8 ms·
Interesting points: ZEN3: - 19% IPC improvement - 8 Core CCX complex with unified L3 Cache (before 4 cores shared half the L3 Cache) - Still 7nm process Ry
by lhoff 6y ago
Interesting points:
ZEN3:
- 19% IPC improvement
- 8 Core CCX complex with unified L3 Cache (before 4 cores shared half the L3 Cache)
- Still 7nm process
Ryzen:
- 631 points in single core cinebench for 5900X
- 640 points in single core cinebench for 5950X
- 26% performance increase in 1080p gaming compared to Ryzen 3000
- Models (Available November 5th):
-5950X (16C 32T, 4.9Ghz / 3.4 Ghz, 105W TDP, 799$)
-5900X (12C 24T, 4.8GHz / 3.7 GHz, 105W TDP, 549$)
-5800X (8C 16T, 4.7 Ghz / 3.8GHz, 105W TDP, 449$)
-5600X (6C 12T, 4.6GHz / 3.7 GHz, 65W TDP, 299$)
Radeon:
6000 Series launch on October 28th
- vbezhenar 6y ago5950X base frequency is 3.4 Ghz according to anandtech.
- lhoff 6y agoThanks. Wasn't shown on the slides.
- greggyb 6y agoThat 5950X (and its predecessor) seem like voodoo with the core count, clock frequency, and TDP (yes, I know TDP is a flawed, flawed number - it's still impressive).
- bob1029 6y agoI second this reaction. Historically, clock speeds scaled inversely with the # of cores. Seems like the efficiency is overtaking other constraints at this point.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- loeg 6y agoThe achievable all-core clock will inevitably scale inversely with # of cores, in practice. The advertised single core and all-core clocks are some combination of binning and pure marketing.
- greggyb 6y agoWith most modern PC processors, both GPU and CPU, one of the primary limitations is thermal headroom. There are features and technologies with varying names across brands and processors that essentially do the same thing: run at the maximum clock that the current thermal situation will support. From my personal experience, my Threadripper 3970X will happily maintain ~4.4GHz all-core (rated for 4.5GHz max single-core) so long as I can keep the temperature in or below the 70s, with no overclocking.[0] There are power limits as well, but rated performance numbers are within the power limits. Overclocking can put you past the marked power limits, and certainly needs ample cooling. [0] Granted, I need to pump cold air into the case to maintain the temperature, but that's a limitation of my current thermal solution. At some point I'll probably upgrade to an excessive water cooling solution (:
- formerly_proven 6y agoThe difference with watercooling for CPUs seems to mostly come down to lower noise, and only marginally better thermals.
- greggyb 6y agoI can get much more surface area of radiator than can reasonably be reached by the heat pipes on an air cooler. There are limits to how many radiators you can effectively leverage in a cooling loop. Additionally, a loop with a large volume of liquid offers much more thermal buffer before reaching a steady state temperature. Most air coolers will be heat saturated within a minute or so. A water cooling loop may maintain lower temperature for minutes to tens of minutes. So even with two solutions that otherwise reach the same steady state temperatures (and therefore throttle equally), you may see better real world performance out of the water cooling solution. I'll note, I would be building an open loop, not using an AIO/closed loop cooler. My case has room for 7x140mm of radiator in a couple of configurations. I would probably use 5x of that in one 420mm radiator and a 280mm radiator. This should offer much more cooling capacity than any tower cooler.
- MrRadar 6y ago> Historically, clock speeds scaled inversely with the # of cores. It's the miracle of chiplets. AMD isn't binning one 16-core CPU, they're binning two 8-core CPUs and then combining them together.
- GuB-42 6y agoMaybe not the voodoo you are thinking about but on the GPU side, the 3Dfx Voodoo was indeed a groundbreaking 3D accelerator card. At the time, 3Dfx main competitors were Nvidia and ATI, Nvidia finally bought 3Dfx and AMD bought ATI. So technically, voodoo is on the side of AMD's competition.
- zanny 6y agoTDP is about as meaningful on CPUs now as nm is in fab tech. In practice the 3950x pulled up to ~225w running maxxed out avx2 workloads, ~300w if you overclocked it. The 3900x pulls up to ~190 watts at stock boosts. Both are called "105w TDP" parts.
- greggyb 6y agoIf you're going to attack the "spec" that is TDP, you may as well do it correctly. None of the scenarios you mentioned align with what TDP is supposed to "measure". Even if TDP weren't the flawed measure it is, you still wouldn't be critiquing it by noting the measures you have. Here's the critique you should use! https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/3525-amd-ryzen-tdp-explained-deep-dive-cooler-manufacturer-opinions https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/3525-amd-ryzen-tdp-explai... Nevertheless, for a given manufacturer, TDP is useful as a coarse grouping of power consumption.
- Dylan16807 6y agoI disagree. If TDP wasn't so flawed as to be completely meaningless, that critique would probably be valid. The definition AMD uses is absolute nonsense, given how much the θca values differ from model to model. If they fudged any harder the higher end CPUs would start having "TDP" lower than the weak CPUs.
- NorwegianDude 6y agoPPT on the 105W TDP CPUs are ~143W by default, so your numbers are way of and not possible without overclocking by removing the limit. You'll also go way beyond 300W with heavy overclocking.
- juergbi 6y agoThis is incorrect, to the best of my knowledge. 3900X and 3950X both have a 142W package power limit (PPT, 35% above TDP) at stock, with a properly working motherboard. As I understand it, not even short boosts are allowed to use more power than the PPT. The limit can be lifted in the BIOS (or e.g. Ryzen Master) but that would no longer be stock operation. And there was a defect in the initial BIOS of ASRock X570 and maybe other motherboards, which broke PPT but that was running the CPU out of spec, not stock operation.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- scuget 6y agoThe TDP is really good. Even by "being conservative about our specs" standards.
- baybal2 6y agoThey, again, use an interesting binning trick: They sell 2 low bin dies on a single package as a superior product to a 1 die good bin, and delay a 2 good die release: $ per core: 16C $50 12C $45 8C $56 6C $50 $ per die: 16C $400 12C $275 8C $450 6C $300 This time though, they decided to linearise boost clocks against the place in the lineup: i.e. 8C now has boost below 12C, and 16C.
- pedrocr 6y agoWhat would be the 2 good die release? They've already announced the line-topping AM4 part that uses all the cores from the two dies. Isn't the next step up a four die part in a Threadripper packaging on a different socket with some cores disabled?
- zapnuk 6y agoAs much as I like the new generation I'm not quite sure about those prices. Right now I can buy: - Ryzen 9 3900X (12C / 24T) 3.8GHz - 4.6GHz => 389€ - Ryzen 7 3700X (8C / 16T) 3.9GHZ - 4.5GHz => 299€. It seems to me that the current Ryzen 9 3900X has an insane value compared to the new generation. Sure, it's single core performance is lower by a meaningful amount. But I'd assume that the multi core performance is WAY better with its 12 cores compared to the 6/8 cores of the 5600X/5800X.
- neogodless 6y agoIf you compare MSRP at launch to retail a year later, you're going to notice a big difference. In the US, the Ryzen 9 3900X MSRP was $499 but is $70 less now. (Initially, supply was low, and it was selling over MSRP as high as ~$570.) But they came with coolers... I have a Ryzen 2700X that I got for $230, and I still use the stock cooler. To jump to a Ryzen 5800X plus a cooler would be a huge expense. I will definitely be on the sidelines for the next six months, but then I'll revisit the pricing situation (once motherboard manufacturers release updated 400-series firmware.)
- NikolaeVarius 6y agoThey don't ship with coolers? Man the lack of a 5700x is really making it hard for me to not justify getting a 3700x on sale
- Tuna-Fish 6y agoThe rumor is that any cpus with TDPs of 65W or below will ship with coolers, and ones with above that will ship without.
- zrm 6y agoThe thing to watch is then going to be the "5700X", i.e. the Zen3 version of the 3700X, which, if the analogy matches, should have 8 cores and a 65W TDP. It isn't in the initial slate but they left room for it in the numbering.
- jeffbee 6y agoThat cinebench score is about 6% higher than the highest score on Anandtech, which is an Intel laptop part. Not sure which I will consider more vaporware. https://www.anandtech.com/bench/CPU-2020/2758 https://www.anandtech.com/bench/CPU-2020/2758
- ksec 6y agoThis actually pave way for 32 Core Threadripper that could simply be double 5950X with 4.9Ghz all within 280W TDP. For me having 32 Core and high Clock speed is the sweet spot for Workstation type workload. Leaving the 64 Core with lower boost due to TDP limitation are better for Server.