3 ms·

https://www.servethehome.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/AMD-EPYC-9005-SKU-Stack-2024-10.jpg https://www.servethehome.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/AMD-... Has

https://www.servethehome.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/AMD-EPYC-9005-SKU-Stack-2024-10.jpg https://www.servethehome.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/AMD-... Has the full range with TDP. 500w is only for the 128/192 monster chips. The 16 core fast sku has a 320W TDP.

Sakos 2y ago
The 7950x3D is rated at 120w TDP. 320w seems quite high.
- adgjlsfhk1 2y ago
  that's the processor you're supposed to buy only if you are paying $10000 per core per year for some ridiculously expensive enterprise software. the extra power comes from all the extra memory channels and cache
- icegreentea2 2y ago
  It is high, but it probably can sustain much higher all core frequency compared to 7950x3D (or 7950x). If nothing else, it has a bigger die and heat spreading to pull heat from, it should be easier to maintain thermal headroom on the EYPC chip. That being said, it looks most probable what a 9175F is just a 9755 (their absolute max full size Zen5 core part) with nearly all (7/8) of their cores per CCD disabled in order to get all 512MB of cache. This means that there's a lot of extra interconnect being kept running per core which certainly would contribute to the higher TDP. Of course, in principle this should also mean that each core (which should basically have all of a CDD's IO and cache available to it) should be screaming fast in real terms. Of course finally, TDP is a totally fluffy number. The TDP of the 7950X3D is most probably as low as it is because of how much internal thermal resistance (the extra V-Cache layer) it has. Part of it's lower TDP isn't because "it's efficient", part of it is because "if we run it hotter, we'll melt it". The TDP for the 7950X for example is 170W.
ticoombs 2y ago
> 500w is only for... 128/196 chips. The 16 core fast sku has a 320W TDP. When you think about it. 180W more for 7x threads is amazing
- masklinn 2y ago
  It’s not new that high frequencies require higher power. The base clock falls by half between the fastest and the widest chips.

Sakos 2y ago

The 7950x3D is rated at 120w TDP. 320w seems quite high.

adgjlsfhk1 2y ago
that's the processor you're supposed to buy only if you are paying $10000 per core per year for some ridiculously expensive enterprise software. the extra power comes from all the extra memory channels and cache
icegreentea2 2y ago
It is high, but it probably can sustain much higher all core frequency compared to 7950x3D (or 7950x). If nothing else, it has a bigger die and heat spreading to pull heat from, it should be easier to maintain thermal headroom on the EYPC chip. That being said, it looks most probable what a 9175F is just a 9755 (their absolute max full size Zen5 core part) with nearly all (7/8) of their cores per CCD disabled in order to get all 512MB of cache. This means that there's a lot of extra interconnect being kept running per core which certainly would contribute to the higher TDP. Of course, in principle this should also mean that each core (which should basically have all of a CDD's IO and cache available to it) should be screaming fast in real terms. Of course finally, TDP is a totally fluffy number. The TDP of the 7950X3D is most probably as low as it is because of how much internal thermal resistance (the extra V-Cache layer) it has. Part of it's lower TDP isn't because "it's efficient", part of it is because "if we run it hotter, we'll melt it". The TDP for the 7950X for example is 170W.

ticoombs 2y ago

> 500w is only for... 128/196 chips. The 16 core fast sku has a 320W TDP. When you think about it. 180W more for 7x threads is amazing

masklinn 2y ago
It’s not new that high frequencies require higher power. The base clock falls by half between the fastest and the widest chips.