• 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.
CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
Nearly double the price of an equivalent 16GB 3200MHZ kit though,so it's niche. 3200MHZ kits can be had for close to £70,and 3600C16 kits for under £90. 32GB 3200MHZ kits were as low as £100 a few months ago! Plus you could probably fiddle around with the kits and get higher clockspeeds and better timings. £74 is easily the difference between getting a Ryzen 5 3600X and a Ryzen 7 3700X,or a GTX1660,or a RX5600XT or RX5700. In the end,the fast RAM kits are overpriced IMHO. They will only be mainstream once they replace the 3200MHZ and 3600MHZ kits at similar price points,but currently they are of more concern to enthusiasts who like the best of everything.
Click to expand...

You talk to someone who is using 5 year old 3600C16 Ripjaws V :P
 
Panos said:
You talk to someone who is using 5 year old 3600C16 Ripjaws V :p
Click to expand...
The RAM cartel segments worse than Intel,and only were forced to drop pricing on the higher speed kits due to the glut of RAM in the last year,and a short period in 2015~2016. You saw what happened after 2016,when the pricing doubled...ultimately Intel/AMD can talk about RAM speeds,but the 4000MHZ kits needed to replace the 3200MHZ/3600MHZ kits at their current price-points for them to be common. You can see RAM prices are now slowly going up.
 
opethdisciple said:
I thought ram speed and as a result ccx latencies was the one thing that AMD needed to improve in order to catch Intel in gaming scenarios?
Click to expand...

Actually no :) the 3300X is per core per Mhz <14% faster in gaming than the 3100, the ONLY difference between the two is the 3300X has a single CCX and the 3100 like all other Zen 2 CPU is multiple CCX.

Zen 3 will be a single 8 core CCX.

Hl2fLU6.png

v8EgPlk.png
 
That is a mighty impressive score.

So Zen3 is likely to repeat that pattern just with more cores. What do think will be the sweet spot between price vs performance? I know we have no concrete performance or price figures but educated guesses, would that most likely be the 8 core this time round?
 
Umm. Well hopefully they are priced well. I’m defiantly leaning towards a 4000 replacement which will probably be it for me until DDR5 is established and warranted.

Do we think they are going to be Ram sensitive also as I cheeped out a little And wish I went B die or similar. What I have now doesn’t o/c at all really.
 
Doobedoo said:
Umm. Well hopefully they are priced well. I’m defiantly leaning towards a 4000 replacement which will probably be it for me until DDR5 is established and warranted.

Do we think they are going to be Ram sensitive also as I cheeped out a little And wish I went B die or similar. What I have now doesn’t o/c at all really.
Click to expand...

Don't know but clocking the IF and RAM on the 3300X seems to make little difference, Steve Burk did that and that was his conclusion.

Thinking about it i think we, my self included are better off going Zen 3, not Zen 4, DDR5 will be expensive, early DDR4 was actually slower than DD3 because the timings were so loose....

imatw8r.png
 
Yeah I’m just pondering. I doubt I’ll get it on release this time as when I brought the 3600 the common perception was 3200c14 was the sweet spot but clocking the IF higher with 1:1 parity seems to net the better results.

Im hoping I don’t have to replace the ram so if I can keep it I’ll more than likely go for an 8 core depending on which cpu appears the best bang for buck.

Getting a little itchy now :D.
 
Clocking the IF / Mem on normal Zen 2 defiantly helps, the 3300X being a single CCX seem to not have that problem to start with ;)

I just realized the 4 core 8 thread 3300X is faster than my 6 core 12 thread 3600 in that MT game ^^^^^ nooooooooooooooooo :o
 
humbug said:
Don't know but clocking the IF and RAM on the 3300X seems to make little difference, Steve Burk did that and that was his conclusion.
Click to expand...
It makes sense.
Clocking IF helps to reduce latency in inter-CCX communication that happens via IF.
As 3300X is single CCX, there is no such communication needed so not much benefit, apart from some memory speed improvement.
 
alec said:
It makes sense.
Clocking IF helps to reduce latency in inter-CCX communication that happens via IF.
As 3300X is single CCX, there is no such communication needed so not much benefit, apart from some memory speed improvement.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the CCX's are linked together through an L3 Cache bridge, if the cores in CCX 1 need to communicate with cores in CCX 2 they do that through the memory system, the faster the memory the faster that will happen.

Having everything contained in a single CCX does away with that completely....
 
I could be wrong but here is my logic.

AMD are going to fix some of the issues with the existing design of Zen2 by making the cluster of cores all part of the same ccx.

Great that fixes it for now.

But once the cores/ccxs scale again and we have cpus with 32, 64 + cores/threads we will be back to the same issue of inter ccx latencies.

So replicating the same issue we have now but at a different scale.
 
By the time that actually matters, I doubt we'll be using Zen, so that's probably the engineering approach of "it works for now, who cares".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom