• 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 3 (5000 Series), rumored 17% IPC gain.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joxeon said:
I don't think there are any games where your fps tanks on 6/12cores vs 8/16 currently even on games that can take advantage of 12 cores. If you want to keep the CPU for 3 year+ though then 8 core will be the better option even though it will most likely get beaten by a newer 6 core CPU in 3 years time
Click to expand...

by that logic we’d all still be on 4 cores and we’re not. You just can’t tell
 
An Octocore CPU has 33.3% more cores that a Hexacore. So if AMD increases IPC by exactly 16.65% each year, then an 8 core CPU from this year should have the same IPC as a 6 core CPU in two years. That's not taking the improved memory bandwidth into consideration either.

Assuming well optimised multithreaded software of course.
 
Last edited:
Joxeon said:
CPUs back then were only advancing by a few % every generation but now we are seeing 15-20% gains year on year if not more with the core counts increasing also.

Could you imagen buying a pentium 4 1.5ghz in 2001 for $800 and trying to run modern games on that 10 years later?
Click to expand...

Games requirements are tight with consoles life cycles. It matters less how much improvement CPUs get over the years. If a current 8c/16 or 12c/24t CPU can do 60fps, than the average gamer couldn't care less that the best new shinny CPU does 300 in 5 years. Just upgrade the GPU, storage, RAM, etc...
 
IPC is only high because there is so much to improve when your architecture is new.

unless AMD is right now working on a brand new architecture to replace ryzen in 2 years you can bet that in 2 years the IPC increases will sub 5% by then
 
Whilst I understand this won't apply to everyone, I've just always been perfectly happy (and better off, both financially and in terms of frames) buying at the budget end of new CPU technology and spending some of the saving on a better GPU.

But then I game at 4K and at that res, the difference between a 6 core and 8 core CPU is (at the moment) basically meaningless.

My non-gaming requirements are also very basic. Chrome, Excel, and PS are probably about as much CPU work as my machines do outside of games.

Each to their own situation I guess.
 
Grim5 said:
IPC is only high because there is so much to improve when your architecture is new.

unless AMD is right now working on a brand new architecture to replace ryzen in 2 years you can bet that in 2 years the IPC increases will sub 5% by then
Click to expand...

As die nm node is reaching limits, 5nm is a likely end even if 3nm is on trial.
so normally a die shrink allows to double the transistors.
AMD went with IF to unload some stuff on a different chiplet allowing a scaling and yield to be superb.
So its still an innovated approach to scale, ipc not just with clockspeed.
Next year we see am5, on ryzen 4 with a likely redesign to some extent of the ryzen 3 coming out soonish.
AMD has shown the way they designed ryzen it been able to scale 15% ipc in each generation due to they cant milk the customer like Intel did for a decade.
Intel also burned their goodwill and brand alongside the 10nm epic fiasco.
New solutions and innovations usually happens when things starts to become limited the old way
 
Participant said:
Whilst I understand this won't apply to everyone, I've just always been perfectly happy (and better off, both financially and in terms of frames) buying at the budget end of new CPU technology and spending some of the saving on a better GPU.

But then I game at 4K and at that res, the difference between a 6 core and 8 core CPU is (at the moment) basically meaningless.

My non-gaming requirements are also very basic. Chrome, Excel, and PS are probably about as much CPU work as my machines do outside of games.

Each to their own situation I guess.
Click to expand...

Exactly the same with me - I bought the budget CPU of the line and it's been perfectly capable. Don't see any need to buy the top end.
 
I needed a new machine at the end of last year so opted for a 3600 with a higher end X570 with intentions of upgrading to a Zen 3 processor when they came out. The 3600 is a little cracker so will probably wait until the Zen 3 processors start dropping in price before considering now.
 
I know October was basically confirmed/guessed at as retail launch but I think MSI just basically said "yes it's October" with the B550 Unify in a nonchalant way: https://wccftech.com/msi-meg-b550-u...herboards-pictured-high-end-amd-ryzen-boards/

"We have also got a word from our sources that both of these motherboards will feature a highly aggressive design that is targeted for overclocking on AMD's next-generation Ryzen Desktop CPUs codenamed Vermeer... the B550 Unify series is expected to launch in a September/October time-frame"

Makes sense to have the board ready end of September/very start of October in preparation for a Zen 3 launch around October 10th. This might also hint at no other chipsets (X670) being made if MSI is going this much in with a 2 DIMM board.
 
november was the last date said by someone amd. x670 you know will probably drop at same time or after. to take over from the x570 just like the 550 has the 450.
 
~>Dg<~ said:
november was the last date said by someone amd. x670 you know will probably drop at same time or after. to take over from the x570 just like the 550 has the 450.
Click to expand...
X570 don't really need replacing though, B550 was a big upgrade over B450 in terms of Vrm and feature sets but where do they go with X670 as X570 is already pretty well stacked?.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom