AMD Ryzen Z1 Packs Zen 4 and Zen 4c Cores: CPUID Dump

By Anton Shilov
published

AMD's Phoenix 2 powers the $599 Asus ROG Ally.

AMD Ryzen Z1 processor
(Image credit: AMD)

When AMD introduced its Ryzen Z1 and Ryzen Z1 Extreme accelerated processing units (APUs) for handheld game consoles earlier this year it made it clear than the two processors are very different. But a new CPUID dump discovered by @InstLatX64 shows that the vanilla Ryzen Z1 is actually based on Phoenix 2 silicon with Zen 4 and Zen 4c cores.

AMD's Ryzen 7040-series (Phoenix) APU boasts eight high-performance Zen 4 cores and a GPU with 12 compute units (768 stream processors), while the Phoenix 2 has a mix of six cores: two high-performance Zen 4 cores and four energy-efficient Zen 4c cores that are notably more compact. Meanwhile, the Phoenix 2 also integrates a Radeon GPU with only four compute units (256 stream processors) that is about three times less powerful than the one used in the Z1 Extreme. 

Configuration of Phoenix 2 suggests that AMD is targeting this silicon for more budget-friendly laptops rather than for gaming solutions and yet Ryzen Z1 is officially positioned as an APU for gaming consoles.

Right now, the only device that uses AMD's Ryzen Z1 is the cheap Asus ROG Ally version that is priced at $599. Yet, the full-fat Asus ROG Ally based on Ryzen Z1 Extreme costs $699 and it is unclear whether a $100 lower price justifies three times lower GPU performance and a lower-end CPU configuration.

While we can only wonder how significantly Zen 4c cores are slower than Zen 4 cores in case of Ryzen Z1 versus Ryzen Z1 Extreme, the clear performance bottleneck of this chip in games is evidently its GPU rather than CPU.

Anton Shilov
Anton Shilov
Freelance News Writer

Anton Shilov is a Freelance News Writer at Tom’s Hardware US. Over the past couple of decades, he has covered everything from CPUs and GPUs to supercomputers and from modern process technologies and latest fab tools to high-tech industry trends.

12 Comments Comment from the forums
  • setx
    Calling Zen4c cores "energy-efficient" is an insult: Zen4 cores are probably as efficient as Zen4c with the same voltage and frequency.

    Zen4c are not the dumb Intel cores that press needs to use euphemisms for – they are just compact Zen4 that trade die area for max frequencies.
    Reply
  • JarredWaltonGPU
    setx said:
    Calling Zen4c cores "energy-efficient" is an insult: Zen4 cores are probably as efficient as Zen4c with the same voltage and frequency.

    Zen4c are not the dumb Intel cores that press needs to use euphemisms for – they are just compact Zen4 that trade die area for max frequencies.
    Erm, no. They trade die area for... DIE AREA! There's no indications that Zen 4c clocks as good as or better than Zen 4. They're just smaller and trade raw performance for a smaller size, and presumably efficiency (power). AMD's specs pages on both the Z1 and Z1 Extreme show the latter clocks higher, but both have the same power range. We'll need more testing of the hardware to figure out exactly what Zen 4c does well and where Zen 4 is faster.
    Reply
  • tesjo1
    I reserveve comment on 4c, sorry.
    I have a work provided Intel desktop 13700, and am far better off disabling 8 ecores.

    But my main issue in this space, is where are slim efficient 7840u LAPTOPS. Manufacturers can't get away from hs plus dgpu.
    Reply
  • setx
    JarredWaltonGPU said:
    There's no indications that Zen 4c clocks as good as or better than Zen 4. They're just smaller and trade raw performance for a smaller size, and presumably efficiency (power).
    You'd better read about the topic you are writing about...
    Zen4c are Zen4 cores made with dense library: lower max clocks but less die area (maybe also cut cache). Efficiency should be pretty much the same as it's the same core, just without very inefficient range of max clocks of Zen4.

    Also, there are already tests of Zen4c...
    Reply
  • hotaru.hino
    tesjo1 said:
    I have a work provided Intel desktop 13700, and am far better off disabling 8 ecores.
    And do you actually get better performance or is this just placebo?
    Reply
  • tesjo1
    hotaru.hino said:
    And do you actually get better performance or is this just placeb


    F
    hotaru.hino said:
    And do you actually get better performance or is this just placebo?
    Reply
  • tesjo1
    tesjo1 said:
    Sorry mistype. I run some parallel codes and VMs. Simple timings tell me what I need to know. I don't have affinity control on that machine, but why should one need to do so.
    tesjo1 said:

    tesjo1 said:
    Reply
  • hotaru.hino
    That's not really an answer, but okay.
    Reply
  • Amdlova
    People don't see or don't want to see the E-cores changed the 12700T 8P 4E for the 13500T 6P 8E.
    On the system side the E-core works good with small task "kernel or other system things". Draw side if you don't change your power settings the system become slow because the E-cores and P-cores don't boost all the time and make The Dpc a little High. I will put two pics same system with only change the power settings.
    Balanced Power to High power, make your own conclusions.

    https://ibb.co/VH7XPS1 (balanced power)
    https://ibb.co/Dkh1SzY (high power)
    Reply
  • usertests
    setx said:
    Calling Zen4c cores "energy-efficient" is an insult: Zen4 cores are probably as efficient as Zen4c with the same voltage and frequency.
    JarredWaltonGPU said:
    Erm, no. They trade die area for... DIE AREA! There's no indications that Zen 4c clocks as good as or better than Zen 4. They're just smaller and trade raw performance for a smaller size, and presumably efficiency (power). AMD's specs pages on both the Z1 and Z1 Extreme show the latter clocks higher, but both have the same power range. We'll need more testing of the hardware to figure out exactly what Zen 4c does well and where Zen 4 is faster.
    https://www.tsmc.com/english/news-events/blog-article-20220616
    If AMD starts using "FinFlex" for future hybrid/heterogeneous monolithic APUs, then they could tune the "c" cores to have greater efficiency in a more compact die area, and the normal cores to hit higher clocks with less efficiency and bigger die area.

    I don't think they are doing that for Phoenix 2, and they could even be using the primary 8-core Phoenix die to make some Phoenix 2 chips.
    Reply