AMD's big breakthrough

[Kenrou]

UK - ~$200 1500x vs ~320 7700k

https://www.amazon.co.uk/AMD-Ryzen-...?ie=UTF8&qid=1492438776&sr=8-1&keywords=1500X

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Intel-i7-7...&ie=UTF8&qid=1492438787&sr=1-1&keywords=7700k

Listen to the section on the cache at around 5m15s :

 

[ShrimpBrime]

UK - ~$200 1500x vs ~320 7700k

https://www.amazon.co.uk/AMD-Ryzen-...?ie=UTF8&qid=1492438776&sr=8-1&keywords=1500X

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Intel-i7-7...&ie=UTF8&qid=1492438787&sr=1-1&keywords=7700k

In the Links I saw prices different. $189 vs $349.90

It's a no Brainer

 

[EarthDog]

You mean like this one ED?
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=19-113-436

Or are you talking about the 4c/4t ones?

yeah that one... and a quad without smt... to compete with the intel quad sans ht. Only at this level are you seeing 'a deal' of any sort considering amd hex+ cpus above that cost or costing much or more (octo). So until those were released, there wasnt really a deal there unless you used all cores. Otherwise, yay...more cores.... memory costs are the same, board costs are the same... etc.

How are the overclocks on that? Reaching 4.5ghz+?

 

[Bluefalcon13]

yeah that one... and a quad without smt... to compete with the intel quad sans ht. Only at this level are you seeing 'a deal' of any sort considering amd hex+ cpus above that cost or costing much or more (octo). So until those were released, there wasnt really a deal there unless you used all cores. Otherwise, yay...more cores.... memory costs are the same, board costs are the same... etc.

How are the overclocks on that? Reaching 4.5ghz+?

I wasn't ragging on you ED. But I thought you didn't know the 4c/8t CPUs were released. But yes, clocks aren't as high as similar Intel products. I think we all know this.

On the flip side, I haven't analyzed why, but some code I wrote this weekend (it's a long story...) Utilized all 16 threads of my CPU, but for some reason it only used ~30% of each thread. My guess: I need to work on my multi-threading code skills. This was done on Ubuntu 17.04 (kernel 4.10, should have the scheduler fix for Ryzen). Took 12 hours to run, and generated a GIANT CSV file (~145GB, (2^32)-1 data points...). Should be fun to start analyzing the data generated...

Some of us can use the threads

I'm sure if my CPU thread utilization was 100%, I would've saturated SATA3 speeds for that SSD.

 

[Alaric]

I'm sure if my CPU thread utilization was 100%, I would've saturated SATA3 speeds for that SSD.

So we could be looking at SATA 3 being a bottleneck in the (hopefully) near future? That would make Ryzen a Breakthrough by itself, I would think. And start bumping up the cost of builds. LOL A "must have" NVMe, anyone?

And in all fairness to the clock speed debate, my 6700k runs at 1500 MHz most of the time. I just don't don't need 4600 MHz for lounging around OCF and checking my email.

 

[EarthDog]

I wasn't ragging on you ED. But I thought you didn't know the 4c/8t CPUs were released. But yes, clocks aren't as high as similar Intel products. I think we all know this.

On the flip side, I haven't analyzed why, but some code I wrote this weekend (it's a long story...) Utilized all 16 threads of my CPU, but for some reason it only used ~30% of each thread. My guess: I need to work on my multi-threading code skills. This was done on Ubuntu 17.04 (kernel 4.10, should have the scheduler fix for Ryzen). Took 12 hours to run, and generated a GIANT CSV file (~145GB, (2^32)-1 data points...). Should be fun to start analyzing the data generated...

Some of us can use the threads

I'm sure if my CPU thread utilization was 100%, I would've saturated SATA3 speeds for that SSD.

naa, knew you werent ragging, just saying that some people thinks its such a great deal but the vast majority cant use more than 8t... amd i frankly dont see more than 8t becoming relevant for mainstream and gaming within the next few years. For a 1:1, clockspeeds are going to matter...so the question to me is if 900mhz is worth $100...

 

[Bluefalcon13]

So we could be looking at SATA 3 being a bottleneck in the (hopefully) near future? That would make Ryzen a Breakthrough by itself, I would think. And start bumping up the cost of builds. LOL A "must have" NVMe, anyone?

And in all fairness to the clock speed debate, my 6700k runs at 1500 MHz most of the time. I just don't don't need 4600 MHz for lounging around OCF and checking my email.

Data storage has been the bottleneck for years Alaric. I'm sure with the right code, even an nvme drive can be capped out. After all, how do you think the drive benchmark utilities actually test a drive? [emoji14]

The problem is with this data set I am working with, it is stupid huge.

 

[Alaric]

It can be, but usually isn't. It was drive speed that spurred SSD use, not the interface speed.

 

[mackerel]

So we could be looking at SATA 3 being a bottleneck in the (hopefully) near future?

Depends on how big a data set you need to be working on! Keep it on CPU cache, and you have excellent usage potential. Bigger than that, it sits in ram. If you have some task that exceeds realistic ram sizes, that's some serious job!

The ram bandwidth side of Ryzen has been my concern all along. You have up to 8 cores, and still only two channels to feed it...

 

[Bluefalcon13]

In fairness mackerel, each element is 3 uint64 (unsigned 64bit integers). It's just there are (2^32) - 1 of em [emoji14]

It can be, but usually isn't. It was drive speed that spurred SSD use, not the interface speed.

I'm sure there are plenty of Enterprise applications that exceed NVMe specs as well. Most home uses will never touch that utilization either.

 

[EarthDog]

The ram bandwidth side of Ryzen has been my concern all along. You have up to 8 cores, and still only two channels to feed it...

Really, outside of a few applications, ram bandwidth/channels are not an issue. It may be for your uses, but, you already know you are one in a thousand, really.

 

[mackerel]

The ram bandwidth argument has been simmering in the background on Intel side for a while, and there are various tests by various people showing in gaming, maybe not that much difference in average framerates but it helps with the lows. If you have even more cores yet same (or arguably lower bandwidth while the system matures) it has to be a consideration.

For my uses, AMD have already found a way to limit ram bandwidth consumption by half by not putting in as good a FMA unit as Intel.

 

[Kenrou]

Why would they do it if 99% of consumers don't use anywhere near the full potencial ? This isn't a GPU where the faster the better for everything. And they have to cheap out somewhere to keep prices low no ?

 

[mackerel]

I'm concerned this is another step of a race to the bottom. There are existing claims that future Intel IPC may drop as they prioritise on energy efficiency. The design choices in Ryzen are in a similar direction. The market between consumer and high end is splitting. I have already accepted the likelihood that at some point in the future, I may have to drop consumer level kit and will end up buying E5 Xeons (or possible future server Zen depending on spec). I hope we are still some years from that. There is also a chance that other changes in software or hardware may mean this scenario doesn't play out.

 

[Alaric]

I'm concerned this is another step of a race to the bottom. There are existing claims that future Intel IPC may drop as they prioritise on energy efficiency. The design choices in Ryzen are in a similar direction. The market between consumer and high end is splitting. I have already accepted the likelihood that at some point in the future, I may have to drop consumer level kit and will end up buying E5 Xeons (or possible future server Zen depending on spec). I hope we are still some years from that. There is also a chance that other changes in software or hardware may mean this scenario doesn't play out.

Interesting point. The Green Weenies have wrecked more than a few things, no reason to suspect our hobbies are immune.

 

[Woomack]

Both sides are working on efficiency for last couple of years. That's why they were working on multi CPU Atom and ARM platforms for servers, Kabini chips or console version of Jaguar. Most of them were fail but some time ago we could also see plans of moving most consumer CPU into SOC and BGA. It's actually happening for couple of years and will be only worse. Intel is working more on lowering power usage as mobile market is getting larger so there they see profits. Computers for gamers are not really large market comparing to home/office series ( mainly laptops, tablets, AIO etc ). They can't remove higher performance processors for gaming pc and workstations. However for workstations more often are dedicated Xeons. Right now we have nothing from AMD which can cover that part of the market. Ryzen is not ready for business series and I can't see it in workstations in next months.
Where I could see Ryzen are gaming consoles. Current XBOX and PS4 are based on Jaguar chips which are much worse than what Ryzen is offering. I just wonder if we will see anything really good in consoles from AMD.

 

[ssjwizard]

Where I could see Ryzen are gaming consoles. Current XBOX and PS4 are based on Jaguar chips which are much worse than what Ryzen is offering. I just wonder if we will see anything really good in consoles from AMD.

Actually the new AMD chip designed for XBOX scorpio is pretty beastly. Its still roughly based on jaguar but with a done of operation specific instructions added to the die, and a super beefed up IMC.