AMD delays Ryzen 7040HS series and Intel cancels Thunder Bay SoCs

[mongeese]

What just happened? Intel and AMD both suffered casualties this week. Team Red lost its schedule at the last minute and had to postpone this month's launch of the 7040HS series to April. Team Blue said goodbye to a niche accelerator that it never got to launch – RIP Thunder Bay.

Announced at CES 2023, AMD's Ryzen 7040HS series (codenamed Phoenix) and the recently released 7045HX series are based on Zen 4 and use TSMC's N4 node, but the similarities stop there. The HS series features a monolithic die that combines an RDNA3 GPU with up to eight cores, and the HX series uses a chiplet design ported from the desktop series with only a basic integrated RDNA2 GPU but up to 16 cores.

Late Friday afternoon, AMD announced that the 7040HS series had been delayed by a month to iron out the bugs. "We now expect our OEM partners to launch the first notebooks powered by Ryzen 7040HS series processors in April," Team Red said in a press release.

Phoenix

Model	Cores / Threads	Base / Boost Clock	L2 + L3 Cache	GPU CUs	cTDP
R9 7940HS	8 / 16	4.0 / 5.2 GHz	24 MB	12	35-54 W
R7 7840HS	8 / 16	3.8 / 5.1 GHz	24 MB	12	35-54 W
R5 7640HS	6 / 12	4.3 / 5.0 GHz	22 MB	8	35-54 W

There are three models in the HS series: the R9 7940HS and R7 7840HS with eight cores each and the R5 7640HS with six cores. All three have roughly 5 GHz boost clocks and target a 35-54 W power bracket. The CPUs also come equipped with dedicated AI accelerators, and modest integrated RDNA3 GPUs clocked just under 3 GHz, intended to compete with the GTX 1650.

Thunder Bay

Intel started submitting patches to the Linux kernel last week that removed support for the Thunder Bay SoC. Phoronix found the explanation in a dreary patch note: "the product got canceled, and there are no end customers or users."

Thunder Bay was the codename of an SoC that Intel first referenced in its submissions to the Linux kernel in 2021. Rumors said it combined Movidius VPUs (visual processing units) with Xeon cores, but its now-removed drivers revealed that it had Arm A53 cores instead.

Don't worry if the name Movidius has you scratching your head. Intel acquired the company, which makes AI accelerators for IoT applications, in 2016, and phased out its branding. Intel continues to quietly release Movidius VPUs every couple of years since then but mostly integrated the tech into its other lines, including the 13th-gen Core CPUs as the AI unit.

Team Blue probably hasn't abandoned its plans to develop accelerators like Thunder Bay but has paused them as part of its recent efforts to cut costs.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/97989-amd-delays-ryzen-7040hs-series-intel-cancels-thunder.html

 

[Theinsanegamer]

I figured they were having issues, between most of the 7000 series mobile being reheated zen 2/3/3+, and the lack of leaks.

Phoenix is mostly interesting for that big iGPU, and I hope once we establish how useful 3d cache is for it we can get a larger 16cu+ model with 3d cache.

 

[GeforcerFX]

Can we please get some new APU's on the desktop? Like a proper replacement of the 5600 and 5700g? Laptops are all well and good but common, I would even take zen 3 cores still, but give me a nice 680m based iGPU.

 

[kiwigraeme]

Can we please get some new APU's on the desktop? Like a proper replacement of the 5600 and 5700g? Laptops are all well and good but common, I would even take zen 3 cores still, but give me a nice 680m based iGPU.

They have to be coming - with all the advances and 3nm processes - these have to have a large future - very competent Nuc/desktop/laptop/handheld- then you have dedicated gaming or production PCs
Promises of 3060 performance running on low watts and all

 

[loki1944]

Well for consumers...no real need for new processors; even stuff from 2008 is plenty for 99% of the general population; and for most gamers it's not necessary over what has come out since 2008 as long as it has 4c8t. You can still seen gains from a 3080Ti on an i7 920 in modern games; and even that old CPU is good to go for 99% of games (looking at you Ubisoft AC Origins DRM). Maybe these companies should go to a 4 year plan instead of a yearly plan.

 

[HardReset]

Can we please get some new APU's on the desktop? Like a proper replacement of the 5600 and 5700g? Laptops are all well and good but common, I would even take zen 3 cores still, but give me a nice 680m based iGPU.

For what? 5700G got only 70/100 https://www.techspot.com/review/2293-amd-ryzen-5700g/

Pretty useless according to review.

 

[yRaz]

Well for consumers...no real need for new processors; even stuff from 2008 is plenty for 99% of the general population; and for most gamers it's not necessary over what has come out since 2008 as long as it has 4c8t. You can still seen gains from a 3080Ti on an i7 920 in modern games; and even that old CPU is good to go for 99% of games (looking at you Ubisoft AC Origins DRM). Maybe these companies should go to a 4 year plan instead of a yearly plan.

2008 is pushing it quite a bit for gaming. If only looking at gaming I'd say 2016-2017. Even in older games my 1800x drops to 30-40FPS as soon as there is a lot going on on screen and is basically hardcapped at 90FPS on a 6700xt in anything that isn't CS:GO or Rainbow 6

 

[loki1944]

2008 is pushing it quite a bit for gaming. If only looking at gaming I'd say 2016-2017. Even in older games my 1800x drops to 30-40FPS as soon as there is a lot going on on screen and is basically hardcapped at 90FPS on a 6700xt in anything that isn't CS:GO or Rainbow 6

Actully I have an i7 920 (and 930/960/980X) as well as more modern i7 4770K/5930K/6850K/7800X/10700KF systems and it is perfectly capable of gaming @1080/2560/3440 and will show scaling ; the only game that caused me issues was AC: Origins.
i7 920 vs 6850K and 7800X

 

[KofeViR]

Can we please get some new APU's on the desktop? Like a proper replacement of the 5600 and 5700g? Laptops are all well and good but common, I would even take zen 3 cores still, but give me a nice 680m based iGPU.

APUs for desktop don't really sell well. Most used in OEM. iGPU is too slow and pointless and you sacrifice on the CPU part.

5700G can't even play games at 1080p on lowest settings and don't drop below 30 fps.

 

[yRaz]

Actully I have an i7 920 (and 930/960/980X) as well as more modern i7 4770K/5930K/6850K/7800X/10700KF systems and it is perfectly capable of gaming @1080/2560/3440 and will show scaling ; the only game that caused me issues was AC: Origins.
i7 920 vs 6850K and 7800X

The 920 is certainly showing it's age. The 6850k and 7800X goes almost exactly with what I was saying about 2016-2017 CPUs. I would like to see how they fair in more modern titles. These CPUs are seriously pushing their end of life. I'm also going to take those numbers you posted with a grain of salt, I flat out don't believe the GTA V numbers because I get 4-5FPS when maxing the game out at 4k. I know the 3080ti is faster than the 6700xt but it isn't 2,000% faster

 

[GeforcerFX]

APUs for desktop don't really sell well. Most used in OEM. iGPU is too slow and pointless and you sacrifice on the CPU part.

5700G can't even play games at 1080p on lowest settings and don't drop below 30 fps.

Really cause I play at 1080p 40-50 fps in most games almost everyday. Just depends on the game, but most popular titles have no issue at 1080p, a few of the newer aaa I have to drop res or lock at 30 fps, which a newer apu would solve since a 680m in a laptop apu is almost 40% faster than the 5700g in a desktop for graphics.. With the crap prices of budget gpu's the 5600g is still a good dollar per frame option, and I can build my system into very small cases which I like to do.

 

[Fulljack]

APUs for desktop don't really sell well. Most used in OEM. iGPU is too slow and pointless and you sacrifice on the CPU part.

5700G can't even play games at 1080p on lowest settings and don't drop below 30 fps.

it actually sold well on emerging market such as Asia and Africa, since dedicated graphics card are way too costly.

that's why people asks 6000G series and 7000G series on desktop. the improvement from Vega to RDNA2 or 3 with DDR5 are huge.

 

[KofeViR]

it actually sold well on emerging market such as Asia and Africa, since dedicated graphics card are way too costly.

that's why people asks 6000G series and 7000G series on desktop. the improvement from Vega to RDNA2 or 3 with DDR5 are huge.

Yeah during minig craze maybe, today it's not - dGPUs that demolish any APU are cheap and you are not stuck with a slow GPU forever.

APUs have their place, it's not in desktop PCs tho.

5700G is horribly slow in gaming.

The iGPU inside Ryzen 7000 is laughable as well.

dGPU is needed if you want decent perf and that is still true 5 years after people said APUs were the next big thing. In 10 years an APU might be able to deliver 1080p on medium with 60 fps.

 

[KofeViR]

Really cause I play at 1080p 40-50 fps in most games almost everyday. Just depends on the game, but most popular titles have no issue at 1080p, a few of the newer aaa I have to drop res or lock at 30 fps, which a newer apu would solve since a 680m in a laptop apu is almost 40% faster than the 5700g in a desktop for graphics.. With the crap prices of budget gpu's the 5600g is still a good dollar per frame option, and I can build my system into very small cases which I like to do.

It's pointless, and yeah reviews confirm what I am saying. Newer games run like garbage on 5700G and even older games struggles unless graphics are put to low.

A cheaper CPU + cheap dGPU will beat 5700G any day, bigtime as well. Especially if the GPU is used. Then it will demolish the APU.

Even a 5 year old CPU and a 5 year old GPU will smash 5700G around completely.

 

[Fulljack]

Yeah during minig craze maybe, today it's not - dGPUs that demolish any APU are cheap and you are not stuck with a slow GPU forever.

APUs have their place, it's not in desktop PCs tho.

5700G is horribly slow in gaming.

The iGPU inside Ryzen 7000 is laughable as well.

dGPU is needed if you want decent perf and that is still true 5 years after people said APUs were the next big thing. In 10 years an APU might be able to deliver 1080p on medium with 60 fps.

yeah, not really. internet cafes can just use APUs, as well as light gamer who doesn't need dedicated graphics. indie games and esports doesn't need dedicated graphics, either. not everyone plays AAA title.

APU is the next big thing since Vega iGPU, even more so if AMD did bring RDNA-based iGPU to AM5.

 

[KofeViR]

yeah, not really. internet cafes can just use APUs, as well as light gamer who doesn't need dedicated graphics. indie games and esports doesn't need dedicated graphics, either. not everyone plays AAA title.

APU is the next big thing since Vega iGPU, even more so if AMD did bring RDNA-based iGPU to AM5.

Internet Cafes? This is 2023. I don't see any. Most people own several devices.

iGPU's existed for years and years on Intel chips. They can do exactly what you are looking for, including indie and light gaming.

FYI iGPU on Ryzen 7000 series are slow as hell, just like the their APUs. They will still play indie and older games tho.

The only APUs that makes sense are custom console chips. Ryzen 5700G is pointless without a dGPU for actual gaming. Too slow.

5700G did not sell well. Good idea but failed because GPU part is way too slow. It will take years before desktop APUs will make sense, even for light gamers. And most new games won't run well, if at all.

So please explain to me, why Ryzen 5700G would be a good idea over a cheaper CPU with a dedicated GPU that can be REPLACED when it's too slow but will STILL demolish Ryzen 5700G in terms of 3D performance on day one. It makes no sense to buy an APU for gaming and CPUs with iGPU will do fine enough for 99% that don't need 3D power anyway, it will even drive high refreshrate monitors.

For now, APUs for desktop are simply too slow to make sense. Might change, might not.

 

[GeforcerFX]

It's pointless, and yeah reviews confirm what I am saying. Newer games run like garbage on 5700G and even older games struggles unless graphics are put to low.

A cheaper CPU + cheap dGPU will beat 5700G any day, bigtime as well. Especially if the GPU is used. Then it will demolish the APU.

Even a 5 year old CPU and a 5 year old GPU will smash 5700G around completely.

Except I can't fit a 5 year old CPU and GPU into my cases, I can't get anywhere near the CPU performance from a 5 year old CPU that I can from a 5600g for my non-gaming workloads. My 5600g has played every title I have thrown at it at 1080p or 900p maintaining at least 30 fps, usually in the 40's to 50's. Newer games are more demanding but they usually support FSR so I can still run them just fine. What "cheaper" CPU you going with today? a 5600g can be had for around $125, anything cheaper is either much worse or your spending $25-30 less for it. Your not buying a GPU for $25, your not buying a GPU for $50, your not getting into better used GPU's until you spend $80-100 and a new "budget" gpu starts around $130-150. If your playing older games these APU's do great still 1080p 60 is a cake walk for anything from before 2016 and usually that's on medium or high settings. Considering most of the most popular games on PC are pretty old or very low demand on hardware you will have plenty of popular games to play. Anything the GTX 750 Ti could play I can play but usually better since I am not VRAM limited and still have a compute advantage and more modern driver support.

But I am not talking about the 5700g or the 5600g in my original comment I want a new APU, one using the newer RDNA integrated graphics that have been out on laptops for the last year or so. A 680m in a ryzen 6800h has almost 30% better GPU performance compared to a full desktop 5600/5700g, even more modern driver support and would be paired with even faster DDR5 on the AM5 platform.

 

[KofeViR]

Except I can't fit a 5 year old CPU and GPU into my cases, I can't get anywhere near the CPU performance from a 5 year old CPU that I can from a 5600g for my non-gaming workloads. My 5600g has played every title I have thrown at it at 1080p or 900p maintaining at least 30 fps, usually in the 40's to 50's. Newer games are more demanding but they usually support FSR so I can still run them just fine. What "cheaper" CPU you going with today? a 5600g can be had for around $125, anything cheaper is either much worse or your spending $25-30 less for it. Your not buying a GPU for $25, your not buying a GPU for $50, your not getting into better used GPU's until you spend $80-100 and a new "budget" gpu starts around $130-150. If your playing older games these APU's do great still 1080p 60 is a cake walk for anything from before 2016 and usually that's on medium or high settings. Considering most of the most popular games on PC are pretty old or very low demand on hardware you will have plenty of popular games to play. Anything the GTX 750 Ti could play I can play but usually better since I am not VRAM limited and still have a compute advantage and more modern driver support.

But I am not talking about the 5700g or the 5600g in my original comment I want a new APU, one using the newer RDNA integrated graphics that have been out on laptops for the last year or so. A 680m in a ryzen 6800h has almost 30% better GPU performance compared to a full desktop 5600/5700g, even more modern driver support and would be paired with even faster DDR5 on the AM5 platform.

i5-12400 with cheap board and memory + used GPU will run in circles around 5700G in gaming and productivity would probably be the same, or better.

A GTX 970 can be had for like 50 dollars and it will be ALOT FASTER.

Vega GPU Arch is simply dated, thats why performance is so bad.

AMD don't seem to care much about APUs for desktop use tho, most sales are OEM going in dirt cheap machines.

Lets see if AMD cares to make a 7000 series APU with RDNA3. They don't really have to now that Ryzen have iGPU like Intel had for 10+ years

 

[Fulljack]

Internet Cafes? This is 2023. I don't see any. Most people own several devices.

iGPU's existed for years and years on Intel chips. They can do exactly what you are looking for, including indie and light gaming.

FYI iGPU on Ryzen 7000 series are slow as hell, just like the their APUs. They will still play indie and older games tho.

The only APUs that makes sense are custom console chips. Ryzen 5700G is pointless without a dGPU for actual gaming. Too slow.

5700G did not sell well. Good idea but failed because GPU part is way too slow. It will take years before desktop APUs will make sense, even for light gamers. And most new games won't run well, if at all.

So please explain to me, why Ryzen 5700G would be a good idea over a cheaper CPU with a dedicated GPU that can be REPLACED when it's too slow but will STILL demolish Ryzen 5700G in terms of 3D performance on day one. It makes no sense to buy an APU for gaming and CPUs with iGPU will do fine enough for 99% that don't need 3D power anyway, it will even drive high refreshrate monitors.

For now, APUs for desktop are simply too slow to make sense. Might change, might not.

where do you live? I said previously that it makes sense in emerging market such as Asia, Africa, and even Latin America. the world doesn't revolve only around US, Canada, and Western Europe. just because you don't have the need, nor sees it as a weak products when compared to a dedicated graphic cards sipping hundred watts, doesn't mean everyone does so.

did you also seriously just compare an Intel iGPU with Vega iGPU? really?

it's simply the price. get a cheap 300 or 400 series AM4, 5600G or 5700G, good enough 450W PSU and DDR4 RAM stick, and boom, you just spend less than 300$ for a light gaming PC capable of indie and esport titles.

you're so hellbent against AMD releasing 6000 series and 7040 series on desktop, while I admit that currently DDR5 and mobo costs were far too costly, expect it to went cheaper too. it doesn't costs AMD that much to repackage them to AM5, too.

12 CU RDNA2 has been proven to be good enough to run AAA games, and of course the same would be the case for 12 CU RDNA3. if you don't like it, don't buy it. meanwhile, people who doesn't has the bank to buy dedicated graphics, especially during the crypto craze just bought an APUs.

 

[hwertz]

2008 probably is too old; I will say, I have an Ivy Bridge desktop (so 2013 vintage or so) which I stuck a GTX1650 into. About the only way I can max out the GPU is running Furmark or Gravitymark, the GPU is a bit too much for this CPU really. I can run Cyberpunk 2077 at a nice smooth 30FPS, but GPU load is only at 45%, it is strongly CPU limited (of course the good news on that is, since it's CPU limited anyway, I can go ahead and keep the graphics settings all cranked up!). But that is probably the lowest frame rate I've seen in a game so far on there, most happily will either get 100+ FPS or exactly 60FPS (if they're locked to screen refresh rate.)

And luckily (unlike both Windows and MacOS), a few Linux distros recently mulled upiing the requirement to "x86-64v3" (AVX and AVX2, which my CPU would miss by *1* model...). But instead they realized the technical stuff is already in the distros for "hwcaps" (hardware capabilities)... this was already used "back in the day" to ship SSE/SSE2 requiring and non-SSE/SSE2 requiring versions of mainly video encode/decode and 3D libraries, it installs both side-by-side and picks the right one to use "on the fly". The plans now are to use this for AVX/AVX2 and non-AVX/AVX2 libs; and possibly in some distros to have AVX/AVX2 and non-AVX/AVX2 versions of packages where AVX gives them a speedup, so it'd install one package or the other depending on the CPU capabilities.