Friday, December 27th 2019

AMD Ryzen 4000 Rumored to Offer Around 17% Increased Performance

AMD's upcoming Ryzen 4000 series processors will be based on the company's Zen 3 design, which will feature a deeply revised architecture aiming to offer increased performance (surprising no-one). AMD themselves have already said that Zen 3 will offer performance increases in line with the release of new architectures - and we all remember the around 15% increase achieved with the release of Zen 2 Ryzen 3000 series, which surprised even AMD on its performance capabilities. Several sources around the web are quoting an around 17% increase in performance, taking into account increased operating frequencies of Zen 3 (100 to 200 MHz at least for the enterprise solutions, which could pave the way for even higher increases in consumer-geared products) and increased IPC of its core design. The utilization of EUV in the 7 nm process shouldn't have much to do with the increased frequencies of the CPUs, and will mostly be used to reduce the number of masks that are required for production of AMD's Zen 3 CPUs (which in turn will lead to increased yields).

Sources are claiming an increase of up to 50% in Zen 3's Floating Point Units (FPU) compared to Zen 2, while integer operations should make do with a 10-12% increase. Cores should remain stable across the board - and with that increase in performance, I'd say an upper limit of 16 physical and 32 logic cores in a consumer-geared CPU is more than enough. Increased IPCs and frequencies will definitely make AMD an even better proposition for all markets - gaming in particular, where Intel still has a (slightly virtual) hold in consumer's minds.
Sources: 3D Center, Red Gaming Tech, Reddit
Add your own comment

101 Comments on AMD Ryzen 4000 Rumored to Offer Around 17% Increased Performance

#1
64K
AMD is in overdrive lately!
Posted on Reply
#3
lynx29
yep, I have every reason to believe these rumors are true. really looking forward to upgrading my 3600 to a 4900x and retiring for a good 7-14 years depending on gains/needs... but seeing as how my backlog is already massive and i have stopped buying new games, i foresee the 4900x lasting me 10+ years.
Posted on Reply
#4
Jack1n
I think this article is a bit misleading when it comes to Intel's upper hand in gaming performance since it is not virtual at all and is completely factual. That being said, with this performance boost they will certainly overtake Intel in gaming as I doubt Intel could match this improvement with their 10900K.
Posted on Reply
#5
Jism
Jack1n
I think this article is a bit misleading when it comes to Intel's upper hand in gaming performance since it is not virtual at all and is completely factual. That being said, with this performance boost they will certainly overtake Intel in gaming as I doubt Intel could match this improvement with their 10900K.
I suggest you read https://www.techspot.com/article/1876-4ghz-ryzen-3rd-gen-vs-core-i9/

AMD is as good as even to Intel. The difference will be closed and even supass in the 4x00 series.
Posted on Reply
#6
DeeJay1001
lynx29
yep, I have every reason to believe these rumors are true. really looking forward to upgrading my 3600 to a 4900x and retiring for a good 7-14 years depending on gains/needs... but seeing as how my backlog is already massive and i have stopped buying new games, i foresee the 4900x lasting me 10+ years.
I did the same thing, built an overkill system with a 3600 place holder. I plan on going 8 core 4000.

Honestly though the 3600 is a freakin' awesome chip and there is no real reason to upgrade it other than satisfying an itch.
Posted on Reply
#7
lynx29
DeeJay1001
I did the same thing, built an overkill system with a 3600 place holder. I plan on going 8 core 4000.

Honestly though the 3600 is a freakin' awesome chip and there is no real reason to upgrade it other than satisfying an itch.
I sometimes do need more than 6 cores, its rare but doubling my core count, IPC by another 10-17%, and 4.1 all core on my 3600 to i imagine will be 4.8 or 4.9ghz single core boosts on 4900x is going to be one hell of an upgrade. i won't be overclocking my 4900x though, since AMD seems to have auto OC'ing mastered, i only did it on my 3600 cause it was easy to do, but a 12 core chip will be too hard to do that too and i don't want to sacrifice single core on a 12 core chip
Posted on Reply
#8
r9
Not looking good for Intel, but this is the right environment for leaps in technology.
Highly unlikely for anything in a near future but I'm hoping that after AMD builds a good foundation Intel fights back with another core2/icore scale of leap.
I have wet dreams about having Intel AMD and Intel competing for the fastest discrete GPU. lol
Posted on Reply
#9
ShrimpBrime
It has been reported TSMC is at 50% yields on the 5nm wafer which has the 4000 series chips releasing on target for 2021.
Posted on Reply
#10
DeeJay1001
ShrimpBrime
It has been reported TSMC is at 50% yields on the 5nm wafer which has the 4000 series chips releasing on target for 2021.
I believe Zen3 / 4000 is still 7nm
Posted on Reply
#11
r9
lynx29
yep, I have every reason to believe these rumors are true. really looking forward to upgrading my 3600 to a 4900x and retiring for a good 7-14 years depending on gains/needs... but seeing as how my backlog is already massive and i have stopped buying new games, i foresee the 4900x lasting me 10+ years.
We have a saying "Pig swore that will stop eating shit" LOL
Good luck! :D
Posted on Reply
#12
lynx29
r9
We have a saying "Pig swore that will stop eating shit" LOL
Good luck! :D
well I don't need 70 secruty patches bi-monthly, so no luck is needed, Ryzen is already in my system and ryzen is what i am upgrading to. good luck.
Posted on Reply
#13
Turmania
I want 20 core 40 thread CPU from them to mark the year 2020 accordingly, if they do and hit at least 5ghz on all cores, than they can finally have my money even if costs 1000 usd after Athlon 64 days.
Posted on Reply
#14
Dave65
Another 17 percent. I will take it:rockout:
Posted on Reply
#15
HugsNotDrugs
It's awfully difficult to squeek out better IPC from today's designs. I have a tough time believing an additional 17% improvement on IPC and clock increase combined. On multicore I can easily see 17% on better SMT or triple SMT etc.
Posted on Reply
#16
r9
lynx29
well I don't need 70 secruty patches bi-monthly, so no luck is needed, Ryzen is already in my system and ryzen is what i am upgrading to. good luck.
lynx29
well I don't need 70 secruty patches bi-monthly, so no luck is needed, Ryzen is already in my system and ryzen is what i am upgrading to. good luck.
That probable sounded bad. :D Wasn't meant to offend and nothing wrong with Ryzen they are kicking ass at the moment.
I'm actually fighting to resist to upgrading to 2700x they are $149 at microcenter and you get another $30 off when you bundle with mobo.
What I was trying to say was good luck holding off when the next best thing comes out. :D
Posted on Reply
#17
ShrimpBrime
DeeJay1001
I believe Zen3 / 4000 is still 7nm
Ah yes, jumped the gun with the time line thing there.
7nm+ 4000 and 5nm 5000 series chips.
Thank you.
Posted on Reply
#18
HTC
DeeJay1001
I believe Zen3 / 4000 is still 7nm
7nm+: the 1st one with EUV, i believe.

Here's something interesting regarding 7nm yields:





Notice anything with the left part of 1st pic and the 2nd pic? Give you a hint: they switched the colors ...

The 1st pic is from an article in November while the 2nd one is from an article in July. That "~0.09" is the defect rate of N7 "not-Large Die", before Zen 2 was even launched. N7's "Large Die" yield is ... somehow ... even better, if this is to be believed (Large Die is 250+ square mm, such as Navi 10, which is 251 square mm).

Here's the yield with a defect of 0.09 for Zen 2 Ryzen chiplets:



Over 93% yields ... but this is 7nm and NOT 7+nm.

ShrimpBrime
It has been reported TSMC is at 50% yields on the 5nm wafer which has the 4000 series chips releasing on target for 2021.
Care to share where you got that from?
Posted on Reply
#21
P4-630
HTC
Apparently, the 50% number is incorrect and 80% is much more likely, or so says the 2nd link you provided.
Correct, but since ShrimpBrime mentioned the 50% I also posted that article from 9 Dec.
The 80% was posted on 12 Dec by HWI.
Posted on Reply
#23
EarthDog
Cool....... but premature. I'll wait and see the numbers before latching on with hope. Been disappointed too many times by both camps.

lynx29
i foresee the 4900x lasting me 10+ years.
I wouldn't be happy with a 10 year old CPU... Phenom II was out in 2009 and I think I owned an i7 930 around that time...while the latter makes a decent basic PC, I can't imagine gaming on it or being productive in 10 years. An AMD APU beats Phenom II while any 4c/8t CPU from intel walks Nehalem 4c/9t...
Posted on Reply
#24
ShurikN
HTC
Apparently, the 50% number is incorrect and 80% is much more likely, or so says the 1st link you provided.
Those yield numbers were achieved on an unrealistic 17mm^2 die.
If a Zen 2 die was hypothetically used (around 76mm^2), yields would be around 41%.
Which is not bad for something a year away from mass production.
Posted on Reply
#25
trparky
HugsNotDrugs
It's awfully difficult to squeek out better IPC from today's designs. I have a tough time believing an additional 17% improvement on IPC and clock increase combined. On multicore I can easily see 17% on better SMT or triple SMT etc.
That may be so for architectures such as Intel's Core architecture because it's an older architecture, that's not so with AMD's Zen architecture. It's a new architecture, less than four years old so there's some more gas in the tank whereas with Intel's Core architecture all of the low-hanging fruit has been picked already. AMD's finding ways to tweak caches, branch prediction, and all sorts of things but that's to be expected with a new architecture such as the Zen architecture.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment