FEATURED AMD ZEN Discussion (Previous Rumor Thread)

Dolk · Feb 23, 2017

Janus67 said:
I'm happy for everyone that has pre-ordered the cpu and such (good for my $AMD stock values), but I honestly don't see a reason why with the limited information that we have. We know results from cherry-picked AMD benchmarks, but AMD did the same thing when Dulldozer launched and soon was shown to be out performed by the PhenomII and older Intel CPUs with less cores. This isn't supposed to be a doom and gloom post, I sure as hell hope they can bring the performance back up to snuff and for a competitive price point. But I don't pre-order much of anything anymore without knowing everything there is to know about it before hand. So until I see numerous reviews, benchmarks, comparisons, heat reports, OC reports, cooling required, longevity issues, motherboard compatibility/ram compatibility/etc things posted I'm staying away from new hardware.

Now granted, you can take this with a grain of salt as I pre-ordered a Tesla 3 even before the official reveal to get in line to hopefully get one, but at least by the time I would get mine I could still get 100% of my money back and everything will be known about it by that time.

Its what gets our jimmy's pleasurable ruffle.

I did the same thing for Phenom II 940 because I knew it would be something special. Didn't do it for the FX line up because I knew it would be meh. This time though.. The king returned to build the architecture he wanted. I gotta see what he did, and why there is a neural net system in the front end.

Janus67 · Feb 23, 2017

cdawall said:
The 6950x scores upward of 2800 points. The only records amd is setting are for 8 core single chip setups. They took the last one by all of a couple points 2449 vs 2445.

Yep, just had to check/verify as well. And obviously scaling up from the 10core 6950x the scores increase even further, but nevertheless, beating the 5960X score in cinebench is pretty impressive, if even by 4 points.

BuRgLaR · Feb 23, 2017

Janus67 said:
Yep, just had to check/verify as well. And obviously scaling up from the 10core 6950x the scores increase even further, but nevertheless, beating the 5960X score in cinebench is pretty impressive, if even by 4 points.

Exactly and that's all I was saying as far as price to performance goes.

If these benchmarks aren't bull**** and these benched engineering samples are what we're getting I'd say this is a Grand Slam for AMD.

- - - Updated - - -

Dolk said:
Its what gets our jimmy's pleasurable ruffle. I did the same thing for Phenom II 940 because I knew it would be something special. Didn't do it for the FX line up because I knew it would be meh. This time though.. The king returned to build the architecture he wanted. I gotta see what he did, and why there is a neural net system in the front end.

Everytime I hear the Neural Net jargon I go straight to Terminator.

This is the end folks AMD has become self aware

Blaylock · Feb 23, 2017

DaveB said:
Reports are that you'll have to wait until Q2 for Ryzen 5 and 2H sometime for Ryzen 3.

Can you please post your source? I'm looking specifically at the 1600x. Thanks

Bluefalcon13 · Feb 23, 2017

DaveB said:
Reports are that you'll have to wait until Q2 for Ryzen 5 and 2H sometime for Ryzen 3.

Blaylock said:
Can you please post your source? I'm looking specifically at the 1600x. Thanks

Indeed, I am curious as well, cause I've read every link posted in this thread. Granted I haven't watched all the videos.

Johan45 · Feb 23, 2017

Janus67 said:
Yep, just had to check/verify as well. And obviously scaling up from the 10core 6950x the scores increase even further, but nevertheless, beating the 5960X score in cinebench is pretty impressive, if even by 4 points.

What I found very impressive is that it was 800MHz slower than the 5960x. If AMD can improve things to the point of mainstream chips released in the 4.5 GHz area that would be something.
I just have a feeling that the voltage/heat is going to scale very quickly on these. 4.5GHz for initial Ryzen release even on custom water may not be attainable for many.

SubPar · Feb 23, 2017

So sad that that the r3 chips arent out till 2H 2017, I was hankering to build me a new system and r5/r7 are just way to much $/cores for me to ever use lol. At least I can watch the magic unfold vicariously through the forums

mackerel · Feb 23, 2017

Woomack said:
So I wonder what will be real OC/performance difference between 1700 and 1700X as I see $100 difference between them and I will OC it manually anyway.

I'm betting on the 1700 myself. We will surely compare notes once we've had a go at them and see if there is any significant degree of binning.

Janus67 said:
I'm happy for everyone that has pre-ordered the cpu and such (good for my $AMD stock values), but I honestly don't see a reason why with the limited information that we have. We know results from cherry-picked AMD benchmarks, but AMD did the same thing when Dulldozer launched and soon was shown to be out performed by the PhenomII and older Intel CPUs with less cores.

There is an element of risk in it, which could be simply removed by waiting a week or so. Now, my bank balance isn't exactly overflowing but I'm not short on a few $ either, and this is something new to play with. I mean, really new, not just a minor spin from Intel. My interest areas are unlikely to be covered by the mainstream reviewers, and I'm willing to test it out quickly for others with similar interests.

For practical purposes the pricing of a 1700 based system will be close enough to a 7700k based system. Worst case, even if it turned out with poor IPC/OC the extra cores will go a long way to offset it. I can't see Ryzen sucking badly enough to negate that.

Helgaiden · Feb 23, 2017

Happy that alot more information has been coming out and it isnt all leaks/rumor. Cant wait to see real benchmarks. Really want to see XFR further explored. The 100mhz free bump discussed at the AMD event didn't sound like much, but it was probably all the stock coolers could allow.

DaveB · Feb 23, 2017

Well I don't think AMD has the capability to control all the benchmarks leaks we've been seeing. The preponderance of evidence says Ryzen is a winner for AMD and, even better, that Intel will be forced to respond with lowered prices on their current offerings, and then by reasonable pricing on their next release (Coffee Lake?). This is good for everybody and I don't see why we shouldn't be optimistic at this point. I just wish AMD was coming out with their entire Ryzen line now and not just the high prices R7 ones.

Johan45 · Feb 23, 2017

AFIK 100MHz is the max that XFR gives.

Intel is releasing their SKY/KABYLAKE X299 series this summer. If it follows the original series they clock a lot higher than the Haswell/broawell did. I still don't think there's much of an IPC gain at least from the mainstream chips but the speed will definitely be ther. If they launch with elevated clock speeds like kaby did then they'll have much higher "stock" performance than AMD does

Janus67 · Feb 23, 2017

DaveB said:
Well I don't think AMD has the capability to control all the benchmarks leaks we've been seeing. The preponderance of evidence says Ryzen is a winner for AMD and, even better, that Intel will be forced to respond with lowered prices on their current offerings, and then by reasonable pricing on their next release (Coffee Lake?). This is good for everybody and I don't see why we shouldn't be optimistic at this point. I just wish AMD was coming out with their entire Ryzen line now and not just the high prices R7 ones.

All what benchmark leaks? I've seen the one person post a great cinebench score on LN2. Are there other sources that I'm unaware of that have tons of leaked benchmarks other than what AMD had picked and released themselves?

I see no issue with being optimistic, I too am optimistic in how the CPU will perform in the hands of the general public. There's no disagreement that a competitive AMD product is good for the average Joe either by having more choice and/or by possibly forcing Intel to lower their prices or to step up their development game. But I've been bitten once too many times by AMD's (or any company's) promises and numbers to trust blindly in what they are showing/"leaking".

Dermen · Feb 23, 2017

That would be a bummer if R3 isn't coming out until 2H. If it doesn't come out before June my next build will have whatever Intel is selling for summer retail edge program (I'm assuming 7700k). I was hoping to build it before then.

cdawall · Feb 23, 2017

Johan45 said:
What I found very impressive is that it was 800MHz slower than the 5960x. If AMD can improve things to the point of mainstream chips released in the 4.5 GHz area that would be something.
I just have a feeling that the voltage/heat is going to scale very quickly on these. 4.5GHz for initial Ryzen release even on custom water may not be attainable for many.

I was super impressed at the clockspeed difference. It proves yet again AMD is the better multithreading company, so far they are toasting my guesstimate of performance and I am very happy to be wrong in this situation.

I have a feeling their TDP's are a bit of a joke the top tier cooler is comparable in performance to the hyper212, so we aren't talking about low heat chips in my opinion and some of the leaks I have heard put the actual power consumption in line with intel's HEDT which is not bad, but that's still hot.

Helgaiden · Feb 23, 2017

Speculation on Temps has been rather quiet. Anyone want to comment on that, guys? I have a few friends playing devil's advocate saying these may run hot since temp conversations have been rather muted that its like AMD is hiding something. Other guy speculates chip separation (whatever that means...) due to heat (didnt even happen with prescott) and is advising to wait 6 months to a year to see how everything plays out with these new chips....

im just left scratching my head. These things simply cannot run any hotter than their previous gen counterparts, right? And imo, inclusion of XFR points to AMD being pretty confident of operating within a good enough range to extend past specified boost ratings. Thats a positive sign.

cdawall · Feb 23, 2017

I have nothing I will hopefully know friday.

mackerel · Feb 23, 2017

My theory on temps is that the workload that will cause an Intel CPU to reach the max are AVX/FMA3 heavy tasks. To the best info I have, this is an area AMD chose not to compete against Intel and Ryzen will offer significantly lower IPC in this specific area, offset in part by more cores for the money. The side benefit to AMD of this is that Ryzen wont run as hot under those loads. There was a press demo I think, where they showed Ryzen against Intel with live power readings overlaid. They weren't that different, not by the degree implied by the rated TDP. I think in like for like throughput, they're probably pretty close in power usage. Also bare in mind you can choose where you want to sit on the speed/power curve, so certain models may appear better or worse. In going for the 1700, let's see if its consumption is comparable to the TDP at stock, then see if OC'ing will bring it comparable to the higher models.

Dolk · Feb 23, 2017

mackerel said:
My theory on temps is that the workload that will cause an Intel CPU to reach the max are AVX/FMA3 heavy tasks. To the best info I have, this is an area AMD chose not to compete against Intel and Ryzen will offer significantly lower IPC in this specific area, offset in part by more cores for the money. The side benefit to AMD of this is that Ryzen wont run as hot under those loads. There was a press demo I think, where they showed Ryzen against Intel with live power readings overlaid. They weren't that different, not by the degree implied by the rated TDP. I think in like for like throughput, they're probably pretty close in power usage. Also bare in mind you can choose where you want to sit on the speed/power curve, so certain models may appear better or worse. In going for the 1700, let's see if its consumption is comparable to the TDP at stock, then see if OC'ing will bring it comparable to the higher models.

What!?

Johan45 · Feb 23, 2017

Dolk said:
What!?

Yeah what he said^^^. The cpu either runs the instructions or it doesn't, so unless it downclocks automatically when it reads them that statement doesn't seem to make any sense to me.

cdawall · Feb 23, 2017

Johan45 said:
Yeah what he said^^^. The cpu either runs the instructions or it doesn't, so unless it downclocks automatically when it reads them that statement doesn't seem to make any sense to me.

I could see them not being able to stay under boost in high stress situations, just like intel chips, but other than that I do not know what he is getting at.

FEATURED AMD ZEN Discussion (Previous Rumor Thread)

I once overclocked an Intel

Benching Team Leader

Member

"That Backfired" Senior Member

Member

Benching Team Leader Super Moderator

Member

Member

Member

Senior Member

Benching Team Leader Super Moderator

Benching Team Leader

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

I once overclocked an Intel

Benching Team Leader Super Moderator

Member

Similar threads