• 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 ***

Illuminist

Illuminist

Illuminist

Soldato
Joined
26 Sep 2017
Posts
6,189
Location
In the Masonic Temple
d_brennen said:
I didn't realise AMD had launched the whole Ryzen 3xxx stack yet... Oh no, it hasn't, you've just got your knickers in a twist still :D
Click to expand...


The 16/32 core was confirmed in case you missed it guys, it was shown off back stage on liquid cooling running at 4.1/4.2 ghz with 1.4v+ (which i guess means it's not ready yet) beating a i9-9980xe in cinebench
 

Vince

Vince

Vince

Man of Honour
Joined
30 Oct 2003
Posts
13,273
Location
Essex
Illuminist said:
The 16/32 core was confirmed in case you missed it guys, it was shown off back stage on liquid cooling running at 4.1/4.2 ghz with 1.4v+ (which i guess means it's not ready yet) beating a i9-9980xe in cinebench
Click to expand...

If they have all the other chips ready then the 16 core is also ready. The issue I think is that there isn't a compelling reason to release it.
 

humbug

humbug

humbug

Caporegime
Joined
17 Mar 2012
Posts
47,954
Location
ARC-L1, Stanton System
Potatowithearsontheside said:
That's a gross oversimplification, and factually incorrect.
The 9900K has a base of 3.6GHz but that is not the speed at which is 95w is drawn under full load. Turbo works off tye back of thermal headroom, and you cannot have thermal headroom if your base clocks runs at the cooling limit. In reality, under heavy load a 9900K will turbo up to 4.7GHz until the thermal headroom is exhausted and then it will clock down to a clock speed that it can maintain 24/7 under the same heavy load. This clock down speed is where the 95w rated cooling is at its limit. For the 9900K that has been shown to be 4.2GHz.
The 9900K is an incredibly efficient CPU when operating at its TDP. The fact it never runs at spec, by choice, simply hides its actual efficiency.
Anyone that's read by my posts here and on Anandtech would know that I was highly critical of the 9900K's thermals on launch, but that changed once the true behaviour of it when propeely adhering to Intel spec became apparent. You'll recall there was an uproar amongst folk that didn't realise that this was also happening with the 8700K and 7700K too (though less noticeable at the time because they weren't throwing out silly power numbers that warranted further investigation).
In terms source, IIRC it was Gamers Nexus that first properly did a deep dive on what the 9900K was doing, and how it was supposed to operate according to Intel spec.

Edit: https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/3389-intel-tdp-investigation-9900k-violating-turbo-duration-z390
Click to expand...


From your link

MSI Z390 Godlike (ET Auto) Turbo Duration vs. ASUS Maximus XI Hero (MCE Off)

YnOqVKa.png
Here’s the frequency versus time plot when MSI’s Godlike is involved. For this setup, the ASUS board is still set to follow spec and has MCE disabled. The MSI board is under its Auto ET settings, which are the same as its Disabled ET settings. In this example, the MSI board is holding strong to 4735MHz, which is violating the spec in multiple ways: For one, BCLK is 100.8, which we already discussed. For two, the turbo duration limit is removed under these auto settings – and all settings, actually – and so it holds a higher ratio. Power draw is also higher, pegged to 152W instead of 95W from ASUS.
Click to expand...

So the Asus board has MCE disabled and TDP limit enabled, yes there is a brief 10 second boost before it climbs down to a 95 watt limit, at about 2.4Ghz under AVX load. the MSI board is set to let it boost over spec and its running at 4.7Ghz near 200 Watts, the Asus at 4.2Ghz has the TDP limit taken off and its running 4.2Ghz at 160 Watts.
 

beany_bot

beany_bot

beany_bot

Soldato
Joined
19 Nov 2015
Posts
4,867
Location
Glasgow Area
I just read MSI said that Ryzen 3000 overclocks very well. Much improved over Zen1. So, we could yet all be seeing 5Ghz on these new chips. That with the IPC gain will destroy anything 14nm++++++++++++++++++ can throw at it.
 

Vince

Vince

Vince

Man of Honour
Joined
30 Oct 2003
Posts
13,273
Location
Essex
Grim5 said:
lol wtf - what happened to all the 5ghz leaks then
Click to expand...

5ghz is just an arbitrary number that for whatever reason people feel the chip must hit. Say it could beat a 9900k in every metric at 2ghz (obviously this is not the case but for the sake if this) is it not a good platform because it's not 5ghz? People need to forget about the ghz race (think athlon 64 and core2) and focus on performance metrics rather than some arbitrary number.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom