AMD Zen 2 Microarchitecture Analysis: Ryzen 3000 and EPYC Rome
by Dr. Ian Cutress on June 10, 2019 7:22 PM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
- AMD
- Ryzen
- EPYC
- Infinity Fabric
- PCIe 4.0
- Zen 2
- Rome
- Ryzen 3000
- Ryzen 3rd Gen
Fetch/Prefetch
Starting with the front end of the processor, the prefetchers.
AMD’s primary advertised improvement here is the use of a TAGE predictor, although it is only used for non-L1 fetches. This might not sound too impressive: AMD is still using a hashed perceptron prefetch engine for L1 fetches, which is going to be as many fetches as possible, but the TAGE L2 branch predictor uses additional tagging to enable longer branch histories for better prediction pathways. This becomes more important for the L2 prefetches and beyond, with the hashed perceptron preferred for short prefetches in the L1 based on power.
In the front end we also get larger BTBs, to help keep track of instruction branches and cache requests. The L1 BTB has doubled in size from 256 entry to 512 entry, and the L2 is almost doubled to 7K from 4K. The L0 BTB stays at 16 entries, but the Indirect target array goes up to 1K entries. Overall, these changes according to AMD affords a 30% lower mispredict rate, saving power.
One other major change is the L1 instruction cache. We noted that it is smaller for Zen 2: only 32 KB rather than 64 KB, however the associativity has doubled, from 4-way to 8-way. Given the way a cache works, these two effects ultimately don’t cancel each other out, however the 32 KB L1-I cache should be more power efficient, and experience higher utilization. The L1-I cache hasn’t just decreased in isolation – one of the benefits of reducing the size of the I-cache is that it has allowed AMD to double the size of the micro-op cache. These two structures are next to each other inside the core, and so even at 7nm we have an instance of space limitations causing a trade-off between structures within a core. AMD stated that this configuration, the smaller L1 with the larger micro-op cache, ended up being better in more of the scenarios it tested.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
216 Comments
View All Comments
jamescox - Saturday, June 22, 2019 - link
You seem to just be trying to spread FUD. Also, you don’t seem to know how long a nanosecond is. The CCX to CCX latency can cause slower performance for some badly written or or badly optimized multithreaded code, but it is on such a fine scale that it would just effect the average frame rate. It isn’t going to cause stuttering as you describe.The stuttering you describe could be caused by a huge number of things. It could be the gpu or cpu thermally throttling due to inadequate cooling. If the gpu utilization goes down low, that could be due to the game using more memory than the gpu has available. That will slow to a crawl while assets are loaded across the pci express bus. So, if anyone is actually having this problem, check your temperatures, check your memory usage (both cpu and gpu), then maybe look for driver / OS issues.
playtech1 - Wednesday, June 12, 2019 - link
Good products and good prices.Knock-out blow though? I don't think so for the consumer and gaming space, as I can buy a 9900 today for a fairly small premium over the price of a 3800x and get basically the same performance.
The 12 and 16 core chips look more difficult for Intel to respond to though, given how expensive its HEDT line is (and I say that as an owner of a 7860x).
Atari2600 - Wednesday, June 12, 2019 - link
Yeah, power and thermals are not so important in consumer/game space.In server/HPC, Intel is in deep crap.
Phynaz - Wednesday, June 12, 2019 - link
Bahahaha. No.eva02langley - Thursday, June 13, 2019 - link
Phhh... are you ban from WCCFtech?Gastec - Wednesday, June 19, 2019 - link
I guess I'm neither consumer nor gamer with my i7-860 and GTX 670, G502, G110 and G13. I bought the Logitech G13 just to type better comments on Tweeter :PGastec - Wednesday, June 19, 2019 - link
I also turn OFF RGB whenever I can, anti-cosumerism and anti-social is written on my forehead and everyone is pointing at me on the woke streets.just4U - Thursday, June 13, 2019 - link
I'd say it's a substantial blow to Intel. One of the reasons I picked up a 2700x was the cooler, which is pretty damn good overall.. and the buy in was substantially lower. The 3700x-3800x will only add to that incentive with increased performance (most will likely not even notice..)Drop in the 12-16 core processors (provided there are no tradeoffs for those additional cores..) make the 9900k unappealing on all fronts. The 9700K was a totally unappealing product with it's 8c/8t package..already and after this launch won't make sense at all.
Gastec - Thursday, June 20, 2019 - link
Core i9-9900 I presume. Nowhere to be found for sale in Mordor. Only found one on Amazon.com for $439.99 reduced from $524.95, sold by "Intel" whomever that scammer is.Hamza12786 - Thursday, June 13, 2019 - link
I Like This Site.Also Checkout<a href"https://www.khanzadatech.com/2019/05/zong-unlimite... Unlimited Free Internet</a>