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

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Oops!!

 

[Fatpizza]

There only makeing 999 and I would think there already sold/people got dibs on them.

I would hope that there'd still be an allocation to the public. Otherwise they may as well not even show the thing off at a consumer event.

 

[smilingcrow]

So on iGPU performance Intel used 10nm vs AMD's 12nm Zen+, that's fine given that's all that's available from AMD right now.
But, they used 3733Mhz Ram on Ice Lake and 2400Mhz on the Zen+ iGPU.

I'd read that the 3700U only officially supports RAM of that speed so it's normal to use that.
So the remaining question is whether Intel officially supports 3,733MHz which might surprisingly be the case if the details on the latest XPS 13 using that speed are true.
That would be a big shift for Intel as they are usually conservative with RAM speed and is that even a JEDEC standard?

 

[Potatowithearsontheside]

I'd read that the 3700U only officially supports RAM of that speed so it's normal to use that.
So the remaining question is whether Intel officially supports 3,733MHz which might surprisingly be the case if the details on the latest XPS 13 using that speed are true.
That would be a big shift for Intel as they are usually conservative with RAM speed and is that even a JEDEC standard?

Intel only officially support 2666MHz on desktop, so in future we are correct to run all Zen 2 games at 3200MHz and Intel at 2666MHz.
What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

 

[Troezar]

Anyone any ideas on 2x16GB DDR4 that would run 4000MHz on X570 yet? I've already jumped on 2x8GB 8Pack 4000MHz but thinking for the future I may need more but don't want to sacrifice on speed.

 

[Potatowithearsontheside]

https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/17324677

 

[MyBrainz]

Steam just offered me to enter the Steam Survey for the first time in a long time, but first time i actually decided to go ahead with it

Anyway i noticed a slow and gradual trend going on in the CPU section over the last 4 months.

I dont usually go by anything in these surveys but as some do i thought i'd post these here.




I hope to see this continue after the Ryzen 3000 release

 

[smilingcrow]

Intel only officially support 2666MHz on desktop ...

You've completely missed the context here.
1. This is a laptop chip not desktop.
2. It's yet to be released so we don't know what speed RAM it supports.
3. It seems unlikely they will support speeds that high but reports are that Dell are releasing a laptop with RAM clocked that high.
4. So right now we are left with speculation so not sure why people are making any sort of a deal about it.

 

[TrixP10]

You've completely missed the context here.
1. This is a laptop chip not desktop.
2. It's yet to be released so we don't know what speed RAM it supports.
3. It seems unlikely they will support speeds that high but reports are that Dell are releasing a laptop with RAM clocked that high.
4. So right now we are left with speculation so not sure why people are making any sort of a deal about it.

because it looks like the only reason that the memory is clocked that high is for one reason only. Just to get a tiny couple of pips higher than AMD and retain their crown. Intel = panic mode.

 

[Scougar]

Still not found an answer. Does a time know the memory speeds used in the AMD demos? I am hoping 3200.

 

[humbug]

Ryzen 3000 is 3200Mhz rated ^^^^so probably.

because it looks like the only reason that the memory is clocked that high is for one reason only. Just to get a tiny couple of pips higher than AMD and retain their crown. Intel = panic mode.

It does look like that.

Memory speed is critical to iGPU gaming performance.

Intel's memory is clocked 55% higher, a massive chunk, and it only just beats out AMD's older generation.

Not only does that look pretty crap for Ice Lake, it does also look desperate.

run them both at the same speed and AMD's old APU will humiliate Ice Lake, could have that happen.

If this is what we can expect from Intel discrete GPU's coulor me very unimpressed.

 

[smilingcrow]

because it looks like the only reason that the memory is clocked that high is for one reason only. Just to get a tiny couple of pips higher than AMD and retain their crown. Intel = panic mode.

It's a reasonable guess to make but in this case it may well be wrong:

"The new memory controller supports LPDD4x-3733 (up to 32 GB) or DDR4-3200 RAM (up to 64 GB)".

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel...-in-a-new-9W-multi-chip-package.421566.0.html

 

[N19h7m4r3]

Anyone any ideas on 2x16GB DDR4 that would run 4000MHz on X570 yet? I've already jumped on 2x8GB 8Pack 4000MHz but thinking for the future I may need more but don't want to sacrifice on speed.

Nothing yet, I'm waiting on similar news.

 

[smilingcrow]

run them both at the same speed and AMD old APU will humiliate Ice Lake, could have that happen.

These are laptop chips which probably can't run the RAM out of spec.
In this case it seems as if both systems were running the RAM at stock speeds which is what you'd want in a benchmark.

 

[humbug]

These are laptop chips which probably can't run the RAM out of spec.
In this case it seems as if both systems were running the RAM at stock speeds which is what you'd want in a benchmark.

Yeah 55% higher, just to edge out AMD's old chips, its pathetic.

Intel's wonderfull new Ice Lake architecture with 10nm.... little more than matches AMD's old 12nm and at the same 25 Watt TDP, and they needed 55% higher memory clocks to do it.

Laughable.

 

[KungFuSpaghetti]

Am not an experienced Overclocker, i can tell you the X470 Taichi doesnt have the additional PBO level enhancer like Asus boards( sorry cant remember what its officially called )

Biggest gripe has been Bios updates, slow to release and buggy, each one seeming one step forward , two steps back.

Bearing in mind I only bought the 2700x end of November last year expecting bios and such like would be long stable by then, at that time the current Bios had issues with offsets being lost when PBO was set, another fixed that but the EDC limits where not reset for PBO, so PBO didnt boost well unless you opened Ryzen master every boot to apply a higher limit through software.

Eventually there was a beta bios that i had to download from some German retailers old school looking FTP like site ( nowhere to be seen on Asrocks sites ) .

Now we have the 3xx onwards bios for Ryzen 3000 compatibility, but that seems to have cocked up EDC and PBO again, now boosting lower etc. Also read many other options disappeared. I went to 3.1 and downgraded back to 2.0. Asrock then decided you cant downgrade to 2.0 once youve updated, yet i somehow managed it... seems ok, but worrying.

As well as that the 3.xx bios have the worse memory latency issues, although that seemed to be across the board with other manufacturers x470s affected, possibly due to agesa 0.0072 the beta profile for ryzen 3000.

From what I've read re 3.2 still cack, 3.4 has the latest agesa which i'm presuming is no longer beta ( dont know if latency has been fixed) , but seems to be causing boot issues , but not much detail as only out a few days, so waiting to see.

Why upgrade the bios, well if you wanted the latest agesa profiles for improved memory compatibility / speed, you dont have much choice.

Most of my issues have been PBO related and as thats just about as effective as manual overclocking due to very little OC headroom on a 2700x and an advertised feature of 2700x , pretty annoying.

It might be the X570s and 3000s have more headroom to manually OC and PBO / XFR gripes are less important. But Asrock support does not
give me a great feeling going forward, particularly the latest 3xx bios have lost a bunch of options, dunno if they are back in 3.4.

In short, i would not buy another Asrock due to their crappy bios support. The board itself may well be rock solid for overclocking when youve a chip that can go higher. Maybe its be careful what you wish for as it might be the same elsewhere.

Wow, not had much luck there!

I totally agree about the BIOS missing additional PBO settings, those should absolutely be there, as soon as you switch it on, the CPU immediately goes to unsafe volts under any sort of load, rendering it a pointless BIOS setting. Standard seems to be best, boosts as it should...

Other than that and the voltage offset not remaining on with PBO, I've not really had any trouble. I've left all the settings totally standard and just used Ryzen DRAM calc to get the memory timed in, which was a doddle. 3466 CL14 is rock solid stable, as is 3666 CL14 (albeit seems slower :S).

I'm using the 3.10 BIOS still, not updated it since as it's been reliable (touch wood!).

 

[kitfit1]

Yeah 55% higher, just to edge out AMD's old chips, its pathetic.

Intel's wonderfull new Ice Lake architecture with 10nm.... little more than matches AMD's old 12nm and at the same 25 Watt TDP, and they needed 55% higher memory clocks to do it.

Laughable.

@humbug, there really isn't any point in "jumping" on that. For a start, we all know ram speed has little effect on Intel CPU's................it might have done in the past but certainly not now. Even if it actually did have an effect, it will be blown out of the water next year anyway.
If you were a tech savvy laptop consumer, would you buy it ?................of course you wouldn't. You'd wait until AMD's next release for lappies.

 

[humbug]

@humbug, there really isn't any point in "jumping" on that. For a start, we all know ram speed has little effect on Intel CPU's................it might have done in the past but certainly not now. Even if it actually did have an effect, it will be blown out of the water next year anyway.
If you were a tech savvy laptop consumer, would you buy it ?................of course you wouldn't. You'd wait until AMD's next release for lappies.

Its game testing, i thought i made that clear in a previous post? the memory speed has the same dramatic performance effect on Intel's iGPU's as it does on AMD's.

Seriously, what are Intel doing? nothing of theirs is moving forward. its the same #### refreshed over and over and over and.......

 

[smilingcrow]

Yeah 55% higher, just to edge out AMD's old chips, its pathetic.

That video you linked is pathetic aimed at fanboys who lap up any old biased crap.
He complained that Intel tested with both systems using stock RAM speeds.
How could Intel even test a Ryzen laptop chip at 3,733 RAM!
Does that imply that the Intel system should be handicapped to 2,400 because that's the best AMD offer?
In which case when he tests Zen 2 against an i7-8700 he should use DDR4-2667 for both systems as otherwise to quote him, "are we testing RAM speed or the CPU".
Apart from the blatantly biased nature of the content, what a weird and creepy voice he has.

 

[Scougar]

Thanks all for info on the memory speeds very much appreciated.