AMD's Ryzen CPUs (Ryzen/TR/Epyc) & Vega/Polaris/Navi GPUs

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

  1. TANWare

    TANWare Just This Side of Senile, I think. Super Moderator

    Reputations:
    2,525
    Messages:
    9,509
    Likes Received:
    4,921
    Trophy Points:
    431
    ok, more of same, up too 8 core single chiplet;
    https://www.techpowerup.com/news-tags/Ryzen 7 3700X
    https://www.mytravellinguide.com/five-cpus-12-cores-for-499-up-to-4-6-ghz-pcie-4-0-coming-7-7/
    https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-third-gen-ryzen-7nm-launch-intel-cpu,39449.html

    Edit; what I find interesting is that I doubt there will be both dual and/or quad chiplet TR3, so maybe the 16 core will be avoided and only 24 to 32 core? if latency is not severe could there be a up to 64 core eight chiplet?
     
    Last edited: May 30, 2019
    Vasudev, ajc9988 and hmscott like this.
  2. Zymphad

    Zymphad Zymphad

    Reputations:
    2,321
    Messages:
    4,165
    Likes Received:
    355
    Trophy Points:
    151
    Am I the only one disappointed with Zen2? Zen+ already crushes Intel's consumer/gaming offerings for multi-threading, but it definitely showed with a good graphics card, 2700x was a bottleneck, not by much, but 9600K @ 5ghz consistently got between 5-20 FPS more depending on the game.

    I was really hyped that 3700x would not just catch up but exceed Intel. But all we saw was the 3700x was equivalent of a stock 9700K. But we all know that 9700K can overclock like a monster. And we all know Zen architecture leaves VERY little room for overclock. And then it became known AMD's demonstration was fudged, disabling certain features that Intel excels at, I don't know the details, but Intel had legitimate reasons to be upset with AMD's demonstrations.

    The hype for Zen2 was too good to be true. We expected 3700x to be a 12 core with 4.5 all core boost @ 329. Instead we got a 8 core LOW POWER offering with all core boost of approx 3.7 ghz, so pretty much the same as 2700x, granted with 15% IPC boost. It seems for AMD, what seems too good to be true is truly too good to be true. I'll have to wait for real benchmarks before making my buying decision. I don't trust AMD hype right now.
     
    Papusan and tilleroftheearth like this.
  3. Deks

    Deks Notebook Prophet

    Reputations:
    1,135
    Messages:
    4,760
    Likes Received:
    1,896
    Trophy Points:
    231
    Overclocking depends mostly on the manufacturing process. UArch has some influence but not much.
    Intel refined 14nm so many times that its possible their CPUs can overclock that high, whereas AMD was using a node designed for low clocks and mobile parts... But AMD actually surpassed intel now on 7nm

    On IPC grounds alone, a zen 2 with 500mhz lower clocks than Intel achieves same or better performance... And lets not forget power consumption/efficiency in this equation as well.
    Even an overclocked zen2 might be able to surpass an overclocked Intel while still consuming less power.

    If you are that interested in overclocking, wait for independent reviews to see how high zen2 will overclock. If vega 7 is any indication, it may be able to overclock better than zen1 and +.
     
    Last edited: May 31, 2019
    ajc9988 and hmscott like this.
  4. TANWare

    TANWare Just This Side of Senile, I think. Super Moderator

    Reputations:
    2,525
    Messages:
    9,509
    Likes Received:
    4,921
    Trophy Points:
    431
    As far as features, I think this was with the Epyc comparison. Servers typically do not OC, and rarely do we want water cooled and/or refrigerated servers. so I take those complaints with a grain of salt or two.

    I am not sure yet where Zen2 will be when overclocking. History does show AMD is not great at that but it is a new process and now TMC vs GF. This too is a wait and see.

    As far s further clocks and cores, this may be later down the line. As I speculated they need to not sabotage their own TR2 sales with over doing performance out of the gate. Again a wait and see.

    So in the end it all is a wait and see what we get and what we end up with after everything settles....……...
     
    tilleroftheearth, Vasudev and hmscott like this.
  5. Deks

    Deks Notebook Prophet

    Reputations:
    1,135
    Messages:
    4,760
    Likes Received:
    1,896
    Trophy Points:
    231
    There could be several reasons due to AMD dropping TR from their roadmap. None of which would necessarily indicate they didn't want to usurp previous TR performance with similarly performing zen2 with much less cores... Mainly because as new generations of hw emerge, they are more or less bound to surpass previous generations.

    Anyway, I don't think that it matters too much because AMD said they will release TR zen2.
     
    ajc9988 and hmscott like this.
  6. TANWare

    TANWare Just This Side of Senile, I think. Super Moderator

    Reputations:
    2,525
    Messages:
    9,509
    Likes Received:
    4,921
    Trophy Points:
    431
    I do not doubt their word I just like it in writing (roadmap). As far as next gen usurp the prior, this is a different case as their are clock increases, IPC and core count increases. A lot to stuff into one upgrade generationally.
     
    Last edited: May 30, 2019
    Vasudev likes this.
  7. Vasudev

    Vasudev Notebook Nobel Laureate

    Reputations:
    7,551
    Messages:
    10,464
    Likes Received:
    7,745
    Trophy Points:
    931
    I think AMD means, if developer use Ryzen specific compiler optimisations they might be able to exceed the advertised IPC. i think none uses them and most of them stick with Intel compilers because its very fast.
     
  8. ole!!!

    ole!!! Notebook Prophet

    Reputations:
    2,301
    Messages:
    5,776
    Likes Received:
    3,680
    Trophy Points:
    431
    fixed for you!
     
    ajc9988 likes this.
  9. Vasudev

    Vasudev Notebook Nobel Laureate

    Reputations:
    7,551
    Messages:
    10,464
    Likes Received:
    7,745
    Trophy Points:
    931
    No, Intel compilers gives very heavy analytics of how your program exploits all cores performance and also access regions. You can get real time hotspots and detailed bug check and fixes. Once optimised the code is 10x faster than MSFT on Intel only while on other platform it runs 20x slower. So, developers targeting multi platform use gcc or MS compilers to achieve a balance.
     
    bennyg and tilleroftheearth like this.
  10. ole!!!

    ole!!! Notebook Prophet

    Reputations:
    2,301
    Messages:
    5,776
    Likes Received:
    3,680
    Trophy Points:
    431
    this is an area i dont go into, since i dont code.

    intel had vast majority of market catering to their cpu for nearly a decade. i think any software out there right now that has been using intel compiler will continue to use it.
     
Loading...

Share This Page