AMD Zen 3 microcode surfaces in Linux kernel

onetheycallEric

TS Addict
Staff member

Renown hardware leaker @Komachi_Ensaka spotted lines of code that appear to detail EDAC (Error Detection and Correction) for AMD's Family 19h processors -- family 19h refers to AMD's Zen 3-based chips -- the current-gen Zen 2 is Family 17h, and the new Linux patch mentions those as well.

Looking over the code, we can spot at least two device IDs for the upcoming Zen 3 family: "PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_19H_DF_F0" and "PCI_DEVICE_ID_AMD_19H_DF_F6" are both listed under Family 19h.

AMD is expected to formally launch Zen 3 later this year, as confirmed by AMD CEO Dr. Lisa Su.

AMD has committed to a yearly update cadence for the Zen architecture, and past roadmaps for Epyc Milan and Genoa have offered a glimpse of what Zen 3 will look like under the hood, including a 7nm+ EUV process (N7+) from TSMC.

Permalink to story.

 

pcnthuziast

TS Evangelist
Never had AMD, but Zen 3 will probably be my first. Not impossible I'll stick with Intel, but they need to get back in the game and it's looking like a very long road at this moment in time. Doubt I can hold out on an upgrade till next year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dyper

Dyper

TS Rookie
I share your sentiments.

But I try and reduce watts and rely less on software by adding better hardware each upgrade as I use PC’s for Digital Audio Workstations.
So my needs diminish instead of increase, and single core speed is my priority.

If the i3 10300k Tiger Lake doesn’t have the increased cache they promised, or a base speed of 4GHz I’ll be going with Zen 3.
 

Evernessince

地獄らしい人間動物園
Never had AMD, but Zen 3 will probably be my first. Not impossible I'll stick with Intel, but they need to get back in the game and it's looking like a very long road at this moment in time. Doubt I can hold out on an upgrade till next year.
Zen 3 is releasing this year, not next year.

AMD currently bests intel in nearly every metric often times by a wide margin (like multi-threading and performance per watt). Intel wins in a single metric, gaming, by a tiny 4.2%.

The Ryzen 4000 series is not AMD playing catchup. It's AMD furthering it's lead.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lounds

Dyper

TS Rookie
Which is why we want it.
Only bench that concerns me is DAWtest.

The 3000s are roughly 5-7% behind in single core, but ahead in MultiCore by 10-15% depending on core count, but the software is playing catch up here as they scramble to get past Octo.

2H 2020 should be great, but the show in Taipei will be where AMD shows off the Zen 3.
Intel will need to do more than catch up.
About time they had competition.
 

QuantumPhysics

TS Evangelist
Never had AMD, but Zen 3 will probably be my first. Not impossible I'll stick with Intel, but they need to get back in the game and it's looking like a very long road at this moment in time. Doubt I can hold out on an upgrade till next year.

What I don't understand is how everyone acts like they are buying the newest, most powerful CPU available the moment it comes to market...

The reality is - they aren't - mostly - and by the time most people can actually afford to get a new, highly positively reviewed CPU...there's something newer and more advanced out or coming.

Games absolutely don't need this level of CPU. Most games run on a Core i3 and i5 nowadays.
People with an old Core i7 4790 are still able to run virtually any game on the market with a good GPU.

And a bigger issue: most people who already have intel - or AMD - are not gonna spend the money to upgrade their motherboard (another $300 - $500) just to run out and buy a $500- $1000 CPU.
 

PeterPigger

TS Rookie
Digital Foundry shows the biggest difference between AMD & Intel in games, maybe they choose games that run better on Intel chips to demonstrate that but who knows.

Anyway like Hardware Unboxed said, it seems to be the latency holding AMD back from parity or beating Intel there. Let's see if Zen 3 can finally manage it, because Zen 2 is already seemingly noticeably better than the first Zen chips in games.
 

Danny101

TS Evangelist
What I don't understand is how everyone acts like they are buying the newest, most powerful CPU available the moment it comes to market...

The reality is - they aren't - mostly - and by the time most people can actually afford to get a new, highly positively reviewed CPU...there's something newer and more advanced out or coming.

Games absolutely don't need this level of CPU. Most games run on a Core i3 and i5 nowadays.
People with an old Core i7 4790 are still able to run virtually any game on the market with a good GPU.

And a bigger issue: most people who already have intel - or AMD - are not gonna spend the money to upgrade their motherboard (another $300 - $500) just to run out and buy a $500- $1000 CPU.
I do regret my decision on jumping in early with the x370 chipset, when I should have waited until x570. But like you said, there's plenty of power with it to serve me for years to come so it isn't a total loss. Coming from my last build, an AMD 770 / SB600 chipset, it was a long time coming. I probably won't wait as long the next time, but I do try to maximize the usefulness of my builds. While power usage wasn't as much as a factor for me in the past, it will be factor into my considerations going forward. Not every board can handle everything that you throw at it. I'm disappointed in the one I settled on:

AM4 Vcore VRM Ratings v1.4 (2019-11-07)
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1d9_E3h8bLp-TXr-0zTJFqqVxdCR9daIVNyMatydkpFA/edit#gid=611478281

 

Peter Farkas

TS Evangelist
Since even the 9900K is on 14nm, I am really curious to see how the game will look like when Intel goes down to 10nm and below.
I just bought a 2600 because it was an amazing value for the price and am hoping to see Zen 3 on my B450 mobo later this year. Currently AMD is back on top, after what, like 2 decades. Well done Lisa!
We need Intel and AMD to exchange blows every year to keep the competition alive and prices down. This won't happen until Intel sorts out its manufacturing issues.
 
And a bigger issue: most people who already have intel - or AMD - are not gonna spend the money to upgrade their motherboard (another $300 - $500) just to run out and buy a $500- $1000 CPU.
Isn't that the beauty of AM4? You can continue to use your motherboard and just upgrade the CPU. May not have all the latest bells and whistles that way, but a better CPU.

For Intel - if you do not have the top of the line (excluding Skylake / Kaby Lake X) and a good enough motherboard, you could always upgrade from e.g. an i5 to an i9-9700 / 9900k. Problem here seems to be that the old gen top models are not really getting much cheaper when the next gen comes out. May be due to the fact that this is the only upgrade option without buying a new mainboard.

Just take the i7-7700k for an example. It's still in the $450 range new - you can get an i7-9700k for a good bit less or $50 more gets you a Ryzen 9-3900X (pretty much the same price if you need to get a good HSF for your 7700k).

If you got a bottom end Ryzen 1 at the same time with a decent mainboard, changes are you can upgrade to a 3600 for $200.
 

TheBigT42

TS Guru
Never had AMD, but Zen 3 will probably be my first. Not impossible I'll stick with Intel, but they need to get back in the game and it's looking like a very long road at this moment in time. Doubt I can hold out on an upgrade till next year.
I have not had an AMD recently. In the past I had a AMD 386 40, 486 DX4 120, and an Athlon 750. They were all great CPUs. When my 10 year old i7 gives up the ghost I will go AMD.
 

Dyper

TS Rookie
I used a Tyan Tiger and Dual MPs decades back before the 1GHz Coppermine came along. AMD cache was a whopping 512k.
Now it’s cache is much bigger, and will become unified with Zen 3.

If Intel would have upped the cache on the 9000s and 10000s AMD might not have had such surprising market share.
Seems they figured that out a little late and applied that wisdom to a Tiger Lake.

Exciting times in 2020/2021.
 

Mike E

TS Rookie
I do regret my decision on jumping in early with the x370 chipset, when I should have waited until x570.
It was a significant passage of time between X370 and X570. I don't think that I would have waited for X570, especially when there was no specific launch date. For me, I had ridden that Athlon II as far as I could.

You can certainly drop a Ryzen 9 into the current X370 mobo, and it should work fine.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/ca60ys
 
  • Like
Reactions: Danny101

Danny101

TS Evangelist
It was a significant passage of time between X370 and X570. I don't think that I would have waited for X570, especially when there was no specific launch date. For me, I had ridden that Athlon II as far as I could.

You can certainly drop a Ryzen 9 into the current X370 mobo, and it should work fine.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/ca60ys
It was the first generation and experience had dictated that there's usually issues to work out in the first generation. I got impatient to finally try out the more modern ones I mean it has been a while since may last upgrade. I also have been laptops mostly and haven't used the desktop much anyway. As far as the CPU, I wanted to put in Ryzen 9, thinking it will be the last available for that board, but then there's this:
Due to the thermals:
Since I have an Asus X370 Prime-A, I may just limit it to Ryzen 7 3700X. Although I don't fool with overclocking that much and so that may just be what this spreadsheet is referring to So Ryzen 9 may be OK although I suspect that due to thermals, the Ryzen 7 would be less prone to throttling if I decide to take a hand in overclocking. I don't need that many cores. There's also a slim chance that Zen 3 chips, with even better thermals, might be made available for this board. Whatever I decide on will ultimately depend on the timing. I may opt for a mid range upgrade at a much lower cost just to buy me a few years.