A concept for the best AMD processor ever.
A concept for the best AMD processor ever.
I've been reflecting on this recently. AMD offers a solid range of CPUs, yet it seems to have overlooked what I'd refer to as the "perfect setup." Let me clarify my thoughts. Recently, I'm thinking about upgrading to the 7800X-3D to pair with my new 7900-XTX. Still, I also enjoy video editing and multitasking, along with a few other smaller tasks that benefit from more cores. Some have suggested I should go for the 7900X-3D, and they're right in part, but the core-parking scheduler problems mean I might end up giving up some productivity gains for overall system speed. This got me thinking... With transistors now made at 5nm, why can't we pack 10 cores onto a single chip? AMD's whole strength since Ryzen launched has been more cores and threads than Intel, but that's changing. If they could add two more cores to a single core die, their top-tier Ryzen 8950X (or whatever it would be named) could become a 20-core/40-thread processor, easily outpacing Intel in productivity. Plus, the flagship gaming CPU could then be a 10-core/20-thread monster with 3D V-Cache—perfect for games and still offering some productivity benefits, making it a strong pick for streamers and content creators. All while avoiding core parking headaches. It feels odd to me that after over six years on the market, AMD's Ryzen lineup hasn't increased its core count since its launch. Of course, this is just my perspective. What do you think if AMD could push 10 cores per chip? I get it there are power and heat concerns with 5nm chips, but I believe they can be addressed with better design in the future.
It seems the design likely revolves around a straightforward mix of data inputs. A quick look at AMD’s past shows they once offered a 3-core option—still unclear if it was a standout feature. The current setup appears to be a reliable, well-rounded configuration with balanced performance.
It seems reasonable, though 10 cores remains an even count. With today’s technology, I’m confident the data streams could be managed effectively through smart engineering decisions.
AMD is developing a 16-core CCD based on their upcoming "Zen 5c" design. Yet standard Zen 5 and the V-Cache variant will remain at eight cores per CCD. According to current understanding, Zen 5c won't integrate with 3D V-Cache due to architectural constraints—specifically, reduced L3 cache space that wouldn’t accommodate a typical 3D V-Cache module. While AMD might design a customized solution, the compact nature of Zen 5c will likely limit its performance, especially under gaming demands. The main challenge appears to be balancing high-frequency cores with thermal limits. Ideally, future improvements could involve smarter use of V-Cache for most games and regular cores for those needing higher speed, enabling top-tier CPUs like the 7900X3D and 7950X. Still, AMD faces significant hurdles in optimizing Zen 4’s multi-CCD operations before tackling V-Cache variations. A potential solution might benefit both platforms, possibly leading to a powerful hybrid architecture with a mix of cores and V-Cache die. If a driver update can enhance gaming performance across all multi-CCD designs, we could see a powerful 24-core processor combining an 8-core V-Cache and a 16-core compute core—truly exceptional in capability.
There are server chips with unusual core numbers such as 10, 14, 18, 22, 28, etc. My estimate would likely depend more on how they're grouped—like Ryzen 5 has 6 cores, Ryzen 7 has 8, and Ryzen 9 has 12 or 16. A 10-core CPU would probably match something like 6, 8, or 10 cores. The R5 8600X is around 6 cores, the R7 8700X about 8, the R7 8800X about 10, and the R9 8900X could be either 14 or 16. What the hell about the 8900X core count? It seems to be either 14 or 16.
I believe it the product stack would look like this: Single CCD CPUs: R5 8500X = 6C/12T; R7 8600X = 8C/16T; R7 8700X = 10C/20T Twin CCD CPUs: R9 8800X = 12C/24T; R9 8900X = 16C/32T; R9 8950X = 20C/40T Of course there is a chance in this scenario that AMD would just eliminate the 6C/12T CPU from the "enthusiast desktop" segment and move it down to the lower-end range along-side the APUs. Some people are worried that 6C/12T will end up not being enough cores for optimal performance in the next few years after all. And it wouldn't really eat into the ThreadRipper segment either. They could just have ThreadRipper begin at 24C/48T and then have the next step be 32C/64T and then probably 40C/80T; 48C/96T; 64C/128T; and finally 80C/160T if ThreadRipper ever goes that high. ThreadRipper Product Stack could get messy if they were to try and implement multiples of 10 cores in that segment so maybe it would only be for standard Ryzen CPUs but it would give them the benefit of a massive selection tailor-made to fit the needs of literally anyone.