Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Oct 2013
- Posts
- 4,158
- Location
- Scotland
Does anyone still get the feeling AMD are sandbagging a little bit?
-
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
They will be holding back the 3xxx FX/Black Edition parts that have a higher rated TDP for later in the year, maybe Q4 to really put the nail in for the peak season, or for when the competition release something to try and counter, e.g a 130w 10c/20t part with a 5GHz boost.
I feel like they will cut prices a bit if Intel's Comet Lake is any good but otherwise no, not really. If the current rumours about Comet Lake are true (not coming until 2020, might have SMT completely disabled, 14nm+++++, no IPC bump like Ice Lake/Sunny Cove), AMD will not be sweating at all.
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Oct 2013
- Posts
- 4,158
- Location
- Scotland
They will be holding back the 3xxx FX/Black Edition parts that have a higher rated TDP for later in the year, maybe Q4 to really put the nail in for the peak season, or for when the competition release something to try and counter, e.g a 130w 10c/20t part with a 5GHz boost.
I could definitely see something like that happening to be honest. There's no incentive for them to release faster 8 core cpus yet either for example.
I am 100% they could release 8 core cpus closer to 5Ghz. I mean if they can offer 16 cores at 4.7 then within a thermal envelope they should be able to bin a single 8 core chiplet at 4.8/4.9Ghz and call it a gaming king. I have a feeling they could release a higher clocked halo product too at 130/140W.
I might well be wrong but I just have a feeling they haven't shown off the absolute best they can do yet.
I think AMD have left no room for "yeah but" types, all benchmarks were done on stock.systems, and they left off patched that hindered Intel and also updates that favoured AMD, this is a "this is the worst case scenario for our chips" type of deal
Pretty impressive, also the fact they left benchmarks where they are still behind to me shows they are hiding nothing except XFR and PBO info which they haven't mentioned yet.
Here's Intel's best desktop CPU run at stock with MCE without its security patches known to dampen it's performance, being beaten or equalled and sometimes winning against our CPU line ups which incidentally we haven't included our new performance increase from the new Windows Update, this is a comparison if you bought both now, set them up out of the box and went head to head performance test
I'm impressed, I still think they are sandbagging a bit more on the overclocking potential of these chips, so many people commenting "wait til NDA lifts" type excitement, and also just the fact the boards have been so well supported with really high end models tells me we haven't seen the full potential of these chips yet.
Would be fun to see a fully security patched and OCd 9900k up against a 3800x running on the latest windows update on a high end board with decent ram and an overclock
Pretty impressive, also the fact they left benchmarks where they are still behind to me shows they are hiding nothing except XFR and PBO info which they haven't mentioned yet.
Here's Intel's best desktop CPU run at stock with MCE without its security patches known to dampen it's performance, being beaten or equalled and sometimes winning against our CPU line ups which incidentally we haven't included our new performance increase from the new Windows Update, this is a comparison if you bought both now, set them up out of the box and went head to head performance test
I'm impressed, I still think they are sandbagging a bit more on the overclocking potential of these chips, so many people commenting "wait til NDA lifts" type excitement, and also just the fact the boards have been so well supported with really high end models tells me we haven't seen the full potential of these chips yet.
Would be fun to see a fully security patched and OCd 9900k up against a 3800x running on the latest windows update on a high end board with decent ram and an overclock
I get the feeling they've over-priced them or are very close to over-pricing them, although i also suspect they've done that on purpose so they've got plenty of wiggle room for what i expect is going to be a price war.
Can I just say LOL.....hahah... mwhahah... LOL etc.
Remember they have Threadripper and EPYC to bin for, too.
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Oct 2013
- Posts
- 4,158
- Location
- Scotland
I know, but eventually they will get on top of all segments and yields/quality should improve. The Ryzen 5/7 will be bottom of the barrel chiplets just now.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 15 May 2006
- Posts
- 4,107
- Location
- London
So Ghost Recon Breakpoint is going to be fully optimised for multicore Zen2 and the 5700 series Radeons.
without*
Permabanned
- Joined
- 15 May 2006
- Posts
- 4,107
- Location
- London
Quote:
AMD’s Ryzen 3000 series processors likely now can turn the clock speed dial or ramp up and down faster than any desktop processor available to date. Even Intel Skylake- and Kaby Lake-based processors don’t have 1- to 2-millisecond temporal granularity for dynamic selection of the clock speed. It’s 40 and 15 milliseconds respectively in those cases. With AMD’s XFR automated overclocking in particular, we may also see huge gains because of this.
Sources:
https://images.anandtech.com/doci/1...on_Gaming-3rd_Gen_Ryzen_06092019-page-008.jpg
“For any of our users familiar with our Skylake microarchitecture deep dive, you may remember that Intel introduced a new feature called Speed Shift that enabled the processor to adjust between different P-states more freely, as well as ramping from idle to load very quickly – from 100 ms to 40ms in the first version in Skylake, then down to 15 ms with Kaby Lake. It did this by handing P-state control back from the OS to the processor, which reacted based on instruction throughput and request. With Zen 2, AMD is now enabling the same feature.
“AMD already has sufficiently more granularity in its frequency adjustments over Intel, allowing for 25 MHz differences rather than 100 MHz differences, however enabling a faster ramp-to-load frequency jump is going to help AMD when it comes to very burst-driven workloads, such as WebXPRT (Intel’s favorite for this sort of demonstration). According to AMD, the way that this has been implemented with Zen 2 will require BIOS updates as well as moving to the Windows May 10th update, but it will reduce frequency ramping from ~30 milliseconds on Zen to ~1-2 milliseconds on Zen 2. It should be noted that this is much faster than the numbers Intel tends to provide.
“The technical name for AMD’s implementation involves CPPC2, or Collaborative Power Performance Control 2, and AMD’s metrics state that this can increase burst workloads and also application loading. AMD cites a +6% performance gain in application launch times using PCMark10’s app launch sub-test.”
https://www.anandtech.com/show/14525/amd-zen-2-microarchitecture-analysis-ryzen-3000-and-epyc-rome/3
AMD’s Ryzen 3000 series processors likely now can turn the clock speed dial or ramp up and down faster than any desktop processor available to date. Even Intel Skylake- and Kaby Lake-based processors don’t have 1- to 2-millisecond temporal granularity for dynamic selection of the clock speed. It’s 40 and 15 milliseconds respectively in those cases. With AMD’s XFR automated overclocking in particular, we may also see huge gains because of this.
Sources:
https://images.anandtech.com/doci/1...on_Gaming-3rd_Gen_Ryzen_06092019-page-008.jpg
“For any of our users familiar with our Skylake microarchitecture deep dive, you may remember that Intel introduced a new feature called Speed Shift that enabled the processor to adjust between different P-states more freely, as well as ramping from idle to load very quickly – from 100 ms to 40ms in the first version in Skylake, then down to 15 ms with Kaby Lake. It did this by handing P-state control back from the OS to the processor, which reacted based on instruction throughput and request. With Zen 2, AMD is now enabling the same feature.
“AMD already has sufficiently more granularity in its frequency adjustments over Intel, allowing for 25 MHz differences rather than 100 MHz differences, however enabling a faster ramp-to-load frequency jump is going to help AMD when it comes to very burst-driven workloads, such as WebXPRT (Intel’s favorite for this sort of demonstration). According to AMD, the way that this has been implemented with Zen 2 will require BIOS updates as well as moving to the Windows May 10th update, but it will reduce frequency ramping from ~30 milliseconds on Zen to ~1-2 milliseconds on Zen 2. It should be noted that this is much faster than the numbers Intel tends to provide.
“The technical name for AMD’s implementation involves CPPC2, or Collaborative Power Performance Control 2, and AMD’s metrics state that this can increase burst workloads and also application loading. AMD cites a +6% performance gain in application launch times using PCMark10’s app launch sub-test.”
https://www.anandtech.com/show/14525/amd-zen-2-microarchitecture-analysis-ryzen-3000-and-epyc-rome/3
Playing Devils Advocate's here because really I'm not arsed but:
AMD disabled MCE.
Benchmarks weren't done on low quality preset or 720p.
For whatever reason they used a RTX 2080 rather than RTX 2080TI.
Games like Rocket League hit their FPS limit.
So apart from potentially GPU limiting these benches,disabling MCE and selecting benchmarks which are useless there's nothing for the "year but" types ;D
Let it go. Continuing to bang out about how 8 month-old leaks have proven to be incorrect in the face of zero competition from Intel is only serving to make yourself look stupid.Just as Adoredtv leaked.... oh no, wait, nope
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Aug 2004
- Posts
- 5,155
- Location
- South Wales
Isn't anyone curious why they used a 2080 instead of a 2080 Ti?
I'd say mostly unlikely. A 64 core TR would require 8 full 8-core chiplets capable of decent clocks (if the trend of Threadripper matching Ryzen's top clocker). The 3950X arguably already eats into 3800X inventory, 64c TR would do so even more.
I think 48 cores will be the limit for Threadripper this generation: it's an increase in core count over previous generation and seeing how well Zen 2 performs it will utterly crush anything Intel can bring to the table for years.