What's new
  • Please do not post any links until you have 3 posts as they will automatically be rejected to prevent SPAM. Many words are also blocked due to being used in SPAM Messages. Thanks!

Ryzen 5000 - 3 Features in Zen 3 That Will Make It Worth It!

Gav

Administrator
Staff member
Folding Team
Joined
Oct 2, 2006
Messages
1,296
Location
Canada

Let’s get started with AMD. Some people at the company teased an announcement which was then announced for the announcement of their upcoming next-gen CPU and GPU’s. Yes, I’m making fun of their marketing. Anyways, we got the next-gen Ryzen announcement on the 8th of October and Today we’re talking about the big changes from Zen 2 to Zen 3.

So,Next-gen Ryzen, it would be called Ryzen 4000 like expected but rumors are popping up with a possible change to 5000. It’s just a name though, so who cares. That next-gen family of CPU’s will sport Zen 3 cores. We’ve known through some EPYC documents that this architecture would feature some changes to the cache. Instead of 16mb of L3 cache for groups of 4 cores, or CCX’s, Zen 3 would have a unified 32MB block of L3 cache for all 8 cores on each chipset.
 

Entz

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 17, 2011
Messages
1,516
Location
Kelowna
I really hope that is true. Having APUs/Mobile a "tier" above was silly and had to throw OEMs fits. You should be able to look at the number and figure out the generation. People would be like "why would I get a 3700 over a 4600 the number is higher on the latter"...
 
Last edited:

Bond007

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 24, 2009
Messages
5,801
Location
Nova Scotia
4 is considered unlucky in China (I believe), so maybe that is why.

I am all on board if they align cpu and APU naming though.
 

CMetaphor

Quadfather
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
5,713
Location
Montreal, Canada
Wait, back to combined L3? Does that mean the overly complicated OCing will go away? To this day I still don't think I understand all of the CCX "attributes". Never understood what was wrong with locking all the cores together - for OC purposes - and getting the maximum OC to the point where the weakest core is stable. It still just makes more sense to me. One core gets almost the maximum of it's potential, and the rest are OCd and comfortable.

... Maybe it's just me?
 

Bond007

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 24, 2009
Messages
5,801
Location
Nova Scotia
Wait, back to combined L3? Does that mean the overly complicated OCing will go away? To this day I still don't think I understand all of the CCX "attributes". Never understood what was wrong with locking all the cores together - for OC purposes - and getting the maximum OC to the point where the weakest core is stable. It still just makes more sense to me. One core gets almost the maximum of it's potential, and the rest are OCd and comfortable.

... Maybe it's just me?

I suspect OCing will be very similar.

if you do tasks that don’t take advantage of all the cores,then you would be better off with fewer faster cores.
 

CMetaphor

Quadfather
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
5,713
Location
Montreal, Canada
if you do tasks that don’t take advantage of all the cores,then you would be better off with fewer faster cores.

That much is pretty obvious...? Dynamic "turbo" OCs are already everywhere in abundancento boost the clocks of a few cores when not all are being loaded. Although from what I've seen most people disable it when they go for Max OC 🤷‍♂️
 
Top