News: 1605164409

  ARM Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set fire to him and he's warm for the rest of his life (Terry Pratchett, Jingo)

Who among you can resist an eight-core, 2.9GHz mini-PC or thin client that drives four displays?

(2020/11/12)


AMD’s taken the wraps off four Ryzen processors aimed at embedded applications, thin clients and mini-PCs.

The new Ryzen Embedded V2000 Series microprocessors are all built on a 7nm TSMC process and offer Zen 2 cores that also feature in AMD’s Epyc server silicon.

AMD suggests mini-PCs, thin clients, and kit living on the network edge as likely homes for the new silicon. The Register suggests plenty are destined for duty driving digital signage, as all four models are rated to drive a quartet of 4K displays.

Without further ado, let’s meet the silicon:

Model

TDP Range

CPU Core / Thread Count

Base frequency

Max frequency boost

GPU cores

Max graphics in GhZ

L2 Cache

V2748

35-54W

8 / 16

2.9 GHz

4.25 GHz

7

1.6 GHz

4 MB

V2546

35-54W

6 / 12

3.0 GHz

3.95 GHz

6

1.5 GHz

3 MB

V2718

10-25W

8 / 16

1.7 GHz

4.15 GHz

7

1.6 GHz

4 MB

V2516

10-25W

6 / 12

2.1 GHz

3.95 GHz

6

1.5 GHz

3 MB

AMD has a policy of guaranteeing a decade’s availability for its embedded CPUs and says that won’t change for these new products. Given the raw grunt expressed in the specs above, the processors should still be well and truly useful once 2030 comes around. ®

Get our [1]Tech Resources



[1] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/

Dangerous Times For Intel

bazza

AMD are really turning up the heat. These look fantastic. With TSMC now looking at 5 and 3nm, capacity to deliver a huge number of chips is growing whilst Intel has zero capacity at any of these nodes. Intel now has to target 3nm or smaller to catch up, and there's no sign of them being able to do that.

Re: Intel 3nm chips

Flocke Kroes

Intel will be selling <10nm chips ... made by TMSC.

mihares

AMD is really being awesome these last few years. They deserve one -->

bazza

That's certainly the case. And Intel, in a way, really need AMD to be successful at the moment. ARM is becoming more commonplace, Apple are headed that way, its growing in server land too. Without AMD carrying the x64 torch, there might not be an x64 market to come back to once Intel gets its silicon process sorted out.

Not really embedded ready

hammarbtyp

We looked at AMD embedded processors as a replacement for our Intel processors.

While the cost and benchmarks looked attractive, it didn't really work out

What we found was that AMD achieve their performance with aggressive clock management. If the processor starts heating up, they slow the clock down, and unlike Intel processors there seemed no way to manage this.

On a PC, running windows, the user would not notice any difference, but on a hard real time system that relied on very low jitter in process cycles, it was pretty horrible. After working with our supplier for about 6 months, we gave up and went back to Intel

Re: Not really embedded ready

John Robson

And that's what testing is for... but very few embedded systems require an RTOS.

Re: Not really embedded ready

TonyJ

"...And that's what testing is for... but very few embedded systems require an RTOS..."

Yep, agreed. It would've been fairer to say not suitable for RTOS rather than not ready for embedded use.

Re: Not really embedded ready

hammarbtyp

True. I agree that our requirements are on the harder side of real time, but it is not unusual in embedded systems.

I would argue that most embedded systems support some manner of RTOS, but I would agree that the majority require only soft realtime which the AMD processor would be eminately suitable, especially if they use the x86 architecture

I think the other point is that benchmarks do not give you the entire story and a lot of performance metrics are based on managing of the controller.

The fact was we were disappointed because the AMD processor looked great and we really wanted to use it

Re: Not really embedded ready

Sgt_Oddball

Sounds like Zen 3 architecture would be more beneficial, but obviously too late for your product.

Which architecture was it that you looked at by the way? (Zen or Zen2?)

NUC killer?

aidanstevens

Anyone that can make a good quality, off-the-shelf, passively cooled (silent) mini PC out of one of these is going to absolutely rake it in. A far better solution for your average home user than a fragile and expensive laptop with no upgrade capability.

Price is key

Shak

After failing to find a sub £100 4k60 x86 thin client, specs matter much less to me than price. The only option right now is a second hand 4th gen i3 sff which isn't ideal.

I'd give my right arm to be ambidextrous.