the54thvoidThose clocks are superb for that many cores. I'd love to see a review of the two 16 core parts from both camps up against each other at stock. How long we have to wait for that?

Imsochobounfortunately late this year probably because of intel is late :)
review of the 16core will be seen in a matter of a week :D
but these clocks are crazy for a 16core, and the infinity fabric designs rock :)

HTCBut the infinity fabric is supposed to be the Aquilles heel of the Zen architecture ...

HTCBut the infinity fabric is supposed to be the Aquilles heel of the Zen architecture ...

the54thvoidIt scales with memory speed and latency.

bugIt's an engineering trade-off, yes. The best interconnect will never be as fast as a monolithic design. Yet the trick is to get enough benefits (flexible, cheaper design) to offset the downsides (mainly added latency).
Achilles' heel is too strong, it's a bottleneck that can be observed under some scenarios and that is completely irrelevant in many others.

HTCIt seems you both missed my sarcasm ...

Unless some new materials replace silicon, we'll soon be @ the limit and the only way is to improve core count, but that gets very very expensive with higher number of cores due to low yields. AMD realized this and came up with infinity fabric which solves the low yields problem because Zen chips are small enough to have very high yields, thus making high core count chips not only possible for a "cheap" price but also very scalable.

Remember: the same Zen chip is the main component of Ryzen / Threadripper offerings from 4 C / 4 T all the way to 32 C / 64 T, made possible by infinity fabric.

bugWell, when silicon miniaturization hits the wall, so does increasing the core count. IF seems to solve the yields problem for now, but it's not a magic bullet.

And yes, your sarcasm font wasn't very readable to me ;)

HTCBut the infinity fabric is supposed to be the Aquilles heel of the Zen architecture ...

ZoneDymoreally would love to get that 1950x just for livestreaming, putting that CPU preset on "placebo" and compressing the Sh*t out of that footage >:D

bugIt's an engineering trade-off, yes. The best interconnect will never be as fast as a monolithic design. Yet the trick is to get enough benefits (flexible, cheaper design) to offset the downsides (mainly added latency).
Achilles' heel is too strong, it's a bottleneck that can be observed under some scenarios and that is completely irrelevant in many others.

OSdevrThere is still the 3D IC route. More expensive than separate dies on a PCB but cheaper (and nearly as fast as) a monolithic design.

bugThis is not a matter of surface/area, but rather of producing billions of transistors with zero defects. Whether they're planar or stacked is rather irrelevant (except that it's harder to build stacked transistors).

OSdevrI was referring to the latency of infinity fabric. Using a silicon interposer would allow the dies to be much closer together. Xilinxhas done this for several years with their top of the line FPGAs.

ZoneDymoreally would love to get that 1950x just for livestreaming, putting that CPU preset on "placebo" and compressing the Sh*t out of that footage >:D

the54thvoidThose clocks are superb for that many cores. I'd love to see a review of the two 16 core parts from both camps up against each other at stock. How long we have to wait for that?

saikamaldossYa you will see. But intel biased reviewers will run single core bench and games that use single thread performance to take advantage of intel turbo 3 to show intel is superior... lol until unless they run multi thread games and softwares to measure performance. It will just be waste of time.