• 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 demonstrates Ryzen 9 5900X prototype with 3D V-Cache stack chiplet design

Curlyriff said:
No half from each. It was last year when we just wanted to compare performance figures. It made no difference to all 16 on or 8 on with 4 on each but it was still loosing out to the 5800x for most part. The 5950x wouldn't boost past about 4.6Ghz, sometimes 4.7Ghz though for me regardless of how many cores where as I know humbug has had his 5800x boosting to 5Ghz St times.

Where it was noticed is mid/late game Stellaris or Star Citizen which both ran better with all 16 cores enabled or all cores on one CCX. Oh and late game total war and civilisation. They were fine until then but system chugged more late game as it was completing one form the AI turns.
Click to expand...

In Star Citizen i have seen 100% spikes on all 16 threads at Orison. which is nuts....

Not turn times but maybe related? Civ seems quite heavy on the CPU as there is a marked difference between all these CPU's, tho it does not seem thread heavy, it could be cache access heavy?

nDJUCm8.png
 
A few here where single CCD edges out the dual CCD chips.

Its not making that much of a difference tho, all in all i would say the best Zen 3 gaming chip is the 5800X but its purely academic as the there is not much between them and the performance is so high on all of them you need to use stupidly low settings to separate them.

I think AMD have the pitfalls of chiplet CPU's pretty well nullified with Zen 3.

5dnmCZ1.png
ypp35Va.png
rrqa3iV.png bLyGCdn.png
 
The difference in performance between the 5900X and 5800X on those slides is:

5%
11%
13%
15%

To the 5800X.

That's AMD's claimed "average +15%" I don't know what that means, i doubt it means its actually +0% vs the 5800X, or that its just about getting their best gaming CPU, "existing" on the charts given that a lot of the large reviewers opted not to have the 5800X on 12900K gaming charts at all.

But why glue a 64MB slab of 2,000 GB/s SDRAM on the chip if its not going to make a difference?
 
humbug said:
The difference in performance between the 5900X and 5800X on those slides is:

5%
11%
13%
15%

To the 5800X.

That's AMD's claimed "average +15%" I don't know what that means, i doubt it means its actually +0% vs the 5800X, or that its just about getting their best gaming CPU, "existing" on the charts given that a lot of the large reviewers opted not to have the 5800X on 12900K gaming charts at all.

But why glue a 64MB slab of 2,000 GB/s SDRAM on the chip if its not going to make a difference?
Click to expand...

I'm sure it helps in some games, and it seemed like the quickest way for AMD to get back on top in gaming. However, it doesn't seem to as easy to impliment as they thought it would be. (For whatever reason)
 
Twinz said:
I'm sure it helps in some games, and it seemed like the quickest way for AMD to get back on top in gaming. However, it doesn't seem to as easy to impliment as they thought it would be. (For whatever reason)
Click to expand...

Why doesn't it? They said Spring 2022. That is March, April & May months. We are not even into March yet and as long as they release before last day of May they hit their target.
 
Journey said:
Not sure why that matters when they said spring, yet people are suggesting it is later than expected, when we aren't even in spring yet.
Click to expand...
Not only that, AMD said production takes in december, and people expected release in december and critising AMD for delay, they read AMD news with half of brain.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom