7 ms·
AMD Zen 5 CPUs Reportedly Made on TSMC's 3nm Process, Mass Production in Q3
- downrightmike 3y agoTSMC has two 3nm lines, one is exclusively used for Apple right now, and it looks like AMD has a large reserve on the other one.
- kijin 3y agoAnd the rest of the production capacity goes to nvidia, of course.
- alberth 3y agoThe headline is a bit clickbait. Because the article goes on to say: > "Zen 5 will be using the 4nm node while Zen 5C will be made using the 3nm process" > "It might be possible that UDN has confused the Zen 5C 'Prometheus' core with Zen 5 'Nirvana'."
- nimish 3y ago@dang Blogspam, original is in Chinese from UDN: https://money.udn.com/money/story/5612/7776705 https://money.udn.com/money/story/5612/7776705
- kergonath 3y ago> @dang This does not work and just adds noise. This is not Twitter, if you want him to see something, you should send an email. Also, submissions in non-English languages are strongly discouraged so the quality of your source does not matter. You can submit a better article in English, though, which should not be too hard in this case.
- wing-_-nuts 3y agoWow this is terrible timing. I was literally planning on building my first pc in 20 years and I had settled on the 7800x3d. This might convince me to hold off for a bit if the 8800x3d is right around the corner. I'm also waiting to confirm whether the 5090 will have a 512 or 384 bit bus as that informs whether it'll be a 24 or 32gb card (need the VRAM for AI / ML).
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- tutfbhuf 3y agoThe best time to realize a PC build is actually never because there will always be something better around the corner.
- loeg 3y agoThe current gen hardware is great, you'll be fine.
- mldbk 3y agoGet 7800X3D now, upgrade to 8800X3D as soon as prices and stocks will settle. It will be on the same AM5 platform.
- wmf 3y agoMost people don't upgrade every year though.
- IAmGraydon 3y agoI'm in the same boat, though looking at the 7950X. May wait.
- COGlory 3y agoNext generation computer hardware releases every ~18 months. No matter what you buy it will be "last gen" in like a year.
- 3y ago
- cobalt60 3y agoSensational news aside & theoretically speaking, what changes would a design possibly go through if you could upgrade node from 4 to 3 nm?
- wmf 3y agoFor example, it is rumored that AMD is using the extra transistor density to double the width of the FPUs from 256 bit to 512 bit. Probably all the core structures like the ROB and branch predictor will get a little bigger as well.
- kjkjadksj 3y agoApple M3 chips are using the tsmc 3nm stock as well so you could look at that vs m2 chip. Basically a few more cores for each sku, and faster clock speeds for both performance and efficiency cores, iirc it was a 30% gain.
- brennanpeterson 3y agoIt is a roughly 20% improvement to speed and power per area. And about 20% density. So you get more, faster cores/units, in the same footprint. sram.is the exception as it scales poorly, so don't expect much. If anything, this is the largest and most important hardware issue facing all the chip gains, since so much of performance is memory dependent.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- lbourdages 3y agoI can't wait to see benchmarks on these chips. Lots of people are saying that Apple chips are good only because they have the node advantage. Let's see what they can do within the same power envelope now.
- lp4vn 3y agoCan someone explain to me how Apple managed to come from nowhere with a chip(M Series) that's competitive with the best chips from two companies(AMD and Intel) that have operated for decades exclusively in this field? Shouldn't AMD and Intel have an expertise that ideally would take decades and billions to be reached?
- wmf 3y agoIt wasn't nowhere. M1 was based on A14. It's called A14 because it's the 14th generation Apple Silicon chip (although the early generations were designed by Samsung so maybe it's Apple's 10th generation chip design).
- wredue 3y agoYou’re just seeing generalized platforms with history cruft vs walled garden controlled platforms. A program built for an intel and amd cpu 30 years ago runs today. That’s not true of M series.
- bryanlarsen 3y agoARM64 and AMD64 are contemporaneous redesigns of the underlying architecture that got rid of a lot of cruft, so being ARM does not have an advantage there. One could argue that the more relaxed memory model of ARM gives a slight advantage, but that's a mixed bag. Even without that, all modern chips translate the ISA into internal ops, and that translation take such a miniscule fraction of chip area that ISA in 2024 has minimal effect on power and performance.
- bryanlarsen 3y agoBy purchasing expertise. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P.A._Semi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P.A._Semi This was the team that did the Digital Alpha & StrongARM.
- jwells89 3y agoReally curious to see the efficiency on the mobile CPUs from this gen. Been looking to replace a Tiger Lake ultraportable which despite being a good laptop otherwise is terrible in terms of battery life and heat, but have been waiting to pull the trigger until an x86 laptop that can manage battery life numbers similar to that of a MacBook Air without also throttling the CPU to oblivion appears. Hopefully this gen of AMD mobile CPUs delivers.
- nicolaslem 3y agoYou will likely have to wait 18 months more. Typically AMD mobile chips get announced in winter and are widely available in laptops by summer.
- wtallis 3y agoMore specifically, CES in January is when laptop OEMs announce their new products, with ship dates staggered over the next several months (though oddball products can sometimes take until September or October to hit the shelves). Laptop chip announcements are usually timed at or slightly before CES, because there's no point announcing a laptop chip out of cycle when it'll be an uphill battle to get OEMs to use the chip. (The importance of annual laptop updates announced at CES also contributes to why laptop CPUs and GPUs almost always get new model numbers every year, even if it isn't new silicon. OEMs don't like having to market a new machine with last year's chip.)
- AzzyHN 3y agoTo my knowledge, x86 is just more energy inefficient than the later ARM architectures. That being said, AMD chips are absolutely more power efficient than Intel chips, by a huge margin
- manuelabeledo 3y agoNot in idle, though.
- vient 3y ago
- dansalvato 3y agoI often see sentiment that x86 architecture itself is fundamentally a bottleneck, compared to ARM/RISC, when it comes to efficiency and performance per watt. Does someone with the right expertise have insight to share on this? I'm curious what the factors are here. I would imagine that a factor is that most ARM implementations we see (like from Qualcomm, Nvidia, and Apple) are full-on SoCs which will naturally have efficiency benefits. But I'd love to learn more about this before "taking sides" and declaring that so-and-so architecture is the future, or whatever.
- Sparkyte 3y agoX86 and ARM are practically the same these days in performance. Let me explain RISC vs CISC, RISC is Reduced Instruction Set Computer and CISC is Complex Instruction Set Computer. The base component instruction sets of x86 are CISC. The base component instruction sets of ARM are RISC. When technology evolves and newer instruction sets are required to handle those tasks they can often become more complex and so today with the variety of instruction sets on both x86 and ARM they are closer to each other more than ever. Still different. Now going to the differences between ARM and x86 where it matters. ARM has the lowest power draw to performance ratio but it's need for power skyrockets as it approaches more complicated tasks. x86 starts higher in power draw but its performance is pretty maintained under all workloads. Neither are wrong, just it depends what you're planning to do. x86 is probably the best architecture for the general user, but ARM is great in a phone if everything stays relatively simple. Notice how some phones with 4000 mAh battery will be dead in 30mins while playing a game which the Steam Deck can handle for maybe 1.5 hours of gameplay? However if I wanted something to stay on all day to receive text notifications and pretty much be idle in my pocket, I'd want an ARM processor. I think the real reason Apple went ARM is that after studying the life habits of their customers they realized most of their laptop users fold sleep their devices like a phone without ever really charging them. At least the majority, when working in a Mac Shop, the term used for a mac only software development team, the constant amount of fold close open recharge would've been better on an ARM processor. Someone at work even asked if they could just code on their Samsung phone because it got better battery life than the old Intel Macs.
- 3y ago
- ksec 3y agoI sometimes wonder at what point will compute density in DataCenter outgrows our compute needs. Example If you have servers that is 5 - 7 years old. You could have swap them with Zen 5c EPYC and reduce your server count by 70%+.