https://hothardware.com/news/amd-cto-envisions-more-cores-next-gen-ryzen-processors
 
They seem to be keeping the full court press on Intel.  Intel sits in the 14nm corner, while AMD keeps moving forward at a pretty torrid pace

Cool GTX
2020 will be an interesting year & good for anyone building a new Rig

Yes and for two reasons:
1. Intel should have their 10nm issues solved by then because it's latest HEDT processors have heat issues with multi-cores. 
2. AMD will have it's next gen CPUs at the improved 7nm process or maybe even 5nm

lehpron
Next gen could be any variation of Zen from upcoming 3, 4, 5, etc.  It could be years down the line; I totally expect more cores, eventually.  I except Intel to do the same or better if they want to lead with more cores at some point.

It is conceivably possible to shrink the I/O die down, and maybe add another IF link, in order to make a 24-core in mainstream, 96-core in Threadripper/Eypc.  

The next Zen CPU is already in the testing stage as far as I am aware. Intel is still trying to fix it's multiple problems at its fab. 

Hoggle
 
The real question is how many pieces of software will make good use of those cores? Also how much software will be held back to run well on Intel software. AMD is able to make an amazing CPU but really it's held back by the software side as well as by support for Intel from really showing off what it can do.

Here's what I think, Intel could have held onto 4c8t flagships for mainstream (9900K could have been an all-stock 5GHz quad-core) and turned the other cheek to AMD's approach, why didn't they?  Because they know they can't do that, and choose a conservative approach of more than before but less than AMD.  They will stick to this stance until they are able to lead in core counts, and by that point, they will take advantage of the environment AMD had to create.


As for devs, I'd like to think that beyond corporate sponsorship, that each company still pays attention to their customer target base; meaning, if a larger share of their typical customers own a certain number of cores, then the developer will follow suit.

I remember an old article from former xbitlabs.com from 2012 where it showed some OEM data for the year, that 94% buy systems with less than a Core i5 or equivalent system, that half of them were still on dual-cores-- and back then Intel themselves were selling well over 300 million systems a year.  That was why many consumer apps were designed for four threads for so long, because that's all people bought.  I still believe then as I do now, the only way we are going to get any progress is if *everyone* bought more cores, not just enthusiasts because we're just a ridiculous minority.  But those more cores have to be cheaper, most people will go home instead of going big.

With AMD's strategy of more cores per dollar, it ought to trickle down and allow the high-volume low-end market to get into more cores, and devs will follow.  It will just take a few years, devs need to see more people on the cheap buying more cores.  Core i3 and Ryzen 3 are now 4c8t, two years ago that was only i7 class; it wouldn't be a coincidence if upcoming games are best with 8-threads because that is what most will buy.  Maybe in a year or two the i3/R3 layer would have 6c12t, then those future games are best on 12-threads.  The cheapest of the cheap have to get more cores for any change to occur throughout the stack.

For now, higher core count enthusiast platforms are for folks that multitask.

More cores is great since it depresses prices across the entire product stack. But AMD needs to focus on keeping its platform updated too... multi-gig NICs, good audio, and PCIe 5.0 for when Intel finally gets around to implementing PCIe 4.0. But most of all more cores on Ryzen doesn't make sense with only dual-channel memory, they really need to add 1-2 more channels to Ryzen 9 as it is.
 

boylerya
I want to see all cores hit 6Ghz in 3 years without an overclock.

That'd be awesome, but it's physically impossible unless the industry changes from silicon to something new. IBM only does it because they utilize watercooling and subzero cooling for its various Power chips.