4 ms·

the thing is those 4000 cpus are really 3000 ones. intels laptops are always 1 gen ahead. amds laptop is always one gen behind. its kinda annoying. granted zen

the thing is those 4000 cpus are really 3000 ones. intels laptops are always 1 gen ahead. amds laptop is always one gen behind. its kinda annoying. granted zen 2 (or 3000) was a good architecture so it should compete nicely but I would expect intel to actually be more efficient still because its newer.

lhoff 7y ago
Yes, that naming scheme annoys me as well.
arcticbull 7y ago
The core architecture is totally irrelevant. They took the previous generation core, improved the process, made various tweaks, ran it at a different clock speed and within a different thermal and TDP envelope, and everything else that entails. Laptops have different requirements that need to be considered. Taking a mature part they understand well gives them room and understanding to make necessary tweaks. The reality is those changes take time, it's not like they took a Ryzen 3700X, dropped it onto a smaller package and called it a day. If that were the case I'd imagine they'd have released it alongside...
- lhoff 7y ago
  Sure, they still should have called it the Ryzen 3000. The mistake was made during the Ryzen 1000. they called the APUs (CPU with graphics) Ryzen but the CPU cores were not even Zen. I know that it takes more then putting another name on to create these CPUs. But since they have the same Architecture they should be in the same generation. Intel's 10th Gen naming annoys me as well. 10nm and 14nm CPUs all under the same naming scheme. The only reason to do this is to confuse uninformed customers.
  - arcticbull 7y ago
    > Sure, they still should have called it the Ryzen 3000. Why? It's just a name. It's not the same as a 3700X, it's been modified, tweaked and revised to meet a different application. It's a new version.
    - lhoff 7y ago
      The core part of it is unchanged. All CPUs with the Zen2 Architecture are made out of the exact same 8 Core die. Ryzen, Threadripper and Epyc. And that is one of the big advantages that AMD currently has compared to Intel. Take a look at the pictures. The CPU actually consists of 3 Parts: CPU, GPU, Interconnect. What's new with this CPU is the GPU Die that is soldered right next to the CPU and the interconnect chip that combines CPU and GPU. It should have been: Ryzen 1000 - Zen1 Ryzen 2000 - Zen+ Ryzen 3000 - Zen2 But it is: Ryzen 1000 - CPU: Zen1, APU: - Ryzen 2000 - CPU: Zen+, APU: Zen1 Ryzen 3000 - CPU: Zen2, APU: Zen+ Ryzen 4000 - CPU: ?, APU: Zen2
      - makomk 7y ago
        These APUs are all single-die parts combining both the CPU and GPU cores, along with the IO, onto the one die. They share that die across the entire 4000-zeries APU lineup though.
        lhoff 7y ago
        Yes you are right. I had some leaks in mind where they had a three die picture. My fault. The CPU Cores are stil Zen2
tracker1 7y ago
The terms and tech do get muddied... that said, these are 3-5 year processes to get a new line released. The 4000 series g and u cpu's should do quite well against current Intel options though.
prike 7y ago
as i see, amd will still be more efficient in practice.
wmf 7y ago
And Intel's 10000 series are really 6000.

lhoff 7y ago

Yes, that naming scheme annoys me as well.

arcticbull 7y ago

The core architecture is totally irrelevant. They took the previous generation core, improved the process, made various tweaks, ran it at a different clock speed and within a different thermal and TDP envelope, and everything else that entails. Laptops have different requirements that need to be considered. Taking a mature part they understand well gives them room and understanding to make necessary tweaks. The reality is those changes take time, it's not like they took a Ryzen 3700X, dropped it onto a smaller package and called it a day. If that were the case I'd imagine they'd have released it alongside...

lhoff 7y ago
Sure, they still should have called it the Ryzen 3000. The mistake was made during the Ryzen 1000. they called the APUs (CPU with graphics) Ryzen but the CPU cores were not even Zen. I know that it takes more then putting another name on to create these CPUs. But since they have the same Architecture they should be in the same generation. Intel's 10th Gen naming annoys me as well. 10nm and 14nm CPUs all under the same naming scheme. The only reason to do this is to confuse uninformed customers.
- arcticbull 7y ago
  > Sure, they still should have called it the Ryzen 3000. Why? It's just a name. It's not the same as a 3700X, it's been modified, tweaked and revised to meet a different application. It's a new version.
  - lhoff 7y ago
    The core part of it is unchanged. All CPUs with the Zen2 Architecture are made out of the exact same 8 Core die. Ryzen, Threadripper and Epyc. And that is one of the big advantages that AMD currently has compared to Intel. Take a look at the pictures. The CPU actually consists of 3 Parts: CPU, GPU, Interconnect. What's new with this CPU is the GPU Die that is soldered right next to the CPU and the interconnect chip that combines CPU and GPU. It should have been: Ryzen 1000 - Zen1 Ryzen 2000 - Zen+ Ryzen 3000 - Zen2 But it is: Ryzen 1000 - CPU: Zen1, APU: - Ryzen 2000 - CPU: Zen+, APU: Zen1 Ryzen 3000 - CPU: Zen2, APU: Zen+ Ryzen 4000 - CPU: ?, APU: Zen2
    - makomk 7y ago
      These APUs are all single-die parts combining both the CPU and GPU cores, along with the IO, onto the one die. They share that die across the entire 4000-zeries APU lineup though.
      - lhoff 7y ago
        Yes you are right. I had some leaks in mind where they had a three die picture. My fault. The CPU Cores are stil Zen2

tracker1 7y ago

The terms and tech do get muddied... that said, these are 3-5 year processes to get a new line released. The 4000 series g and u cpu's should do quite well against current Intel options though.

prike 7y ago

as i see, amd will still be more efficient in practice.

wmf 7y ago

And Intel's 10000 series are really 6000.