AMD's Ryzen CPU's (Ryzen/TR/Epyc) & Vega/Polaris GPU's

Discussion in 'Hardware Components and Aftermarket Upgrades' started by Rage Set, Dec 14, 2016.

  1. hmscott

    hmscott Notebook Nobel Laureate

    Reputations:
    4,657
    Messages:
    16,193
    Likes Received:
    19,913
    Trophy Points:
    931
    The 8400 is in a weird spot right now. It's the budget part, non-OC'able, but doesn't have a matching low cost motherboard right now.

    The B360 Intel motherboard chipset isn't out till 2018, Feb?

    So for right now you'd need to spend more to get a z370, but not be able to use the OC features.

    The good news is you can use faster memory on z370 vs B360, so for now you get that performance advantage. But, any test results on z370 may of course be slightly higher than what you would get with a B360 motherboard.

    The Asrock z370 motherboards have implemented the BCLK OC for the 8400 and until Intel blocks that with microcode updates you could OC perhaps as much as 25% with the 8400 to 5.0ghz, anxiously waiting for reviews with that configuration.

    As far as the rest for that video, the performance in gaming differences aren't enough to worry about, with G-sync / Free-sync the top end will be dropped off, negating the value of the differences.

    1440p / 2160p FPS differences are even smaller, and as far as expensive monitors the 1440p / 2160p monitor prices are coming down, and the budget monitors with 1080p again will be limited by refresh.

    The expensive high refresh 1080p monitors are the only place you can really use the higher FPS, and reducing eye candy will get you there too, without being a slave to Intel and paying for the privilege :)

    In non-gaming work, the 8400 is well behind in performance. With 4ghz OC applied to the unlocked 4c/8t Ryzen 1500x it should match the locked 8400 6c/6t in CB results.
    8400 cinebench score.jpg
    There's no good reason to give Intel money for their bad behavior to us and to competitors over the years.
     
    Last edited: Oct 14, 2017
    Deks likes this.
  2. hmscott

    hmscott Notebook Nobel Laureate

    Reputations:
    4,657
    Messages:
    16,193
    Likes Received:
    19,913
    Trophy Points:
    931
    Nvidia might BAN OVERCLOCKING on new 1070Ti
    Rumors point to a frequency lock on Nvidia's next graphics card.
    http://www.pcgamer.com/you-might-not-be-able-to-overclock-nvidias-geforce-gtx-1070-ti/

    "We are fairly confident that Nvidia is readying a GeForce GTX 1070 Ti graphics card that slip into its product lineup between the non-Ti variant and the higher-end GeForce GTX 1080. However, if you are hoping to squeeze out GTX 1080-like performance through overclocking, you might be in for a rude awakening—the latest rumors suggest Nvidia is locking the frequency on the GTX 1070 Ti."

    Nvidia might BAN OVERCLOCKING on new 1070Ti - WAN Show October 13, 2017
    01:01:52 - Rumored 1070 Ti rumored to not be overclockable
    00:09:26 - OnePlus OxygenOS built-in analytics
    00:19:34 - Apple not intentionally slowing down iPhones
    00:27:00 - Sponsor: Squarespace
    00:28:41 - Sponsor: Mack Weldon
    00:31:20 - Sponsor: Savage Jerky
    00:34:34 - Airbnb building in Florida
    00:39:38 - iOS and Samsung market share tied in US
    00:41:24 - Windows 10 Fall Creator's Update
    00:47:42 - Floatplane
    00:51:24 - FLIR cameras have unremovable backdoors
    00:54:40 - Floatplane (cont)
    01:00:28 - AU Optronics roadmap
    01:01:52 - Rumored 1070 Ti rumored to not be overclockable
    01:04:11 - Razer teased first smartphone
    01:06:22 - Two new Oculus headsets coming
    01:09:44 - Coffee Lake in short supply


    It sounds like Nvidia is having 2nd thoughts about releasing a GPU cheaper than the GTX1080 that could conceivably OC to the same or higher performance than the GTX1080.

    The AMD Vega RX56 has nothing to fear from either the GTX1080 nor the GTX1070ti :)
     
    Last edited: Oct 14, 2017
    Deks likes this.
  3. Deks

    Deks Notebook Prophet

    Reputations:
    984
    Messages:
    4,054
    Likes Received:
    1,256
    Trophy Points:
    231
    It's been effectively demonstrated that the only reason Intel is faster than AMD right now is because it's able to clock it's cores higher and enjoys industry support from developers using their compilers that take advantage of Intel uArch features.

    That's working on a highly refined 14nm++ process, whereas AMD is using a regular 14nm process suitable for lower clocks and mobile parts (so it's pretty impressive it's getting the speeds and overclocks, not to mention power consumption it does).

    The Ryzen refresh though will be on 12nm LP (leading process - thank you guys for posting the articles here) and it will by default increase base clocks by 10% and chip density by 15%.
    So, let's say that a Ryzen with 3.2 GhZ base, gets boosted to 3.5 GhZ... and boost clock by another 10% above that (or close to 4 GhZ).
    In the case of Ryzen 1600X... it's refresh would push base clock to 4 GhZ (across all cores) and boost to about 4.4 GhZ (on single core). So, leaving potential overclocking headroom by another 10%, we could see Ryzen refreshes running oveclocks to about 4.4 GhZ - at which point you could compare 1600X+ (refresh) to i7-8700 at stock clock of 4.3 GhZ across all cores.

    But this is just a personal estimate that could easily be wrong.
    The manuf,. process is no longer 'low power'... but 'leading process', same designation as used on upcoming 7nm IBM's process that GloFo will be using for achieving high performance and Ryzen 2 will be made on (5 GhZ stock anyone?).

    So, I would imagine that the 12nm LP process might (I repeat 'might') allow AMD to approach Intel tightly in terms of clocks and overclocks... depending on how high AMD can push Ryzen on that process without requiring much higher voltages.
    I don't think we can expect to see them being pushed to 5.2 GhZ like 8700K... though it would be nice too see that if possible... not sure if Ryzen might limit this somehow due to it's architecture, but I still maintain that the architecture isn't the issue, but rather the manuf. process for Ryzen's inability to clock past certain point (say 4.1 GhZ0.

    Btw, one of the guys on youtube apparently called me a 'moron' for saying that software devs optimize programs for CPU's and GPU's architectures.
    He says no program is optimized for any CPU or GPU... which is pure nonsense.
    I provided him with links from accredited sources and even game devs who acknowledged that after releasing patches for Ryzen for example, performance in some games jumped by up to 30% and how GTA V for instance is an Nvidia optimized game.

    Btw, the guy never provided a shred of data to back up his claims, and of course told me to 'get a proper education'.

    I would think that gaming and hardware devs know more about this situation that this youtube poster does and we've seen instances of both GPU's and CPU's being coded for by games and software in general.
    Most of the industry is using Intel compilers for crying out loud... open source and closed source.
     
    Last edited: Oct 14, 2017
    hmscott likes this.
  4. Papusan

    Papusan JOKEBOOKS = That sucks!! STAHP! Dont buy FILTH...

    Reputations:
    12,428
    Messages:
    18,539
    Likes Received:
    27,956
    Trophy Points:
    931
    Yeah, Clocks are clocks. And Apples vs. Apples. And not Apples vs. Oranges(8 cores vs. 6 cores). And the performance gap will increase further as you probably know with a decent overclock. I see people think Intel will let AMD come closer than ever. Oh'well
    upload_2017-10-14_20-16-35.png
    upload_2017-10-14_20-23-41.png

    And you think Intel haven't learned anything of the release of AMD Ryzen? I'm quite sure Intel knows whats will come from Amd next time. Aka they will be more prepared than with the release of Ryzen.
     
    tilleroftheearth and hmscott like this.
  5. hmscott

    hmscott Notebook Nobel Laureate

    Reputations:
    4,657
    Messages:
    16,193
    Likes Received:
    19,913
    Trophy Points:
    931
    Of course Intel and AMD watch each other, but they are on different paths with different development architecture, so there will be differences moving forward.

    As we've already seen Intel can't change their product schedules like the Coffee Lake morphing into Kabylake + 2 cores, and expect it to succeed without problems, as there are certainly problems delivering product.

    Given AMD's path with AM4 / TR4, and process + architecture changes it's very likely AMD will continue to gain ground on Intel while Intel spins it's wheels trying to stay relevant until they can catch up on core count.
     
    Last edited: Oct 14, 2017
    Papusan likes this.
  6. Deks

    Deks Notebook Prophet

    Reputations:
    984
    Messages:
    4,054
    Likes Received:
    1,256
    Trophy Points:
    231
    According to those results, Intel has about 10% IPC advantage over Ryzen (when you adjust for 100 MhZ higher clocks on 8700k).
    Still, with Ryzen+, I think AMD will catch up to Intel closely in core frequencies... and Ryzen 2 will likely close the gap on IPC.
    Assuming of course that Cinebench is helping Intel gain an extra advantage by using it's uArch features and not those of Ryzen.
     
    hmscott likes this.
  7. Papusan

    Papusan JOKEBOOKS = That sucks!! STAHP! Dont buy FILTH...

    Reputations:
    12,428
    Messages:
    18,539
    Likes Received:
    27,956
    Trophy Points:
    931
    Many of you expect Intel will give up the performance race aka sit down and let AMD come on the side or in front. Oh'well. We will see. Too early make conclutions. Next time, won't AMD have same surprise factor. Thats for sure.
     
    tilleroftheearth and hmscott like this.
  8. hmscott

    hmscott Notebook Nobel Laureate

    Reputations:
    4,657
    Messages:
    16,193
    Likes Received:
    19,913
    Trophy Points:
    931
    Intel appears direction-less at this point, and needs new management. Intel couldn't be bungling this more if they were trying to screw up. :)
     
    Papusan and ajc9988 like this.
  9. Rage Set

    Rage Set A Fusioner of Technologies

    Reputations:
    716
    Messages:
    996
    Likes Received:
    2,634
    Trophy Points:
    156
    We all know that the 8400 is NOT going to perform that way it is now unless you buy a Z370 mobo. No one buying an i5 8400 and picking up an expensive Z370 mobo. If they are, they really need to rethink their computing needs. With that said, the 8700K is the king for gaming and productivity multitasking. Unfortunately for Intel, a paper launch doesn't cut it. That means AMD wins this round. Whenever Intel does have full stock of the 8700K in Q1 2018, AMD will have their Ryzen revision on its way.
     
    Last edited: Oct 14, 2017
    hmscott and ajc9988 like this.
  10. Papusan

    Papusan JOKEBOOKS = That sucks!! STAHP! Dont buy FILTH...

    Reputations:
    12,428
    Messages:
    18,539
    Likes Received:
    27,956
    Trophy Points:
    931
    Faster ram + increased BCLK can make a difference for i5-8400 (as in the pict... 869cb vs. 1012cb)Aka +15% performance increase. Could be the Z370 MB is worth it.
    http://hwbot.org/submission/3674224_ev0lv3_cinebench___r15_core_i5_8400_1012_cb

    Could point towards an earlier than expected release time-frame for B360 boards.
     
    Last edited: Oct 14, 2017
Loading...

Share This Page