Soldato
- Joined
- 16 May 2007
- Posts
- 3,221
I appreciate you may not know this but does dual chiplets hold back cpu performance in any way ?
-
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 2 (Ryzen 3000) - *** NO COMPETITOR HINTING ***
- Thread starter Jamin280672
- Start date
I appreciate you may not know this but does dual chiplets hold back cpu performance in any way ?
Not according to the leaked info. If anything it makes more sense now as the 12c had lower clock speeds than the 16c and if they are from defective dies then it makes more sense to downclock them over the 8c die.
Soldato
- Joined
- 16 May 2007
- Posts
- 3,221
Thanks, I am looking at getting a 3700x all being well with them later in the year and assuming the supporting bios update.
I really enjoyed the keynote. Radeon 7 was underwelming, but I don’t think anyone was really expecting more. Ryzen however is looking interesting and shows real promise. I think, even with the lack of clock speed details, it is clear AMD can easily match Intel’s top chip, core for core.
The most interesting bit for me was the showing of the delidded CPU. There was no reason to reveal that at this stage other than to show that they are using a chiplet design and there is space for more. By showing their hand in this way they must be really confident that Intel are nowhere near being able to do something similar.
16 cores in this package size and power envelope will be very impressive. It probably won’t make much difference to gaming but will be really great for creative workloads.
The most interesting bit for me was the showing of the delidded CPU. There was no reason to reveal that at this stage other than to show that they are using a chiplet design and there is space for more. By showing their hand in this way they must be really confident that Intel are nowhere near being able to do something similar.
16 cores in this package size and power envelope will be very impressive. It probably won’t make much difference to gaming but will be really great for creative workloads.
No mate, sorry to disappoint. I'll be getting Zen 2 aswell as I'm loaded
I'll ditch 9900k in 7 months if Zen 2 is king....No problem , no remorse, no nothing...
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Nov 2018
- Posts
- 2,840
I like this perspective
https://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-3000-specs-prices-leaked-upto-16-cores-5-1ghz-on-am4/Link?
You have made that up
The Ryzen 5 8c Lisa Su held up had one chiplet. It showed enough space below to place a second chiplet. We already know that Zen 2 is based on the Epic chiplet design, with an updated infinity Fabric interconnect. So all the leaks seem to now fall into place.
a amd chip beat or level with a intel chip in a benchmark. look at previous amd chips even current ones on cinebench then go look at real life game benchmarks see where that top end amd chip comes . below a lowly i5. people just bleating on about cinebench what about gaming where most here will be using it lol. cant wait for the launch gunna be some salty people when they realize they been amd hoodwinked yet again.
Loaded AND insecure. Cool combo that...No mate, sorry to disappoint. I'll be getting Zen 2 aswell as I'm loaded
I'll ditch 9900k in 7 months if Zen 2 is king....No problem , no remorse, no nothing...
Given we don't know the frequency of the ES used, it could even be as low as 4GHz. If that's the case then it'll have the pure brute force to beat a 9900K in single threaded gaming even with it optimised for Intel. Then who's gonna be the salty ones...
Insecure? Over a cpu?
Maybe down under but not the tough stiff upper lip of Great Britain mate.
Not when they have paid £200 for the mid tier Ryzen rather than the £500 on the 9900k.
yeah gaming performance is key for the masses for the niche Im hoping they have sorted out the Latency issues...As a low latency 16/32 core chip could sit happily in my studio...
I could sell the 9900k in MM to the poor folk
if and a big if they perform at what they say they do for leaked prices. its all guesses. look logically and realistically. why would amd sell a 200 quid chip that can beat a 500 for 200 ? makes no sense in anyway or business sense. people have no understanding of this. also remember you comparing intel prices now to what they will be in 6 months. so in 6 months a 9900k which will probably be quicker still ingames than the chip we talking about might be 350. so hundred ish difference. people will still pay it to have superior performance ingames just like they do now.
I did post facts. I removed the hyperbole and reposted actual mathematically derived numbers. So stop commenting "it's not half" when I already said it's not half.
So stop crying like a pathetic little child and find an actual real argument or counterpoint to discuss rationally like an adult. Or just stop trolling and don't let the door kit you on that 9900K on the way out.
They pulled apart the price brackets with Ryzen 1st gen pushing out a 8/16 for £300 when the closest Intel was over £1k. They could have sold it for £600 but they didn't. They will do it again because they can afford to do it. And pushing more cores on hardware will give developers the push they need to write for more cores.
My guess is that AMD need the market share. If you have a superior product, then it makes business sense to flood the market at a cheaper RRP. To gain that market share. As people tempted, will need to get an AM4 or AM5 board.