Friday, May 31st 2019

AMD Confirms Ryzen 3000 "Matisse" Features Soldered IHS

AMD senior technical marketing manager Robert Hallock, responding to a specific question on Twitter, confirmed that the 3rd generation Ryzen processors do feature soldered integrated heatspreaders (IHS). Soldering as an interface material is preferred as it offers better heat transfer between the processor die and the IHS, as opposed to using a fluid TIM such as pastes. "Matisse" will be one of the rare few examples of a multi-chip module with a soldered IHS. The package has two kinds of dies, one or two 7 nm "Zen 2" 8-core CPU chiplets, and one 14 nm I/O Controller die.

The most similar example of such a processor would be Intel's "Clarkdale" (pictured below), which has its CPU cores sitting on a 32 nm die, while the I/O, including memory controller and iGPU, are on a separate 45 nm die. On-package QPI connects the two. Interestingly, Intel used two different sub-IHS interface materials for "Clarkdale." While the CPU die was soldered, a fluid TIM was used for the I/O controller die. It would hence be very interesting to see if AMD solders both kinds of dies under the "Matisse" IHS, or just the CPU chiplets. Going by Hallock's strong affirmative "Like a boss," we lean toward the possibility of all dies being soldered.
Image Credit: TheLAWNOOB (OCN Forums) Source: Robert Hallock (Twitter)
Add your own comment

51 Comments on AMD Confirms Ryzen 3000 "Matisse" Features Soldered IHS

#1
lynx29
they better have plenty of stock of 3900x, thats all we in the community care about. if they are sold out for a month straight shame on them. I DESIRE POWER!!!!
Posted on Reply
#2
Metroid
"The package has two kinds of dies, one or two 7 nm "Zen 2" 8-core CPU chiplets, and one 14 nm I/O Controller die. ". So in truth, they are 8/16 or 16 cores/32threads cpus. I wonder about latency, one chiplet will communicate directly, 2 chiplets might have constraints in the process and might cause some delay even if is very low, I wonder if a single 8/16 threads will be better in this case for maximum performance and minimum latency delay. Only reviews will tell us this. The 3900x might not be the best performer here, cache wise it will offer double because it will have 2 chiplets.
Posted on Reply
#3
lynx29
Metroid, post: 4057778, member: 178915"
"The package has two kinds of dies, one or two 7 nm "Zen 2" 8-core CPU chiplets, and one 14 nm I/O Controller die. ". So in truth, they are 8/16 or 16 cores/32threads cpus. I wonder about latency, one chiplet will communicate directly, 2 chiplets might have constraints in the process and might cause some delay even if is very low, I wonder if a single 8/16 threads will be better in this case for maximum performance and minimum latency delay. Only reviews will tell us this. The 3900x might not be the best performer here, cache wise it will offer double because it will have 2 chiplets.
aye. I might roll the 8 core variant as well, not sure yet. i will wait for benches too, but i am leaning towards the 3900x and a Navi gpu.
Posted on Reply
#4
Metroid
lynx29, post: 4057780, member: 153071"
aye. I might roll the 8 core variant as well, not sure yet. i will wait for benches too, but i am leaning towards the 3900x and a Navi gpu.
See that is the problem. I wanted to pre-order the 3900x, after seeing some things, I decided not to, now I'm not sure which one to get, 3700x or 3900x. AMD power point slides showed 4% single thread performance 9700k x 3900x, 3700% has a measly 1% but memory wise might be better on 3700x, so 3700x might be better if you have a better memory in theory but cache is double on 3900x which would reduce latency to compensate the included chiplet delay.
Posted on Reply
#5
lynx29
Metroid, post: 4057784, member: 178915"
See that is the problem. I wanted to pre-order the 3900x, after seeing some things, I decided not to, now I'm not sure which one to get, 3700x or 3900x. AMD power point slides showed 4% single thread performance 9700k x 3900x, 3700% has a measly 1% but memory wise might be better on 3700x, so 3700x might be better if you have a better memory in theory but cache is double on 3900x which would reduce latency to compensate the included chiplet delay.
i probably will get 3900x anyway. and some 3733 cas 17 ram. then i will use my old 5570 1gb vram gpu until Navi releases.

apparently all intel laptops still overheat like 90ish celsius is considered normal even for the i7-9750h laptops... so im done with gaming laptops once and for all. might even buy a 360mm water cooler for the 3900x, overkill. but i want good temps
Posted on Reply
#6
Octopuss
"8 cores ought to be enough for anybody"
Posted on Reply
#7
jesdals
Octopuss, post: 4057802, member: 74316"
"8 cores ought to be enough for anybody"
Famous last words...

could not help it
Posted on Reply
#9
the54thvoid
ZoneDymo, post: 4057814, member: 66089"
I desire the 3900x
I desire comprehensive reviews.
Posted on Reply
#10
Joss
Octopuss, post: 4057802, member: 74316"
"8 cores ought to be enough for anybody"
I believe an 8 core is a totally safe buy in terms of "future proofing".
I've put the above in quotes because I heard it so many times from people who know bollocks about hardware, and others who, even if they know their CPU from the GPU, insist on making predictions as if that was possible. As if you could formulate the present in an equation and thus extrapolate to the next 10 or 15 years: yeah, sure, just like Economists and Sociologists do with such success (I'm being sarcastic folks :rolleyes: )
Just buy your f***ing processor, 6 or 8 core and get on with it. Oh, and spend more time using it for gaming instead of benchmarks.
Posted on Reply
#11
Kamgusta
Octopuss, post: 4057802, member: 74316"
"8 cores ought to be enough for anybody"
There is no rush in buying cores. It's not as the World is ending today. If you need 6 cores now, buy 6 cores. If you think you'll need 16 cores 2-3 years from now, you're better buy a 6 cores CPU now, wait those years and then buy a 16 cores CPU by then.
Posted on Reply
#12
zlobby
After his "in your butts" statement about no PCIe 4.0 on older mobos, I'd take this news with a pinch of salt.
Posted on Reply
#13
Metroid
Joss, post: 4057834, member: 152251"
I believe an 8 core is a totally safe buy in terms of "future proofing".
It depends how your "future proofing" is based, Nehalen was released in november 2008, almost 11 years from there, that was the first quad-core with hyperthreading and from that there has not been much excitement till this moment, if it was not for ryzen then the 9900k would have never existed, the 9700k would still be 4 cores/8 threads, resident evil 2 remake would have never needed more than 2 cores to work properly, most games would have their cpu recommendation up to 2 cores which would be in the $200 range and the top desktop cpu 9700k 4 cores 8 threads would have still been sold for around $350 and Intel would be laughing and celebrating amd never caught up to them by have had sabotaged amd in all fronts and so on, that is how intel does its business and has been for the past 30 years or so.

So I guess the history was different so, resident evil 2 remake needs 4 cores to work properly minimum, core count doubled from 4 to 8 and now 12 and next year 16 cores, cost wise in line with the market, $499 for 12 cores, instead of $2000, tables have turned and the future seems to be bright.

Now you ask me, what is "future proofing" and I say, it's the development of business services within the ecosystem.

8 cores cpus might last for the next 5 years or so, don't expect more than that, developers will make sure to use all possible resources.
Posted on Reply
#14
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
Too bad they'll probably still use TIM on the APUs.:(
Posted on Reply
#16
Mats
Vario, post: 4057860, member: 18224"
That is incorrect, coffee lake was on the roadmap for 6 threads before ryzen. It was never to be a quad core top sku.
https://www.overclock3d.net/news/cpu_mainboard/intel_roadmaps_show_a_6-core_coffee_lake_cpu_for_mainstream_desktops_in_2018/1
I think a bot should post a reply like this in every thread where certain keywords are present in previous posts, like "Intel", "lazy", "ass", "sleeping", "forever", "decade" etc..
Posted on Reply
#17
Wavetrex
To all shills on both sides, this is a topic about thermal transfer, and the new CPU's being soldered and not with paste.
Not about which company makes more cores.

So... let's see.
If the IHS for 3900X is soldered and one slaps a 200W high-perf water cooler on it... I wonder what that 105W TDP cpu can do with (near) double the headroom?
Posted on Reply
#19
Octopuss
Joss, post: 4057834, member: 152251"
I believe an 8 core is a totally safe buy in terms of "future proofing".
I've put the above in quotes because I heard it so many times from people who know bollocks about hardware, and others who, even if they know their CPU from the GPU, insist on making predictions as if that was possible. As if you could formulate the present in an equation and thus extrapolate to the next 10 or 15 years: yeah, sure, just like Economists and Sociologists do with such success (I'm being sarcastic folks :rolleyes: )
Just buy your f***ing processor, 6 or 8 core and get on with it. Oh, and spend more time using it for gaming instead of benchmarks.
Kamgusta, post: 4057837, member: 182585"
There is no rush in buying cores. It's not as the World is ending today. If you need 6 cores now, buy 6 cores. If you think you'll need 16 cores 2-3 years from now, you're better buy a 6 cores CPU now, wait those years and then buy a 16 cores CPU by then.
So many young people who didn't get it.

Suddenly I feel so very old.
Posted on Reply
#20
Metroid
Vario, post: 4057860, member: 18224"
That is incorrect, coffee lake was on the roadmap for 6 threads before ryzen. It was never to be a quad core top sku.
https://www.overclock3d.net/news/cpu_mainboard/intel_roadmaps_show_a_6-core_coffee_lake_cpu_for_mainstream_desktops_in_2018/1
At that time Intel knew what amd was planning, so they added a 6 cores to their roadmap but Intel knowing amd would launch a 8 cores, they added a 6 cores cause they were overly confident their 6 cores would match and beat 8 cores amd. I guess when amd launched the 2700x things got a bit more interesting, so intel had no other choice than to launch a 8 core cpu because the 6 cores could not beat amd's 8 cores anymore. Funny though amd is doing what Intel used to do, launching a 12 core instead of a full 16 cores, milking has started on amd at this time, now is time to see how long amd will be milking, intel has been milking their way for far too long, 11 years or so.
Posted on Reply
#21
Divide Overflow
I hope the manufacturing will provide an even surface between multiple chiplets and the heat spreader. Soldering sounds like a nice perk for moving heat away from the hot spots on the die, but I'm really looking forward to extensive hands-on reviews to give us all the details.
Posted on Reply
#22
nemesis.ie
Singing: "Take the last train to Clarkedale and I'll meet you for the hype train, I've been waiting for Matisse and there'll be no hesitation; don't be slow, no no no .... and I'm never going +++ again ....".

:)

With apologies to The Monkeys.
Posted on Reply
#23
RichF
Divide Overflow, post: 4057915, member: 69232"
I hope the manufacturing will provide an even surface between multiple chiplets and the heat spreader. Soldering sounds like a nice perk for moving heat away from the hot spots on the die, but I'm really looking forward to extensive hands-on reviews to give us all the details.
What about some kind of graphite/graphene or synthetic diamond surface instead of metal, at least for the area of the spreader directly above CPU dies? Is it impossible to improve upon the spreader itself? Of course, the cooler would ideally have the same material on the bottom and it would need to be absolutely flat. The manufacturing would be clearly more challenging than making a deformed metal spreader. One possibility might be to ban heavy/air coolers in favor of a more precise mounting surface and mechanism. The rise of the AIO seems to make this feasible for the general enthusiast market.
Posted on Reply
#24
Mats
Metroid, post: 4057901, member: 178915"
Funny though amd is doing what Intel used to do, launching a 12 core instead of a full 16 cores, milking has started on amd at this time,
Keep guessing. :D
Posted on Reply
#25
lexluthermiester
lynx29, post: 4057776, member: 153071"
they better have plenty of stock of 3900x, thats all we in the community care about. if they are sold out for a month straight shame on them. I DESIRE POWER!!!!
Wait for the 3950X then. It'll be the 16c/32t part. Or wait for the new TR parts which will be quad-channel.

nemesis.ie, post: 4057943, member: 22637"
With apologies to The Monkeys.
And you should be sorry, using such an awesome song for your fanboy nonsense. Just go away..

zlobby, post: 4057838, member: 172939"
After his "in your butts" statement about no PCIe 4.0 on older mobos, I'd take this news with a pinch of salt.
The bandwidth difference between PCIe3 and PCIe4 is there, but no GPU can maximize it and none will for years to come. No one is going to be bottlenecked by PCIe3. Hell, my system is still on PCIe2 and it's still going strong in gaming performance. Mountains out of molehills...
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment