AMD Execution Thread [2023]

Status
Not open for further replies.

 
Latest drivers are crashing on me whenever I start fiddling with the performance controls. It seems specific to the voltage control. Every time I try and undervolt it the screen goes black and I need to reboot.

8GB RX 580, and lots of annoyance. :(
 
https://videocardz.com/newz/amd-x86...ana-zen6-morpheus-microarchitectures-detailed

IPC figure is rather conservative for ZEN5, far form this 25%-30% IPC "leaks" from RGT/AdoredTV
finally 6 ALU´s
new 16 core complex


AMD-ZEN5-ZEN6-ARCHITECTURES.jpg
 
Last edited:
https://videocardz.com/newz/amd-x86...ana-zen6-morpheus-microarchitectures-detailed

IPC figure is rather conservative for ZEN5, far form this 25%-30% IPC "leaks" from RGT/AdoredTV
finally 6 ALU´s
new 16 core complex


AMD-ZEN5-ZEN6-ARCHITECTURES.jpg
10-15% would be healthy. Something like 19% for Zen 3 was unusual and was done by chasing a pretty low hanging fruit with the unified L3. I think without doing V-cache as standard(which AMD have made clear they aren't doing, at least not with Zen 5), there's not really any such low hanging fruit again to boost IPC like that in a single gen. Any talk of like 25%+ should just be laughed out of the room(as I did when MLID tried to claim this for Zen 4 early on).

Low power core is interesting, if true. Given that 'dense option' was pointed out with Zen 4 here, it suggests a potential 3rd design apart from the main and 'c' variants.
 
Latest drivers are crashing on me whenever I start fiddling with the performance controls. It seems specific to the voltage control. Every time I try and undervolt it the screen goes black and I need to reboot.

8GB RX 580, and lots of annoyance. :(

I have a 7900XTX and when I try to undervolt it fails the first time, if I retry it succeeds. I guess someone forgot to run regression tests in this area with the latest drives.
 
Lol did the verge really use the word bullshit in a question to a CEO?

The moat thing is a non issue. The question immediately after that one addressed it.

“PyTorch is a big deal, right? This is the language that all these models are actually coded in. I talk to a bunch of cloud CEOs. They don’t love their dependency on Nvidia as much as anybody doesn’t love being dependent on any one vendor. Is this a place where you can go work with those cloud providers and say, “We’re going to optimize our chips for PyTorch and not CUDA,” and developers can just run on PyTorch and pick whichever is best optimized?”

Great interview overall.
 
Oh there is.

They are making an actual LITTLE but it's not due for Zen5.
You have been consistently wrong about most everything regarding AMD for the past few years, but you talk so confidently about things that you still manage to get people buying into your rhetoric anyways. There's genuinely no reason to believe you actually know anything

EDIT: unless you actually give us some information.
 
Last edited:
It's an interesting "hybrid" approach with the Zen4 and Zen4C cores going in the Phoenix 2.

So they don't "believe" in the big and little core solution done by others but instead offer two cores sharing the same register-transfer level (RTL) template. The result being that both cores are exactly the same but Zen4C has a higher cell density (which makes it 35% smaller) and sacrifices clock speed potential compared to the less dense Zen4 core.

This makes a lot of sense in devices that are thermal limited like laptops, gamepads etc. In these cases having Zen4 cores would just be a waste of silicon area as they would be limited in speed due to the thermal design power.

It also makes sense in high core count products where not all cores can boost to full speed because of thermal and power constraints while offering good multi-core performance.
 
Oooh someone's upset.
Yes, RDNA3 missed.
Nothing else did.

They do, just that the real LITTLE shouldn't be an infra throughput core like Cortex-A or Atom.
I just wish you'd qualify your comments with more appropriate language, unless you actually KNOW something is true, in which case you should be telling us more about it, which you almost never do. You just continually talk as if you're some insider with secret knowledge, yet rarely ever substantiate anything you say, not to mention that you've been wrong many times in things you've talked so confidently about. It's even worse when you're replying to others trying to say they're wrong, without ever really detailing why. You just make it sound like you know we're wrong and we just have to trust you for some reason.

I dont have any skin in the game here, I simply care about having better quality discussion and ensuring that people are being transparent about whether their discussion points are speculation or knowledge.
 
Last edited:

Samsung said marketing things about their upcoming Exynos 2400 which has an RDNA3 GPU:

One of the event’s highlights was the preview of Samsung’s next-generation flagship mobile processor, the Exynos 2400 with Xclipse 940 GPU based on the latest AMD RDNA™ 3 architecture. A live demo showcased the processor’s substantially enhanced ray tracing capability, promising improved realism and immersion in gaming through a range of optical effects including global illumination, reflection and shadow rendering.

Achieving significant advancements in computing performance, the Exynos 2400 processor features a 1.7x increase in CPU performance and a remarkable 14.7x boost in AI performance compared to the previous Exynos 2200 product. Additionally, Samsung introduced a new AI tool designed for upcoming smartphones, demonstrating text-to-image AI generation using its Exynos 2400 reference board.

Comparisons to the Exynos 2200 (2022 SoC) instead of the current Snapdragon 8 gen 2, expecting it to be competitive with SD8G2 but less so 8G3. Samsung and AMD announced an extension of their IP licensing agreement earlier this year but more info and confirmation isn't bad
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top