AMD confirms Zen 4 and RDNA 3 remain on track to launch next year

midian182

Posts: 7,085   +62
Staff member
Forward-looking: The seemingly endless global chip shortage has raised questions over whether anticipated product releases will be delayed. In the case of AMD’s Zen 4 Ryzen CPUs and RDNA 3 Radeon RX GPUs, the company says not to worry—they’re still launching next year.

Speaking during AMD’s Q2 2021 investors call, CEO Dr. Lisa Su said, “We remain on-track to launch next-generation products in 2022, including our Zen 4 processors built with industry-leading 5nm process technology and our RDNA 3 GPUs.”

Su wasn’t specific about when the next-gen graphics cards and CPUs will arrive. Rumors put the launch dates sometime in the fourth quarter of 2022, and we might even see both products release simultaneously, or at least very close together.

We recently heard claims that the Zen 4-based Ryzen 6000 desktop processors, reportedly codenamed Raphael, will come with a maximum 16 cores rather than the previously predicted 24. That’s just speculation, of course, and AMD itself has hinted that they might exceed 16 cores.

Raphael CPUs, built on TSMC’s 5nm fabrication process, will feature an AM5 socket that switches from AMD’s usual pin grid array (PGA) design to the same land grid array (LGA) used by Intel, though the chip itself is expected to retain the same 40mm x 40mm size as those used in the AM4 socket—current AM4 cooling setups will likely work with AM5 through a conversion kit.

Zen 4 is also said to offer 25% IPC gains over Zen 3, clock speeds of around 5 GHz, and support for DDR5 and PCIe 5.0.

AMD's rise continues

RDNA 3 graphics cards, meanwhile, are also expected to use TSMC’s 5nm process and offer performance-per-watt improvements comparable to the 50% jump from RDNA to RDNA 2. The flagship Navi 31 GPU is rumored to feature over 15,000 cores and boast over three times the performance of Navi 21. Let’s just hope they’re easier to buy than the Radeon RX 6000 series.

Elsewhere, Q2 was another bumper quarter for AMD. The company brought in $3.9 billion in revenue, up an incredible 99% compared to the same period a year earlier, and it’s gross profit was $1.8 billion, up 116% YoY.

Permalink to story.

 

VitalyT

Posts: 5,850   +5,922
AMD itself has hinted that they might exceed 16 cores
Only if they succeed with their 128-core Threadripper prototype, to make 32-core + 64-core + 128-core strictly Threadripper territory, leaving 16-core + 24-core for "regular" desktops. Otherwise, there won't be any 24-core regular CPU, as it will make 16-core Threadripper look weak.
 

noel24

Posts: 749   +920
I wonder how officially launching a new generation could improve availibility of production slots in TSMC or convince scalpers not to buyout whole stock at launch?
Some kinda magic?
 

Dimitriid

Posts: 959   +1,774
Yeah sure Lisa: "RDNA 3" can "remain in track" all you want if you haven't been able to sell A SINGLE RDNA 2 card at MSRP and you're getting killed in the steam survey.

It's pretty damn easy to keep "releasing" products when all you have are paper launches for all your GPUs.
 

wiyosaya

Posts: 6,404   +4,743
For this, I cannot help but refer to @NeoMorpheus post here. 🤣
I wonder how officially launching a new generation could improve availibility of production slots in TSMC or convince scalpers not to buyout whole stock at launch?
Some kinda magic?
To be fair, TSMC is considering new fabs https://www.techspot.com/news/90551-tsmc-evaluating-germany-possible-location-european-arm.html

I agree that the problem of scalping is another issue that somehow needs resolution.
I am not losing hope, but I won't pay a scalper's high prices even though my next build will likely be Zen 4.
 

Tantor

Posts: 189   +335
Yeah sure Lisa: "RDNA 3" can "remain in track" all you want if you haven't been able to sell A SINGLE RDNA 2 card at MSRP and you're getting killed in the steam survey.

It's pretty damn easy to keep "releasing" products when all you have are paper launches for all your GPUs.

Ridiculous. AMD has no control over card prices. They're driven by retail demand, not by the MSRP.


 

nnguy2

Posts: 308   +610
Yeah sure Lisa: "RDNA 3" can "remain in track" all you want if you haven't been able to sell A SINGLE RDNA 2 card at MSRP and you're getting killed in the steam survey.

It's pretty damn easy to keep "releasing" products when all you have are paper launches for all your GPUs.

I got 5900x at launch for MSRP. I also got Sappire 6800 Nitro + at msrp. Both at a brick and mortar store.
 

Dimitriid

Posts: 959   +1,774
Ridiculous. AMD has no control over card prices. They're driven by retail demand, not by the MSRP.
That's a common cop-out: They absolutely *do* have control of the price if they had any control whatsoever of supply. And part of "control" implies NOT LAUNCHING BEFORE YOU HAVE SUFFICIENT PARTS TO SELL which is precisely what Lisa refuses to do: No delays, we don't care about actually producing cards, we're just careless engineers that create the parts entirely in theory and don't make any business decisions based on the reality of our overwhelmed foundry partner(s).

And all of this was BEFORE there was even any pandemic or mining-craze related issues. This was just Lisa deciding "Yes we need to release RDNA 2.0 right when we're also releasing Ryzen 5000 and not one but TWO brand new consoles" basically saying "I don't care if we want like 4x or 5x more chips out of TSMC than what we would usually get I'm sure they'll figure something out"

Just, no: Stop making excuses for AMD. If they can't get enough chips fabricated because they have too many other products and not enough allocated capacity with foundries, that's fine. It's a shame but it's better than endless, pointless, stupid paper launches.

I got 5900x at launch for MSRP. I also got Sappire 6800 Nitro + at msrp. Both at a brick and mortar store.
I went out of my way to exclude Ryzen 5000 series from my comment for a reason: I know that went fairly well. In fact I am sure Lisa is actively sacrificing RDNA 2.0 dedicated space just to get more Ryzen 5000 chips out of the gate since they probably consider that a more worthwhile market. This isn't a bad choice by the way it's what they have to do if there's just not enough fab nodes to go around.

Just be honest about it.
 
Last edited:

NeoMorpheus

Posts: 883   +1,678
I got 5900x at launch for MSRP. I also got Sappire 6800 Nitro + at msrp. Both at a brick and mortar store.
I got a 5600x and a 6900xt at msrp at amd.com. It took me many tries, but its possible.

Meanwhile...

6dba6f69b405ea9f85dd2f474c13738fdb11fa41b735c4ba1006a10cd3ccb337.gif
 

Squid Surprise

Posts: 4,151   +3,330
Only if they succeed with their 128-core Threadripper prototype, to make 32-core + 64-core + 128-core strictly Threadripper territory, leaving 16-core + 24-core for "regular" desktops. Otherwise, there won't be any 24-core regular CPU, as it will make 16-core Threadripper look weak.
Latest rumors say the 6990 will have 96 cores... will be interesting to see how that goes... wonder if they’ll be 64 big, 32 small... or actually 96 big... either way, I think 16 core threadripper is gone in Zen 3
 

HardReset

Posts: 1,240   +898
I wonder how officially launching a new generation could improve availibility of production slots in TSMC or convince scalpers not to buyout whole stock at launch?
Some kinda magic?
For production slots, easy. 5nm and 7nm chips are manufactured on different production lines. 5nm production is added to current 7nm production.

Scalpers, well...
That's a common cop-out: They absolutely *do* have control of the price if they had any control whatsoever of supply. And part of "control" implies NOT LAUNCHING BEFORE YOU HAVE SUFFICIENT PARTS TO SELL which is precisely what Lisa refuses to do: No delays, we don't care about actually producing cards, we're just careless engineers that create the parts entirely in theory and don't make any business decisions based on the reality of our overwhelmed foundry partner(s).
There are no availability problems. Just checked one shop from my country (not big country). Immediately available cards (different brands, total):

6700XT: over 100
6800XT: at least 50
6900XT: at least 150

About Nvidia:

3090: around 100
3080Ti: around 80
3080: around 50
3070Ti: around 20
3070: around 50
3060: around 40
3060: over 200

Availability problems? No. Prices, around 70-120% over MSRP. Clearly AMD's fault 🤦‍♂️"👍"
 

Kosmoz

Posts: 384   +694
Yeah sure Lisa: "RDNA 3" can "remain in track" all you want if you haven't been able to sell A SINGLE RDNA 2 card at MSRP and you're getting killed in the steam survey.

It's pretty damn easy to keep "releasing" products when all you have are paper launches for all your GPUs.
You got it wrong buddy, AMD is STILL selling at MSRP on their own store, sure not in great numbers and not worldwide, but they still do it even now....

You know what GPUs you can't find at MSRP AT ALL? The nvidia ones, not even on their store, the reference models are nowhere to be found.

So tone down the hate a little. AMD is making chips for 2 consoles, CPUs and GPUs all at TSMC (battling for wafer allocation with all the major players on the planet), while nvidia is doing a shitload of GPUs at Samsung, which has them as the biggest customer only... nvidia at Samsung foundry is like a mad glutton at an all you can eat buffet, only for silicon wafers...yeah.
 

wiyosaya

Posts: 6,404   +4,743
Latest rumors say the 6990 will have 96 cores... will be interesting to see how that goes... wonder if they’ll be 64 big, 32 small... or actually 96 big... either way, I think 16 core threadripper is gone in Zen 3
IMO, Intel is pandering to us with "Big" and "Small" cores in the same CPU. Honestly, I think that coming from Intel is just because they can no longer charge astronomical prices for their "Enthusiast" CPUs and have decided that they cannot live without screwing the consumer, price-wise, using any means they can.

I do hope, though, that AMD will not adopt this tack. I don't know about anyone else, but I would be disappointed in AMD following suit and adopting yet another "Intel" mind set from the dark side. :scream: AMD's current Threadripper pricing was enabled, IMO, by Intel's astronomical Enthusiast CPU Pricing.
 

nodfor

Posts: 93   +162
You got it wrong buddy, AMD is STILL selling at MSRP on their own store, sure not in great numbers and not worldwide, but they still do it even now....

You know what GPUs you can't find at MSRP AT ALL? The nvidia ones, not even on their store, the reference models are nowhere to be found.

So tone down the hate a little. AMD is making chips for 2 consoles, CPUs and GPUs all at TSMC (battling for wafer allocation with all the major players on the planet), while nvidia is doing a shitload of GPUs at Samsung, which has them as the biggest customer only... nvidia at Samsung foundry is like a mad glutton at an all you can eat buffet, only for silicon wafers...yeah.
Noone is gonna bother buy from a scalper, if a retailer has the product at the same or lower price. And retailers will lower prices when their competitors have stock and they want to be the first to move inventory at a profit.
But for all of this to happen, the producer must SUPPLY the product in good amounts.
 

Avro Arrow

Posts: 1,732   +2,049
TechSpot Elite
To me, the most interesting thing about Zen4 will be the Genoa-based EPYC CPUs for the server side. I've always loved EPYC CPUs because they're just disgustingly powerful so I've "consumed mass quantities" of content about them and they are just absolutely insane. :laughing:

However, the news in the EPYC pipeline is... staggering. As insane as the Rome(Zen2)-based EPYC 7702P and Milan(Zen3)-based EPYC 7713P are with their 64 cores and 128 threads, the flagship Genoa(Zen4)-based CPU will have 128 cores and 256 threads! OH MADONNA!!!

Going by what I know about how EPYC model numbers are generated (and looking at the Wikipedia list of EPYC server CPUs), I'm going to use the S.W.A.G. system (sophisticated wild-a$$ed guess) and see if I can't predict what the model number of the 128-core monster will be.

The 1st digit seems to indicate the CPU series and non-embedded server EPYC CPUs are 7000-series, so the first digit will of course be 7. Standalone EPYC CPUs (for single CPU systems) all have P as a suffix so that one's easy as well. So we'll start with EPYC 7xxxP.

The 2nd digit seems to indicate core counts and I think that, based on what AMD has done with EPYC in the past, this number will be 9. Now we have 7 and 9 and P (I'd rather have 7 OF 9 but without the P :laughing:) which means EPYC 79xxP.
Explanation: AMD seems to use the number 5 for 32 cores and 7 for 64 cores atm and I expect that it will be expanded to also cover 72-core CPUs. I imagine that 8 would have to be used for 84 and 96 core models. That leaves 9 for the monster.

The 3rd digit seems to indicate clock speed levels. I think that 0 will be the most likely number used. So now we're at EPYC 790xP.
Explanation: I expect the base clocks on the 128-core monster to be somewhere in the range of 1.2-1.6GHz (we'll say 1.4GHz). Let's be real here, how else could you possibly keep this thing cool? Besides, a 128-core EPYC CPU at 1.4GHz would still decimate CPUs with higher clocks and lower core counts when it comes to server/data centre performance. Keeping the clocks down goes a long way to reduce power consumption/heat but it also has an advantage that most people might not consider. By only requiring the silicon to be stable at low clock speeds, silicon yields can increase dramatically which keeps costs down. So at this point, it's an EPYC 790xP.

The 4th digit is the generation number. This one's just obvious.

So, my prediction is that the 128-core, 256-thread standalone Genoa-based EPYC CPU will be called the EPYC 7904P.

(Or possibly the 7914P if AMD decides to be difficult. :laughing:)
 
Last edited:

hahahanoobs

Posts: 3,612   +1,716
IMO, Intel is pandering to us with "Big" and "Small" cores in the same CPU. Honestly, I think that coming from Intel is just because they can no longer charge astronomical prices for their "Enthusiast" CPUs and have decided that they cannot live without screwing the consumer, price-wise, using any means they can.

I do hope, though, that AMD will not adopt this tack. I don't know about anyone else, but I would be disappointed in AMD following suit and adopting yet another "Intel" mind set from the dark side. :scream: AMD's current Threadripper pricing was enabled, IMO, by Intel's astronomical Enthusiast CPU Pricing.
Downplay upcoming Intel/Microsoft/NVIDIA/Apple product...
Praise AMD's upcoming product.

That logic never made sense to me.
Waiting for reviews does.
 
Last edited:

Moochy

Posts: 9   +15
For this, I cannot help but refer to @NeoMorpheus post here. 🤣

To be fair, TSMC is considering new fabs https://www.techspot.com/news/90551-tsmc-evaluating-germany-possible-location-european-arm.html

I agree that the problem of scalping is another issue that somehow needs resolution.
I am not losing hope, but I won't pay a scalper's high prices even though my next build will likely be Zen 4.
I will stay with my Ryzen 3600 and 1070ti for as long as they continue to do what I need. I refuse to buy scalper items. Never.
Running a 144 1400 monitor and my day to day and gaming are very acceptable.
 

Gimp65

Posts: 37   +76
Yeah sure Lisa: "RDNA 3" can "remain in track" all you want if you haven't been able to sell A SINGLE RDNA 2 card at MSRP and you're getting killed in the steam survey.

It's pretty damn easy to keep "releasing" products when all you have are paper launches for all your GPUs.
You seem to misunderstand what a paper launch is, nothing from AMD has been paper launched since Zen 1. Tons of RDNA 2 has been pumped out. That it's not enough has to do with well known factors that affect many others than AMD. Things like historic demand, substrate shortages, covid, etc etc, those are not excuses, those are real circumstances. Nothing to do with paperlaunch at all.
 

Dimitriid

Posts: 959   +1,774
You seem to misunderstand what a paper launch is, nothing from AMD has been paper launched since Zen 1. Tons of RDNA 2 has been pumped out. That it's not enough has to do with well known factors that affect many others than AMD. Things like historic demand, substrate shortages, covid, etc etc, those are not excuses, those are real circumstances. Nothing to do with paperlaunch at all.
Again the assumption is that poor AMD could have not foreseen the increase in demand, which I simply refuse to accept: that's pure, unadultered cheerleading for a corporation and I have no stomach for it, or further need to discus it.
 

maxxcool7421

Posts: 39   +62
Yeah sure Lisa: "RDNA 3" can "remain in track" all you want if you haven't been able to sell A SINGLE RDNA 2 card at MSRP and you're getting killed in the steam survey.

It's pretty damn easy to keep "releasing" products when all you have are paper launches for all your GPUs.

there nothing paper about it .. they made HUGE monetary gains selling real silicon to .. And to be honest your blaming the wrong people. this has nothing to do with mining. Amd cards have never been that good at mining. this is all about WFH and people combining their gaming rigs with remote work and upgrading them.
 

maxxcool7421

Posts: 39   +62
That's a common cop-out: They absolutely *do* have control of the price if they had any control whatsoever of supply. And part of "control" implies NOT LAUNCHING BEFORE YOU HAVE SUFFICIENT PARTS TO SELL which is precisely what Lisa refuses to do: No delays, we don't care about actually producing cards, we're just careless engineers that create the parts entirely in theory and don't make any business decisions based on the reality of our overwhelmed foundry partner(s).

And all of this was BEFORE there was even any pandemic or mining-craze related issues. This was just Lisa deciding "Yes we need to release RDNA 2.0 right when we're also releasing Ryzen 5000 and not one but TWO brand new consoles" basically saying "I don't care if we want like 4x or 5x more chips out of TSMC than what we would usually get I'm sure they'll figure something out"

Just, no: Stop making excuses for AMD. If they can't get enough chips fabricated because they have too many other products and not enough allocated capacity with foundries, that's fine. It's a shame but it's better than endless, pointless, stupid paper launches.


I went out of my way to exclude Ryzen 5000 series from my comment for a reason: I know that went fairly well. In fact I am sure Lisa is actively sacrificing RDNA 2.0 dedicated space just to get more Ryzen 5000 chips out of the gate since they probably consider that a more worthwhile market. This isn't a bad choice by the way it's what they have to do if there's just not enough fab nodes to go around.

Just be honest about it.

so many wrong statements here ... jebus ... lets go with just one.

AMD has no control over chip production. TSMC/GLOBOF both told AMD they could make X-number of cpus and gpus... they fulfilled the contract based on 2018 demand.

TSMC/GLOBOF had no idea deman would spike up 3x ... so TSMC/GLOBOF did not have enough capacity to allow for extra parts to bge made. ergo TSMC/GLOBOF is to blame along with the WFH spike.

Proof? NVIDIA is in the exact same boat, but does not make but-loads of CPU's ... sooo same deal .. goes both ways.
 

HardReset

Posts: 1,240   +898
Again the assumption is that poor AMD could have not foreseen the increase in demand, which I simply refuse to accept: that's pure, unadultered cheerleading for a corporation and I have no stomach for it, or further need to discus it.
Name one semiconductor company that foresaw upcoming increase in demand and successfully prepared for that.

Good luck.