2100mhz FCLK(not mine)
Nice, was that fairly easy?
-
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.
- Thread starter AStaley
- Start date
- Status
Nice, was that fairly easy?
AMD Fans: INTEL GOT COMPLETELY DESTROYED IN GAMING!!!!111
Checks some sites for reviews and it seems that Zen 3 has around the same performance/advantage Intel had over Zen 2 in gaming. Non gaming Intel got destroyed
Some of you need to dial it back abit as some are worse than clickbait Youtubers.
Checks some sites for reviews and it seems that Zen 3 has around the same performance/advantage Intel had over Zen 2 in gaming. Non gaming Intel got destroyed
Some of you need to dial it back abit as some are worse than clickbait Youtubers.
Last edited:
2100mhz FCLK(not mine)
Mine will do 2000/2000 at just 1.1 SOC but haven't tried any more yet. Last thing I've fiddled with
I shall try more tomorrow.
how do pictures work
Looking around the net wins like that ^^^^ are not that unusual, most Zen 3 is only around 10% faster, and losing in a couple of games, but there are enough of these big margin wins for AMD to add to the smaller wins and make the whole thing really quite shocking, in some games AMD have managed as much as <50% higher performance vs Zen 2, and here's the thing, where AMD wins big its in games where with Zen 2 AMD lost big, for example that ^^^^, Serious Same 4 is another where Zen 2 was bad in comparison and now AMD are 15% faster than Intel, Far Cry 5 is another huge jump for AMD, CS:GO AMD complete take the pee.....
This is the gob smacking thing about it, everywhere in gaming where AMD did unusually badly vs Intel they are now smashing it, its almost as if Intel thinking "its ok we have sevral of these games where AMD are so far behind they would need 30% to match us and that's not happening...." AMD be like "Think again Intel!"
This is the gob smacking thing about it, everywhere in gaming where AMD did unusually badly vs Intel they are now smashing it, its almost as if Intel thinking "its ok we have sevral of these games where AMD are so far behind they would need 30% to match us and that's not happening...." AMD be like "Think again Intel!"
Someone gonna cover the Latency on AMD? Latencymon on my 4770k
Idle 7-20us
4k games and Youtube 55us max
And if i remember right 70ns on the 2400mhz ram.
It was and is a great gaming setup, The best way to do this is download Latencymon click the playbutton and run the game and Latencymon in windowed mode. This way you can play the game and watch the latency in realtime. It should be done on a fresh install really.
Idle 7-20us
4k games and Youtube 55us max
And if i remember right 70ns on the 2400mhz ram.
It was and is a great gaming setup, The best way to do this is download Latencymon click the playbutton and run the game and Latencymon in windowed mode. This way you can play the game and watch the latency in realtime. It should be done on a fresh install really.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,775
- Location
- Planet Earth
The big wins are probably the same places the Ryzen 5 3300X also improved,ie,latency is what held back Zen2 CPUs. I remember saying a while back the biggest improvements in Zen3 will be in games where the latency of the 4+4 CCX design causes problems.A lot of those are older games,or those based on older generation engines. Even with Intel look at the HEDT CPUs with the mesh bus and the consumer CPUs with the ring bus which was lower latency, and despite the same cores,the latter was faster in many games.
Any engine or game which is more CCX aware will have lower improvements,and I suspect Zen2 will also hold its own in future multi-platform games,because the consoles use it.
Yeah, you might be on to something there, a combination of the +19% IPC, clock speeds and unified L3 would explain the up to near 50% jump in performance.
Are all 3300x cpus single ccx? Iv seen they are quite good sometimes beating a 3600. I'm probably going to pick one up in town tomorrow to use whilst I wait for the 5900x.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,775
- Location
- Planet Earth
Well if you look at the IPC improvement,and the minor clockspeed bump it isn't enough to explain the improvements alone. We also saw Zen2 underperform in certain games relative to its better IPC(or technically per core per clock performance) against similarly clocked Intel CPUs. In practice AMD should have been closer with Zen2.
So basically these games probably didn't have proper Zen optimisations and Zen2 has to brute force things. Zen3 with a unified CCX,will have lower CCX-memory latency and reduced intercore latency,because for the first 6~8 cores there needs to be less hops along the IF.
AMD is technically also brute forcing it with Zen3 if there is no Zen optimisations in a game,but it has the extra resources to do it sucessfully now. Its why some games might be still relatively close with Intel Skylake uarch CPUs still,but Zen3 can push through.
Its also why some of the other games,show lower improvements with Zen3 against Zen2 if they had suitable updates for Zen too. Its why I think if you are going to run newer games,or realistically those based on newer engines Zen2 is probably going to fine also,if not lower performance than Zen3. A bit like the R9 290 series was a good base level for years.
Yes they are. Its a single chiplet with one CCX group enabled.
Last edited:
Well that's great if your running CSGO on a 680hz monitor then.destroyed!
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 May 2010
- Posts
- 23,790
- Location
- London
No doubt looking at 1080p benchmarks shows the strength of the raw CPU and takes the GPU out of the equation.
However how many of you game at 1080p?
I was looking at 1440p benchmarks yesterday and the gain from a 3700x to a 5800x was around 3%.
Hardly astonishing.
And that was with benchmarks using a 2080ti.
However how many of you game at 1080p?
I was looking at 1440p benchmarks yesterday and the gain from a 3700x to a 5800x was around 3%.
Hardly astonishing.
And that was with benchmarks using a 2080ti.
Last edited:
CPU reviews are always a bit hit and miss for games, reviewers lower settings so they are CPU bound to test the frame limits bit hardly anyone plays that way.
It’s never rally clear which games are actually CPU bound on the lower end SKUs when running realistic image quality for a given resolution, I suspect hardly any.
It’s never rally clear which games are actually CPU bound on the lower end SKUs when running realistic image quality for a given resolution, I suspect hardly any.
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 May 2010
- Posts
- 23,790
- Location
- London
What's strange here is the consoles all have 8/16 threads. Yet the top gaming chip on PC is the 5600x.
So is 6/12 still a good idea on the PC in light of next gen games?
So is 6/12 still a good idea on the PC in light of next gen games?
If 4k is standard 8/16 would be ideal. You match the thread count and the resolution means the cpu matters less. For luxury i suspect 16c with SMT off is the best you can buy. If the past repeats then thats what i want to do disable fake threads and match the console thread count with real not fake cores.
They have more cores but they are both slower from an architectural point of view being zen2+ and also from a clock speed point of view.
A 5600x will be faster than a PS5 and XBox series in every metric. It doesn’t matter that it has less cores, if anything having less cores is better because games always have a primary thread which is always a bottleneck and better single core performance will aid that massively. However the consoles will of course benefit from efficiency gains at the OS level.
doesnt derbauer's overclock tool do that too?
- Status