AMD 4000 series APU for mobile

[Gubbi]

7nm APUs from AMD announced

From Anantech:

Top SKU: 8 CPU cores , 1.8/4.2GHz base/turbo clock @ 15W TDP, faster graphics as well (despite fewer CUs)

Salvage SKUs down to 4 CPU cores with 2.7/3.7GHZ base/Turbo.

Major power savings coming from 7nm, and equally important, support for LPDDR4X. Double perf/watt compared to 3000 series.

IMO, this is much more important, economically, than the high core count desktop models, since this will allow AMD to compete head-to-head with Intel in the biggest segment of the PC market.

Cheers

 

[Deleted member 13524]

A 8-core / 16-thread APU is fantastic, but it seems AMD did a sizeable cut on the GPU proportion of the chip. Which is a bit odd since they now have at least 55% higher memory bandwidth.
Unless they still have other models down the road with a higher number of enabled CUs, this seems like a bit of a lost opportunity unless the iGPU is really clocking at those >1600MHz (which I doubt TBH).

We also don't know what LPDDR4X clocks the new APUs support. Intel's Ice Lake only supports 3733MT/s, but Samsung apparently only sells 4266MT/s chips nowadays, meaning the limit is on Intel's supported MCU clocks.

 

[Gubbi]

A 8-core / 16-thread APU is fantastic, but it seems AMD did a sizeable cut on the GPU proportion of the chip. Which is a bit odd since they now have at least 55% higher memory bandwidth.

The 3400g was woefully limited by bandwidth. It's integrated GPU has over 50% more oompf on paper vs the 3200g, but is typically only 10-20% faster in games.

I don't think AMD will have any problems hitting 1600MHz with the Vega cores. They already built the Radeon VII which runs 60CUs over 1700MHz with a 300W TDP, equivalent to 40W per 8 CUs. A years worth of process and logic improvements should allow the GPU to run at 1600MHz in a 45W TDP.

Cheers

 

[Deleted member 13524]

I don't think AMD will have any problems hitting 1600MHz with the Vega cores. They already built the Radeon VII which runs 60CUs over 1700MHz with a 300W TDP, equivalent to 40W per 8 CUs. A years worth of process and logic improvements should allow the GPU to run at 1600MHz in a 45W TDP.

Except the Ryzen 7 4800U is promising 8CUs @ 1750MHz in a 15W TDP, together with 8 cores at 1.8GHz base frequency.

I think it's rather obvious the 4800U is reaching 1750MHz on the GPU about as often as the 3700U's GPU is hitting 1400MHz. Which is never. AFAIK the Vega 10 on that SoC rarely passes 900-950MHz.

 

[mczak]

I agree the 1750Mhz gpu clock are a paper number, nevertheless the actual average clock under load could easily be more than 60% higher than on Vega 10 (IIRC that number was more like ~800Mhz). A more efficient cpu (and potentially better power distribution between cpu and gpu) could also help there.
I think though gpu performance on 45W and desktop models is probably going to be disappointing (that is, basically the same as Raven Ridge). These also won't benefit from (much) faster memory, and it seems quite obvious that for this generation amd didn't consider gpu performance at those higher TDP numbers to be all that important (and they are probably right).