This being AMDs 50th Anniversary Year, here is a little history regarding its first major CPU offerings starting in the 1990s. As the article indicates AMD architecture had some advantages. But, the initial offerings also had design issues that held them back. I knew of AMD then, but I also knew they did not work as well as Intel then -- so I used Intel PCs.
As I have posted previously regarding my history: I became an AMD fan in early 2000s. Back in 1976, for my first PC that I both designed from scratch and built from scratch myself (took 1.5 years -- had to teach myself digital electronics), I used a Zilog Z80 CPU (it was better than the Intel offering). Needed to use toggle switches to key in a 250 byte program so that it would recognize the keyboard. About the time I finished building, the first commercial PCs arrived, I then switched to pre-built Intel desktops (that blew my invention out of the water) until early 2000s -- those early Intel's I used cost $2000 to $4000. After 2000, I started building PCs from parts like we do today.
Initially, I did not use PCs for ANY gaming (except to write a couple simple games to teach myself PC programming -- gave them to friends to play). Rather, it was all business -- I used them to solve science/engineering type problems for work (gave faster turnaround than using the company's room-filling computers that had to be shared). I used the digital-electronics knowledge I had gained to help me design Space Hardware in the 1980s and 1990s. I started gaming in early 1990s. I ordered some business software and they included a "flight simulator" war game for free -- always a fan of flight and fighter aircraft, I was "hooked". Joined SimHQ when I first saw it -- prior to my official join date listed by my posts. End my early PC history.
Microprocessor History – AMD K5
In March of 1996, AMD released their first products based on a totally in-house microarchitecture, the K5. Internally, AMD engineers decided the ‘K’ in K5 would stand for Kryptonite, hinting AMD is the Kryptonite to their competitor Intel. AMD’s K5 CPUs were a big step toward affordable computing.
The story is straightforward. Ever since Playstation One, Sony didn’t want to use Nvidia for various reasons nor did Nvidia wantto settle for low console margins offered by Sony.
AMD is designing a semi-custom design for Sony; this is where Lisa [AMD CEO] has real expertise and what we learned over the years that she likes to do. She likes the semi-custom business as this is stable but yet a lower margin business than selling GPUs or CPUs to OEMs. Selling to OEMs is volatile, as it fluctuates based on market conditions while semi-custom guys have to commit years in advance.
Also expect AMD to provide the next Microsoft XBox CPU/GPU capability. For both consoles, a 2020 launch is rumored/speculated.
Rumored to have 8 core CPUs. If so, new games will start to make better use of 8 core CPUs. Parenthetically, XPlane 11 already used 8cores/16threads to 90/95 percent for a brief time in one of my tests. I read XPlane will use more than that if available -- but, they say there is little effect on FPS (and I saw no prolonged effect).
Rumor regarding what's after AMD 7nm parts: 5nm is turning out easier than I thought it would be.
TSMC’s 2020 5nm node has 80% higher transistor density than Ryzen 3000’s 7nm
even though TSMC is preparing to produce 5nm chips in volume in 2020, the Zen 3 processors set to launch that year will be on the only slightly refined 7nm+ node
[TSMC's] Wei says on TSMC’s Q1 earnings call, “we expect most of our customers who are using 7nm today will adopt 5nm.”
while 7nm and 5nm don’t sound like anywhere near as big a jump in scale as the previous move from 14nm down to 7nm, there’s still a huge [80 percent] difference between the two nodes.
Now, just imagine how many CPU cores AMD could jam inside a 5nm chiplet if it has another 80% more transistor space to play with…
As previously posted, the future of CPUs is Cores and Threads. Eventually, we'll have at least 64 cores and 128 threads and games will be programmed to use them up (I'm guessing). That's many years off, I assume.
From AMD: AMD to build worlds fastest most expensive USA Supercomputer. This is a big, big win. The Supercomputer uses both AMD CPUs and AMD compute GPU type hardware. The AMD hardware is not current hardware. It will be up to date in 2021 when it is installed. The author of the article believes Intel/Nvidia bid since they have produced a previous top Supercomputer (did not win, obviously).
AMD Scores ‘Landmark Win’ In Deal To Build World’s Fastest Supercomputer For U.S. Government
the U.S. Department of Energy had chosen to partner with Cray and AMD to procure the world’s largest and most expensive supercomputer ever. The deal is said to be worth a total of $600 million dollars and will be commissioned in early 2022.
The system will be used in a wide range of activities ranging from modeling advanced medicinal molecules with thousands of atoms – up from only a few atoms at a time currently, simulating quantum computers, nuclear reactions, and more.
The price tag is indeed steep, $600 million dollars, which makes it the most expensive to date ever purchased by the U.S. government.
Cowen Analyst: “This is no ordinary HPC [high performance computing] win, but rather an important long-term milestone for AMD’s datacenter strategy”
$100 million is being given to AMD and Cray to develop some of the hardware going into the system.
Matthew Ramsay, an analyst at Cowen stood by his Outperform rating for AMD stock, claiming that AMD is firmly back when it comes to high-performance computing.
AMD could be pocketing $300 to $400 million dollars for the deal which is a huge chunk of revenue for them. Remember, last quarter AMD booked about $1.3 billion in total, a deal like this is a major blockbuster for the Santa Clara, CA-based semiconductor firm.
Based on recent AMD presentations, some are speculating that the 7nm high core count (up to 64 cores/128 threads ??) Threadripper desktop CPUs will not be released late this year (2019) as originally expected. Lacking concrete info from AMD, 2020 is speculated, for now..
AMD Ryzen 3000 Series 16 Core, 32 Thread CPU Details Leaked – Early Sample With 7nm Zen 2 Cores Clocks In At 3.3 GHz Base and 4.2 GHz Boost
Now bear in mind that the chip that has been leaked is said to be a very early engineering sample and as we have seen with past ES chips, the frequency in the final retail variants is much higher.
Thus, 16 core/32 Thread 7nm Ryzen seems confirmed. The clocks shown on the engineering sample are much lower than rumored for the final highest end 16/32 part (4.3GHz base, just above 5.0GHz boost). Normally, the highest end CPUs are hand selected based on tests of as-fabricated CPUs. So, the high number is feasible for the hand selected CPUs. We'll see in a couple months.
Raja Koduri: “AMD no software ecosystem that’s meaningful without Intel”
Raja Koduri was a previous AMD higher-up snatched by Intel. He made some comparisons with AMD that were (understandably) favorable to Intel.
This is a basically pro-AMD article. The author finds some flaws in Koduri's "message". Though we all know Intel still has the larger share of the markets, maybe it does not have superior products (vs AMD and Nvidia).
Leak : AMD Showcasing 16 Core & 12 Core Ryzen 3000 Series CPUs to OEMs
AMD Reportedly Showing 12 Core Ryzen 3000 Series CPU With “Really High Clocks” to Board Maker
Jim has been consistently right on the money over the past with his leaks and sources. Which lends us to believe that this is a legitimate leak.
.. an official debut/launch set for Computex this June... starting from the budget friendly ~$100 segment all the way to the ultra high-end ~$500 enthusiast no-compromise end of the market.
Leaks indicate the weakest AMD Ryzen CPU will be 6 core/12 thread at 4GHz boost. I've read (and posted previously) that the top chip will be a fast 16c/32t and reasonably priced. Until we see them on sale, its speculation.
AMD Ryzen 3000 Series CPUs With 7nm Zen 2 Architecture Can Support Up To A Max of 5000 MHz DDR4 Memory Speeds
not all CPUs may be able to hit those speeds.
In my tests using games and normal benchmarks, I've noticed that above 2.9GHz memory speed seems to have no effect on Ryzen 1000 and 2000 series (it may be there, but too small for my tests to notice).
We'll see if people can really "see" and "feel" (rather than only "measure") the impact of memory faster than, say, 3.0GHz. I intend to use 3.2GHz memory (I've already purchased 64GB on sale in anticipation of Summer builds with the 7nm products). Anyhow, read the test reports before jumping on the 5.0GHz wagon. Of course, one can buy it for the fun of "bragging rights"
AMD Ryzen 3000 Series Support on Existing AM4 Boards Confirmed by Asus & Asrock
So just update the BIOS, unplug the Ryzen 1000 or 2000 series CPU, plug in the Ryzen 3000 series -- and go.
I've been considering that route (just plug into my ASUS 470 motherboard). But, on my main system, I'll probably go all-in and get a new 570 motherboard for the fun of it (I doubt I'll "see" a difference). Now, I hope the CPU performance/price rumors are true. It will be a let down if the rumors have been overblown and my dreams are dashed.
AMD to stream "Next Horizon Gaming" event at E3 2019
As well as the Computex 2019 keynote
AMD has announced its new "Next Horizon Gaming" event that will take place at the E3 2019 show on June 10th, which will be live-streamed. It has also announced that the Computex 2019 keynote on May 27th will be live-streamed as well
AMD To Provide Architectural Deep-Dive Into 3rd Gen Ryzen CPUs With Zen 2 Cores and Navi GPUs at Hot Chips 2019
AMD planning to hold their own conference during the event on 19th August at Palo Alto at 1:45 PM PT. During the conference, AMD is expected to talk about two key architectures that are powering their next-generation CPU and GPU lineups, Zen 2 and Navi.
Hopefully, by then, some will be available to buy and will have been third party tested. On August 19, AMD will be describing how the circuits actually work. Up to then, its rumor and speculation.
Intel Loses 5X More Average Performance Than AMD From Mitigations: Report
Phoronix's .. found the fixes reduce Intel's performance by 16% (on average) with Hyper-Threading enabled, while AMD only suffers a 3% average loss.
Intel's chips can suffer even more with Hyper-Threading (HT) disabled, a measure that some companies (such as Apple and Google) say is the only way to make Intel processors completely safe from the latest vulnerabilities. In some of Phoronix's testing, disabling HT reduced performance almost 50%
To be clear, this is not just testing with mitigations for MDS (also known as Fallout, Zombieload, and RIDL), but also patches for previous exploits like Spectre and Meltdown
AMD's processors are immune to the latest round of vulnerabilities, and its users also don't need to turn off Simultaneous Multi-Threading (or SMT)
Previously, it was written that Intel "cut corners" in its CPU hardware design to help make their CPU instructions per clock higher than AMD -- now, Intel users needing protection from "attacks" can lose much of that advantage over AMD. AMD did not "cut corners" with their CPU design -- so do not have the same vulnerabilities.