AMD Ryzen 8000 "Granite Ridge" Zen 5 Processor to Max Out at 16 Cores [Rumor]

[erek]

Do we even need more than 16 cores on the HEDT for Gaming?

"Perhaps the most interesting aspect of the PCGH leak would have to be the TDP numbers being mentioned, which continue to show higher-performance SKUs with 170 W TDP, and lower tiers with 65 W TDP. With its CPU core-counts not seeing increases, AMD would bank on not just the generational IPC increase of its "Zen 5" cores, but also max out performance within the power envelope of the new node, by dialing up clock speeds. AMD could ride out 2023 with its Ryzen 7000 "Zen 4" processors on the desktop platform, with "Granite Ridge" slated to enter production only by Q1-2024. The company could update its product stack in the meantime, perhaps even bring the 4 nm "Phoenix" monolithic APU silicon to the Socket AM5 desktop platform. Ryzen 8000 is expected to retain full compatibility with existing Socket AM5, and AMD 600-series chipset motherboards."

Source: https://www.techpowerup.com/308614/...-ridge-zen-5-processor-to-max-out-at-16-cores

 

[uOpt]

Boo. We need moar cores!

 

[david123]

16-core probably is enough for most games. If you need more cores, pay more for EPYC.

 

[pgaster]

Funny timing on this leak, right after cpus and boards are dying.
It's almost like they are afraid people will go Intel.

 

[PC-Only]

Do we even need more than 16 cores on the HEDT for Gaming?

Certainly not for the current design of games, which isn't great.

 

[vegeta535]

16-core probably is enough for most games. If you need more cores, pay more for EPYC.

It will be fine for all games for the foreseeable future. Hell 8 cores is still perfectly fine for all games.

 

[RomeoGolf87]

Sounds fine for gamers, at least until next gen consoles? Then maybe bump up the core count?

 

[Gideon]

I have seen no compelling reason to go beyond 16 cores for the desktop at this point. Very few programs can utilize much beyond 8 cores.

 

[XJJack]

16 will be enough until windows or other operating systems start doing their own separation of work to make use of those cores independent of software developers that aren't doing it themselves.

 

[ChadD]

Anyone trying to sell more then 16 cores for a consumer grade PC is just compensating for weak performance. AMD has no need to sell more then 16 cores at the consumer level. I would much rather have 16 cores full cores with 3D cache available to them then 24 cores with a handful cut down, and not enough cache to make any beyond 8 matter in gaming anyway.
What uses do consumers have for more then 16 cores really? If your really doing CPU graphics rendering... if the latest greatest 16core is holding you up and costing you money. Then clearly you should be in the market for a Epyc system.

 

[Marees]

AMD Ryzen 9000 "Granite Ridge" Zen 5 Processor Pictured

An alleged picture of an unreleased AMD Ryzen 9000 series "Granite Ridge" desktop processor, just hit the wires. "Granite Ridge" is codename for the desktop implementation of the "Zen 5" microarchitecture, it succeeds the current Ryzen 7000 "Raphael" that's powered by "Zen 4." From what we're hearing, the CPU core counts of "Granite Ridge" continue to top out at 16. These chips will be built in the existing AMD Socket AM5 package, and will be compatible with existing AMD 600-series chipset motherboards, although the company is working on a new motherboard chipset to go with the new chips.

The alleged AMD engineering sample pictured below has an OPN 100-000001290-11, which is unreleased. This OPN also showed up on an Einstein@Home online database, where the distributed computing platform read it as having 16 threads, making this possibly an 8-core/16-thread SKU. The "Zen 5" microarchitecture is expected to provide a generational IPC increase over "Zen 4," but more importantly, offer a significant performance increase for AVX-512 workloads due to an updated FPU. AMD is expected to unveil its Ryzen 9000 series "Zen 5" processors at the 2024 Computex.

https://www.techpowerup.com/321284/amd-ryzen-9000-granite-ridge-zen-5-processor-pictured

 

[Flogger23m]

I have seen no compelling reason to go beyond 16 cores for the desktop at this point. Very few programs can utilize much beyond 8 cores.

I'm sure more software would start supporting more than 8 cores if they became common. I'd still like to see an increase in core count per price range, assuming IPC/clock/3D cache is not limited.

Example:

6 core = $180
8 core = $240
8 core X3D = $280
12 core = $350
12 core 3XD = $400

 

[LukeTbk]

I'm sure more software would start supporting more than 8 cores if they became common

More than 8 threads are common now (my cheap Acer laptop has 12 core-16 thread), 12 will tend to be the frequent minimum, consoles have 16 threads since 2020

And if your code can take advantage of 10 threads but not 18, it was probably quite the challenge to reach 10 already and it stopping to scale for a serious reason and if it was not a big challenge you are using all of them.

 

[Lakados]

More than 8 threads are common now (my cheap Acer laptop has 12 core-16 thread), 12 will tend to be the frequent minimum.

And if your code can take advantage of 10 threads but not 18, it was probably quite the challenge to reach 10 already and it stopping to scale for a serious reason and if it was not a big challenge you are using all of them.

games are so communication-dependent that a lack of memory channels will bite you in the ass long before you pass cores at full utilization.
Many here would likely be shocked at how much time many of those cores are wasting spinning their wheels on busy work while they wait for something else to be ready.
We're going to need 4 memory channels long before we need 16 threads for gaming.

 

[LukeTbk]

I have seen no compelling reason to go beyond 16 cores for the desktop at this point. Very few programs can utilize much beyond 8 cores.

But is there many that use 16 that would not use 24, i.e. if more than 12 has any use... if we see a reason to go beyond 12, the same reason would apply for 24.

People interested in the 16 core are doing stuff that scale went going from 12 to 16 (or they would have bought the 12 core):

And could potentially want a 24-32, if the price gap was not so big, but you can in some case need the memory bandwith too keep up, DDR-5 6000-8000mhz already do some 4 channel DDR-4 type of performance and help.

 

[Gideon]

But is there many that use 16 that would not use 24, i.e. if more than 12 has any use... if we see a reason to go beyond 12, the same reason would apply for 24.

People interested in the 16 core are doing stuff that scale went going from 12 to 16 (or they would have bought the 12 core):

View attachment 648217

View attachment 648218

And could potentially want a 24-32, if the price gap was not so big, but you can in some case need the memory bandwith too keep up, DDR-5 6000-8000mhz already do some 4 channel DDR-4 type of performance and help.

Ok Linux compiling is not something many people do considering the market penetration for Linux is less than 5%. I also don't see someone comparing a 64 core threadripper vs a 16 core X3D chip for normal use. I had a 16 core chip and other than compiling video which I only do on a rare occasion I never really leveraged that chip other than that and I technically downgraded to a 5800X3D and noticed almost no difference except when compiling video, but my games played better. I would rather see memory bandwidth increased before just slapping more cores on a cpu.

 

[LukeTbk]

Ok Linux compiling is not something many people do considering the market penetration for Linux is less than 5%

Its compilation in general, chromium, linux kernel, etc... are just common source code to do for them like the BMW scene in Blender.

It is not something many people do, but of the people interested in a 16 core CPU, that software rendering/compression and other task that scale well yes.

Turn it that way who would be interested in 16 core but not in 24, what can use more than 12 cores but not 18 ?

32 thread is irrelevant for gamers outside the only way to get more cache for the skus are made, that not really the crowd.

 

[TMCM]

im far more interested in knowing what improvements are on the next chipset

 

[RanceJustice]

AMD Ryzen 9000 "Granite Ridge" Zen 5 Processor Pictured

An alleged picture of an unreleased AMD Ryzen 9000 series "Granite Ridge" desktop processor, just hit the wires. "Granite Ridge" is codename for the desktop implementation of the "Zen 5" microarchitecture, it succeeds the current Ryzen 7000 "Raphael" that's powered by "Zen 4." From what we're hearing, the CPU core counts of "Granite Ridge" continue to top out at 16. These chips will be built in the existing AMD Socket AM5 package, and will be compatible with existing AMD 600-series chipset motherboards, although the company is working on a new motherboard chipset to go with the new chips.

The alleged AMD engineering sample pictured below has an OPN 100-000001290-11, which is unreleased. This OPN also showed up on an Einstein@Home online database, where the distributed computing platform read it as having 16 threads, making this possibly an 8-core/16-thread SKU. The "Zen 5" microarchitecture is expected to provide a generational IPC increase over "Zen 4," but more importantly, offer a significant performance increase for AVX-512 workloads due to an updated FPU. AMD is expected to unveil its Ryzen 9000 series "Zen 5" processors at the 2024 Computex.

https://www.techpowerup.com/321284/amd-ryzen-9000-granite-ridge-zen-5-processor-pictured

According to the links in the comments, the pictures have been confirmed fake upon update - https://videocardz.com/newz/amd-ryz...op-es-cpu-with-8-zen5-cores-has-been-pictured I'm sure we'll be getting a real one later in the year.

That said, I'm not so concerned about a 16c/32t being the mainstream cap necessarily, but I AM frustrated if we're to be stuck with asymmetrical 3D cache cores, dual channel memory and limited PCI-E lanes Since AMD (and for that matter Intel) have decided to basically turn the "HEDT" former product lines into "Server/workstation, high core parallelized workloads, junior grade" models instead of enthusiast all around desktop performance , while jacking the prices significantly, the "mainstream" platforms need to expand. For 3D cache, we've been seeing iterations of the tech over the past couple generations, but we've still not come to the point that it can be symmetrically available on both CCD's of a 16 core design AND not have to undermine the core frequency or power consumption for heat concerns giving the bonding process of the 3D cache - if they can do this by the 9000 series Zen5 then that would be a big step forward, in absence of the ability to have a Threadripper like cache/layout. Atop this, an option for quad channel memory and an expanded selection of top speed (5.0?) PCI-E lanes woud be appreciated. As others have said that the memory particulars have been important for performance on recent Zen3 and 4 chips,at least to a "sweet spot", so having an option for quad channel on the top chipset variations and letting there be dual on lower ones would be a step forward. Same is true for PCI-E lanes - it wasn't that long ago that HEDT had quad channel memory and enhanced PCI-E lanes and that was long before the era when people were jamming their boards full of M.2 storage that takes up those lanes even for relatively mainstream usage.

I'm interested to see the maturity of the AM5 socket and to support if AMD intends to replace AGESA proprietary board firmware to the OpenSIL open source Coreboot compatible by 2026, but much the same way as that how being stuck under Intel's push for "4 cores on the mainstream" stagnated things for such a long time, i think we're running up against other hardware limits keeping dual channel memory and a rather limited number of PCI-E lanes in the face of increasingly demanding hardware using them.