|
Thanks, I'll make sure to check reviews some more if there are indeed better and worse boards. However, the difference between B450 and the X boards is roughly 30-50 bucks, which is a bit much considering I can get the Asrock B450 Pro for around 85 € for example.
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2018 17:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 05:23 |
|
|
I just went with a 2970wx build. The cost difference between the 70 and the 90 is $50 per core. I think I can live with 24c/48T vs 32c/64T.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2018 17:57
|
|
|
Hopper posted:Thanks, I'll make sure to check reviews some more if there are indeed better and worse boards. However, the difference between B450 and the X boards is roughly 30-50 bucks, which is a bit much considering I can get the Asrock B450 Pro for around 85 € for example. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMJoLyrWa7E
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2018 17:57
|
|
|
OC trip report with my Ryzen 3 2200g + Wraith Stealth cooler on an MSI B450M Mortar mainboard. Only doing an iGPU OC, I tried to keep the stock 1.1 SoC voltage at first, pushing frequency from stock 1100MHz OC'd up to 1280MHz. Crashed immediately when running Unigine Heaven (didn't even make it past the loading screen lol). Increased voltage to 1.2 and Heaven crashed roughly 3/4 of the way into the loop. Increased voltage to 1.25 and was able to run Heaven on loop for roughly an hour no problem. Pushed GPU frequency up just a bit more to 1300MHz, still on 1.25V and am currently running Heaven on loop atm. CPU package temps seem to hover around 60C, with spikes up to just below 80C. Besides the package temp in HWMonitor, are there any other temps I should be looking at?
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2018 19:16
|
|
|
orcane posted:Technically it would be. But apparently the B450 boards aren't built (although I'm sure that's being way overblown again) as well as the good X470 ones. Since they also don't save you much or any money, I'd go with the X470. I watched the Buildzoid video about this and most of what he was pointing out that all of the boards are 4-phase at most for vCore regulation (and some of them poorly cooled, too) and some have only one phase for SoC regulation. His main concern was that a 2700 or 2700X trying to do XFR would potentially run into issues with the 4-phase vCore. The SoC VRMs are a lesser issue but he said it would still probably not be a good idea to overclock a 2400G on those boards since the larger Vega in that model can pull a surprising amount of power under increased voltage. A six-core or a 2200G would be just fine as long as you have reasonable expectations for the kind of OCs that a budget motherboard can get you, and I imagine a 2400G at stock (or overclocking just the CPU) would be OK too.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2018 19:39
|
|
|
Hi, friends, I asked this in the parts thread but wanted to ask here, as well. So my cpu is kind of old (an i7-6800k) and overclocks basically Not Well. I'm looking to upgrade in the next few months and am leaning toward a 2700x for my use case which is mostly gaming, light video editing and game streaming for friends plus some playing at Maya come to think of it. Does this sound like a sensible purchase? I'm pretty proficient in everything else but I really haven't kept up with cpu updates at all.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2018 21:46
|
|
|
For Maya, you probably do want the extra cores, otherwise I'd say to go with a 2600X and upgrade next year. For games and streaming a 2600X is sufficient.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2018 21:53
|
|
|
Craptacular! posted:XFR2 is an X chip feature. Ah, I did not know that! Thanks! In othe rnews, I found another use case where I'm maxing out my R7 1700. Next year's upgrade to Threadripper 3XXX series is further justified 
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2018 21:53
|
|
|
LRADIKAL posted:For Maya, you probably do want the extra cores, otherwise I'd say to go with a 2600X and upgrade next year. For games and streaming a 2600X is sufficient. Thanks! The extra $30 won't hurt me any to mess around a little more easily so I'll just go with it in case I get a little more interested.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2018 21:58
|
|
|
Considering that Hopper specified that he wasn't planning on doing any overclocking, then any B450 motherboard will do fine. With that said, it seems that MSI decided to basically re-use the same VRM configuration from their low-end X470 boards with all of their B450 boards. Therefore, my recommendation for Hopper would be an MSI B450 motherboard, in case he decides to do some overclocking later.FaintlyQuaint posted:Hi, friends, I asked this in the parts thread but wanted to ask here, as well. So my cpu is kind of old (an i7-6800k) and overclocks basically Not Well. I'd probably point you towards the 2700 regular edition, since it's basically a 2700x with slightly lower clocks. Overclock it, and you've basically got a 2700x.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2018 21:58
|
|
|
Craptacular! posted:XFR2 is an X chip feature. Ugh. Can we please stop repeating this? It is not and has never been true. There are implementation differences between first- and second-generation Ryzen CPUs in the ways they employ Precision Boost and XFR, and there are segmentation differences among first-generation Ryzen CPUs regarding how far XFR can push them, but the fundamental point is that XFR has always been enabled on every Ryzen CPU. What's different between first- and second-gen Ryzen chips with regard to XFR is that the first-generation Precision Boost feature was not terribly well-fleshed-out, so AMD basically figured out what it could about the way its silicon behaved and shipped it. You had concepts of a "one-core," "two-core," and "all-core" boost speed that first-gen Ryzen chips could reach. On top of that, the first generation of XFR applied a fixed offset (50 MHz in the case of non-X chips, 100 MHz for most X chips, 200 MHz for the Ryzen 5 1500X) that raised all three of those boost speeds by that amount if thermal and power headroom was sufficient. With second-generation Ryzen CPUs, all those notions of "single-core," "two-core," and "all-core" loads went out the window, as did the notion of a fixed offset that kicked in across all of the Precision Boost range. AMD had more time to figure out how its hot new silicon performed and was able to implement a version of Precision Boost that behaved the way Lisa intended. Precision Boost 2 establishes a peak single-core clock speed and a base clock speed, and it can more gracefully clock down the chip as more cores and threads are loaded from one to n threads, all in 25-MHz increments. Instead of a cliff, the frequency-scaling curve for Precision Boost 2 looks more like a line down to base clock as more cores and threads are loaded. Beyond the notion of active threads, a second-generation Ryzen chip is taking into account its temperature, certain current limits as defined by the motherboard, and its TDP to figure out how high it can boost. This is where XFR 2 comes in, and it works nothing like the original XFR. Within the limits I just noted, if the chip decides that it has headroom available to boost higher under sustained workloads (read: lots of threads loaded), it will try and keep clocks as far above the base clock speed as it can. With single-core workloads, however, slapping a bigger cooler on your chip will not cause XFR 2 to push one-core clocks above the maximum boost clock, because that figure is apparently the limits of the silicon to begin with now. Because of the way XFR 2 works, TDP is a much stronger determinant of how the chip will perform (see the extremely conservative all-core boost behavior of the 65-W Ryzen 7 2700 versus the balls-to-the-wall behavior of the "105-W" 2700X, for just one example). That doesn't mean the 2700X "has XFR" and the 2700 does not; it's just that a different set of constraints defines what that boost intelligence can do from model to model at stock speeds. TheJeffers fucked around with this message at 22:55 on Nov 26, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2018 22:45
|
|
|
TheJeffers posted:Ugh. Can we please stop repeating this? It is not and has never been true. There are implementation differences between first- and second-generation Ryzen CPUs in the ways they employ Precision Boost and XFR, and there are segmentation differences among first-generation Ryzen CPUs regarding how far XFR can push them, but the fundamental point is that XFR has always been enabled on every Ryzen CPU. I thought he meant it was an X_70 mobo feature, although I guess this does point towards AMD's room-for-improvement naming scheme.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 01:24
|
|
|
That's not exactly what they were saying/getting at. It's not a function of the motherboard but the CPU.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 01:25
|
|
|
NewFatMike posted:I thought he meant it was an X_70 mobo feature, although I guess this does point towards AMD's room-for-improvement naming scheme. AMD isn't segmenting the market much because they want to get market share while the getting is good. They've also never been particularly big on it, as far as I know. Also, B350 and X370 ram compatibility is the same as B450 and X470. It's just first gen processors that have worse compatibility than second gen. Combined with the post about Precision Boost/XFR2, these are the three biggest pieces of misinformation about zen and zen+. Khorne fucked around with this message at 03:20 on Nov 27, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 03:16
|
|
|
Ok, this 2970WX is just stupid. Watching all the cores peg to max and a program that normally takes 10 minutes to compile finish in about 2 is just stupid.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 02:51
|
|
|
Stupid AWESOME  More cores plz
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 03:19
|
|
|
I just hope the Zen 2 based Threadrippers do double the core count for a similar price range of the predecessor models, i.e. my future 3950X having 32 of them for a grand.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 04:07
|
|
|
You know how the Athlon 200GE is supposed to be locked? Turns out MSI forgot to add that to their latest firmware for their B350M Gaming Pro: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KM9kMK9Fi5E
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 04:09
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:I just hope the Zen 2 based Threadrippers do double the core count for a similar price range of the predecessor models, i.e. my future 3950X having 32 of them for a grand. I hope they do too but be prepared to pay well for it. AMD has moved into the "Intel can't even gently caress with this" territory for core count.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 05:30
|
|
|
Mr.Radar posted:You know how the Athlon 200GE is supposed to be locked? Turns out MSI forgot to add that to their latest firmware for their B350M Gaming Pro: Talk about holding a little something back just in case.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 06:03
|
|
|
just lmao if a bios update allows overclocking on all boards suddenly
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 06:07
|
|
|
Just part of AMD's master plan to cut the legs out from under Intel in the enthusiast market.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 06:08
|
|
|
TheJeffers posted:Because of the way XFR 2 works, TDP is a much stronger determinant of how the chip will perform (see the extremely conservative all-core boost behavior of the 65-W Ryzen 7 2700 versus the balls-to-the-wall behavior of the "105-W" 2700X, for just one example). That doesn't mean the 2700X "has XFR" and the 2700 does not; it's just that a different set of constraints defines what that boost intelligence can do from model to model at stock speeds. Is it possible to change the tdp/power constraints on a 2700 to get a ghetto 2700x instead of having to manually overclock?
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 14:00
|
|
|
Arzachel posted:Is it possible to change the tdp/power constraints on a 2700 to get a ghetto 2700x instead of having to manually overclock? If AMD ever brings Precision Boost Overdrive down to X470/B450, maybe (it's a second-gen Threadripper exclusive at the moment). AMD still considers Precision Boost Overdrive to be an overclock, but power limits are one of the things it lets you toy with. TheJeffers fucked around with this message at 14:23 on Nov 29, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 14:20
|
|
|
TheJeffers posted:If AMD ever brings Precision Boost Overdrive down to X470/B450, maybe (it's a second-gen Threadripper exclusive at the moment). AMD still considers Precision Boost Overdrive to be an overclock, but power limits are one of the things it lets you toy with. Huh? My 2700x on an Asrock x470 SLI Master board has an option to enable PBO and it works (CPU hits 4.4/4.5 given enough thermal headroom). Isn't this the same thing? Even Ryzen Master shows PBO when this BIOS option is enabled.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 16:49
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:I just hope the Zen 2 based Threadrippers do double the core count for a similar price range of the predecessor models, i.e. my future 3950X having 32 of them for a grand. I'm guessing they probably will. Personally I'd prefer a 16 core with a really high clock speed, but I guess we'll see how things work out. If the 32-core has barely any clock deficit from the 16.. well... 
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 17:13
|
|
|
Stanley Pain posted:Huh? My 2700x on an Asrock x470 SLI Master board has an option to enable PBO and it works (CPU hits 4.4/4.5 given enough thermal headroom). Isn't this the same thing? Even Ryzen Master shows PBO when this BIOS option is enabled. What kind of cooling you have to get 4.4-4.5 GHz?
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 17:31
|
|
|
ufarn posted:What kind of cooling you have to get 4.4-4.5 GHz? Thermaltake Floe Riing 360 @ max. There are a bunch of other settings in the BIOS that seem to allow for specifying TDP and Max Amps that I haven't played with. That being said the CPU is hitting 1.55v when hitting 4.4/4.5. Typically on an all core load/gaming I'm seeing between 4.2 and 4.3 GHz.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 17:38
|
|
|
Stanley Pain posted:Huh? My 2700x on an Asrock x470 SLI Master board has an option to enable PBO and it works (CPU hits 4.4/4.5 given enough thermal headroom). Isn't this the same thing? Even Ryzen Master shows PBO when this BIOS option is enabled. https://www.hardocp.com/article/2018/05/01/precision_boost_overdrive_xfr_enhanced_confusion Motherboard makers are free to do similar things, and they may even have similar names, and it may work fine, but it's going to be vendor-implementation-dependent for X470/B450 until AMD officially deigns to support PBO on those platforms. See: https://community.amd.com/community/gaming/blog/2018/08/13/understanding-precision-boost-overdrive-in-three-easy-steps From that link: quote:Precision Boost Overdrive requires a 2nd Gen AMD Ryzen™ Threadripper processor with AMD X399 chipset motherboard. Because Precision Boost Overdrive enables operation of the processor outside of specifications and in excess of factory settings, use of the feature invalidates the AMD product warranty and may also void warranties offered by the system manufacturer or retailer.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 18:32
|
|
|
Stanley Pain posted:2700x Stanley Pain posted:1.55v Isn't that a big bag of nope?
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 18:44
|
|
|
Stanley Pain posted:Huh? My 2700x on an Asrock x470 SLI Master board has an option to enable PBO and it works (CPU hits 4.4/4.5 given enough thermal headroom). Isn't this the same thing? Even Ryzen Master shows PBO when this BIOS option is enabled. I was just reading about this a few days ago. PBO was seemingly pulled out of the desktop parts at the last second, so some motherboard makers still have the flag in the BIOS. It’s not an officially supported feature outside of TR it seems, so there isn’t VRM awareness on desktop unless the mobo makers implement it themselves. Here’s a link about it, dunno if it’s still true. https://m.hardocp.com/article/2018/05/01/precision_boost_overdrive_xfr_enhanced_confusion Efb
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 18:52
|
|
|
Seamonster posted:Isn't that a big bag of nope? It's pretty common to see figures like that for single-core/light loads on Ryzen CPUs, as Stanley Pain observes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 20:37
|
|
|
Mr.Radar posted:You know how the Athlon 200GE is supposed to be locked? Turns out MSI forgot to add that to their latest firmware for their B350M Gaming Pro: Those are some nice gains, and that's merely a core overclock without even touching the memory. Wonder if someone hasn't tried to pick apart what's different between the previous and current firmware, and see if they couldn't do the same for most boards, it's got to just be a flag in the BIOS right?
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 22:37
|
|
|
I know they're trying their hardest to remove gpu bottleneck to show the truth of THOSE GAINS, but its a rather absurd gpu pairing that no real athlon 200GE owner will ever see...
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 22:44
|
|
|
Seamonster posted:I know they're trying their hardest to remove gpu bottleneck to show the truth of THOSE GAINS, but its a rather absurd gpu pairing that no real athlon 200GE owner will ever see... Hardware Unboxed did some testing with the Athlon 200GE and it'll throttle a 290X/RX480/1060 3G card, which means you should see similar differences in nearly everything you'd try to pair with a 200GE in the first place. Seriously, 2C/4T is very dead on desktop and the new minimum seems to be 4C/4T and optimum is 6C/12T.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2018 22:48
|
|
|
Now, I guess the next question is, how low can they clock the 200GE, and can it meet or beat a Pentium 4415Y in the same power envelope? Because the Intel part is $161, and in the current Surface Go, and the 200GE is $60. And I REALLY want to see the Gen 2 Surface Go take a significant step forward.
SwissArmyDruid fucked around with this message at 00:33 on Nov 30, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2018 00:22
|
|
|
EmpyreanFlux posted:Hardware Unboxed did some testing with the Athlon 200GE and it'll throttle a 290X/RX480/1060 3G card, which means you should see similar differences in nearly everything you'd try to pair with a 200GE in the first place. Seriously, 2C/4T is very dead on desktop and the new minimum seems to be 4C/4T and optimum is 6C/12T. I wondering just how big is that "I'm dirt poor but I also insist on not buying refurb/used" segment the 200GE is aimed at.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2018 09:42
|
|
|
SwissArmyDruid posted:And I REALLY want to see the Gen 2 Surface Go take a significant step forward. Maybe it eventually will... https://www.tomshardware.com/news/microsoft-surface-laptop-amd-cpu,38176.html eames fucked around with this message at 13:34 on Nov 30, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2018 11:19
|
|
|
TBH if the Surface Go had launched with an AMD Zen-based CPU I would have picked one up.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2018 14:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 05:23 |
|
|
Palladium posted:I wondering just how big is that "I'm dirt poor but I also insist on not buying refurb/used" segment the 200GE is aimed at. Large, surprisingly, because people are really squeamish about used parts (not so much a full refurb PC) and the 200GE is the absolute minimum really to getting a DDR4 PC.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2018 21:40
|
|