[News] AMD Begins Sampling Entry-Level Ryzen Chips - 4 Cores With SMT Disabled

[StyM]

https://www.techpowerup.com/229540/a...h-smt-disabled

With AMD's Ryzen chips launch being ever closer to us, details about its product line - which still remain mysterious enough - eventually begin to slip. Reportedly, AMD's entry-level Ryzen chips - the SR3 line of processors, if previous leaks ring true, will be made up of 4-core processors with AMD's SMT (Simultaneous Multi-Threading), the equivalent to Intel's HT (Hyper-Threading) disabled. These will be, apparently, true 4-core processors, without any additional logical processors exposed by SMT.

If reports about AMD's line-up being composed of 8-core and 6-core processors, then with this news, we can now theoretically paint the numbers on AMD's Ryzen line-up. As it stands with this new information, it could be composed of entry-level four-core parts (under the SR3 product stack, and a base clock of 3.4 GHz at the minimum for any Ryzen-based part, according to AMD); a midrange six-core, twelve-thread part (under the SR5 moniker; I don't figure AMD would disable their much-lauded SMT on this six-core part); and the top-of-the-line, SR7 8-core, 16-thread chip we've seen in so many benchmarks and leaks.

I find it strange that AMD would cut the SMT out of any of its processor lines, though - at least, from all of its processors. My educated guess would be that AMD is planning to release a special-edition part (or a specific part number) just like Intel does in its i3, i5 and i7 product lines to differentiate between multiplier-locked (non-K processors) and multiplier-unlocked (K processors, such as the i5-7600K). Though, with all AMD Ryzen processors having an unlocked multiplier, like the company has often announced, this differentiation might be between SMT-disabled and SMT-enabled chips - perhaps with AMD bringing back their Black Edition line of processors for this particular use-case. It just seems strange for AMD to shed one of their vaunted technologies (which would allow them to improve their performance at little to no cost added) completely, considering the comeback the company is planning to accomplish.

[vario]

https://www.techpowerup.com/229540/a...h-smt-disabled

TBH, if these 4 core no SMT chips are gonna be positioned vs i3 segment. This might be the biggest news yet from the volume sales standpoint.Imagine getting 4690K`s for the price of i3...
You get 4 cores Haswell like performance (maybe broadwell), all chips unlocked.
Its also to be seen how effective SMT from AMD is gonna be, if they dont cut L3 cache also, these chips can be 90% of the "regular" 4 core/8Thread ryzen.
Yea, 7600K is going to be faster and will OC better, but people buying these arent gonna afford to buy GTX 1080 either way.
If this is true, there are gonna be shortages like in A64 era ...

[FlanK3r]

Im not sure about 4C without SMT....

[qcmadness]

It is a news only if the 4-core die is different from the 8-core one.

[AbortRetryFail?]

It is a news only if the 4-core die is different from the 8-core one.

Not really. This is the AMD modular concept 2.0.

We're probably better served to look at this from the Raven Ridge side of things. I'd pretty much rather have 16 CUs and some fancy UVD than SMP or Turbo (though I'm not turning it down ). Unlocked and ready to clock. Having the ability to drop in a 8/16 chip and a discreet GPU is gravy on the biscuit.

If the performance/watt pans out and AMD pops that die on an interposer with high bandwidth memory, that should be a fun thing, too.

[StAndrew]

An SMT enabled 4 core will cost just as much as a SMT disabled 4 core processor to manufacture unless they actually change the chip design. Doesn't make sense.

Maybe this will be for ultra low powered chips to compete with Intel Atom...

[AliG]

An SMT enabled 4 core will cost just as much as a SMT disabled 4 core processor to manufacture unless they actually change the chip design. Doesn't make sense.

Maybe this will be for ultra low powered chips to compete with Intel Atom...

Sure it does. Why does Intel sell the i7 7700k for more than the the i5 7600k?

Because it adds additional value.

[StAndrew]

Sure it does. Why does Intel sell the i7 7700k for more than the the i5 7600k?

Because it adds additional value.

Higher bin?

Maybe I'm not getting it... If it costs $50 per chip to manufacture and you sell it for $100 then artificially disable SMT and sell it for $75... I don't know; unless you sell the SMT enabled chip for a premium. It makes more sense if they are designing a simpler chip with no SMT designed to run at low power and compete with Intel Atom...

[AliG]

Higher bin?

Maybe I'm not getting it... If it costs $50 per chip to manufacture and you sell it for $100 then artificially disable SMT and sell it for $75... I don't know; unless you sell the SMT enabled chip for a premium. It makes more sense if they are designing a simpler chip with no SMT designed to run at low power and compete with Intel Atom...

That. Adds artificial value to their SMT chips.

SR3 is the lowest end varient. I would assume either SR5 gets SMT versions of the 4 cores - OR - they just inherently add more value to their 6 core chips for multithread applications (but I would be highly surprised if SR5 doesn't have a 4 core SMT chip).

[Darakian]

That. Adds artificial value to their SMT chips.

Artificial? It's an extra feature. Intel charges more for hyper threading, is that also artificial value?

[AliG]

Artificial? It's an extra feature. Intel charges more for hyper threading, is that also artificial value?

Ehh that's a nitpick, but it's artificial in the sense every chip already has it.

Whatever. My point of added value still stands.

[vario]

An SMT enabled 4 core will cost just as much as a SMT disabled 4 core processor to manufacture unless they actually change the chip design. Doesn't make sense.

Maybe this will be for ultra low powered chips to compete with Intel Atom...

It isnt rational from engineering standpoint, but it makes sense from business standpoint.
You artificially cut out functionality from one and the same chip, and voila you have a full spectrum of chips, and average selling price increases.Its with HT, L3 sizes, often even with core counts ,locking multi etc etc.
Just think what would happen if intel didnt lock multis on its xeons ;-).
And of course there are chips that have just broken functionality in a physical way, so on them it REALLY makes sense to disable parts of the chip and sell it anyway.