Quote from: ArsLoginName on June 10, 2023, 13:50:36Strix Halo on the other hand, is rumored to be an essentially toned-down consumer version (only 256 bit memory interface) of the multi-chip MI300. It will be much larger in total Si area than Strix Point but aggregated from higher yielding chiplets. As a result, AMD could price it at say $550 since it would perform close to a $270 RX7600 plus a $300 7700X (forgot how many CPU cores it is rumored to have but guessing 8). Slightly less revenue than consumer buying those individually, but that is offset by a lower BOM since fewer PCBs, less total packaging & shipping costs, and maybe less supporting electrical components (VRMs, etc) since GPU is on CPU package that already has a 12 V, 5 V, rail, etc. That is, instead of 170W for a 7950X/7900X on AM5, imagine 70 W allocated to CPU with it's standard 128-bit DDR5 interface and 100 W to GPU with its own dedicated 128 bit memory bus.

He's said that Strix Halo would be too large to fit on AM5. If Minisforum or somebody else puts it in a Mini PC, I'd probably buy that.

Agree with you Anonymousgg regarding the write-up vs what was said. As for the analysis, Strix Point will have lower performance than Granite Ridge due to hitting a price point on size (yields) knowing it cannot be as 'fast' as a separate CPU and dGPU due to limited space/cost for memory channels and I/O since it is to be monolithic.

Strix Halo on the other hand, is rumored to be an essentially toned-down consumer version (only 256 bit memory interface) of the multi-chip MI300. It will be much larger in total Si area than Strix Point but aggregated from higher yielding chiplets. As a result, AMD could price it at say $550 since it would perform close to a $270 RX7600 plus a $300 7700X (forgot how many CPU cores it is rumored to have but guessing 8). Slightly less revenue than consumer buying those individually, but that is offset by a lower BOM since fewer PCBs, less total packaging & shipping costs, and maybe less supporting electrical components (VRMs, etc) since GPU is on CPU package that already has a 12 V, 5 V, rail, etc. That is, instead of 170W for a 7950X/7900X on AM5, imagine 70 W allocated to CPU with it's standard 128-bit DDR5 interface and 100 W to GPU with its own dedicated 128 bit memory bus.

Very similar design to what Tom mentions for the AI chips and server parts at the end of the video and to what others have mentioned before regarding only a single chiplet die on AM4. That is, use the other chiplet spot on the package for a on-package GPU chiplet.

QuoteAccording to the latest Moore's Law Is Dead video, the desktop Strix Point chips may only pack Zen 5 cores skipping on small Zen 5c cores.

I watched the video before, and rewatched parts of it just now. The headline is wrong, the video doesn't say anything desktop Strix Point packing only "big" Zen 5 cores. Whatever a Strix Point desktop APU looks like, it should use the same cores as the mobile version.

Transcript:

Quote5:46 - When I asked, what about this idea of AMD actually using like 12-core Strix APUs in the midrange next year instead of a 12-core Granite Ridge offering, I was told the following.

Basically, the full 12-core Strix Point APU can't replace a Zen 5 successor to the 7900X in the Ryzen 8000 lineup, because Strix Point will have lower CPU performance while using a relatively large die size. He then speculates that Phoenix/Rembrandt makes more sense for the low-end than a successor to the 7600X/7600:

Quote10:54 - While I don't think an 8900G makes sense to be made cheaply, although they might still make it and sell it to you for a premium price, I do actually think rebranding Phoenix or using Hawk Point at the low-end might make more sense than using a 6-core Zen 5 Granite Ridge.

The hypothetical: would you rather buy an 8-core Zen 4 Phoenix desktop APU or 6-core Zen 5 Granite Ridge desktop CPU?