Say sorry, faggot

Say sorry, faggot.

"They basically deactivated 1/2 of Ryzen, resulting in 4/8 config and OC it to 4Ghz. They tested the 7700K at 4Ghz for IPC reasons only. It's an academic test to simulate the upcoming Ryzen 5."

Source: zolkorn.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-vs-intel-core-i7-7700k-mhz-by-mhz-core-by-core/3/

Other urls found in this thread:

zolkorn.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-vs-intel-core-i7-7700k-mhz-by-mhz-core-by-core/3/
reddit.com/r/hardware/comments/5xcnye/720p_r7_1700_vs_7700k/
youtube.com/watch?v=bIbwuLdHbMg
youtube.com/watch?v=ylvdSnEbL50
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Finally, good that somebody did that test I looked for that in day 1 benches and found nothing. Still disabling cores not improving casual overclocks, it's pretty much confirmed that is a silicon limitation unless you have exotic cooling.

What remarkable and trustworthy benchmarks showing a 50% ipc lead over kabylake. Wow! It's like AMD didn't even know they could do that, even after confirming with GN that Ryzen was 9% behind kabylake IPC.

How did they fix the SMT ?

Why do you think they did? Hypothetically disabling cores would limit windows scheduler moving threads between cores and lessen the effects of bad SMT management

>FAAAAAAAAAKE
>REEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!
Did you even read the image?

Wait, I am confused. Is Single-Thread better in this image or not?

anybody with a brain knew that low clock high core R7 wouldn't compete with 7700k in gaming. this was never the case.

the R5 at 4.0+ GHz is going to be the ass kicker. I really hope that the 6 core 12 thread can reliably clock high

Much faster in gayms.

all game tested use 8 core ? i would expected if game use 4 core or less it would be same problem as now

Well, Battlefield 1, aka one of the most reliant games on multi-cores. Say I wanted to play Yoda's Stories. Can AMD run it as well as Intel? These tests don't really tell me anything. Also, is Ryzen even stable with Windows 8.1, aka the last good version to play Yoda's Stories on?

>zolkorn.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-vs-intel-core-i7-7700k-mhz-by-mhz-core-by-core/3/

Read the fucking article.

Holy Russian text Batman!

I don't get how this tells me if I can play Yoda's Stories. They keep talking about modern games with better core capabilities.

...

If a cpu with 8 cores gets too hot with high clocks, why don't they separate the cores into two clusters of 4 and have a decent amount of physical distance between them?

>he posted the fake benchmark again

Joker literally had to redo that benchmark because it was inaccurate: reddit.com/r/hardware/comments/5xcnye/720p_r7_1700_vs_7700k/

in integer and fpu it leads on IPC that's what games use

also it confirms that L3 and SMT cache do not work at all yet

10 ip's ITT and only like 3 of them had read the image and or article...

Min fps
Average fps
Max dps????
Either shit benchmark or fake

see this voltage vs frequency doesn't scale linearly after a point so going above 4.0Ghz isn't logical for performance given the wattage used. Also Ryzen has 2 core complexes that are already somewhat separate

It is hard when it is in Russian and talks about DX12/11 games. I don't see Yoda Stories or any equivalent I can compare it to.

Buy AMD, it makes you deal more DPS than Intel!

>all those bubbles in the tim

I'm expecting the 6c/12t Ryzen to be unusually strong compared to the 4c/8t and 8c/16t at single threaded tasks.

It won't.

It's the same chip as the R7, same process and everything.

4.1 will be the limit, and 1.45v will be the most it can take.

What it will do, is seriously undercut the 7700k in performance per dollar.

It's not TIM, Ryzen heatspreader is soldered to the die. They have to heat it to a certain temp and carefully to remove it in order not to destroy the die. Obviously the process won't end up in a smooth surface after removal

It's not an air bubble, it's soldered on and part of the solder broke off and stayed on the IHS when they removed it.

...

These benchmarks may not match actual R3s and R5s.

Basically the 8c/16t dies have to be disabled in twos, 1 per core complex so each side of the die is in balance. Here the two cores that are left in each core complex have access to more cache than they would normally have so they perform unusually well. Also since there's fewer cores in each complex they have more headroom for overclocking while keeping the power under control. You can expect the 6c/12t variant to perform similarly to this but maybe not quite as fast. The 4c/8t variant which I believe is only one 1 core complex wouldn't allocate cache the same way that these chips do so it wont necessarily perform the same.

Unless someone can prove here that Ryzen allows for more copies of Yoda's Stories on your computer without lag than Intel, I see no reason to purchase it.

You can't purchase a 4c/8t Ryzen chip currently, there is nothing to prove.

Indiana Jones Desktop Adventures was superior, so no one gives a shit.

You can disable 4 cores... that is what the whole topic here is about.

delet this goyim

Yoda Stories was better. It had high scores so I felt I amounted to something when I stomped myself.

so when half of the cores are disabled the ryzen is faster than on 8 cores with the same 4ghz oc?
that makes no sense at all

You can't "prove" it, it's a simulation based on what is available. See

It's possible that AMD can tweak microcode or something else to change how a 4core will work with caches etc

Even though this doesn't necessarily reflect the true performance of the R3s and R5s this is still a big deal because the lowest 8 core chip also happens to be around the same price range as Intel's 4 core chips so you have a chip that can either be for a workstation or a gaming chip depending on how you configure it. R7s are more versatile.

maybe it has something to with how the zen die configuration is since its two quad core modules.

It makes sense when you consider how bugged bioses and Windows are at the moment, especially concering Zen'a cache(win reads 170mb lol), disabling a single ccx makes it look more like a traditional Intel core complex

it somehow fix the Smt, and 7700k is not it real clock.

DELET THIS
This board is for comparison of 4c i7 and 8c r7 in single-threaded applications!

Hmm, I guess I will continue on Intel until R5 gets released. Then we shall continue this debate and find out what the superior CPU is.

Does the performance increase have something to do with the cache?

so why did literally no one make this test before? it's not like it was hard to disable 4 cores

It takes a couple days to install Gentoo on two computers.

Try to get fast review for more click ?

that's not russian you uncultured dipshit

This

Unrealistic as fuck

Two things to consider.

Less power drawn and less heat, silicon will perform somewhat better in terms of efficiency and keeping things stable.

Windows scheduler performance differences due to moving threads between cores/logical cores

Watch this video
Wendell and other youtubers. They have different priorities in testing
youtube.com/watch?v=bIbwuLdHbMg

Wendell also talks about hypothetical future 4 and 6 cores and windows scheduler issues in that stream

Dunno, just like no one tested a cTDP 35w 8 core ryzen, but it's still there, only 25% slower in mulithreaded work than the regular 65w 1700.


Neat, huh?

You expect competence from youtubers?

>that farcry benchmark
Jesus. Intel BTFO.

You cant know if the R3s will have a ccx disabled or 5wo cores per ccx disabled.
The latter is better for yields and power consumption might I add.

Ah, United Arab Emirates. Even better.

4c and 6c Ryzens won't have 4 GHz base clock tho.

Basically 1600X is 1800X with 2 less cores.

Intel has more experience on the 14nm process and they can clock higher as a result. Removing cores won't make r5 & r3 clock as high as Intel.

Two CCXs like on the R7s would lead to performance exactly like in the OP but I don't know if AMD would do that. It's definitely possible but a single complex die would be smaller and have higher yields so it makes sense for AMD to go that route too. The 6c/12t is for sure going to be two complexes though so definitely pay close attention to that one when the benchmarks come out.

are you sure?

It's either gonna be a summit ridge die or a raven ridge die(apu), their size won't be all that much different to affect yields.

This 720p tests just shows a very underused cpu, you can see percentage in every thread of Ryzen being always lower in 7700k, I ask why. It should at least use the first thread more, and if it was slower, it should be using its threads even more than 7700k while delivering less fps.

Ryzen have slightly lower IPC than Kabylake but its higher L2 cache helps get on kabys feet.

Now there's something I hadn't considered yet.

R3s might end up being Raven Bridge cut down while the R5s might end up being cut down R7s with two mostly intact CCXs

1600x has the exact same base and boost clock

> moving threads between cores
between CCXs.

switching between cores ain't a problem as long as it stays in the CCX.

>yet another thread dedicated to gaymers on Sup Forums arguing over some fucking hardware brands
losers tbqh

Most of the thread looks cautious, only the first few kneejerk posts are gaymen related.

>yet another "you can't mention gayms on g" post
you forget that a good chunk of software slows down because of this too

The most analitical guy strikes again
youtube.com/watch?v=ylvdSnEbL50

Look the FX 8XXX getting ahead of the 2500K on the years goes by. FineWine Technology, bitches.

youtube.com/watch?v=ylvdSnEbL50

LMAO Intel corelets btfo!

No, this guy is clueless.
Surprisingly the only ones keeping some objective and technical outlook on Zen so far are the Stilt, Wendel and Patrick Kennedy

These results are still impressive I mean the R7s are pretty close to Intel's 4 chips so if you're willing to disable 4 cores you get at least equivalent performance if not much better with the ability to enable more cores when necessary. It at least can provide an end to those dumb comparisons to the 7700K I hope.

Now we wait(tm) for the BIOS and scheduler patches.

It'll end up being compared to i3s OCd to 5.0 in ST tasks and 2 cores will be the new 4.
You can't win.

How is he clueless, what the video, he only shows data from reviewers, nothing pulled out of his own ass.

I was really disappointed in Ian from AT in the last podcast.

i dont care about oc so i will just get whatever is better with default settings if i ever need to upgrade from my i5 2500k

>Basically the 8c/16t dies have to be disabled in twos, 1 per core complex so each side of the die is in balance.
no they don't. you can disable 1+1, 2+0, 2+2, or 4+0, or 3+3, or 4+2 in BIOS.

You realize that due to the arc you have specific cores to disable right? None this shows shit because you have no clue if the correct side is disabled,and windows think all smt cores are real

I think he meant from a manufacturing standpoint

In this case I meant from the BIOS standpoint. I didn't realize it was even possible for asymmetrical configurations like 2+0 to work.

I don't know how much this changes, I assume they probably configured it 2+2 because that's likely the best option.

No. he just btfo low res testing. I use to believe it back then. It absolutely true if 1 core vs 1 core during pentium era , that not how it work today. yet review still use it without question the validity of it

DELETE THIS

DELETE THIS

DELETE THIS

No. he just btfo low res testing. I use to believe it back then. It absolutely true if 1 core vs 1 core during pentium era , that not how it work today. yet review still use it without question the validity of it

I shouldn't hope so. Raven Ridge will probably lack the level 3 cache, so any Raven Ridge sans IGP will probably stick to the Athlon branding we've seen them use.

unrelated to the thread but I think this is the best version of this comic I've seen yet

Best OC on Sup Forums in the last 3 years.

Sadly.

>The most analitical guy
Oh please, this shithead was on the "the rx480 will be between a gtx 980 and 1070 and will overclock really well" hype train.

91% of Kaby Lake would still be too damn high to be real

That signboard "muh ghz" lol

400 × 240 is the next big gaming hit resolution?

Gorillion FPS

Bulldozer had pretty bad latency in the L3 cache and it didn't get utilized much so maybe it made sense there but I think the L3 contributes heavily to Zen's general performance so I don't think they would cut it out completely. Maybe they would cut it down.

and whats your consensus about it?

when the game is properly optimised, like Doom, the rx480 shits on the 980

Not worth the effort, the core complex already has its own photomask developed, no need for a new one.

>when the game is properly optimised
I don't buy hardware because it theoretically has better performance than the competition if you tailor your use case scenario to the hardware. I buy hardware because it fits my use case scenario.

To me, the rx480 is a gtx970 with more vram.

i buy hardware for the act of future proofing the games i wanna play.

going amd is always better than intel or nvidia in this regard because they develop the future as we've seen in the past

You say that but apparently even carrizo couldn't compete with piledriver in terms of IPC because of the lacking l3 cache. Also, it's very possible that it might be a result of giving more space to the IGP as the l3 cache is rather large.

By the time Bulldozer became usable, it was outdated and a shitty value. I don't spend my money based on speculation and faith.

so they underclocked the intel chip and overclocked the ryzen chip, another bullshit benchmark.

not sorry.