|
SwissArmyDruid posted:Honestly, I need a 7nm Zen2 APU with non-GCN graphics also on 7nm like needing to pee so bad your back teeth start floating. Just the sheer potential of such an idea has me anxious. While great, it seems that by the time that kind of APU comes out, real graphics cards will be another step ahead entirely. On the other hand,that scotsman leak indicated a low end navi part matching 1060 performance on slot power only for $130 so  if true.
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 16:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 02:11 |
|
|
Seamonster posted:Do NOT expect these to be cheap. Do we think AMD will raise their prices to intel levels here? I figured the top end Ryzen would match the top end i9 9900k in pricing at the most.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 16:38
|
|
|
I'd take a 16C/32T @ 4.4GHz+ for $530. Even better, you might actually be about to find the AMD part  It would be quite a come-down from $880 for the 2950X.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 16:48
|
|
|
SwissArmyDruid posted:Honestly, I need a 7nm Zen2 APU with non-GCN graphics also on 7nm like needing to pee so bad your back teeth start floating. Just the sheer potential of such an idea has me anxious. Seamonster posted:Do NOT expect these to be cheap. I'd also expect everything to be cheap. Cheap being ~$500 for 16c. Whether retailers will adhere to that or not I don't know, but I'd bet MSRP is +/- 10% of that. The zen+ CPUs were designed to be against ice lake. Zen2 was supposed to be against either an extended ice lake lifetime or the next generation after it. AMD has a golden opportunity to make Intel look completely non-competitive for at least an entire year. The only thing on the horizon for intel is a 4c 10nm laptop in ?Q4. TSMC also has spare 7nm capacity and I'd bet AMD is making use of it. Supposedly x570 is the only iffy part about the release right now. Khorne fucked around with this message at 17:14 on Jan 23, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 17:00
|
|
|
I'd love to move my compute nodes to 16c, but that'll depend on what the power and cooling requirements look like. I'd still be really happy with 12c parts that operated in the power/thermal envelope of the 2700.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 18:11
|
|
|
If I can go from 4 to 8 cores with ~300 dollars it will own.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 18:51
|
|
|
OhFunny posted:If I can go from 4 to 8 cores with ~300 dollars it will own. You can if you already have DDR4 RAM? R7 1700s are going for like $170 or less, and a good B350 motherboard will be like $50 or less.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 18:55
|
|
|
NewFatMike posted:You can if you already have DDR4 RAM? R7 1700s are going for like $170 or less, and a good B350 motherboard will be like $50 or less. I totally forgot about R7 1700s, but I also am still on DDR3.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 19:28
|
|
|
Khorne posted:You have to wait for 2020. The APUs lag a year behind. They should still be not great for gaming. No, I have to wait for 2022-2024.. I said NON-GCN. SwissArmyDruid fucked around with this message at 21:16 on Jan 23, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 21:12
|
|
|
Seamonster posted:On the other hand,that scotsman leak indicated a low end navi part matching 1060 performance on slot power only for $130 so if navi releases this fall the 1060 will be 3 years old, so they'd better be able to match it with the low end part. if they can't that means navi is a failure straight out of the gate.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 22:26
|
|
|
Klyith posted:if navi releases this fall the 1060 will be 3 years old, so they'd better be able to match it with the low end part. if they can't that means navi is a failure straight out of the gate. Meh, a plug in card, with no other power requirements that matches 1060 for $130? thats pretty good, my man. Considering the Nvidia 1060 still runs $200 for 3gb, and $300 for 6gb. This will be perfect for value builders that wanna get their feet wet with some gaming. Either way it will be good for the market that desperately needs competition. Nvidia is running crazy with their prices with the latest offerings.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 22:39
|
|
|
Solid 1080p performance on slot power for $130 is pretty awesome. That's throwing it into an office or prebuilt box without having to worry about a PSU. I'd argue that that would get more console folks into trying PC for gaming than nearly any other recent development. poo poo, even upgrading an HTPC for transcode. E: hell, the RX 580 is going for $165 with 2 free games, so the price point is about there even if PSU isn't. I imagine that the node shrink alone would nearly get you there, not even accounting for architectural approvements: https://www.pcworld.com/article/333...free-games.html NewFatMike fucked around with this message at 23:04 on Jan 23, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 22:59
|
|
|
i have zero faith in any part of that rumor, but i was wrong about Zen 2 being multidie so who knows
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 23:24
|
|
|
Lube banjo posted:Do we think AMD will raise their prices to intel levels here? To me that was the most BS thing about the previous leaks. For the rumored performance/cores the prices were incredibly low. I'd love for that part of the rumors to be right too I just don't expect it to happen. SwissArmyDruid posted:No, I have to wait for 2022-2024.. I said NON-GCN. PC LOAD LETTER fucked around with this message at 04:10 on Jan 24, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 04:06
|
|
|
PC LOAD LETTER posted:Historically AMD has never been shy about cranking up their prices if they have something that will meet or beat Intel's stuff so there isn't much reason to expect them to keep their prices as low as they have so far. Yup, AMD falling behind 9900K by like 5% is actually good news for price/performance.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 04:15
|
|
|
Went from an offset of -0.075 to -0.09375(what it defaulted to when I entered 0.09) with my 2700x running PE4 today. I tried a -0.1 but it didn't want to boot. I'm under 1.4V average in games with a pretty hefty average temperature drop as well.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 06:52
|
|
|
Palladium posted:Yup, AMD falling behind 9900K by like 5% is actually good news for price/performance. If that AMD eng. sample (rumored to be clocked @ 3.7Ghz) was 5% behind a totally truly stock clocked 9900k (so 3.6Ghz base) then yeah it would be. That "stock" 9900k was supposedly allowed to all core boost itself up to 4.7Ghz though. And the system power use difference was fairly large too which is strongly suggestive those clock speed difference rumors might not be bullshit. If Zen2 can pretty much match Coffeelake performance even with a ~1Ghz clock disadvantage AND can clock well north of 4Ghz all core (which is fairly certain at this point IMO) than I think its hard to go reasonably expecting Zen2 8C/16T+ chips to be as cheap as previously rumored. PC LOAD LETTER fucked around with this message at 08:40 on Jan 24, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 08:38
|
|
|
PC LOAD LETTER posted:That "stock" 9900k was supposedly allowed to all core boost itself up to 4.7Ghz though. And the system power use difference was fairly large too which is strongly suggestive those clock speed difference rumors might not be bullshit. The score is also in line with 9900k@4.7Ghz. I don't buy that the Zen2 sample was running at 3.7Ghz, but that doesn't matter because it pulled ~70W so we're almost guaranteed to see a 95W X version that boosts higher.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 09:37
|
|
|
fknlo posted:Went from an offset of -0.075 to -0.09375(what it defaulted to when I entered 0.09) with my 2700x running PE4 today. I tried a -0.1 but it didn't want to boot. I'm under 1.4V average in games with a pretty hefty average temperature drop as well. I couldn't find an offset option on my MSI board. I'm wondering if that's just bios specific.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 10:32
|
|
|
Balliver Shagnasty posted:I couldn't find an offset option on my MSI board. I'm wondering if that's just bios specific.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 11:28
|
|
|
lllllllllllllllllll posted:Was wondering the same thing a few weeks ago in the overclock thread. Sadly MSI does not seem to offer that option for an easy undervolt. I asked because the mobo's still on bios 7B77v11 or 12 and I didn't feel like messing around with bios upgrades unless it was absolutely, positively necessary.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 13:40
|
|
|
Arzachel posted:I don't buy that the Zen2 sample was running at 3.7Ghz If that Zen 2 eng. sample was boosting all core to those speeds and still staying at ~70W that is fairly impressive but also very unlikely IMO. I don't think AMD was able to work any magic with Zen 2 nor do I think TSMC's 7nm is THAT good to get those sorts of clocks with that power usage. I do expect it to clock fairly well but I also expect it to put out lots of heat with these high core count Zen 2's when you push for higher clocks. Arzachel posted:but that doesn't matter because it pulled ~70W so we're almost guaranteed to see a 95W X version that boosts higher.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 14:11
|
|
|
It had to be at least 4.4 in the benchmark. Zen2 ipc should be awfully close to the 9900k's. It should have some advantage in cinebench because AMD has a significantly better SMT implementation, zen2 improves fp performance by ~19% over zen+ in synthetic benchmarks (vs ~1%-2% int), and to be pulling the power it was it has to be clocked kinda high. There is also a benchmark leak for a 12c/24t ES now: https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/14076820 Unfortunately, it has really slow RAM. It also shows a potential bug in the ES with the IO die. Khorne fucked around with this message at 14:51 on Jan 24, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 14:47
|
|
|
If it was running at 4.4GHz then there's barely any improvement since a 2700X running at 4.4GHz scores around 1960. Taking the numbers from the Tech Report Ryzen 2700 review we get a Cinebench score of 1912 at 4.2GHz. Comparing that to the engineering sample score of around 2050 it's clear that it had to be running at a lower clock, or there has not been much improvement to IPC. Assuming that IPC has improved by 15%*
My bet would be a 13% IPC improvement running at 4GHz. If it was running at 3.7GHz then that would be a 20% IPC improvement. * Of course I'm aware that Cinebench doesn't scale perfectly
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 15:52
|
|
|
Khorne posted:It had to be at least 4.4 in the benchmark. Zen2 ipc should be awfully close to the 9900k's. Measly Twerp posted:My bet would be a 13% IPC improvement running at 4GHz. If it was running at 3.7GHz then that would be a 20% IPC improvement. I think the number that is currently being passed around is ~15% IPC improvement for Zen 2 over Zen+ in general FWIW.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 16:28
|
|
|
Balliver Shagnasty posted:I couldn't find an offset option on my MSI board. I'm wondering if that's just bios specific. It looks like there might be an option on the latest BIOS for at least some MSI boards? Might be worth it to at least investigate.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 16:45
|
|
|
PC LOAD LETTER posted:Nah the power use is too low to me for a 8C/16T chip at a all core boost of 4.4Ghz. Zen 2 has been rumored for a while now to beat Skylake/Coffeelake on IPC by a respectable amount too FWIW. Would that more or less bring it to parity with Intel for gaming? I'm trying to weigh getting a 9900k vs just waiting for Zen 2. I could get by with an old system for 6 months but no point in waiting if its just going to be the same performance and pretty close on price.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 21:08
|
|
|
I doubt the 8-core Ryzen parts cost as much as a 9900k since that will be the mid range of their lineup, some of the 12 or 16-core parts might.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 21:45
|
|
|
PC LOAD LETTER posted:Do you think it ran at 4Ghz? There were some rumors it had a boost of 4.4-4.5Ghz but there was no word if that was all core boost, single core boost, or disabled for the test they showed. My guess is 4.2-4.4Ghz with this particular test being on the lower end of the average ipc increase, more efficient use of resources without extra execution width might hurt the SMT scaling slightly. The Gunslinger posted:Would that more or less bring it to parity with Intel for gaming? I'm trying to weigh getting a 9900k vs just waiting for Zen 2. I could get by with an old system for 6 months but no point in waiting if its just going to be the same performance and pretty close on price. I think it's pretty safe to say that the Zen 2 9900k counterpart is going to be significantly cheaper.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 22:02
|
|
|
Significantly cheaper AND more readily-available.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 22:23
|
|
|
If all this comes true, Intel is getting dunked on super hard in a couple months. I got cash, sell me the 5ghz 12c part stat
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 23:51
|
|
|
Risky Bisquick posted:If all this comes true, Intel is getting dunked on super hard in a couple months. I got cash, sell me the 5ghz 12c part stat Yep, I'm ready for that as well. Got a 1700X as a bridge CPU for cheap at Microcenter waiting for the Ryzen 3000 series parts to come out. That CPU would finish off my PC build that I've already spent far too much money on so it can sit there as I play Wii U games.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2019 00:01
|
|
|
I, too, look forward to buying far more cores than I need. I'm glad I didn't get a 8700k when they came out. The jump from 4 to 6 cores looked great at the time, but kind of anaemic now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2019 00:22
|
|
|
I want 12 or 16 cores and some hilarious exotic cooling solution to run it at like 5 ghz and 1.4v vcore or something stupid.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2019 00:36
|
|
|
The obvious next step for all of these cores is to get an additional GPU so you can virtualize your gaming box while... Doing CAD work? Rendering models good? Virtualizing a dedicated Plex server? I'm still working on that part, but there is some definite duty escalation about to happen. I can't wait to see what the Threadripper is going to look like.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2019 01:52
|
|
|
Yes, yes, and maybe. Fare thee well, little 7577. Thou has served me well.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2019 01:56
|
|
|
Methylethylaldehyde posted:I want 12 or 16 cores and some hilarious exotic cooling solution to run it at like 5 ghz and 1.4v vcore or something stupid. I don't think we are quite there with requiring a chiller to run at 5ghz 
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2019 05:18
|
|
|
The Gunslinger posted:Would that more or less bring it to parity with Intel for gaming? The Gunslinger posted:I could get by with an old system for 6 months but no point in waiting if its just going to be the same performance and pretty close on price. PC LOAD LETTER fucked around with this message at 07:02 on Jan 25, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2019 05:38
|
|
|
Ok I'll just hang in there for awhile then. Right now I'm playing mostly indie games anyway. Would love to get more into streaming and etc but nothing that can't wait 5 months. I just hope the supply is there.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2019 18:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 02:11 |
|
|
One thing that I am curious about is with AMD pushing ALL THE CORES for the consumer market, how software development will work from here? I am a student and programming stuff to use multiple cores is waaaaaay beyond my level, but I am fascinated by the implications of software becoming efficient enough (one day) to properly use many cores.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2019 19:10
|
|
