16mb should be enough for zen2 + 3 and I'm guessing this is what will happen for the 16mb versions of B450/X570.
-
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
Seeing as Intel are still some way ahead in gaming my bet is higher clocks. The 10900K on 14nm is way ahead of current AMD chips on frame rates. I'm sure AMD would like to be at the top of those charts too.
Soldato
Take a deep breath.
a) Except one motherboard, the rest have MCE on. Which means the CPU runs partially overclocked out of the box. For apple to apples comparison, reviewers should at least activate CPPC on the AMD systems.....
b) Sure for those having 2080Ti gaming at 1080p with 240hz monitors. However who buys £3000 gear to game on 1080p. At 1440p there is barely any difference, especially consider that everyone has freesync/Gsync monitors at those resolutions so anything over 80fps makes no difference.
Soldato
When you say "some way ahead". You mean the average 8% fps in gaming at 1080p whilst used with the 2080Ti? Honestly the issue is the price from Intel, it would need to be around £100 less to even be viable to compare. Unless of course you are gaming with 240hz monitor in pro gaming situations it really isn't worth looking at, the cost, the cooling requirement etc. Shame but no surprise.
AMD responding with the new CCX layout to reduce inter-core latency and a slight clock bump with the rumoured 15-17% IPC gain should net AMD a comfortable performance parity at minimum even comparing to the highest clocked 10900k.
Doesn’t the 10900k need to bathed in liquid nitrogen to even run at stock boost speed?
I think there is a reason why intel don’t supply their CPU with stock cooler in retail package anymore. the stock cooler will be utterly useless in these 14nm++++...CPUs.
personally, I would want performance at the best efficiency. Not outright 8% single core speed at a cost of a electric heater level of power requirement. I want an electric heater I can buy one for £10 not £600
DDR5 (and Pcie5) is not production ready. And when it is, it will be servers that get it first. So seems unlikely that we see AM5 in 2021. Question is, does AMD want to keep its yearly release cadence.
Considering the memory controller is in a separate chip, nothing stops AMD from packaging prospective Zen 4 chiplets with current (DDR4) IO die for AM4.
I think 99% time this applied. 1440p CPU is not the bottle neck so AMD and Intel too chip makes no appreciable gaming difference. But I guess there is probably 1% ppl out there do use 2080ti for 1080p to get max frame rate. Even at those margined, I think extra 10 frames out of 240fps is not going to make anything perceptible. It is the 1% frames that will matter and I don’t think there are any differences in intel and amd offering on that front.
Soldato
Doesn’t the 10900k need to bathed in liquid nitrogen to even run at stock boost speed?
No
That would be idiotic.
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 9,217
Apologies if it's already been covered.
I have Ryzen 2600 on a B450 motherboard.
If the motherboard manufacturer provides a BIOS update, does this mean I could theoretically jump to a 4000 series CPU?
I understand the main issue is to do with the BIOS memory size and the one way motherboard manufacturers and AMD can get round this is to drop support for older AMD CPU models
So would this mean support dropped for Ryzen 1000 and 2000 series, so the only way to run a 4000 series CPU on a B450 is to already have a 3000 series CPU running in your system?
I have Ryzen 2600 on a B450 motherboard.
If the motherboard manufacturer provides a BIOS update, does this mean I could theoretically jump to a 4000 series CPU?
I understand the main issue is to do with the BIOS memory size and the one way motherboard manufacturers and AMD can get round this is to drop support for older AMD CPU models
So would this mean support dropped for Ryzen 1000 and 2000 series, so the only way to run a 4000 series CPU on a B450 is to already have a 3000 series CPU running in your system?
Too many people to reply to all but this is marketing. Intel know how to do it. If go all in if I was AMD, at this point I think higher clocks would gain them more kudos than 10% power saving. They are already well ahead on power. I'm heavily invested in AM4 now so no question what I'll be buying next, but for those on the fence that could clinch it 
With zen 2 release CPUs ranging from around £199 to £750 I wouldn't really say that's a budget brand. A top tier non HEDT CPU on Intel 5 years ago was only about £350.
I haven't heard anything about requiring a 3000 series to get a B450 to run 4000 and I wouldn't worry about that. AMD will have a solution I'm sure.
If you have a B450 Max board, you probably safe as the boards have 32MB rom so Board manufacturer can load more CPU codes to them.
if you have non-max boards then likely situation is that you can download the beta bios from your board manufacture but it will ask you if you really want to do this. Apparently there will be a system check to see what CPU you have in socket and a warning message will appear before allowing you to download the bios update. At least that’s what AMD kind of inclined in their response. But doing this bios update will effectively render your board useless for Ryzen 1 and 2 series CPU. So you need a 3000 or 4000 cpu ready to slot into the board if you want to run your computer again. Also AMD said the process is non-reversible, which is a bit weird.
You should be ok if you have bios flashback feature as you can upgrade/downgrade the bios at will without even having a CPU installed.
AMD did state the bios update would only be for those on 400 series chipsets that are running a 3000 series CPU, not sure how this is going to work but I would be suprised if you couldn't jump from a 2000 CPU to a 4000 and needed a zen 2 chip installed to update the bios.
Last edited:
I'd be very happy with 10% IPC increase on 3950X and a 4-8 cores at 4.2-4.5ghz working flat out when performing demanding tasks. Ideally all those faster cores at 4.4 in cinebench.i just want a 4950x with more ipc thanks
I'll defo bite then assuming all other metrics are the same or better although latency needs to drop 20-30% if at all possible.
Associate
wonder if they will release a 24c 4990
I have wondered if they will roll something different out as a last hurrah.
Associate
some videos i watched cant find it now but said there was 2 16c es parts out for zen 3 which is interesting wonder if its an x and non x part
EDIT - https://youtu.be/c5W3-BNXRbc?t=242
Silly me misread the opn stuff only 1 16c part but has a clock speed bump
Soldato
On that I am really positive if what the AMD Engineers said on the retracted video back in September last year. (Shame not many watched it when posted it here).
Reason is, a 7nm(TSMC N7) I/O (as he said would be) would reduce the size of the chip to 70-75mm2 (Zen 2 chiplet is 76mm2).
Also Zen 3 chiplets are made in N7+ and are smaller than Zen 2 chiplets, so there is space on the AM4 package to fit 3 8 core chiplets, assuming AMD can pull the wiring and will to do so.
However for AMD to do so, would need to keep boost clocks low, at 4.6ghz max, utilizing the 15% power reduction of the node. It would run hotter than a 3950X so 240mm rad AIO would be about OK to keep it at 75C-ish. Nothing extravagant like the 10900K which needs 360mm AIO to keep it at 90C
We shall see. Might explain why the Intel 11 series goes only up to 8 core also.... No point to compete.
And lets not forget. Price wise AMD could sell cheap and make profit. Already we know has 94%+ yield on N7, and TSMC boasts same yield rate on N7+ (and N7P). At $10,000 wafer means each chiplet costs around $13-14 with those yields.
Last edited:
- Status