Ryzen Benchmarks

AMD is finished and bankrupt.

Other urls found in this thread:

cpchardware.com/cpc-hardware-n31-precisions-elucubrations/
wccftech.com/ryzen-overclocks-cpchardware-5ghz-on-air-tease/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

TOPKEK

Zen performs shittier than the i5 6600 at the wattage of a i7 6900 series CPU

haha love this thread gets better every time it's remade

Top tier choice for multiprocessing

...

Buying tech from pooinloos.
Lol, never gonna happen.

time to replace my Athlon X2 4850e

This actually looks extremely good for a 3.15GHz engineering sample.
Also, apparently there were still serious bugs with SMT and uop cache in the stepping they used.
If the final 8 core silicon reaches the advertised 3.4 GHz and single core turbos to 4GHz,similar to Intel's 8 core, it will wreck some serious shit.

>I see the Zen engineering sample is doing quite well. Now, what if I were to make a thread that implied the opposite? Wouldn't that be marvellous?!

According to CPC, bits and chips and other respectable sources, Zen clocks higher than expected.
The >5GHz on air rumor is probably (obviously) not true, but the 8 core version should be able to reach 4.2-4.5 GHz on air at safe voltages and temperatures with an air cooler.

>it's the engineering sample gets treated like release chip episode

>This actually looks extremely good for a 3.15GHz engineering sample.
A0 none the less, on a verification mobo too. So likely throwing errors out of the ass, but even if this is a golden chip, it's still an A0 chip.

So this could go somewhere, once the process matures a little more we could well see some good things come from this all.

>The >5GHz on air rumor is probably (obviously) not true
The 5Ghz was supposedly on 1 core, not all 8. So could well be possible, seen as most Overclocking records on Intel chips are only on single cores. So an argument can be made for the validity of the claim.

Will the 100-150 price range ryzens have equal perfomance with skylake i5?Should I cave in and go i5 or wait?
I dont know how much I can wait when the fuck are amd new cpus come out anyway?

>Will the 100-150 price range ryzens
We don't know any pricing of any part yet, so it's hard to estimate. But currently 8 core Zens look to be trading blows IPC wise with current Intel processors. I think it's more than possible that AMD processors could well be similarly priced to competing Intel processors, mobos are likely to be cheaper if anything.

Ryzen is queued for a Q1 launch. So anytime before May really.

Overclocking records are done with liquid nitrogen at -180°C, which actually changes the electric properties of the semiconductor and thus allows higher clocks.
Overclocking a single core on air should not give significantly different results than overclocking 8 cores on air.

Only question is if they used unrealistic voltages or everyday usable voltages. Intel's 8 cores need pretty insane voltages if you push them to 4Ghz or more.

Q1 for all 4c/6c/8c or only the high end 8 core ones?

CanardPC noted there were SMT and uop cache related bugs on the chip. They also noted issues with the mobo. It wouldn't boot at all with certain graphics cards installed.
Knowing that these bugs will be gone from release chips, and that clocks will be significantly higher, Ryzen will strike right at the i7 6900k in most everything save for specific FPU heavy things. The higher clocked mainstream i5s and i7s will win out in game benches were games only utilize 4 threads, but newer titles will favor Ryzen and the i7E line. As well Ryzen has an advantage over mainstream i5/i7 chips when it comes to gaming and streaming at the same time.


What is most interesting is the clockspeed. 3.4ghz. This is an absurdly important detail for its implications in enterprise. AMD previously stated that the Zen core had the same clock scaling as Excavator. One Excavator module in Carrizo needs right around 10w to hit 3.15ghz. If Zen hit the same mark then we'd have 8 cores at 3.15ghz plus 15w for uncore giving a nice tidy 95w chip.
However Zen clearly has better clock scaling than Excavator present in Carrizo since they're hitting 3.4ghz inside that envelope. That means that their clocks at lower power levels will be significantly higher as well. Excavator took 5w~ to hit 2.45ghz, and its likely that Zen needs less power for the same clocks.
32c/64 Naples might come clocked in at 2.5ghz, possibly a little higher.
The 24c/48t Xeon E7 8890v4 has a 2.2ghz base clock.
The Zen based Opteron has the clock speed advantage with similar IPC.

AMD actually managed to hit a home run.

We don't know.
But expect variety. No one does a chip launch and only launches a single variant.

DELET

I'd avoid using words that imply definates, and use words such as "Should" "Could".

While the numbers we have at the moment are promising, nothing is for sure, and anything we know this early should always be taken with a grain of salt. Implications can get out of hand, here especially, as I'm sure we're all aware.

I'm excited none the less, these early samples show some real possibilities, I'm interested to see some Mobile chip information emerge.

Clock for clock it looks directly on par with the 6900k.

Clock that unlocked bitch up!

>Overclocking a single core on air should not give significantly different results than overclocking 8 cores on air.
Other than, well, around 8 times the power consumption and heat (uncore, memory controllers and some other stuff should remain the same, so it won't be 8 times as much energy)

I wonder if the rumours about AMD dual sourcing the chips from GloFo and Samsung are true.
If so, we might have another wild ride around the silicon lottery.
Though, Samsung's and GloFo's process shouldn't be too different as it was essentially the same. Samsung does have more modern equipment though.

the general direction is desktop lineup Summit Ridge starts in Q1, server lineup Naples starts in Q2 and their mobile lineup Raven Ridge starts in the second half of 2017.

>I wonder if the rumours about AMD dual sourcing the chips from GloFo and Samsung are true.
GloFlo have licensed Samsung's 16nm LPP node, in this agreement there seems to be an arrangement where GloFlo can spin off excess production to Samsung's fabs. But considering GloFlo's production capabilities, it's unlikely Samsung's fabs could be required, unless the OEMs eat Zen up.

Fott from bitsandchips posted exactly that on Twitter. Samsung and GloFo are for all intents and purposes running the exact same process across 4 locations. Fab8 in NY for GloFo, and 3 different facilities owned by Samsung. They periodically run test wafers across all lines to ensure uniformity. GloFo even had some embedded Samsung engineers.

I doubt there would be any difference in them depending on where they were sourced. Though if AMD was running the Zeppelin die at more than one facility it indicates higher demand than any one facility can produce. The Zeppelin die has to be smaller than the Polaris 10 die, so its not a yield issue. Thats a very good sign.

AMD does have an agreement with a Chinese firm to provide them a bunch of chips for a couple new super computers. That combined with OEMs and enterprise sales would be a shitload of demand right off the bat.
We won't know until Q2 and Q3 when we see AMD's revenue increase.

thanks

>AMD does have an agreement with a Chinese firm to provide them a bunch of chips for a couple new super computers
I thought the deal that AMD made with the Chinese was for licensing x86 related development material, patents and IP and the like?

I recall the deal being made public as AMD's stock shot right the fuck up from $2.something to cracking $7 in the space of a day.

Words were minced by financial outlets ignorant of the semiconductor world. AMD formed a joint venture with a Chinese company, and they will be producing semi-custom server SoCs for them. The chinks will be providing some IP of their own, but it will be an X86 based AMD SoC. Basically no different from AMD's involvement with Microsoft and Sony in creating the console APUs.
The only hitch is that it was China rather than an American company seeking the product, and exporting tech to China undergoes heavy scrutiny by the government.

Remember bulldozer? Remember polaris?

bulldozer was great for multitask, pity they didn't release 10-12 core steamrollers/excavators

I sure do.
With Bulldozer AMD made it clear that the arch had big downsides. It was also incredibly rushed to market, the management of the company was in shambles, and it was delivered on a process rife with issues.
Despite being originally detailed in 2004-2005, the Bulldozer arch didn't emerge in any solid form until 2010. This was after it underwent an absolutely enormous revision and radically changed the entire core. Rather than keep wasting money in development hell they rushed it to market with dozens of unresolved bugs. After a single revision they dropped out of the high performance segment, cancelling the previously planned 10c/5 module chip, and all enterprise Steamroller chips.

Polaris, a mid range card, launched and did everything AMD claimed it was aiming for.
$200 entry level price, R9 290X/GTX 970 tier performance, 150w TDP.

Did you have a point, or were you just trying to shitpost and did a really bad job of it?

Everybody but few hardcore fanboys realised bulldozer will be shit once more details about the architecture emerged.
Especially after the first benches were completely abysmal, but fanboys kept the hypetrain going.

Polaris was never meant to be a high end architecture, and AMD said that since the beginning and even their own benchmarks showed that. Polaris kept its promises, such as great performance per dollar and low power consumption compared to previous gen cards.
It was, just like with Bulldozer, the unrealistic hype from fanboys that gave it a bad reputation.

Zen on the other hand has a much more sane architecture with some neat features. Early benches also point to Zen being a very competitive architecture.

Motherboard vendors order a ton of AM4 boards recently expecting huge sales of the thing, guess they like their ES then.

Comparison with my i5 4670:

Both have AVX2 for fast encoding
Ryzen uses 15% more electricity
Ryzen has 1.2% better gaming performance

AMD has to make a 16-thread CPU to barely compete with a nearly 4 year old Intel CPU that cost $220 on release

Hurr look the Haswell i7 and Skylake i7 both outperform the $1100 Broadwell-E i7 6900k.
Intel can't even make a $1100 CPU outperform a $350 chip from 3 years ago!

> It was also incredibly rushed to market, the management of the company was in shambles, and it was delivered on a process rife with issues.

dirk meyer delayed it like a year. it would have been a 45nm chip and sucked even more dicks if it wasn't for him.

he wasn't a bad manager. it was just a fundamentally shit architecture. even now the excavator version is vastly inferior to sandy bridge in most applications. I think the board were the dumb ones forcing him out of the company.

at any rate AMD's leadership is rock solid right now. Lisa Su is probably the best CEO they're ever had.

Meanwhile, brian krzanich is doing everything he can to chase away all talent and ruin Intel completely, right when they're facing more competition than ever before. Nonetheless their stock price is sky high. They're the surest sell of any tech company I can think of.

>Meanwhile, brian krzanich is doing everything he can to chase away all talent
Let's hope the Zen sales will give AMD some wiggle room in their recruitment budgets then :^)

If they sell the 6 core Zen at or more than an i5 then AMD is done for.

A lot of the top guys are just taking retirement. Some of them have defected to Nvidia and Apple and so on. Maybe AMD will pick up a few big Intel veterans but AMD's current engineering staff are very good.

They'll definitely pick up a lot of the low to mid tier guys though. Brian has completely gutted the engineering department at intel and AMD's only a few miles down the road.

Why would that be?
They can't price a chip with the same performance at the same price point as Intel, that's for sure.
They can, however, price a more powerful (hypothetical. 6 core Zen isn't confirmed yet) 6 core CPU above Intel's 4 core i5. Hell, they can easily price it above their 4 core i7.

intels situation right now

My theory on their pricing situation is probably going to be hitting intel's price poiints with +2 cores.

6800/6850 competing with 8core ryzen
7700k/7700 competing with 6core ryzen
i5 competing against 4core+HT ryzen and eventually ryzen APU

With the current CPU market share of Intel and the guaranteed lower single core/IPC of Zen they can't, AMD still has a bad reputation on top. Most CPUs are sold in the lower-mid range market, and even there AMD couldn't compete. They seriously gotta price low and push multicore 6/8 variations tp the mainstream and do it right this time.

>and the guaranteed lower single core/IPC of Zen
We're looking at A0 engineering samples hardly 5% away, at lower clocks to boot.

There's no guarantee right now. It'll take work to get Zen that final 5%, but it's possible.

Keep in mind they hinted that they will price 8 core Zen at a 6700k price back at their gaymen Zen teaser livestream last time when they compared it to a 6700k in Dota 2.

I doubt it

In any case we'll probably know by the end of the week

Isn't that pure speculation though? I mean it's not a bad shot and makes a lot of sense considering how embedded the market is at intel's costs.

But if it's $350 for the 8core, then hopefully the zen server socket has some decent availability, think 16core chips at ~$1000

So no change in CPU shares then. The majority don't buy k variations of i5s yet alone i7s and Intel has and will probably always have the goyim's mainstream market under control amd has to make huge sacrifices like in price

That looks really good

even this fucked benchmark basically sold the zen to me. close to intel 8 even when crippled, and in the current gen i5 range for games. Perfect, and this is with knowing that the chip was likely only running 3.15 while throwing fuckloads of errors, minimum clocks on home chips are 3.4ghz with an unknown max boost or how amd is now handling the boost. If it really does self oc, as in no maximum setting, its just thermally limited, that is even more interesting.

basicly everything has fallen into a "yea shits good" range, now all that needs to happen is sub 500$ pricing. I personally believe it will be in the high i7 low e range due to the way they are showing it off.

Well the majority are going to pcworld or wherever shops to get their pcs, the great unwashed masses are shit and it's basically what shop staff are told by their managers to push. This is key, but it's down to how good amd's relation ship with distributors and retailers is (not good) combined with the public's perception of them.

The separate retail prices, that people here for example, are likely to use are probably going to be vaguely matched, obviously there will be trickle down from top performing parts and other lower clocked/lower tdp. This doesn't include all those OEM only parts which have little or no storefront presence.

should be everything, with 8 core first, sense 4 and 6 were never talked about, mentioned by amd, and so far are only from leaks, treat them as non existent.

there was no unreasonable hype, fact is the hype was around what it could do when clocked higher, and gamers got the bottom run of the binning, a few golden silicons showed what could be possible, and at least xfx has some of the better binned chips in their cards some have clocked to 1450~ range.

Crossing my fingers for 8 core and 6 core chips only, no 4 or 2 cores, we had that shit there for more than a decade.

4 cores with 8 threads seems like it would be a great minimum budget cpu, an i7 performing cpu at i3 prices.

Wouldn't a 6c/6thread be a better budget option for the low-end?

>Ryzen has 1.2% better gaming performance

It probably also obliterates your i5 in any multi threaded workload.

zen is half the size of an 8350, and at 350$ will pull almost 400% more profit per chip then the 8350 ever did.

a smaller unified core type means that across everything, they are only making that 8 core chip and mcming the opteron lines from the same silicon. This drives the price way the fuck down too, then you have no gpu so they trimmed the fat, and to top it off, they are going to get the 6 and 4 core if they exist from the 8 core dies, so they don't have multiple skus.

so very much is going into making it as cheap to produce as possible, that amd hitting intel hard at the i7 range, the i5 and the i3 range to the point where its not should I get intel or amd, but why would I want intel?

I mean we have see the benches, the above engineering sample and the 3 times amd has pitted it up against a 6900 themselves.

we know that gaming is 4 core limited in most games, and clock speed is important, amds base 8 core is higher than intel's 8 core, so if this trend continues, amd is equal to intel in ipc or close the fuck enough its effectively a tie, the 8 core will be worse in games (we think, still have no idea about amd's turbo method) but they may have 4 core chips that would base clock higher then 3.4, possibly the same as intels i7 at 4.0 or 4.2, and at that point 150$ for amd or 300+ for intel?

Last time amd had a clear lead over intel, they put out an equal chip to intels 1000$ line for 300$, and the chip that was clearly faster by 20% at 1200$, and the better one than that at 1500$

The only blip in amd not fucking you over was the 9000 fx line and that's iffy, as it seems like oems sold the chip before amd released it to the public, as msrp I can find on them is 250-270$ but we have newegg selling it for around 1000$

At the very least, this is interesting. very curious if they make a 'workstation' lineup out of opterons.

if amd 4 core 8 thread is up there with an i7 and i3 prices, why not sell it as the equivalent of an i7 from a shop? the chip is cheaper and so is the motherboard so its more profit?

yes and no, why disable threads? amd is not making multiple skus, its largely one chip to rule them all.

dont forget, when shit happens, ryzen would take the load better than an i5 or an i7 would.

>and to top it off, they are going to get the 6 and 4 core if they exist from the 8 core dies, so they don't have multiple skus.

i thought four was the base and the 8 cores are manufactured by interposing two four core modules? that's what it looks like on most of the marketing slides too

Its a single die, called Zeppelin.
Zeppelin is comprised of two quad core CCXs, but it is all one single die.

No, it's 8 base, the 32c Naples is made out of 4 dies

If it'd pay off they could. It might push Intel to go 6c/8c by 2020 as well.

Weird design, so its a pair of l3 caches with access to 4 cores?

>implying zen will be cheap

>Ryzen sample single-core overclock is 5GHz on air
>primary bottleneck for all-core OC was low-quality VRMs on the motherboard

cpchardware.com/cpc-hardware-n31-precisions-elucubrations/

wccftech.com/ryzen-overclocks-cpchardware-5ghz-on-air-tease/

Sort of.
The interconnect fabric used hasn't been detailed yet. Its brand new IP, not based on HyperTransport.

5(or so) more days 'till CES guys! I wonder why AMD hasn't hyped up an event/livestream for it yet though. I hope it won't get delayed.

It's a little wierd, but they're bundling multiple dies for their more core chips. They supposedly have a new and effective interconnect for interdie communication so those kind of technologies are even difficult to include within die.

The wierd design is just competing with intel's ring bus on their larger chips. Anyway, future larger dies could go many ways with their design customisation. Adding another 4core module or some graphics module. Or going oddly and changing a module to be 6cores around an l3 blob and using 6cores + graphics sections for their later mainstream apus.

Seems like main clocking issues are down to motherboard quality, probably a bit more silicon lottery than we experience with intel due to the maturity of samsung's process.

it's an 8 core die, but the smallest design unit is the 4 core module.
The APUs will be made up of one 4 core module + graphics on the same die.

There won't be a 4c summit ridges for the wide market, only for partners like HP for their prebuild shitboxes. The consumer line-up is 6c, 8c and higher binned 8c all with HT and turbos enabled.

I see no reason it wouldn't be, I mean a single 8 core zen should be smaller then i7's and even i5's at 8 cores.

All honesty, im 100% betting on base 8 core zen being the lowest binning possible without fucked up cores, thats why its coming out first.

the higher cost ryzen is higher binned that would have went for a server sku but you paid for the chip at the price they want to sell good ones for, the 6 and 4 core will both clock better than the base 8 core, because they are from high binned skus and from low binned would have been base 8 core but the die is fucked in a way it cant be 8.

unless amd sells 10-12-14 core opterons, and there is no indication yet zen based ones will have these skus, i'm assuming that all fucked chips will be consumer with some of the higher clocking 4 and 6 being better binning but fucked parts of the die.

due, stop making shit up, we still have no confirmed 4 and 6 core chips, their existence is speculation on a supposed leak price registry.

at best we can say 'what if they exist' but we can't say 'oh the 6 and 8 core are what we get, only oems get the 4 core'

I really hope you're right.

[citation needed]

>All honesty, im 100% betting on base 8 core zen being the lowest binning possible without fucked up cores, thats why its coming out first.
My guess if it's similar to polaris, where retail cores are going to be shit binned stuff, even if it's 8 cores working. Decent binnings are going to lower tdp OEM and server/enterprise stuff. Untill a few months into production where decent bins are plentyful.

I don't ever plan on going AMD anything ever again but if Ryzen turns out decent there may be some hope for Intel jewery to not be quite so bad.

It looks like if they can improve from this they might be able to hit that "just about as good but a couple hundos less" spot, which is good for all of us.

It seems like it's another hotplate though, which is kind of a bummer.

With how redditors here want it priced sky high and not getting that ppl won't go AMD because it's AMD all hope is lost.

What?? I'm really old I guess but before the fucking bulldozer disaster AMD was always what you went with when you were cool with getting ~80% of the performance of Intel shit for like half the price. They were the "more bang for the buck" people, and Intel was for the autism-tier performance people.

Ignoring the whole P4 era from Intel. God the P4 was such a fucking piece of shit.

And even then Intel was competetive. Unlike AMD for over a decade.

the people who literally let themselves get memed out of AMD products purely based on bulldozer and wojak shitposting don't deserve ryzen anyway. enjoy your kaby lake volcanos boys.

>we still have no confirmed 4 and 6 core chips
We will see lower than 8c because that's how making processors works. The yields will not be all 8c functioning, thus the need to push out products that have some of the non functioning parts lasered off. AMD however needs to account for the fact that bulk of the chips they'll be getting are going to be all 8c functioning but the demand for mid and lower "tier" cpus will be higher (and they'd prefer to keep the median price as high as possible), thus 6c/8c/8c is something that would make perfect sense from a biz pov.

The upcoming Raven Ridge (one zen CXX + igpu) also plays into this as it as well will have non functioning chips that need to be sold and a Athon equivelant 4c igpu disabled $60 part in that line-up is going to happen

>he still has that ancient piece of junk

This is where the two tiers for the zen comes from, or at least the belief that the sku leaks are real.

you got bare minimum 8 core that is 350 you have better 8 core that is 500

with polaris, we had one card that was pulling 160 watts and another that was pulling 90 for the exact same workload, I think this will be a similar situation, but not nearly as fucked as the polaris where gamers never got the best chips, the higher binned chips will likely be 'if you want to pay what we want to sell the good chips for then you can have one' kind of deal.

intel was about as competitive back then as amd is at this very moment, the only difference is amd is close to competitive in one area and about as far behind as intel was in another.

I don't know why this is hard to believe, Zen cores have similar characteristics to Broadwell internally, similar register size, similar retirement queue, caches, same width, etc.
That pretty much leaves AMD to get their branch prediction in order, if they couldn't do that they couldn't compete anyway without making the core much bigger, so they have in fact got their branch predictor working well.

So it having similar IPC is not surprising, but quite normal.

>you got bare minimum 8 core that is 350 you have better 8 core that is 500

then amd would go bankrupt since nobody would buy their expensive cpus

Depends how those cpus are differentiated. The main difference between I7 (disregarding HEDT) and I5 is hyperthreading and locked clocks on lower models. AMD could go the same way. Or they could artifically throttle the cpus internally, so they would not OC past certain point or were not as aggressive on the Turbo as higher binned ones.

There are ways to segment the market.

350 MSRP would be anywhere between 400 and 500 euros for outside the US. AMD wouldn't sell jack shit, even with the 6 core chip. They must undercut alot if they want to gain more than 10% of market share by the end of the year because on top of all that Intel won't let them.

still cheaper than intel's 8 cores, oh wait, I just looked up europe's prices, the difference between an 8350 and a 6700k is about the same on both sides, possibly with americans paying more for the 6700k

so you are looking at about the same rice for what you pay for a 6700k and a ryzen.
but lets look this way, if there is a 4 core, you can pick that up to if you want. that will be cheaper then intel.

oh, one more thing, amd wrote consumers off as a non growth market, so you being able to pick up an 8 core or not doesn't even register to amd.

my feeling is this, the 350 ryzen will be crappier for heat, but the more expensive one will be able to handle a crap ton more, see the polaris and the xfx ones where the binning is better, its a difference of 91 watts and 160 watts to do the same task.

If amd has an auto overclock, as in it will figure out what the chip can handle down to 25mhz increments, and it has no upper limit, AND these chips are the higher binned ones, I could easily be convinced to pay 500 or more for it, not intel prices, but definitely more as it would do all the 'I don't want to fuck the cpu up' work for me.

Imagine thats the difference between the lower binned and the higher one, the higher one has the same minimum, but gets to 4.5ghz+ apposed to 3.8 or something, that's a significant amount faster without dicking around, and if you run an amd cpu in a cpu benchmark just stock, well there you go, even in games where threading is shit, amd would still clock higher then intel so right there is a benchmark win.

if gamers see that, well guess who just found their reason to go amd?

This is very interesting, cant wait for ces as this is likely where amd will blow their entire cpu load unless they have an event scheduled for a launch party, which we don't know yet.

Intel's 'junk' is overpriced and they got a hold of the whole market. The none US pricing of Ryzen will vary alot because it's a new chip, and I'm not just talking about the EU. And the whole discussion so far here was for the mainstream configs to go 6 core+. And where did you get the assumption that AMD just wrote off the consumer market as a possibility for growth, you only give a shit about high-end/enthusiasts that's all.

>Averaging benchmarks together

No thanks, not having it appear like the kicks ass with Corona when in reality it just blew through a WPrime and inflated the average