• 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 3 (5000 Series), rumored 17% IPC gain.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Richdog said:
AMD want Zen3 to be regarded as completely new ad 'revolutionary' architecture,
Click to expand...
Cite that source, yo! Because there's nothing revolutionary about Zen 3, and AMD have never claimed that to be such. Hell, I remember the EPYC Milan presentation that pretty much confirmed 8-core CCXs and no SMT4 this gen described Zen 3 as an evolution.

Richdog said:
AMD's CPU numbering scheme currently doesn't make sense, it's confusing and they need to come up with something more logical.
Click to expand...
I keep reading this and I just don't see it. Explain to me how Ryzen's numbering is confusing, I want to know what you think is wrong. There are 2 outliers which do throw a wrinkle in the numbering from my perspective. Oh, and I'll pre-empt what I believe your argument will be: Average Joe consumer doesn't know what "Zen" is, so saying the product numbering and architecture number are out-of-step is totally irrelevant.
 
Dave2150 said:
I'm just hoping that brand new Zen3 will finally be able to match, or beat, Intel's 5 year old architecture (Skylake) and almost 6 year old 14nm process in gaming performance (10900k is still Skylake, on 14nm)

My 6700k is coping well with 4K as I'm GPU limited, but when I get a 3080 20GB/3090, or big Navi, I'll likely want to upgrade. Still hoping I can wait it out for LGA1700/AM5 platforms though, as nice to have a big IO upgrade :)
Click to expand...

Why do you care if you are holding out for Intel?
 
Last edited:
Dave2150 said:
I'm just hoping that brand new Zen3 will finally be able to match, or beat, Intel's 5 year old architecture (Skylake) and almost 6 year old 14nm process in gaming performance (10900k is still Skylake, on 14nm)

My 6700k is coping well with 4K as I'm GPU limited, but when I get a 3080 20GB/3090, or big Navi, I'll likely want to upgrade. Still hoping I can wait it out for LGA1700/AM5 platforms though, as nice to have a big IO upgrade :)
Click to expand...
Funny, because in GPU limited scenarios (i.e. playing games properly) there is no discernible difference right now. Hell, there's even a fringe case where an overclocked 3300X beats a 9900K! It's only when you want/need absolute max FPS like in competitive e-sports where you're running a 2080 Ti at potato resolutions do you see Intel's gap emerge. And that's still the fringe case Intel fangirls diehards users still band around like it actually means anything. You can see it yourself in that your 10th Gen i3 is still rocking it at 4K because your GPU is getting bogged down first.

Now of course Zen 3 is coming very soon and Skylake 6 is due early next year so it's worth the wait just to be sure, but frankly I'm not optimistic that Rocket Lake is going to perform well.
 
I just read conflicting information about the memory channels from kitguru &another techsite. One said two unifying memory controllers supporting two channels each (4dimms) & kitguru said two unifying memory controllers supporting one channel each.

I have 4x8GB Patriot viper steel 4400, which I do use more than 16GB quite slot and sometimes slot more. In fact trying to run a filter on a 100MB jpeg in gimp I still ran out of memory.
 
LePhuronn said:
I keep reading this and I just don't see it. Explain to me how Ryzen's numbering is confusing, I want to know what you think is wrong. There are 2 outliers which do throw a wrinkle in the numbering from my perspective. Oh, and I'll pre-empt what I believe your argument will be: Average Joe consumer doesn't know what "Zen" is, so saying the product numbering and architecture number are out-of-step is totally irrelevant.
Click to expand...
The main issue is the APU line being ahead and now with boards supporting different iterations it is a bit confusing for the less tech savvy individual.

This could be easily rectified by bring zen 3 desktop out under the 5000 series naming though.
 
Not as confusing as trying to explain the poop show that is socket 1151. Why can't I use a 6700k in a Z390 board, and why can't I use a 9100F in a H110, or how come my 8600k doesn't work on Z270, or why is the i5 7500 not working in my B365 board...

This list goes on, AM4 is easy in comparison
 
Journey said:
Not as confusing as trying to explain the poop show that is socket 1151. Why can't I use a 6700k in a Z390 board, and why can't I use a 9100F in a H110, or how come my 8600k doesn't work on Z270, or why is the i5 7500 not working in my B365 board...

This list goes on, AM4 is easy in comparison
Click to expand...

This alone should be the reason no one chooses Intel anymore
 
Joxeon said:
The main issue is the APU line being ahead and now with boards supporting different iterations it is a bit confusing for the less tech savvy individual.
Click to expand...
The APU line has always been ahead. But it's not confusing though. Ryzen 4000 CPUs are designed to work primarily on 500 series boards. Average Joe trying to save a couple quid on a build is just going to drop for a A520 board, rather than wade through the nuances of B450 boards with 32Mb BIOS ROMs or whatnot. Hell, this is even assuming Average Joe is going to buy components individually. Never, ever forget that our perceptions of all this comes from we're enthusiasts who know how to BUILD systems, not just buy a pre-built from Curry's.
Joxeon said:
This could be easily rectified by bring zen 3 desktop out under the 5000 series naming though.
Click to expand...
That would make it even worse. What do the Zen 3 APUs get called then? Calling them 5000 makes them look like an afterthought tacked onto the desktop line at the end of the cycle, and suddenly feel obsolete when the 600 series CPUs land a few months later. That's disastrous optics if AMD are trying to sway OEMs.

The only time this gets confusing is when AMD change socket, but even then it's not an issue because the mobile parts come out first leading a new thousands number and they don't drop into desktop boards so the socket isn't an issue, then desktop parts land and would usher in the new socket, then desktop APUs land on that new socket.

It's just not confusing, I honestly fail to see how it could be.
 
Dave2150 said:
I'm just hoping that brand new Zen3 will finally be able to match, or beat, Intel's 5 year old architecture (Skylake) and almost 6 year old 14nm process in gaming performance (10900k is still Skylake, on 14nm)

My 6700k is coping well with 4K as I'm GPU limited, but when I get a 3080 20GB/3090, or big Navi, I'll likely want to upgrade. Still hoping I can wait it out for LGA1700/AM5 platforms though, as nice to have a big IO upgrade :)
Click to expand...

Your CPU is in no uncertain terms beaten by a 3300X, basically an i3 in new Intel terms, the 3300X beats that too.

Just saying. :)
 
LePhuronn said:
Cite that source, yo! Because there's nothing revolutionary about Zen 3, and AMD have never claimed that to be such. Hell, I remember the EPYC Milan presentation that pretty much confirmed 8-core CCXs and no SMT4 this gen described Zen 3 as an evolution.
Click to expand...

Well ok maybe revolutionary is a bit OTT, but AMD have said that Zen3 is “a completely new architecture", which is a bit more than 'evolutionary' no? https://realmoney.thestreet.com/investing/technology/amd-inks-new-server-cpu-deals-15170073

"When asked about what kind of performance gain Milan's CPU core microarchitecture, which is known as Zen 3, will deliver relative to the Zen 2 microarchitecture that Rome relies on in terms of instructions processed per CPU clock cycle (IPC), Norrod observed that -- unlike Zen 2, which was more of an evolution of the Zen microarchitecture that powers first-gen Epyc CPUs -- Zen 3 will be based on a completely new architecture."

LePhuronn said:
I keep reading this and I just don't see it. Explain to me how Ryzen's numbering is confusing, I want to know what you think is wrong. There are 2 outliers which do throw a wrinkle in the numbering from my perspective. Oh, and I'll pre-empt what I believe your argument will be: Average Joe consumer doesn't know what "Zen" is, so saying the product numbering and architecture number are out-of-step is totally irrelevant.
Click to expand...
You are entitled to your opinion and there is no need to spend time trying to convince you of anything that others in the thread seem to be easily getting. You either understand and/or agree with the logic behind why both Zen2 and Zen3 CPUs numbered as 5000 series could be confusing to and undesirable to both AMD and consumers or you don't. Personally I think it's really obvious why it's at least undesirable, so lets agree to disagree.

r22snapper said:
I'm not sure why people keep falling for Dave2150's bait. He must have posted that dozens of times and people still rise to it every time.
Click to expand...

The ignore list is there for a reason, use it to filter out the noise and I guarantee that your forum experience will improve. :)
 
Richdog said:
but AMD have said that Zen3 is “a completely new architecture"
Click to expand...
Norrod said that a year ago before half of the "new" stuff got scrapped, such as SMT4. Zen 3 just isn't completely new.
Richdog said:
You either understand and/or agree with the logic behind why both Zen2 and Zen3 CPUs numbered as 5000 series could be confusing to and undesirable to both AMD and consumers or you don't.
Click to expand...
No, clearly I don't. "Zen" has nothing to do with it, average Joe doesn't know what Zen is. The enthusiast community keep saying this, but as enthusiasts we're largely disconnected from what "regular" users know and understand. Stop confusing yourself with Zen.
Richdog said:
Personally I think it's really obvious...so lets agree to disagree
Click to expand...
No, let's not agree to disagree in this instace. Instead of telling me I'm wrong, why not answer the question and detail to me why I'm wrong. Nobody has yet answered my genuine question.
 
To be fair SMT4 doesn't mean a new architecture. Sure it would be a revolutionary feature on the x86 market. But architecturally it is probably just a flag somewhere "allow 4 threads per cpu".
 
alec said:
To be fair SMT4 doesn't mean a new architecture. Sure it would be a revolutionary feature on the x86 market. But architecturally it is probably just a flag somewhere "allow 4 threads per cpu".
Click to expand...
Right along with the "allow 5Ghz" and "boost IPC 20%" flags? :p

Why don't they just flip the switches and earn that easy money? :p
 
LePhuronn said:
Norrod said that a year ago before half of the "new" stuff got scrapped, such as SMT4. Zen 3 just isn't completely new.

No, clearly I don't. "Zen" has nothing to do with it, average Joe doesn't know what Zen is. The enthusiast community keep saying this, but as enthusiasts we're largely disconnected from what "regular" users know and understand. Stop confusing yourself with Zen.

No, let's not agree to disagree in this instace. Instead of telling me I'm wrong, why not answer the question and detail to me why I'm wrong. Nobody has yet answered my genuine question.
Click to expand...

I'd go even further, regular users barely even know who AMD are. Most are like asking the average lady "what kind of car was it?", "A blue one!". I deal with users at work, amazing how many don't know what a browser is or ask if the password contains "upper case numbers".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom