3 ms·

AMD seems not interested. Intel will go the Apple way though, simpler cores and trading die area for ever larger caches, also on-die memory, downside you can't

AMD seems not interested. Intel will go the Apple way though, simpler cores and trading die area for ever larger caches, also on-die memory, downside you can't upgrade memory, upside it's faster and more power efficient. [Edit] Or someone could have said: I think you meant processor not die, and I would have said: Yes sure, not sure what was on my mind.

appplication 3y ago
Upgrading memory is great in theory (and practice for those who do) but I think for 95% of users this is not a consideration.
- kibwen 3y ago
  It becomes more of a consideration when accounting for the fact that you can buy a Macbook that ships with an un-upgradeable 8 GB of RAM, which, sadly, is deficient for even moderate tasks these days.
- toast0 3y ago
  Upgradable memory also makes things more flexible for OEMs. Most OEMs continue to sell systems built around last years processor (or even a couple year old processors), and they can increase the memory in those systems as needed. Maybe 4GB was enough when they came out, but now you need 8GB or 16GB to sell a system with an older processor. Not a big deal with socketed RAM, not even a huge deal with soldered RAM, but the processors with 4GB on package become very hard to sell.
kllrnohj 3y ago
> Intel will go the Apple way though Hmm, curious what the "Apple way" is here.. > simpler cores Apple's cores are very far from simple. They are much larger than the other ARM CPUs on the market, and this is also why they are faster than other ARM CPUs on the market. > trading die area for ever larger caches Apple has big L1 comparatively, but L2 & L3 are nothing special. Certainly nowhere close to the massive caches that AMD's X3D offers. > also on-die memory Apple doesn't have on-die memory. AMD is the only company to have shipped on-die memory to consumers (they were also the first to ship it), and they only did so on GPUs so far. Nvidia & Intel are playing with it for datacenter products, though, but that's about it (H100 & Xeon Max respectively)
- lunfard000 3y ago
  I think simpler cpu meant to simplify x86, like the x86-s proposal [0] 0: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/developer/articles/technical/envisioning-future-simplified-architecture.html https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/developer/articles/t...
- paulmd 3y ago
  > Apple doesn't have on-die memory. AMD is the only company to have shipped on-die memory to consumers What distinction are you drawing such that Fury X interposers count as “on-die memory” but apple’s literal stacking of the LPDDR on the actual die doesn’t? Apples technique is more advanced than fury actually: fury is just on-package, not on-die, but apple is literally doing v-cache style stacking of the whole memory subsystem right on top of the die. Of course fury x was earlier, but die stacking is a more advanced technology, there is a reason AMD didn’t do that for 5+ years after fury x. And apple actually beat AMD to market with on-die stacking, by several years (epyc v-cache was 2022 or 2021) with a more advanced implementation (the whole memory subsystem rather than just v-cache).
  - wmf 3y ago
    That's not how it works at all. Apple has nothing similar to V-cache.
    - paulmd 3y ago
      > That's not how it works at all. What isn’t how what works? Use your words. (People literally are in such a race to pick a fight and defend their best friend AMD they forgot to make the rest of the post lol. Simply say the most mild thing and AMD people trip over themselves to do this stuff constantly, it’s funny.) Do you think OP is referring to something other than fury x/Vega when they said “gpu shipped to consumers”? That’s the only thing that comes to mind, literally there are only less than a half dozen consumer gpus from AMD in the stacking era so I don’t know what else it would be. If you mean true memory in the die, not stacked, not just a cache - AMD has never shipped that to consumers (or professionals) in a gpu. Nobody puts memory in the gpu because it would be a waste of die space. But like, gotta defend AMD, better hammer that downboat and drop a pithy six-word/single-sentence reply. Social media is constantly seething with the AMD defense force looking for fights, gets super old. Like, it was literally less than 30 seconds from clicking post on my comment to seeing your debate determinating cliche. What fine discourse we have here.
throwaway2990 3y ago
Couldn’t you have on die memory and then have a swap using traditional memory rather than the SSD?

appplication 3y ago

Upgrading memory is great in theory (and practice for those who do) but I think for 95% of users this is not a consideration.

kibwen 3y ago
It becomes more of a consideration when accounting for the fact that you can buy a Macbook that ships with an un-upgradeable 8 GB of RAM, which, sadly, is deficient for even moderate tasks these days.
toast0 3y ago
Upgradable memory also makes things more flexible for OEMs. Most OEMs continue to sell systems built around last years processor (or even a couple year old processors), and they can increase the memory in those systems as needed. Maybe 4GB was enough when they came out, but now you need 8GB or 16GB to sell a system with an older processor. Not a big deal with socketed RAM, not even a huge deal with soldered RAM, but the processors with 4GB on package become very hard to sell.

kllrnohj 3y ago

> Intel will go the Apple way though Hmm, curious what the "Apple way" is here.. > simpler cores Apple's cores are very far from simple. They are much larger than the other ARM CPUs on the market, and this is also why they are faster than other ARM CPUs on the market. > trading die area for ever larger caches Apple has big L1 comparatively, but L2 & L3 are nothing special. Certainly nowhere close to the massive caches that AMD's X3D offers. > also on-die memory Apple doesn't have on-die memory. AMD is the only company to have shipped on-die memory to consumers (they were also the first to ship it), and they only did so on GPUs so far. Nvidia & Intel are playing with it for datacenter products, though, but that's about it (H100 & Xeon Max respectively)

lunfard000 3y ago
I think simpler cpu meant to simplify x86, like the x86-s proposal [0] 0: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/developer/articles/technical/envisioning-future-simplified-architecture.html https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/developer/articles/t...
paulmd 3y ago
> Apple doesn't have on-die memory. AMD is the only company to have shipped on-die memory to consumers What distinction are you drawing such that Fury X interposers count as “on-die memory” but apple’s literal stacking of the LPDDR on the actual die doesn’t? Apples technique is more advanced than fury actually: fury is just on-package, not on-die, but apple is literally doing v-cache style stacking of the whole memory subsystem right on top of the die. Of course fury x was earlier, but die stacking is a more advanced technology, there is a reason AMD didn’t do that for 5+ years after fury x. And apple actually beat AMD to market with on-die stacking, by several years (epyc v-cache was 2022 or 2021) with a more advanced implementation (the whole memory subsystem rather than just v-cache).
- wmf 3y ago
  That's not how it works at all. Apple has nothing similar to V-cache.
  - paulmd 3y ago
    > That's not how it works at all. What isn’t how what works? Use your words. (People literally are in such a race to pick a fight and defend their best friend AMD they forgot to make the rest of the post lol. Simply say the most mild thing and AMD people trip over themselves to do this stuff constantly, it’s funny.) Do you think OP is referring to something other than fury x/Vega when they said “gpu shipped to consumers”? That’s the only thing that comes to mind, literally there are only less than a half dozen consumer gpus from AMD in the stacking era so I don’t know what else it would be. If you mean true memory in the die, not stacked, not just a cache - AMD has never shipped that to consumers (or professionals) in a gpu. Nobody puts memory in the gpu because it would be a waste of die space. But like, gotta defend AMD, better hammer that downboat and drop a pithy six-word/single-sentence reply. Social media is constantly seething with the AMD defense force looking for fights, gets super old. Like, it was literally less than 30 seconds from clicking post on my comment to seeing your debate determinating cliche. What fine discourse we have here.

throwaway2990 3y ago

Couldn’t you have on die memory and then have a swap using traditional memory rather than the SSD?