![]() So they will sell as much as they can now, and other SKUs will follow later. Why bin such great quality silicon lower, and then sell it for less than you can actually get for it? Especially at launch when people are mostly prepared to pay for it? So AMD is just selling everything they have currently made available,įor the highest price they can get for them. And TSMCs (very mature) 7nm yields are excellent, and so is silicon quality, but 5000 launch demand will guarantee higher priced SKU sales, that is why AMD is unwilling to bin them as lower end SKUs (5600/5700X) right now and sell them for less (regardless of whether there is enough supply capacity to meet demand or not). They have pretty much the best all round CPUs at the moment, and they can charge for them, especially at launch. ![]() Incredibly unlikely AMD will stick to only the 4 launch SKU models, and what we are seeing is just business. So I am fairly certain we will see the cheaper SKUs (5600/5700X) early next year sometime, and later on price drops. So AMD is just making their profit off the higher priced SKUs (5600X/5800X) while they are able to (and it also allows more left over Zen2 stock to sell as well), and then we will see the cheaper models later on (next year most likely). What we are seeing is early adopter fees, because AMD has learnt their lesson from launching cheaper SKUs (3600/3700X etc) at the same time as the more expensive models (3600X/3800X etc) from previous launches, because the cheaper non-X and lower end X SKUs (3600/3700X etc), always outsell their more expensive brethren (3600X/3800X). Even Zen2/3000 saw numerous SKU additions well after launch. Just because they have always released a larger portion of their SKUs at launch in the past, does not mean AMD wont extend the 5000 SKU lineup in the future. I highly doubt AMD will stick to only the 4 launch SKUs, especially when you consider how extensive the previous gen Ryzen lineups were. Probably only next year though, either when the B450/X470 MBs get their 5000 BIOS updates, or later when Rocket Lake launches around March 2021. I have made a detailed description of the Zen 3 architecture in my microarchitecture manual and my list of instruction timings ( link). ![]() Therefore, it makes sense to prioritize the hardware resources for other improvements. This feature is likely to be more useful in 32-bit mode than in 64-bit mode. This feature is no doubt costly in terms of hardware complexity and temporary registers. The Zen 2 had the surprising feature that it can mirror memory operands inside the CPU, as I have described here. AMD have focused on higher throughput where Intel have focused on larger vectors. Therefore, Intel processors are likely to be faster for software that can utilize the 512-bit vector instructions. The Zen 3 does not support the AVX512 instruction set, however. This makes the Zen 3 the best choice for many applications. The AMD Zen 3 has a higher instruction-per-clock throughput and a bigger micro-op cache than the best current Intel processors. (The Clang compiler often makes excessive loop unrolling). It is important to avoid loop unrolling where possible in order to economize the use of the micro-op cache. The programmer must make sure the critical part of a program fits into this micro-op cache if you want to get the maximum throughput. Intel processors have the same bottleneck and the same decoding rate. This is a consequence of the messy x86 code structure where instructions can have any length from 1 to 15 bytes, and it is complicated to determine the length of each instruction. The bottleneck in the decoder appears to be difficult to overcome. It is now more important than ever to avoid long dependency chains. The increased throughput in terms of instructions per clock may be difficult to utilize if the software has long dependency chains (where each calculation must wait for the result of the preceding one). To compensate for this, the Zen 3 has a micro-op cache with 4096 entries after the decoder. The clock frequency is 3.8 GHz with boosts up to almost 5 GHz.Ī serious bottleneck is a decoding rate of 4 instructions or 16 bytes per clock. It can do three memory operations per clock. This may be six integer instructions or six floating point/vector instructions, or any mix of these. The throughput of the Zen 3 is now as high as six instructions per clock cycle. AMD's claims about improved performance are basically confirmed by my tests. There are more execution units and several other improvements in Zen 3. Zen 2 made significant improvements over Zen 1, and Zen 3 now turns out to be still faster. The Zen 1 design from AMD was quite successful with substantial improvements over previous models. I have now tested the AMD Zen 3 (Ryzen 5800) architecture.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |