It's also critical to reviewers to UPDATE their Windows 10 to 1903 - May 2019
Everything softwarewise must be updated to the max.
-
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
It's also critical to reviewers to UPDATE their Windows 10 to 1903 - May 2019
Everything softwarewise must be updated to the max.
Associate
- Joined
- 5 May 2017
- Posts
- 142
Do we have to consider that these ryzen 3000 chips aren't out yet with the prober updates (motherboard and drivers)?
Oh and AIDA64 for "Real World Tests"I'm not convinced that these two scenarios affect the CPU in the same exact way. Nor do I believe it to be a worthwhile test.
Five years from now, the most popular resolution is still likely to be 1080p, and I believe so for two reasons:
1) People just seem to like 1080p as the perfect balance between real estate and performance compromise. 900p is also a good candidate for this (I know that some people prefer to not play in full-screen mode, so as to make multi-tasking easier). 1080p panels are also the most common sold.
2) APUs. Ryzen APUs have practically killed the low-end dedicated GPU segment. You can now enjoy GT 1030 levels of performance in a $99 APU. Go back five years to 2013. The HD 8670D (A10-6800K) was the integrated graphics king. Using the same game (and therefore game engine), which is Grand Theft Auto V:
With an overclock, you can bump up the settings to a medium-high balance and not lose frames. In five years, you've gained 50% more frames and increased the number of on-screen pixels by 125%. With the 2200G as the baseline, think what can be achieved in another five years. APUs will take on some serious improvements in the years to come, most likely to the point where AMD is actively pushing 1440p/60 fps marketing material.
- HD 8670D (A10-6800K) = 720p / normal / 40 fps avg
- Vega 8 (Ryzen 3 2200G) = 1080p / normal / 60 fps avg
If we're supposed to take these Zen 2 720p benchmarks as some kind of insight into the future, I think it's incredibly misleading.
Would this be considered one of their "real-world" tests?
According to Intel, one of the benchmarks we should be testing, is how quickly Skype opens.
And SYSmark, of course. It would be illegal to forget about that.
It's hilarious how when Intel won in Cinebench (An actual real world test, it's Maxcom Cinema 4D, same thing as Blender) they pressured everyone to use it, now that they are losing in Cinebench they want reviewers to stop using it and instead use thing's like SYSmark which are entirely synthetic and not at all representative of real world performance, but it's the label Intel give it.
I have my own theory on the matter. I think 1080p on the 22-23-24" monitors and larger actually beats the people off the PC environment.
Because of the large pixels, people prefer their smartphones. At least, they have microscopic nano pixels which don't disturb their eyesight and aren't ugly to be looked at.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 28 Sep 2018
- Posts
- 0
How many reviewers will try to normalize the systems?
Example: Z390 Master vs X570 Master. Same RAM speed and timings on both platforms.
Example: Z390 Master vs X570 Master. Same RAM speed and timings on both platforms.
Hardware Unboxed do this, their reviews are the ones i'm interested in.
Motherboards can't be compared across platforms (naming schemes just follow price points and marketing). Ram should definitely be normalised though.
Also, in Cinebench they are getting exactly the same single thread score (207) which shouldn't be happening.
I did this for some testing hero vs hero.... Like 8Pack vs 8Pack two hero's face off
Ok so that's an oddity.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 28 Sep 2018
- Posts
- 0
I did this for some testing hero vs hero.... Like 8Pack vs 8Pack two hero's face off
Nice. Will you be publishing the results?
Permabanned
- Joined
- 28 Sep 2018
- Posts
- 0
True but they'll be in a similar class of board. A master from gigabyte represents a certain range in their lineup so that's the best parity you can hope to achieve.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 28 Sep 2018
- Posts
- 0
Give yourself a like.
Hero’s what?I did this for some testing hero vs hero.... Like 8Pack vs 8Pack two hero's face off
Exactly, I'd treat this review with caution until we have multiple reviews from reputable websites just in case they are running into some strange bug. Remember that the 3700X only has a 65W TDP and lower clocks vs the 105W TDP 12 core 3900X. There is no way it should be equalling it in gaming or anything else.
Been quite disappointed with AMD in the recent years and I was expecting to end-up with a 9900k after Sunday, but I'm actually quite happy with those early benchmarks. AC: Origins is probably the newest "CPU bound" (not really, but definitely not GPU bound) engine and is the one where both Ryzen CPUs seem faster.
P.S. Best case scenario would be AMD unhappy to see everyone reading this review - as it's being picked up by every outlet, and lifting the review embargo.
P.S. Best case scenario would be AMD unhappy to see everyone reading this review - as it's being picked up by every outlet, and lifting the review embargo.
Associate
- Joined
- 5 Jul 2019
- Posts
- 11
There are a bunch of other oddities if you start looking through it. Then if you go compare it to other 720P benchmarks done in the past on 8700k on the same games you see very different results. How is the 95w limited 9900k faster then the unlimited one in min fps in some tests etc.
that would be interesting to see , if x570 to expensive might grab x470 hero