By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
JRPGfan on 08 January 2020
Edit Thread
Pemalite said:
DonFerrari said:
Don't think they are going for a beefy CPU. They rather put the budget on GPU and RAM.

Whilst the 4800H is beefy for a notebook, it's mid-range on the PC... And depending on clocks, maybe even low-end.

JRPGfan said:

Im not sure how big the chip is, or how much the iGPU portion takes up.
But Im sure once you cut cache abit, these 8 cores are probably not too big, or costly to have in a console.

AMD typically reserves up to 50% of the APU for the Graphics, that has been their design philosophy since they started making APU's with their Fusion initiative.

JRPGfan said:

There pretty energy effecient, and probably not overly expensive (im sure you ll see these in laptops that go as low as 600$).
With BoM on laptops being higher than consoles (overall) I dont see why you couldnt use this cpu in a console.

Probably energy efficient for an AMD mobile part... AMD has never had notebook CPU's with acceptable idle power, which isn't an issue for consoles or PC of course.
Intel however is still a step ahead of AMD in this aspect.

Intrinsic said:

The cache has already been cut down from the equivalent desktop part; basically its been quartered, from 32Mb down to 8MB. I

The hit to cache shouldn't have a corresponding hit to performance, the IMC and uncore is on die which will help massively with reducing latency, which is a big deviation from Zen on desktop.
With consoles also using the APU approach, I would expect to see similar for next-gen consoles.

Intrinsic said:

But even if  SMT is cut, that feature only adds about 30% to overall CPU performance anyways.

Sometimes it even reduces performance.

In saying that... SMT is mostly to ensure that the full CPU pipeline is being utilized fully rather than having parts of it idle.

JRPGfan said:

"Next-gen APUs will be in the 300mm2-405mm2 range, up from the 300mm2-360mm2 range of the current-gen chips. "

After Xbox showed off the photo of the chip, people have estimated it to be upwards of 420mm^2.
Supposedly its rumored to have 56 CU's (compute units) (3584 shaders) in the GPU portion.

Sony is only useing 36 CU's but running at higher speeds (smaller chip to save costs), downsize is its not as power effecient to do this.
Sony chip might be like ~270-280mm^2.

Higher clockspeeds but with a smaller chip doesn't mean it will be cheaper to produce.
Sometimes the opposite is true... Because you reach a point where the majority of chips won't hit a certain clockspeed without significant increases in voltage which then results in an acceleration of electromigration.

It's a balancing act.


Mass quote of text.... Im not sure how to cut out parts when you multiquote so the entire thing just goes with.

"Probably energy efficient for an AMD mobile part... AMD has never had notebook CPU's with acceptable idle power, which isn't an issue for consoles or PC of course.Intel however is still a step ahead of AMD in this aspect." - Permalite


^ a by-product of the infinity fabric design they choose.   (race to idle, wasnt something AMD was good at)

However they are aware of it, and have worked at it.
Supposedly they "fixed" this issue (alot of it is apparently how fast/slow it enters/exits idle/turbo, which is now x5 faster):
That and 20%+ lower soc powerdraw (reduced how low things can go and funktion), ontop of 2x power effeciency (mostly from 7nm node)...

This chip is gonna change AMD in the laptop scene imo.
Its gonna be competitive when it comes to battery life too.

We need to wait a few months to see it in hands of reviewers, but I believe the idle power draw wont be a issue.


Edit:

Also Remember this for a console part (plugged in).... that really doesnt have any barring on Xbox Series X or Playstation 5.
However I remember there was some talk about next gen consoles being alot more "green" in that idle power / sleep modes, would be drastically improved.

Also with the 3000U series, AMD idle power wasnt so bad (they improved it a decent bit, with the 3000 series).
Something like the ThinkPad X395, with a 3700U has 14,5+ hours battery life (while running MobileMark 2014).
(yes supposedly the intel version ( i7-8565U) of the laptop with same battery, lasted like 17hours)

Still any laptop that can run 14,5hours straigth in a benchmark, has decent enough battery life no?

Last edited by JRPGfan - on 08 January 2020