49 ms·
AMD claims a significant improvement in memory latency though, which is concordant with their large gains in gaming workloads (a 20 % general-purpose-throughput
by formerly_proven 6y ago
AMD claims a significant improvement in memory latency though, which is concordant with their large gains in gaming workloads (a 20 % general-purpose-throughput-oriented IPC increase alone would never give you a 20 % FPS increase in games).
- rnvannatta 6y agoA larger cache size would improve memory latency assuming the working set can utilize the full 36mb, which I'm sure the 2 games that had a 20% uplift can. It's purely speculation but I suspect the cache size was limited by yield concerns rather than timing constraints. It looks like the 5600X has 1mb less cache so they probably engineered a way to disable faulty sections of the cache on a 1mb granularity. Edit: My speculation's wrong. The cache difference between the 5700X and the 5600X is due to core count differences. It's the sum of the various cache sizes, and I misread the slide.
- Sohcahtoa82 6y ago> a 20 % general-purpose-throughput-oriented IPC increase alone would never give you a 20 % FPS increase in games Is this true even for games that are CPU-bound? When I play MS Flight Simulator, enable the Dev toolbar, and look at the framerate monitor, it tells me that it's spending 20 ms of CPU time per frame, which causes my framerate to cap at 50 fps. A 20% increase in IPC would theoretically bring the frame time to 16.67 ms, giving me a cap of 60 fps.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- nitrogen 6y agoThere was a now-deleted comment about the CPU busy-waiting for the GPU, to which I had this reply: Reviews/benchmarks of Flight Simulator by e.g. Gamers Nexus show that Flight Simulator is heavily CPU limited, running on a single CPU thread.