Will be interesting to see how long this RAM insanity will last. If it doesn't calm down before Zen 6 releases, people like me on older platforms might just have to skip Zen 6 entirely and wait for the AM6 platform.
https://overclock3d.net/news/cpu_mainboard/amd-extends-am5-l...
They stumbled into the right direction with strix halo but I have a feeling they won't recognize the win/follow up.
They could in theory do on package dram as faster first level memory, but I doubt we'll see that anytime soon on desktop and it probably wouldn't fit under the heat spreader
You won’t be able to add RAM to the die itself there no room on the interposer really.
When you go to the desktop it becomes harder to justify including beefed up memory controllers just for the CPU vs putting that towards beefing some other part of the CPU up that has more of an impact in cost or performance.
Even when feeding all cores, the max bandwith used by the CPU is less than 200GB/s, in fact it is quite comparable to Intel/AMD CPUs and even less than their high-end ones (x86 still rules on the multi-core front in any case).
I actually see this as a weakness of Apple Silicon, because it doesn't scale that well. It's basically the problem of their Ultra chip: doesn't allow doubling of the compute and doesn't allow faster RAM bandwith, you only get higher RAM capacity in exchange for slower GPU compute.
They just scaled up their mobile architecture and it has its limit.
Sure. Keep the DIMM sockets and add HBM to the CPU package.
Actually probably the best possible architecture. You can choose to have both or only one, backward compatible and future proof.
Yes, it adds another level to the memory hierarchy but that can be fine tuned.
You are also overestimating how much room there is on the interposer.
As someone with a 9950x3d with direct die cooling setup I can tell you there is no room.
So to say that Zen 6/7 supports AM5 on desktop, doesn't necessarily exclude that Zen 6/7 product family in general doesn't support other new/interesting sockets on desktop (or mobile) also. Maybe products for AM6 and AM5 from the same zen family.
Medusa Halo and the Zen7 based 'Grimlock Halo' version might be the interesting ones to watch (if you like efficient Apple-stlyle big APUs with all the memory bandwidth)
(Ignore my AM5 workstation with 192GB RAM in the corner)
Considering PC desktops. DDR4 is 3200 MT/s max JEDEC. DDR5 is available on AMD since 3 years and is 5600. DDR6 specification is almost finished. It looks like DDR5 will double performance just right before new DDR6 DIMMs appear. Thus I'd expect DDR6 to double the bandwidth just as late when the new memory standard arrives.
Strange, I bought 64GB DDR5 6400MHz last year and apparently my motherboard can handle up to 7200MHz (or more with overclocking).
Intel's desktop CPUs from last year support up to 5600 MT/s with regular DDR5 DIMMs, or 6400 MT/s for CUDIMMs. Speeds higher than this are achievable, but are overclocking.
If your memory modules are rated for 6400 MT/s, they are most likely advertising the speed when using an Intel XMP or AMD EXPO profile to overclock the memory (and the CPU's memory controller). The JEDEC standard profile likely is no faster than 5600 MT/s. It's also possible that you bought last year a kit of CUDIMMs rated for 6400 MT/s without overclocking, brand new to the market at that time, and of no help whatsoever with any CPU that isn't an Intel Arrow Lake.
The singaling is double the transfers but the bandwidth does not double.
We've seen what ... 5 ... itterations now and people still get this wrong.
The doubling of transfers comes at the cost of latency and processing overhead, always, until the new standard matures and might match the predecessor latency.
Did dual channel DDR5 double dual channel DDR4 bandwidth? Short answer ... nope, not even close, and DDR4 4000 remains viable and trades blows with DDR5 to this day in application performance despite "losing" in sulunthetics.
In fact my wife is still rocking that machine - although her gaming needs are much less equipment intense than mine. After a small refurb I gave it (new case, new air cooler, new PSU) - I expect it to last another 5 years for her.
My new one is a 9700X. Didn't feel the need to spring for higher power budget for a marginal gaming performance bump. But I suppose that also means it's much more practical for me to jump to a newer CPU later.
It's faster than the prior machine, but it sure does not feel like it does things the previous one didn't
I think it's very telling so many people upgrading now are coming from Haswell chips, they are a legendary chip generation, and arguably the last time anyone needed a CPU upgrade short of operating system support or warranty concerns.
Notably, Haswell makes the cut for Win11.
Not that I'd use that over Linux. (I run Arch, btw)
It makes the cut for something else, x86-64v3.
Which I thought was the baseline for Win11. Apparently, not the case.
I'm a gamer, often playing games that need a BEEFY CPU, like MS Flight Simulator. My upgrade from an i9-9900K to a Ryzen 9800X3D was noticeable.
6000 C28 at 256GB using 4x64 is not at all on the bandwidth high end these days, but it's way more than DDR4 could provide.
Most boards support 4x64 at 5600+ now, some go to 6400 with it if you tune voltages and terminations. .
Only if they overestimate demand and overproduce CPUs. Otherwise it will lead to higher prices because there's less economy of scale.
I'd love to build a new desktop soon but I couldn't justify the cost and am instead building out a used desktop that's still on ddr4 / lga1151.
I just checked how much the 64 Gb ddr4 in my desktop would cost now... it starts at 2.5 times what i paid in 2022.
Sorry AMD, I would maybe like a new desktop but not now.
Something like 5900x on 2nm or 4nm