I agree fully on the statement that hardly anyone just doing basic stuff and gaming at all ever needs more than 8 real cores + 8 threads ever the so called 16 cores cpu
Content creators might sometimes need more cores and guess what their is a enormous amount of those who think they need more available on all brands
Sure they cost much more but you get what you need when using MP programs which run only nice when you have overkill on cores.
I constant see people blabbing about needing the best Intel cpu and guess what they actually never use the full power of that CPu ever.
They buy it because people and ypoutube stars call them the best to have
In fact i am still using an ages old 9900 KF and am still running games with a overkill on performance not being used. But i admit i do not care about shadows nor a shiny bling stuff in game it just distracts me from killing my enemies faster than they can react ;)
So all that bling is turned off so when i am looking at my RX 6900 XT being total overkill for all my games as i cosntant turn off the BS which has no function at for me i am happy with the somewhat old hardware.
No i do not use raytracing or the amd fancy nonsense as it does not make my games better nor do i like the shiny crap nor do i like silly shadows which actually does nthing for my gameplay.
Again i set it all at the lowest possible, do not get me wrong my cpu and gpu can run all that bling just almost as fast but i do not like it PERIOD
I admit wanted to switch to a 7800X3D system with pci-e 5 slots both on graphics and nvme but my i now decided again to wait another 4 to 5 year before i switch to newer
I see no need to upgrade at all for the second reason nothing announced in gaming for the next 4 to 5 year will be something i want i check every month if there is a title which i want to go for.
But guess what game devs come always with old stuff not worth buying or copies of the old with a slight adjustment which i do again not care about 

I would have thought the Ryzen 8000 series processors would use the zen4+ architecture rather than skipping to zen5?

My 2 cents. Zen 5 comes with only enlarged L1, L2 cache on die. The L3 will be staggered on top.
This will save some areas on the process node. Note that L3 cache and CPU die will use different process nodes, since Cache is only memory.

I also agree that the time of individual GPUs is running out, AMD needs to embed the most powerful GPU crystals in one package and make the CPU direct access to VRAM, as if it were ordinary RAM. Then no L3 cache will be needed for AMD processors - after all, they will have an L3 cache on the main VRAM with a speed of up to 1TB / s.

And the most interesting thing is that, for example, laptops can be sold without RAM at all, because. the processor will be able to run the OS from VRAM in test mode. And the buyer will then choose the required amount of memory chips and buy as many of them as he needs, and not like now, when greedy laptop manufacturers sell 8-16-32GB with a markup of 300-400%, relative to the real retail price for the same memory , and in retail the guarantee is up to 10-12 years, and in the composition of laptops for it, with a monstrous margin - 1-3 years. On the face of a divorce of buyers for money, now for extremely cheap components.

With 16GB of VRAM - you don't need RAM from the factory in slots, if the processor can run the OS and use no more than 1-2GB for video memory for the built-in gpu in business logic - it will have access to as much as 14GB of super-fast memory.

i believe dishonesties in DNA of AMD will keep it dragging like this making few peaks then loosing back to intel. The biggest dishonesty being fear/paranoia of not putting bleeding edge / current dgpu tech in apus and flawed thinking that it will hury dgpu dept/revenues.. they should design apus like dgpus which will not only attract respect but will strengthen dgpu biz by fostering dgpu ultra loyalist in advocating/enlightening prevalent merits of dgpu like dedicated ram, more peripheral direct outputs, crossfire/nulti-dgpu configs etc. whereas apu camp loyalists touting full dgpu architectural features to start from n overclock to rub shoulders with dgpu guys n satisfaction of owning something poor man's equivalent instead of feeling outcast or AMD's lowcast citizens..

Quote from: LyntonB on April 03, 2023, 19:29:28Interesting! The big question is will 3d cache be included or deferred to Zen5+..?

No, Intel, let alone AMD, can no longer make processors without a large L3 cache, because. their processors with a bunch of cores are physically suffocating with slow 2x channel memory.

Compare the memory speed of the Apple M2 Max - claimed 400Gb/s with 512-bit bus and x86, where, as tests showed, the average speed does not exceed 70-80Gb/s in 2023 models. The difference is a whopping 5 times in favor of Apple.

Obviously, if Intel/AMD doesn't immediately increase the memory bus to 512bit, they will have to increase the L3 cache even further, up to hundreds of MB, and maybe even up to 1GB. And what is actually left for them if the cores cannot work quickly with slow 128-bit memory? =)

Interesting! The big question is will 3d cache be included or deferred to Zen5+..?

Quote from: Anonymousgg on April 03, 2023, 14:14:34Welcome to the 16-core stagnation!

This is not a stagnation in the number of cores, but a dead end in silicon technology.

What do you think, how did they manage to cram 16 cores in 7x45? It's very simple - they made the integrated video chip as primitive as possible compared to 7x40 and removed the "AI" block to leave more space for cpu cores. They even slashed the transistor budget for the memory controller, for that...

In laptops, you can no longer raise consumption, as in desktops, the madness with it comes to an end. And then the real stagnation of performance, until there is a real fundamental breakthrough in technology...

Quote from: Neenyah on April 03, 2023, 15:07:26

Quote from: WaitWhat on April 03, 2023, 14:47:32The fact that Threadripper exists shows that AMD can easily make CPUs with more cores but there simply is not enough demand to justify it.

So can Intel but what's the point? AMD is busy doing PR and marketing unicorns and CPUs that doesn't exist or that won't exist in large enough volume to get them. OTOH, Intel is busy actually producing their own products.

There is a big difference, Intel has to made a completly new and bigger die if it wants to make a CPU with more core (up to now). AMD does not. They can just add more CCDs, of course it is not so easy, but way more easier, cheaper and faster than what Intel has to do. 

Quote from: WaitWhat on April 03, 2023, 14:47:32The fact that Threadripper exists shows that AMD can easily make CPUs with more cores but there simply is not enough demand to justify it.

So can Intel but what's the point? AMD is busy doing PR and marketing unicorns and CPUs that doesn't exist or that won't exist in large enough volume to get them. OTOH, Intel is busy actually producing their own products.

Quote from: Anonymousgg on April 03, 2023, 14:14:34Welcome to the 16-core stagnation!

The fact that Threadripper exists shows that AMD can easily make CPUs with more cores but there simply is not enough demand to justify it.

Welcome to the 16-core stagnation!