While AMD has already plans for 5nm, Intel is fine-tuning their 14nm+++++++++++ process. Looking forward to Zen 2.

Fox2232:

They should ask questions closer to metal. Like how much more power efficient 7nm is. Or if they achieved clock improvement target. Those were not answered, yet and there is good chance that some nice bits of info will come.

I remember some time ago there was information floating that we may see 5.0 GHz mark reached on 7nm ryzen. Personally, I doubt that, however, 4.5 out of the box seems possible, and 4.6-4.7 with OC. If that will be the case, its perfect all-rounder CPU for everything - movies, games, production, day-to-day stuff.

I wonder if we will have to bench games on 480 p with those so we can declare intel the gaming king again!

Venix:

I wonder if we will have to bench games on 480 p with those so we can declare intel the gaming king again!

My 4770k lately became unstable on 4.4, so I tuned it down to 4.3 @ 1.225v Hell, I can tune it down to 4.2 and it won't bottleneck anything due to the resolution I have - 3440x1440.

yeeeman:

...this high refresh rate thing is another big BS...I guess stupid is not the one who asks, but the one who gives.

See you in the court of law. Using 100Hz UWQHD display , with plans to buy the 200Hz one when it finally gets released.

Seems like a wise decision to have Epyc get first treatment, for a few reasons: 1. Now that Ryzen has proved its worth, the server market is where AMD's real money will come in. 2. AMD can offer higher core counts than Intel and at significantly lower prices (you can buy an entire fully-equipped 32-core Epyc server for the price of just a 28-core Xeon) while having competitive performance. Zen 2 will be even more compelling. The sooner they get a head-start on this lead, the more profit they'll make. Intel will eventually make a product that is more competitively priced. 3. Servers don't tend to care about very high clock speeds. As everyone knows, higher clock speeds tend to affect stability. GloFo and TSMC may have figured out how to get 7nm, but it probably isn't refined enough for desktop use with higher clock speeds. If Epyc still doesn't buy AMD enough time, they could also focus on mobile chips, which also don't need high clock speeds. Hopefully by the time those are released, these companies will have got 7nm totally figured out. This of course is assuming there are even clock speed issues with 7nm in the first place.

Zen 2 sounds more and more like my next upgrade.

Fox2232:

I wonder why they are asking questions which have been already answered. 7nm were sampling some time ago. By now they are likely in process of ramping up production. Q1 2019 is almost certain as they will not take year from finishing design and successful sampling to release. Ryzen 3xxx Q1 may be possible too. Maybe early Q2. They should ask questions closer to metal. Like how much more power efficient 7nm is. Or if they achieved clock improvement target. Those were not answered, yet and there is good chance that some nice bits of info will come.

dude, you know way more "inside baseball" than a financial reporter. this guy is excited just because of the yield creates lower costs, he could care less about what we care about.

"AMD Zen 2 nm architecture starts with EPYC CPUs - Talks 5nm also" Think there is a 7 missing in there somewhere... schmitbag, my thoughts pretty much. The GloFlo 7nm process was built for very high frequencies of which you really won't need in 99.9% of the server CPU market. As long as TSMC's process gets significantly high enough in frequencies and does it without a ton of heat then this approach could be genius. AMD will also have a lot more production capability splitting up enterprise and and desktop manufacturing. I suspect both the server and desktop products are going to be a huge success and AMD will need the expanded manufacturing capabilities. Lisa Su is on a freaking role.

Fox2232:

Well, IIRC that info was from foundry. That their 7nm is capable doing it. But then there is CPU design itself. While Zen/Zen+ was 100% held down on clock by manufacturing process, it does not automatically mean that 7nm capable to reach 5GHz will fit Zen2.

That is all true but at least the design was 5Ghz+ vs GloFlo's 14nm lpp which was a low power low frequency designed process that had targets of 3Ghz. I think it's safe to say if AMD's design could hit 4Ghz on on that 14nm lpp node it will likely hit around 5Ghz on the Gloflo 7nm node. Fox, I realize he was reading foundry specs into what Ryzen could do but likely the two won't be to far apart.

5nm is still years away. 2021 at the earliest

cryohellinc:

My 4770k lately became unstable on 4.4, so I tuned it down to 4.3 @ 1.225v Hell, I can tune it down to 4.2 and it won't bottleneck anything due to the resolution I have - 3440x1440.

On every PC, ever, there is always a bottleneck. Always. To think otherwise either you're expressing it in a way to exaggerate for effect, or if you truly believe that, you don't actually understand how bottlenecking works or what it means. 4.2 is a bit low for that CPU. Unstable "lately" ? That means either one of two things. The CPU is dying, was always unstable but now is becoming more apparent, or you have too much dust in your heatsink etc. Or maybe just the wrong combo of bios settings (LLC etc).

that "Title" is very irritating... at first i thought,m whaaat 2nm??? where, how, what... the wording is a little irritating.

D3M1G0D:

If AMD can start shipping 7nm EPYCs by next year then that'll be a major win. Intel won't have their 10nm stuff ready for servers by at least 2020 (and that's assuming there are no more delays). 48-core EPYC on 7nm vs 28-core Xeon on 14nm = no contest.

It matters not, Intel will still reign supreme as far as gaming performance goes. And that's all that matters to a lot of us.

I know what you did here "AMD Zen 2 nm architecture", I read 2nm 😀

D3M1G0D:

How do you figure? Do you think Intel's 14nm++ parts will still reign supreme over AMD's 7nm parts? Matisse will arrive in Q2 of next year and Intel will have nothing to challenge it until the holidays (assuming that 10nm isn't delayed again, which is most likely will!). Not only will Rome give Intel a serious run for their money in the server market, but their long-time dominance of the consumer market will also come under threat. Seriously now, give me a realistic scenario of how Intel will counter AMD's upcoming 7nm Zen 2 products?

D3miG0d is exactly right. the other shoe that needs to be dropped is pricing. it is physically impossible for a 10nm cpu to meet yields and pricing of a 7nm cpu. and while that 10nm is having problems, the 7nm is about to be shipped, leaving the reality of a 14nm cpu vs. a 7nm cpu in the market this year. while it is not a true doubling of yield, it comes close. so TSMC's process produces nearly twice as much at nearly half the cost from the same sized silicon wafers. and the true reality is the vast majority of "gamers" are young and cannot afford much. if anyone thinks that an average gamer will plonk down over 50% more for a less efficient, hotter cpu when there is an equivalent or better for less money i have a bridge to sell them. fanboy-ism is one thing, a complete lapse of reasoning another. just look at AMD's numbers for the last quarter, and Intel's...if you do not count Intel's data center income (over 50%) AMD has grabbed a huge share of the enthusiast (non-oem) market and that was on a similar process...not 7nm - which is more profitable.

I just want to point out that the nm numbers don't matter for direct comparisons - you need to look at feature size. Intel's 10nm is still overall slightly better than Samsung/TSMC/GF's 7nm nodes. I think the gap has been closed though and it will only be a matter of time before the other three are shipping better manufacturing giving AMD an advantage. Intel will either have to sell off it's foundry or compete in some other way.

Guys i see something else my self, intel was since ...20 years or so on a superior lithography 1 step ahead , this is the first time ever amd will have the advantage on it! Amd still is on the backfoot in this both 12 and 14 nm from glofo/tsmc are infirior to intels 14nm+++++++++ (am i missing a + or two?) .

Denial:

I just want to point out that the nm numbers don't matter for direct comparisons - you need to look at feature size. Intel's 10nm is still overall slightly better than Samsung/TSMC/GF's 7nm nodes. I think the gap has been closed though and it will only be a matter of time before the other three are shipping better manufacturing giving AMD an advantage. Intel will either have to or compete in some other way.

Intel's 10nm and GloFlos 7nm are supposed to be pretty close in transistor densities. However there is so much more than just densities albeit that is very important. One key thing is how IBM designed GloFlos 7nm to push 5Ghz+ frequencies much like Intel's 14nm ++ does. I suspect Intel is working on that as we speak for 10nm and is likely what is holding them back as they do have low power low frequency 10nm parts out in the wild now. I don't think Intel will have to sell off it's foundry. Honestly once you hit these 10nm / 7nm nodes there isn't much more you can shrink anyhow. You really only have one more full node shrink left(5nm for Intel or 3-4nm for others) until you have to figure out something entirely new. There is going to be a long lag where everyone is on the a similar process node and those processes will get tweaked a lot over time like intel has done with 14nm.