Live data from Hacker News

AMD Zen 2 Update: 7nm EPYC in Labs Now, Launching in 2019

anandtech.com

61–70 of 75 posts

Re: AMD Zen 2 Update: 7nm EPYC in Labs Now, Launching in 2019

#61
post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My ex is a process improvement engineer at Intel she told me a story about considerably higher failure rate for silicon that was manufactured in a northern part of a room vs the southern part what’s more odd is that it only affected some products that shared this room in their pipeline. The cause was that the water pipes under that section would impact that part of the process because of mechanical vibration the reas…

> If you think about it this way if it was so easy to recreate a process through reverse engineering a few hot chips talks and poaching Intel wouldn’t be in this mess and GloFo didn’t had to scrap their 20nm process. That's what I'm talking about. Who's to say there aren't a few gotchas like this in the new cobalt processing, and that's not exactly something that can be protected under IP law (or even necessarily by…

Don’t know from my limited exposure I would be really surprised if Intel and another Foundry would encounter the same problem on a level any more granular than “issues with Cobalt” since there are so many factors that impact the process. Intel and GloFo produce completely different silicon and it becomes more and more dissimilar with each step of the process so many factors impact this from where your raw materials come from and how long is the path between step 23 and 27 in the pipeline to what latitude your fav is located at and where does it face.

The example I gave in my previous was simplified the actual root cause was much weirder and included a condition where the flow rate would have to get to X and the temperature to get to just an exact Y for thermal expansion to apparently compress the insulation enoguh for it to matter if the temp would be a tad to low it won’t impact anything if it goes above the next level of flow rate it wouldn’t have an impact yet again because it would drop the temp.

Intel’s whole conflict free campaign was a marketing spin on a real problem and a way to benefit from the extra cost of materials and that extra cost wasn’t because of children in African mines.

Intel needs so much control over the raw materials to prevent contamination that they issue orders on what fuel, hydraulic fluid and lubricants can be used to mine their dirt to prevent or at least reduce contamination.

Heck I’m sure if one will read what ever T&C they attach to their supply contracts the metal composition of the pickaxes will be specified.

They survey and sample everything and essentially tell their supplier ok you can mine this specific area everything in the top 1m you get rid off everything below 10m we don’t want.

Like honestly at this point I think the only way for GloFo to have exactly the same problem as Intel is we live in a simulation.

They will however have their own problems with leakage, bonding, crystallization and w/e else can go wrong with this insanity with Cobalt but likely they’ll have completely different root causes and different solutions.

Re: AMD Zen 2 Update: 7nm EPYC in Labs Now, Launching in 2019

#62
post #16

Am I missing something here or is Intel starting to lag behind on Fab Tech? I thought they were years and billions ahead?!?

Yes, Intel has fallen behind already. Their 10nm process node and a supposed equivalent to TSMC, GloFo, and Samsung's 7nm nodes, won't be ready for mass production until 2019. Meanwhile all the other foundries will have their 7nm nodes ready for mass production this year. Also, it's rumored that Intel's 10nm will actually be worse for clock speeds than its 14nm is.

Intel could ultimately try to make their processors using the other foundries until they get their tech sorted out. If I'm not wrong Samsung sells phones with Qualcomm processors and, consumers don't care much about that.

Re: AMD Zen 2 Update: 7nm EPYC in Labs Now, Launching in 2019

#63
post #52
post #45

I am hoping we see some Epyc SKUs clocked to be closer to the threadripper equivalents.

With water cooling and 400 watts per socket, why not?

Well if Threadripper 2 can do 32 cores at ~4GHz@250W is there a good reason we cant have an Epyc SKU that does the same? (So that we can take two of these and put them in a machine).

Re: AMD Zen 2 Update: 7nm EPYC in Labs Now, Launching in 2019

#64

Am I missing something here or is Intel starting to lag behind on Fab Tech? I thought they were years and billions ahead?!?

As feature sizes shrink cobalt start to look like a better choice for implementing wires than copper for reasons of electromigration and mean free path. Intel wanted to get a jump on this for their 10nm process and so decided to switch over to cobalt before TSMC, Global, etc. But they've been having huge problems getting it to work and 10nm has slipped from 2017 to at least 2019 and their process lead is now essentia…

I'm assuming others are also having difficulty with cobalt, but I'm guessing that once their final new cobalt chip is out, it won't be hard for others to figure out what they did unless Intel can patent it somehow.

Re: AMD Zen 2 Update: 7nm EPYC in Labs Now, Launching in 2019

#65
post #50
post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The peeps building Mill CPU are claiming they can do 10x performance over traditional (x86). IIRC in an early talk they explained this is mostly by bringing the IPC on a level with high IPC microcontroller arches. They do VLIW which can do a lot of things more efficiently if your compiler can handle it (Rust should be able to pull a lot of performance out of VLIW IIRC)

VLIW plus a "sufficiently smart compiler"? Isn't that IA-64 in a nutshell?

Nah, the Mill is sufficiently different than a standard VLIW. I'm still on the fence about it, but it's noticeably different from the Itanic.

Re: AMD Zen 2 Update: 7nm EPYC in Labs Now, Launching in 2019

#66

Am I missing something here or is Intel starting to lag behind on Fab Tech? I thought they were years and billions ahead?!?

As feature sizes shrink cobalt start to look like a better choice for implementing wires than copper for reasons of electromigration and mean free path. Intel wanted to get a jump on this for their 10nm process and so decided to switch over to cobalt before TSMC, Global, etc. But they've been having huge problems getting it to work and 10nm has slipped from 2017 to at least 2019 and their process lead is now essentia…

Apparently Imec claims that for the time being (down to the "3nm" node) copper beats cobalt: https://www.imec-int.com/en/articles/imec-extends-damascene-...

Re: AMD Zen 2 Update: 7nm EPYC in Labs Now, Launching in 2019

#67
How is the quality and stability of AMD chips lately? Although I've always purchased AMD chips everytime I upgraded my desktop, the segfault problems reported with Ryzen made me cautious about further upgrades (on Piledriver now).

Are the latest Zen/Zen+ CPUs stable enough now, or should I wait for Zen 2?

Re: AMD Zen 2 Update: 7nm EPYC in Labs Now, Launching in 2019

#68
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, Intels 10nm is comparable to other companies 7nm: https://www.semiwiki.com/forum/content/6713-14nm-16nm-10nm-7...

And as long as it doesn't get delayed again, Intel's 10nm will reach volume production at around the same time as other companies 7nm.

The rumor is that Apple's next SOC is TSMC 7nm and is in high volume production now.

Re: AMD Zen 2 Update: 7nm EPYC in Labs Now, Launching in 2019

#69
post #43
post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you have a particular reference for this? I have read that the Apple ARM chips are more power efficient than comparable ARM chips powering Android devices.

They idle really well. In particular the software layer around suspend is really first rate when compared with the Linux BSPs from vendors, which tend to be somewhere between glitchy and awful (c.f. all those times when your off-brand Android phone turned red hot in your pocket, or the fact that a RPi is running a "mobile" SoC that never manages to draw less than 3W). The power under load is quiet high, apocryphally.…

The Broadcom SoC used in the Raspberry Pi hasn't aged terribly well, there is a pretty good thread comparing the various boards out there on the Armbian Forum[1], in it they discuss how much power boards use with different parts enabled. Some Allwinner boards (like the PC2) can use just 1w at idle without disabling anything. Further savings is possible if you disable gigabit ethernet, GPU, etc. More info is in the 2nd link!

1 - https://forum.armbian.com/topic/1748-sbc-consumptionperforma... 2 - https://docs.armbian.com/Hardware_Allwinner-H3/

Re: AMD Zen 2 Update: 7nm EPYC in Labs Now, Launching in 2019

#70
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They idle really well. In particular the software layer around suspend is really first rate when compared with the Linux BSPs from vendors, which tend to be somewhere between glitchy and awful (c.f. all those times when your off-brand Android phone turned red hot in your pocket, or the fact that a RPi is running a "mobile" SoC that never manages to draw less than 3W). The power under load is quiet high, apocryphally.…

The Broadcom SoC used in the Raspberry Pi hasn't aged terribly well, there is a pretty good thread comparing the various boards out there on the Armbian Forum[1], in it they discuss how much power boards use with different parts enabled. Some Allwinner boards (like the PC2) can use just 1w at idle without disabling anything. Further savings is possible if you disable gigabit ethernet, GPU, etc. More info is in the 2n…

Oh sure. It was more a point about software polish. All these SoC's have hardware support for clock gating and separable power domains and deep idle states, etc...

But in general, making all junk work is a huge rats' nest of complexity. And in practice, except for a tiny handful of devices from top-tier manufacturers, it just doesn't. Maybe it works "most" of the time. Maybe there are tuning tricks you can use that get the power down but break two or three devices in crazy ways.

But Apple has the smarts and resources to ship a power-hungry part and guarantee that it sits at a clean idle reliably. And Qualcomm isn't far behind as long as they have an integrator like Google or Samsung breathing down their neck. But all the other junk? Yeah, junk.

Post reply on HN