• HorreC@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    27 days ago

    the adjusted TDP on both makes me wonder what is going on. So are we going to spend that juice on clocks? I/O (from threadripper I hope) just needed to be a bigger size to handle stuff?? (I dont know the node they made the new ones on.) We going to be pushing the infinity fabric to 1:1 with 8000 MT ram? Something has to be up for that much more power at factory settings.

      • HorreC@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        26 days ago

        I dont know what they are aiming for on the lower core count one, maybe it super weird binning of really good cores just only 4 made it on each die and this is them being like ok we wanna save money on wasted silicon lets make a dual chiplet and make it an x3d now that we have the cache thing work over duals. I cant see the reason for what the leak suggests on that small one.

        • MHLoppy@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          26 days ago

          That’s an interesting take, but I reckon it’d be a tough sell given the latency penalty it’d bring with it to do that, especially if the core scheduling is ever “wrong” and ends up unnecessarily bouncing between the dies. Guess we’ll have to wait and see!

          • HorreC@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            26 days ago

            Yeah it was the only reason I could think of on the fly that they are even doing this. Maybe with the I/O improvements that are in the threadripper maybe there is some locking down of how caching works with this so they tend to understand where the information is, and the cores it will put to use it. But I would think that would be more of a scheduler task, but I dont understand that level very well, or movements in that area.