Tuesday, January 31st 2017

AMD ZEN CPU Complexes Indivisible, Don't Expect 6-core Ryzen: Report

In what could be a blow to budget-conscious PC builders, reports are emerging that the quad-core CCX (CPU complex) units that make up Ryzen processors (and upcoming APUs that use them), are indivisible. This means that the "Summit Ridge" silicon can either be configured as full-fledged eight-core parts, or quad-core parts (one CCX) disabled. The likelihood of cost-effective 6-core parts seems slim.

AMD will continue to sell the Ryzen-branded "Summit Ridge" silicon in three grades - SR7 (top), SR5 (mid), and SR3 (entry-level), but the SR5 may not designate the previously rumored 6-core configuration. Instead, SR7 could indicate eight cores and SMT (multi-threading), which works out to 16 logical CPUs; SR5 could indicate eight cores minus SMT (eight cores, eight threads), and SR3 could designate quad-core with SMT (four cores, eight threads). SR7 and SR5 feature the full 16 MB of L3 cache, while SR3 features 8 MB. All three grades are "unlocked," in that they feature unlocked base-clock multipliers, making overclocking easy.
Sources: PCGH, Zolkorn
Add your own comment

39 Comments on AMD ZEN CPU Complexes Indivisible, Don't Expect 6-core Ryzen: Report

#1
Xzibit
Hmm.. Anything is possible but the source itself is unsure

Zolkorn
I can not confirm 100% full, but it was the information I received
They way the article is written is he made a table from speculation and his "source" said the cores cant be separated but he cant confirm it so he comes to this conclusion (table he made in the first place).
Posted on Reply
#2
Melvis
Hmmm I wonder then if its possible that the 8core's without SMT would then work in older OS's like 7? since SMT is whats stopping them from working in older OS's?
Posted on Reply
#3
ZoneDymo
aww that would be quite unfortunate, 6 cores is a nice place to be at, more power then 4 cores but not as expensive as 8...lets hope some 6 cores will be made.
Posted on Reply
#4
R-T-B
Melvis said:
Hmmm I wonder then if its possible that the 8core's without SMT would then work in older OS's like 7? since SMT is whats stopping them from working in older OS's?
If that's the case, you could always disable it in bios likely too.
Posted on Reply
#5
GoldenX
On the other hand, good, no more dual cores.
Posted on Reply
#6
Xzibit
Melvis said:
Hmmm I wonder then if its possible that the 8core's without SMT would then work in older OS's like 7? since SMT is whats stopping them from working in older OS's?
Its not SMT. Its security feature. Last roll outs are July 17

Don't patch/upgrade your Windows 7 & 8 or you'll have to move to 10 if your on Skylake or higher.
Posted on Reply
#7
R-T-B
Xzibit said:
Don't patch/upgrade your Windows 7 & 8 or you'll have to move to 10 if your on Skylake or higher.
No, you won't. You simply won't be provided CPU-related microcode, driver, or security updates. Of which there are few. It will still continue to function.
Posted on Reply
#8
kruk
This is what CPC has to say:
@Dresdenboy I'm not 100% sure (because it's all marketing), but I expect 5 SKUs to be announced on March 2: 2x 8C/16T, 6C/12T, 4C/8T, 4C/4T.
https://twitter.com/CPCHardware/status/826132904593985536

The 1% of enthusiast buying the top model have been given more that enough info to start deciding, the rest have nothing but rumors to hold on ... and you know how that went with Polaris.
Posted on Reply
#10
Chaitanya
Entry level quad core chip should be more than enough to blow that overpriced i3-7350K out of water. Also 6core chips are just odd to have wouldnt mind good 4, & 8 core cpus.
Posted on Reply
#11
entropic
The Stilt wrote on some forum that given complete symmetry between the CCXs (same number of cores and cache) they could potentially do a 6 core, will they do one is another matter, but a 3/6 and a 6/12 would enrich the lineup imo
Posted on Reply
#12
The Quim Reaper
Well then I hope they've perfected their manufacturing process because 6 core parts were an effective way of utilising 8 core chips that didn't make the grade.

...there's going to be ALOT of 4 core Ryzens out there with 4 cores disabled just because maybe one of them was defective.

Waste.
Posted on Reply
#13
Grings
Wasnt this the same on AMD's previous chips? i thought on phenoms etc it was just a core disabled by bios, which some motherboards let you turn back on
Posted on Reply
#14
Vya Domus
The 8C/16T Ryzen is targeted at the enthusiast market , it's great that they finally have such a product but it obviously wont be their top selling chip. 4C/8T is was most people are interested into. As for the 6C/12T variant , that would still be quite expensive , remember that AMD wont sell Ryzen at FX prices , it would be the least successful/least profitable chip so it shouldn't come as a surprise that they wont bother with it for the time being.

The Quim Reaper said:
Well then I hope they've perfected their manufacturing process because 6 core parts were an effective way of utilising 8 core chips that didn't make the grade.

...there's going to be ALOT of 4 core Ryzens out there with 4 cores disabled just because maybe one of them was defective.

Waste.
And why is this an issue , AMD has done this for ages. It's not waste , quite the opposite , it's cheaper for them to do it this way.
Posted on Reply
#15
bug
Couldn't care less. I have a quad core and nothing is slow.
We'll have a selection of 4, 8 or 16 threads, I just don't see how that doesn't cover everything for home use. Throwing 6 and 12 in there has both pros and cons. You get more choice, you can nickel and dime better, but it also makes picking a CPU harder for the average Joe.
Posted on Reply
#17
Mindweaver
Moderato®™
I expect to see a lower model under "Zen" with 2,4,5,6,7 cores where the unstable cores are locked. AMD has always been good at making money on cpu's that don't meet their top of the line processor standard. I'm not saying this is bad practice either, because if they price them right then it will make a good pc for "web browsers" (Facebook users, etc..).
Posted on Reply
#18
Sihastru
SR3 (more expensive then dual core i3) -> 4 core, SMT disabled = 4 threads
SR5 (more expensive then quad core i5, same price as quad core i5 K) -> 4 core, SMT enabled = 8 threads
SR7 (more expensive then quad core i7 K) -> 8 core, SMT disabled = 8 threads
SR7 FX (more expensive then 6 core i7 K, same price as 8 core i7 X, less expensive then 10 core i7 X) -> 8 core, SMT enabled = 16 threads
Posted on Reply
#19
Atnevon
I just want these things to release so I can know before Mass Effect whether to chuck it back to a Kaby Lake released earlier in the month, cough....RELEASED EARLIER IN THE MONTH DURING CES... or if the hype will make AMD fall on its face flat again.
Posted on Reply
#20
TheLaughingMan
Sihastru said:
SR3 (more expensive then dual core i3) -> 4 core, SMT disabled = 4 threads
SR5 (more expensive then quad core i5, same price as quad core i5 K) -> 4 core, SMT enabled = 8 threads
SR7 (more expensive then quad core i7 K) -> 8 core, SMT disabled = 8 threads
SR7 FX (more expensive then 6 core i7 K, same price as 8 core i7 X, less expensive then 10 core i7 X) -> 8 core, SMT enabled = 16 threads
This works for me.

This also lines up with what AMD said about it being two 4 core modules on 1 die with each module being able to directly access the L3 cache of the other. This brings up interesting questions yields. Are they so good that selling disabled modules is not necessary? Or are they in a situation where if a core is bad the entire module is usesless which would lower yields since 6-core is not an option.
Posted on Reply
#21
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
I guess that means these are really just dual-core processors then...
Posted on Reply
#22
Kei
Interesting, I must admit I do really like 6 core processors.....however, I don't care how they sell them, just give me one now please, I'm hurting with all this waiting lol. :)
Posted on Reply
#23
TheGuruStud
The Quim Reaper said:
Well then I hope they've perfected their manufacturing process because 6 core parts were an effective way of utilising 8 core chips that didn't make the grade.

...there's going to be ALOT of 4 core Ryzens out there with 4 cores disabled just because maybe one of them was defective.

Waste.
A defective CCX will surely be made into mobile dual cores or something low power (although idk how that works without GPU). It's not one big 8 core, so there's no way an 8 core can be defective (due to the CCX itself). That's how I understood the design.

Or it'll just be an acceptable loss. The die is fairly small.
Posted on Reply
#24
TheLaughingMan
newtekie1 said:
I guess that means these are really just dual-core processors then...
Yes. AMD has invented a dual core process that can handle 8 threads each. Not sure if that would be awesome or really sad.
Posted on Reply
#25
R-T-B
TheLaughingMan said:
Yes. AMD has invented a dual core process that can handle 8 threads each. Not sure if that would be awesome or really sad.
Hey, Sun did it years ago with the SPARC T1. 4 Threads per core.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment