vs i7, but even vs mid range i5s is highly unnlikely, even if AMD's "all consoles are mine => 6-7 cores for ya!!!" stragety is successful.

I hope for some Jim Keller driven IPC miracle! I think Zen will be good, I mean, it must be good, or else AMD is in a very very very bad situation...
Posted on Reply
#17
bug
consumers looking for 2-4 CPU cores will be presented with APU options, while those looking for more powerful CPU solutions will be made to choose 8-core CPUs based on the "Summit Ridge" silicon
Or they can just stick with intel.
And tot think there was a time I wouldn't have paid for an intel CPU no matter what (AthlonXP~Athlon64 days)... Today AMD only makes sense if you're scraping the bottom of the barrel. Here's hoping Zen will change that, even if I'm not holding my breath.
Posted on Reply
#18
GhostRyder
Well, first they need to focus on bringing some decent IPC before they make more than 8 core CPU's. I hope these at least somewhat compete in the IPC category!
Posted on Reply
#19
Octavean
HisDivineOrder, post: 3453299, member: 136874"
AMD showing up with a mainstream genuine 8-core CPU (16 threads maybe?) is really about the only way Intel will be compelled to give us a GPU-less, mainstream 8-core CPU.

Which DirectX 12 is making increasingly more needed. It's like Intel doesn't want to make more money in a world where Gaming is one of the extremely few growth markets left to the PC industry.
Unless Zen is vastly superior to current gen Intel processors with respect to performance, in theory all Intel would have to do is drop prices on Broadwell-E 8 core / 16 thread processors or possibly even the 10 core / 20 thread processors.

For what its worth my Core i7 5820K 6 core / 12 thread processor cost about ~$319 USD at Microcenter and I don't think that was too bad with respect to pricing,....or at least it wasn't back when Haswell-E was first released.

Edit:

So if Zen forces prices lower, consumers win regardless of whether they buy a AMD or Intel.
Posted on Reply
#20
TheinsanegamerN
Octavean, post: 3453326, member: 52351"
Unless Zen is vastly superior to current gen Intel processors with respect to performance, in theory all Intel would have to do is drop prices on Broadwell-E 8 core / 16 thread processors or possibly even the 10 core / 20 thread processors.

For what its worth my Core i7 5820K 6 core / 12 thread processor cost about ~$319 USD at Microcenter and I don't think that was too bad with respect to pricing,....or at least it wasn't back when Haswell-E was first released.

Edit:

So if Zen forces prices lower, consumers win regardless of whether they buy a AMD or Intel.
But that pricing means nothing, as you have to live close to a store to take advantage of said price.
Posted on Reply
#21
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
medi01, post: 3453308, member: 158537"
Just facts:
  • Glofo/Samsung 14nm is inferior to Intel's. (Intel can put more stuff onto die of the same size).
  • This is AMDs first try with this process, while Intel been rolling it for quite a while.
  • IPC gap between Intel and AMD is... monstrous and is NOT caused by fab process alone: my i5 750 (45nm piece of shit launched in Q3 2009) has better perf/watt and is on par if not faster than AMDs top chips at most stuff, bar supermultithreaded.
  • AMD is again singing "Moar Coars" song.
Concusions:
  • Most likely we'll get something that sits between i3 and i5, is cheaper, has more cores and consumes more power than competition.
  • We are lucky if Zen can beat even i3 at single perf task
  • Competing head to head not only vs i7, but even vs mid range i5s is highly unnlikely, even if AMD's "all consoles are mine => 6-7 cores for ya!!!" stragety is successful.

Facts:

this isn't based off of fx

Intel had the same IPC gap between athlon 64 and pentium 4

Jim Keller designed zen, the same guy who designed athlon 64

Conclusions:

No one here can legally say how zen will perform anything said by members is pure stipulations based off of nothing.
Posted on Reply
#22
TheGuruStud
TheinsanegamerN, post: 3453330, member: 127292"
But that pricing means nothing, as you have to live close to a store to take advantage of said price.
So salty.

I bitch about Frys lol
Posted on Reply
#23
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
TheinsanegamerN, post: 3453330, member: 127292"
But that pricing means nothing, as you have to live close to a store to take advantage of said price.
It isn't like it is that much different if you order online. I've seen the 5820k on newegg for $350 before on special. Then tend to keep the 5820K about $40 more than the 6700K.
Posted on Reply
#24
bug
cdawall, post: 3453342, member: 28601"
Facts:

this isn't based off of fx

Intel had the same IPC gap between athlon 64 and pentium 4

Jim Keller designed zen, the same guy who designed athlon 64

Conclusions:

No one here can legally say how zen will perform anything said by members is pure stipulations based off of nothing.
Well, it's not based off of nothing: AMD has been promising better performance for years and constantly underdelivered.
But my educated guess is also: we don't know at this point.
Posted on Reply
#25
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
bug, post: 3453352, member: 157434"
Well, it's not based off of nothing: AMD has been promising better performance for years and constantly underdelivered.
But my educated guess is also: we don't know at this point.
That's called stipulations. You know nothing and you are guessing. Remember amds low power isn't based off of fx either and offers 3-4x the performance per clock and a 50% performance per clock increase over phenom ii. Not everything is an fx chip. Intel promised better performance from netburst as well. That's how we got the p4 3.6ghz.

This chip is a ground up redesign with arguably one of the best chip designers to grace this earth engineering it. Will it be great? Fuck if I know, but I doubt it sucks.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment