• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

AMD Zen 2 (Ryzen 3000) - *** NO COMPETITOR HINTING ***

Just to show how unreliable wccftech are, they posted an article about 50th anniversary 2700X with etched Lisa Su signature on it. Problem is, it's clearly a bad Photoshop. The labelled SKU starts YD2600 which is clearly a Ryzen 5 2600 CPU, yet the image says Ryzen 7 2700X with an AMD 50 logo and the signature.
I don't blame them for creating such a terrible Photoshop image because its from their source, but I do blame them for not bothering to analyze what the image is actually saying. If they cannot spot basic inconsistencies then it calls into question their entire articles.
 
Beren said:
Of course we will also have to wait and see what 15% IPC actually means in games as that could apply to just about any task.
Click to expand...

If we're talking about the traditional way of measuring IPC then that would be floating point calculations and we already know Zen2 has improvements related to FP, I'm not sure how much of that we'd see in game, my guess is not a lot as any FP calculations are normally done on the GPU.

I think what's going to effect gaming type workloads more are the changes to the front-end (listed in the link) such as improvements to branch prediction, the prefetcher, and the µOP cache.
 
Potatowithearsontheside said:
Just to show how unreliable wccftech are, they posted an article about 50th anniversary 2700X with etched Lisa Su signature on it. Problem is, it's clearly a bad Photoshop. The labelled SKU starts YD2600 which is clearly a Ryzen 5 2600 CPU, yet the image says Ryzen 7 2700X with an AMD 50 logo and the signature.
I don't blame them for creating such a terrible Photoshop image because its from their source, but I do blame them for not bothering to analyze what the image is actually saying. If they cannot spot basic inconsistencies then it calls into question their entire articles.
Click to expand...

Agreed, this all needs to be taken with a large pinch of salt. Fun to speculate and not long to go now but I'd say it looks promising and morec than good enough to persuade me to upgrade from a 2500K.

I'm going to look at Ryzen 3000 in relation to what I already have and if it's good value compared with what Intel have to offer, not versus the rumours or hypetrain!
 
Troezar said:
Agreed, this all needs to be taken with a large pinch of salt. Fun to speculate and not long to go now but I'd say it looks promising and morec than good enough to persuade me to upgrade from a 2500K.

I'm going to look at Ryzen 3000 in relation to what I already have and if it's good value compared with what Intel have to offer, not versus the rumours or hypetrain!
Click to expand...

Exactly the same thought and setup as myself.
 
theone8181 said:
Why does the Ryzen 2700x at 4.2 take longer than the stock version?
Click to expand...
At stock the chip will boost to (up to) 4.35 GHz on a single core. A manual overclock disables this feature, so it'll in fact be slower in low-core-count tasks when overclocked to 4.2 GHz. Which setup is better depends on your use case.
 
Journey said:
If you think the 2700X is is a steal, you can buy a normal 2700 for £156. :eek: 9900K triple the price...
Click to expand...

Well quite, but it was the 2700x in question. The X chips are worth the extra for Joe Blogs. Pop it in, let XFR do it's thing. Job done, nearly all performance possible extracted :)
 
d_brennen said:
Well quite, but it was the 2700x in question. The X chips are worth the extra for Joe Blogs. Pop it in, let XFR do it's thing. Job done, nearly all performance possible extracted :)
Click to expand...

That's a question for the purchaser really, Joe Blogs might do better spending that £120 saved from the 2700X elsewhere in their system, or indeed on something else entirely, a peripheral for example. Then again it's a low power CPU at default with no overclock, so it's a different proposition I suppose, either way £156 for the R7 2700 is the deal of 2019 so far. :)
 
Back toward the main topic, I am wondering if the 40-lane rumour could be true for a couple of reasons. Firstly the shift towards the design of the SoC/Chipset towards that of EPYC, meaning the I/O die would have been designed with the extra I/O already in there, and secondly the use of more than one CPU chiplet on the AM4 CPU's. Perhaps only CPU's with more than one chiplet will support the extra lanes, as Zen and Zen+ both had 20+4 based a single chip/dual CCX layout. X570, with a 12c/24t CPU, 40 lanes of PCI-E 4.0 and 128GB ECC RAM support = Intel HEDT ruined at fraction of the cost, and power usage keeping the TCO down which makes it a very compelling product. Hmmmmm
 
One of the good things about having a separate IO die is you can cram a lot more IO stuff on it than you could if it was a monolithic CPU.

Rome, the 64 Core Epyc has 128 PCIe 4 Lanes per socket, 4TB of 8 Channel EEC RAM per socket, and look at the size of it.

gwTagzH.png


Ryzen 3000 IO die is roughly 1/3 its size.
If we divide 128 by 3 you get 42.

IBiV2BK.jpg.png
 
Troezar said:
Anyone any idea how the 40 lanes would work? Aren't they limited to 24 from the CPU so 16 from the chips? Is that doable? It would nice to be able to get a few NVME drives working on mainstream.
Click to expand...

I have a horrible feeling it will be wasted on m.2 ports so we start seeing things like boards with 3 or more m.2 ports, but hope I am wrong.

Instead it would be nice if they just kept two m.2, but with the bonus now using them doesnt disable other features on the board. Plus perhaps having an extra pcie x4 slot.
 
chrcoluk said:
I have a horrible feeling it will be wasted on m.2 ports so we start seeing things like boards with 3 or more m.2 ports, but hope I am wrong.

Instead it would be nice if they just kept two m.2, but with the bonus now using them doesnt disable other features on the board. Plus perhaps having an extra pcie x4 slot.
Click to expand...

Picture of the Biostar X570 shows, 3x 16x slots, 3x 1x slots, and 3x M.2 slots. I'd imagine you'll pick where you want the bandwidth to go, if you don't use the M.2 slots then you'll have more for the PCI-E slots etc.
 
Journey said:
Picture of the Biostar X570 shows, 3x 16x slots, 3x 1x slots, and 3x M.2 slots. I'd imagine you'll pick where you want the bandwidth to go, if you don't use the M.2 slots then you'll have more for the PCI-E slots etc.
Click to expand...

Sounds like there's going to be some very nice motherboards this round. Glad I've increased my budget!
 
If this 40 lanes thing is true I'd be very tempted to swap out the b450 and 1700 I'm running now with an x570 based system! Hopefully they are priced sensibly against the X399 parts :)
 
Journey said:
Picture of the Biostar X570 shows, 3x 16x slots, 3x 1x slots, and 3x M.2 slots. I'd imagine you'll pick where you want the bandwidth to go, if you don't use the M.2 slots then you'll have more for the PCI-E slots etc.
Click to expand...

PCI-E will give loads of bandwidth for expansion won't it? I guess bandwidth through the PCH link may be limited.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom