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

[Perfect_Chaos]

~5nm is about 15-20% potential frequency gain at the same power level over 7nm which isn't too bad. With tuning higher frequency gains should be possible.

I think there was a site claiming 20% IPC increase for one of Intel's future chips, but i don't think it's due for another 2-3 years.

 

[Participant]

If the 3600x offers the best value for money as a purely gaming CPU, that might be my preferred option.
If cores become more useful over 8 in the future then you could buy a second hand 3800x, or the next revision when required. I don't think overspending now as future proofing on a socket that has potential it necessarily the best option for everyone.

Depends on single core performance. I'm going for whatever has the highest.

 

[LePhuronn]

~5nm is about 15-20% potential frequency gain at the same power level over 7nm which isn't too bad. With tuning higher frequency gains should be possible.

EDIT: I'm always a bit cautious about the claims of low or negative performance scaling as often they seem to originate from people who have a grudge against a company using the process or against the semi-conductor fab itself, sometimes using spin on a cautious outlook from the fab company in question, and the matured yields generally have some kind of frequency gain. I remember when a certain site was running with the story that 16FF was such a fail it wouldn't offer any gains over 28nm even heh.

We'll know when we get there. You just know when somebody actually starts working on a thing, any prior predictions will go out of the window.

 

[DragonQ]

~5nm is about 15-20% potential frequency gain at the same power level over 7nm which isn't too bad. With tuning higher frequency gains should be possible.

Frequency gain at the same power is not the whole story; the maximum frequency (using reasonable voltages & cooling) is more important for high-end desktop parts. 5nm may well allow for higher frequencies at the same power, but it might cap at lower than 7nm (or Intel's 14nm+++), which means maximum performance might be lower.

 

[MaXxBoulton]

are the spec's here right? or is it still just an estimate
https://www.techpowerup.com/cpudb/2131/ryzen-5-3600x

 

[DragonQ]

are the spec's here right? or is it still just an estimate
https://www.techpowerup.com/cpudb/2131/ryzen-5-3600x

All based on the same leak from months ago. No official confirmation yet but all seems to be pointing in that direction.

 

[Rroff]

Frequency gain at the same power is not the whole story; the maximum frequency (using reasonable voltages & cooling) is more important for high-end desktop parts. 5nm may well allow for higher frequencies at the same power, but it might cap at lower than 7nm (or Intel's 14nm+++), which means maximum performance might be lower.

True but it is generally a fair guide.

 

[LePhuronn]

are the spec's here right? or is it still just an estimate
https://www.techpowerup.com/cpudb/2131/ryzen-5-3600x

Nothing has been confirmed, so those specs do align with current thinking but it's still speculation.

 

[humbug]

I think there was a site claiming 20% IPC increase for one of Intel's future chips, but i don't think it's due for another 2-3 years.

The thing is Intel have made claims of +15% IPC since Sandy Bridge, in reality it was never more than 3% outside of the one application Intel always use to Demo their claims, i don't remember the name of the application but Intel fake the results.

 

[humbug]

are the spec's here right? or is it still just an estimate
https://www.techpowerup.com/cpudb/2131/ryzen-5-3600x

Spot the red flags on this one.

 

[Rroff]

I think there was a site claiming 20% IPC increase for one of Intel's future chips, but i don't think it's due for another 2-3 years.

IPC increases can come from a number of things so doesn't mean the silicon itself is doing higher frequency or all gained from outright frequency.

 

[humbug]

I'll just leave this here for all the old gits like me who should get this reference.

 

[Kelt]

I'll just leave this here for all the old gits like me who should get this reference.

I hope it doesn't all fall apart like his face did!

 

[humbug]

 

[DragonQ]

IPC increases can come from a number of things so doesn't mean the silicon itself is doing higher frequency or all gained from outright frequency.

An IPC increase cannot, by definition, come from frequency increases.

 

[Rroff]

An IPC increase cannot, by definition, come from frequency increases.

LOL true that - I rarely pay attention to whether people are talking IPC/IPS.

 

[MassiveJim]

I hope it doesn't all fall apart like his face did!

"his" face was actually an explosive wasn't it ?

 

[Kelt]

"his" face was actually an explosive wasn't it ?

Yup.

 

[ben90]

2 weeks to go guys.

Is anyone like me, I'm kinda excited, but also a little bit sad re the future of gaming.
It looks like we are going to get yet more cores from AMD. Which obviously I am happy about. But in truth won't make a massive difference in gaming. Not nearly as much as if they were releasing say a 6ghz 2700x.

It just looks like the industry (intel included) is now heading for a industry of increasing core counts. (Zen 3 rumours about 4 threads per core) Alas this doesn't actually really help game FPS at all.

Everyone one is excited about Zen 2, and I am, but I'm struggling to get that excited. Because unlike days of old I just know that it won't make that much difference to gaming.

Definitely. PC gaming feels like it is on a decline as everyone moves to more cores. Intel may even decide to forget about the desktop, given their roadmap, and concentrate on other markets.

My other question is if AMD, in the future, gain a hold of the market, how will they handle it? Will they become the new Intel? Nvidia will probably be the GPU kings for as long as they want so I don't see any changes there.

 

[LePhuronn]

My other question is if AMD, in the future, gain a hold of the market, how will they handle it? Will they become the new Intel?

I don't think they'll be quite as bad as Intel because there's always been a tangible difference in mentality. AMD always come across as nerds who push for crazy **** because why the hell not, Intel always come across as (largely) steady progress but not rushing out (i.e. drip feeding) game-changing technologies.

That's not to say that AMD won't appease their shareholders and start ramping prices and profits up when they are in a position to do so, but even when they've been in a dominant position, AMD have never come across as particularly underhanded like Intel have been.

So yeah, AMD will take advantage of a dominant market position, but I don't see them abusing it.