5Ghz Amd & Intel (speculation topic)

humbug · 1 Nov 2017 at 17:42

@AndreiD They both have a number of Integer units, FP units and caches... in that sense they will look similar, they do because they are both CPU's, nothing more.
What you can't see in those 'shapes' is they are both X86_64 CPU's, that makes Intel copies of AMD CPU's, the fact is they are both operating in the same space and share each-others IP.

Check this out... AMD64, that's for your X86_64 extensions on your Intel CPU, without which your Intel CPU is a paperweight. go there yourself to see all those AMD extensions in your OS that's running on your Intel CPU, there are literally thousands of them built up over many many years of development.

Delete all that nasty AMD stuff, watch what happens.

The fact is right now Ryzen gaming performance is very competitive with Intel in games that were made before Ryzen even existed, that can only get better as newer games come online that have been developed with Ryzen as part of the existing hardware lineup.

Mercutio · 1 Nov 2017 at 17:45

AndreiD said:
Current games still benefit from strong single threaded performance, the 8700K doing so well in gaming is a perfect example of that since most games can't perfectly segment their workloads and split them to however many threads the CPU has. There's always going to be 1-2 threads that are going to be loaded a lot more than the others and those will be the main bottlenecks performance wise.
Ryzen is a perfect example of that happening even in very well multithreaded games like AotS, it's the reason why the 8700K does quite a lot better.

And Ryzen optimizations seem to mainly deal with its NUMA/Infinity Fabric issues, at most you seem to get performance to where it should be, around Haswell level. Note that the games that received "Ryzen patches" all had it performing well bellow par previously. As for some kind of dark magic fairy dust optimizations that will make Ryzen perform better than it currently does in its ideal scenarios, google a Zen core diagram and put it side by side an Intel Core one, AMD took lots of design cues from Intel with Zen, current architectural weaknesses are mainly related to AMD's CCX design.
Future Zen iterations might be an improvement though.

"So, I decided to ignore stuff that says otherwise and keep stating the same rubbish"

"Benchmarks, pricing, sales reports, user experience is all fake news"

Also: "So, anything good in AMD is totally stolen from Intel, anything unique they've come up with, is totally pointless".

7 years after Sandy bridge, Intel were still pushing the same chip, which 6 generations later had STOCK CLOCKS improved by about 150mhz per generation. Totally more innovative and driving the market as the microprocessor gods they are.

Comedy gold

humbug · 1 Nov 2017 at 17:50

AMD were grappling with processing logic in 1969 while Intel were still making memory.

gavinh87 · 1 Nov 2017 at 18:10

humbug said:
@AndreiD They both have a number of Integer units, FP units and caches... in that sense they will look similar, they do because they are both CPU's, nothing more.
What you can't see in those 'shapes' is they are both X86_64 CPU's, that makes Intel copies of AMD CPU's, the fact is they are both operating in the same space and share each-others IP.

Check this out... AMD64, that's for your X86_64 extensions on your Intel CPU, without which your Intel CPU is a paperweight. go there yourself to see all those AMD extensions in your OS that's running on your Intel CPU, there are literally thousands of them built up over many many years of development.

Delete all that nasty AMD stuff, watch what happens.

The fact is right now Ryzen gaming performance is very competitive with Intel in games that were made before Ryzen even existed, that can only get better as newer games come online that have been developed with Ryzen as part of the existing hardware lineup.

How?
What improvements can they make to ryzen that won't also help improve intel? Making one game engine use 8threads/12threads will also help intel, there is no magic going on here since they all use the same instructions etc.
Yes yes we all know AMD pioneered x64

humbug · 1 Nov 2017 at 18:18

Again Intel's current architecture has been around for about 10 years, i think it all traces back to Nehalem.

Ryzen is simply a brand new architecture, aside from that new architecture whatever new extensions AMD may have created for it have yet to be exploited, perhaps they are in Civ-6, who knows.

Whatever.... the CPU does very well with games that have never seen the CPU let alone understand it, so despite games right now not understanding the CPU the performance is still good. It can only get better with coming games that subsequently do understand the CPU now that it exists.

gavinh87 · 1 Nov 2017 at 18:30

humbug said:
Again Intel's current architecture has been around for about 10 years, i think it all traces back to Nehalem.

Ryzen is simply a brand new architecture, aside from that new architecture whatever new extensions AMD may have created for it have yet to be exploited, perhaps they are in Civ-6, who knows.

Whatever.... the CPU does very well with games that have never seen the CPU let alone understand it, so despite games right now not understanding the CPU the performance is still good. It can only get better with coming games that subsequently do understand the CPU now that it exists.

So these claims are based on nothing then? Games haven't seen skylake x neither but are we expecting the performance of those to improve?
I'm not saying they wont but so far you are basing this assumption on nothing other than its been out for a while. The fx series was being sold for a long time also but they never improved.

humbug · 1 Nov 2017 at 18:37

Skylake-X is not a new architecture, its Skylake, the i7 6700K is Skylake.

As dismissive as you want to be about it Ryzen performs very well with games that have never seen Ryzen let alone understand it, for example one of the problems with that is the engine software will treat the CPU as generic, run it at a default safe mode not using any of its advanced instruction sets and extensions, just emulation of its base functions, that can have a detrimental impact on the performance.

That is not a nothingness, its very fundamental.

If Ryzen gaming performance is good despite this, well... obviously its not going to get worse with games that do understand the CPU and use it as intended, is it?

Mercutio · 1 Nov 2017 at 18:38

gavinh87 said:
So these claims are based on nothing then? Games haven't seen skylake x neither but are we expecting the performance of those to improve?
I'm not saying they wont but so far you are basing this assumption on nothing other than its been out for a while. The fx series was being sold for a long time also but they never improved.

But...

1) you're trying to say "well Intel performance didn't improve in the 10 years"... says who?
2) "so AMD performance won't improve either"... says who?

So the warhammer patch, dota 2 patch, rise of the tombraider patch (and a good handful more, can't find a handy list of them all and can't be arsed reading seperate news stories). All improved Ryzens performance in those games. Games being made with it in mind though will obviously see none of those improvements for.... reasons..?

gavinh87 · 1 Nov 2017 at 18:40

Mercutio said:
But...

1) you're trying to say "well Intel performance didn't improve in the 10 years"... says who?
2) "so AMD performance won't improve either"... says who?

So the warhammer patch, dota 2 patch, rise of the tombraider patch (and a good handful more, can't find a handy list of them all and can't be arsed reading seperate news stories). All improved Ryzens performance in those games. Games being made with it in mind though will obviously see none of those improvements for.... reason..?

We're talking about AMD overtaking intel in the future with optimisations. So far none of those patches have been able to help them do that so how will anything else being created now be able to?

jigger · 1 Nov 2017 at 18:43

A 5Ghz Ryzen would fix that.

AndreiD · 1 Nov 2017 at 18:45

@Mercutio I never said any of that, but if those are the conclusions you jumped to...

I do have a Ryzen system fyi, and if anything I'm not ignoring any reviews, or do you have reviews that show Ryzen outperforming an 8700K in gaming? I'd love to see some links if you do!
And I never even said that AMD taking design cues from Intel was a bad thing, it's pretty noticeable with stuff like the micro-op cache which Intel has been using in its designs since Conroe, but wasn't found in any of AMD's architectures until Zen. It worked out for AMD in the end, no? They end result is something competitive after 6 years of Bulldozer.

@humbug
Instruction set wise they're close to parity. The only major difference between the two companies now is AVX-512, but that's not really used in any consumer workloads currently.

gavinh87 · 1 Nov 2017 at 18:49

jigger said:
A 5Ghz Ryzen would fix that.

Let me know when/if that arrives please.

humbug · 1 Nov 2017 at 18:50

gavinh87 said:
We're talking about AMD overtaking intel in the future with optimisations. So far none of those patches have been able to help them do that so how will anything else being created now be able to?

No we are not, you said that and tried to make it your argument, i nor anyone i know of in this thread said that, i simply said Games currently are running on what is to them an unknown quantity in Ryzen, that despite this the performance was still good and could improve with coming games developed with Ryzen as a now known quantity.

@AndreiD

I'm not talking about extensions shared between AMD and Intel, AMD could develop extensions specifically designed to boost performance of their CPU's.

jigger · 1 Nov 2017 at 18:54

gavinh87 said:
Let me know when/if that arrives please.

Has it been three pages already.

gavinh87 · 1 Nov 2017 at 19:01

humbug said:
No we are not, you said that and tried to make it your argument, i nor anyone i know of in this thread said that, i simply said Games currently are running on what is to them an unknown quantity in Ryzen, that despite this the performance was still good and could improve with coming games developed with Ryzen as a now known quantity.

@AndreiD

I'm not talking about extensions shared between AMD and Intel, AMD could develop extensions specifically designed to boost performance of their CPU's.

Wouldn't new extensions require devs to code for that extension? There are plenty out there that can't even get dx12 right. (Not saying that I can do better!)

humbug · 1 Nov 2017 at 19:05

gavinh87 said:
Wouldn't new extensions require devs to code for that extension? There are plenty out there that can't even get dx12 right. (Not saying that I can do better!)

Yes and there is no reason why they wouldn't, all devs want to get the most out of their games and the FX series CPU's get developed for despite its odd and complex shared resources, Ryzen is a far more important CPU already than the FX series ever was.

gavinh87 · 1 Nov 2017 at 19:07

humbug said:
Yes and there is no reason why they wouldn't, all devs want to get the most out of their games and the FX series CPU's get developed for despite its odd and complex shared resources, Ryzen is a far more important CPU already than the FX series ever was.

I dunno, I have no faith in devs optimising anything. If they were that bothered they would all be using vulkan imo.

humbug · 1 Nov 2017 at 19:08

gavinh87 said:
I dunno, I have no faith in devs optimising anything. If they were that bothered they would all be using vulkan imo.

I agree with you on Vulkan.

AndreiD · 1 Nov 2017 at 19:16

@humbug
They tried with a few instruction sets like XOP, ABM or FMA4 and they dropped all of them with Zen. It's possible they'll add some new instruction sets with future Zen iterations, but I wouldn't expect anything groundbreaking. Currently AVX512 seems to be the big step forward, but no consumer apps support it (barely any consumer apps support AVX2/FMA3 to begin with).

jigger · 1 Nov 2017 at 20:28

AndreiD said:
@humbug
They tried with a few instruction sets like XOP, ABM or FMA4 and they dropped all of them with Zen. It's possible they'll add some new instruction sets with future Zen iterations, but I wouldn't expect anything groundbreaking. Currently AVX512 seems to be the big step forward, but no consumer apps support it (barely any consumer apps support AVX2/FMA3 to begin with).

Not sure dropped is the right term, but what was a good fit for the FX8 wasn't a good fit for Ryzen and markets it's entered or is about to enter in 2017. Or are you saying AMD shouldn't make smart moves and stick with old designs?