AMD Zen 3 (Ryzen 4000) already in the works

[LePhuronn]

To be honest I don't think HEDT was ever intentionally a target for AMD. Threadripper was supposedly a skunkworks project at the beginning which AMD never expected to sell, but committed to it given the strong reception it received (hence the WX series last gen). Now it's a case of redefining what the HEDT market is and leading. The 3990X is just rubbing Intel's face in it.

 

[Deleted member 209350]

To be honest I don't think HEDT was ever intentionally a target for AMD. Threadripper was supposedly a skunkworks project at the beginning which AMD never expected to sell, but committed to it given the strong reception it received (hence the WX series last gen). Now it's a case of redefining what the HEDT market is and leading. The 3990X is just rubbing Intel's face in it.

True that! Almost makes no sense to look towards intel when considering a HEDT chip when Threadripper has it massively beat at pretty much every price point.

 

[TNA]

Less cores same performance overall is better. It means each core is a lot stronger which is a good thing or am I missing something?

For example if AMD released two CPU's which both performed the same in cinebench etc, one had 8 cores and the other 12 cores, which would you guys pick? For me the answer is crystal clear, I would choose the 8 core one as it would mean each of those cores are much stronger than the one's on the 12 core cpu which means single core performance is better.

 

[humbug]

Less cores same performance overall is better. It means each core is a lot stronger which is a good thing or am I missing something?

For example if AMD released two CPU's which both performed the same in cinebench etc, one had 8 cores and the other 12 cores, which would you guys pick? For me the answer is crystal clear, I would choose the 8 core one as it would mean each of those cores are much stronger than the one's on the 12 core cpu which means single core performance is better.

This is why i didn't bother with the 8 core 2700 when it was the same price as my 6 core 3600, Zen 2 cores are much stronger than Zen+ cores, at 4.1Ghz vs 4.1Ghz the 2700 is still a little faster in MT BUT not by much and in ST the 3600 is much stronger.

At 4.1Ghz its a good as a 4.5Ghz 8700K, for £190 i'll take it.

 

[TNA]

This is why i didn't bother with the 8 core 2700 when it was the same price as my 6 core 3600, Zen 2 cores are much stronger than Zen+ cores, at 4.1Ghz vs 4.1Ghz the 2700 is still a little faster in MT BUT not by much and in ST the 3600 is much stronger.

At 4.1Ghz its a good as a 4.5Ghz 8700K, for £190 i'll take it.

Exactly. Just another case of 4K8K talking nonsense basically. He seems to think it is all about the core count when there is more to it than that. If he thinks it is all about core count then he should get a old Intel Xeon E5-2651V2 12 core cpu for cheap as chips, or a Bulldozer 8 core for super cheap. I mean why does AMD bother making a 3600 when they could be selling their Bulldozer 8 core CPU for less and make even more profit?

 

[humbug]

I don't want to think about Bulldozer ^^^^

This is why i didn't bother with the 8 core 2700 when it was the same price as my 6 core 3600, Zen 2 cores are much stronger than Zen+ cores, at 4.1Ghz vs 4.1Ghz the 2700 is still a little faster in MT BUT not by much and in ST the 3600 is much stronger.

At 4.1Ghz its a good as a 4.5Ghz 8700K, for £190 i'll take it.

Infact its a little better than that.

Score 3774: Intel Core i7 8700K at 4.7Ghz, Rainmaker
Score 3757: AMD Ryzen R5 3600 at 4.15Ghz, humbug

That's +15% IPC to me

The 8700K was a £400+ CPU, its still selling now for £350, so yeah, i feel pretty good about that.

@TNA

Score 4056: Intel Core i7 8700K at 5.2Ghz, Radox-0
Score 4041: AMD Ryzen R5 3600 at 4.5Ghz, TNA

 

[TNA]

Infact its a little better than that.

Score 3774: Intel Core i7 8700K at 4.7Ghz, Rainmaker
Score 3757: AMD Ryzen R5 3600 at 4.15Ghz, humbug

The 8700K was a £400+ CPU, its still selling now for £350, so yeah, i feel pretty good about that.

@TNA

Score 4056: Intel Core i7 8700K at 5.2Ghz, Radox-0
Score 4041: AMD Ryzen R5 3600 at 4.5Ghz, TNA

Yep. Loving this CPU. 4K8K can keep talking nonsense all he wants

 

[Deleted member 209350]

Less cores same performance overall is better. It means each core is a lot stronger which is a good thing or am I missing something?

For example if AMD released two CPU's which both performed the same in cinebench etc, one had 8 cores and the other 12 cores, which would you guys pick? For me the answer is crystal clear, I would choose the 8 core one as it would mean each of those cores are much stronger than the one's on the 12 core cpu which means single core performance is better.

Exactly this! Not sure why people just pick the more core option if it could possibly mean that each core was worse? More cores sound better on paper, but its obviously a bit more complicated than that

 

[Deleted member 209350]

I don't want to think about Bulldozer ^^^^




Infact its a little better than that.

Score 3774: Intel Core i7 8700K at 4.7Ghz, Rainmaker
Score 3757: AMD Ryzen R5 3600 at 4.15Ghz, humbug

That's +15% IPC to me

The 8700K was a £400+ CPU, its still selling now for £350, so yeah, i feel pretty good about that.

@TNA

Score 4056: Intel Core i7 8700K at 5.2Ghz, Radox-0
Score 4041: AMD Ryzen R5 3600 at 4.5Ghz, TNA

its actually kind of insane to think that with much lower clock speed that the 3600 is performing at this level.

 

[humbug]

its actually kind of insane to think that with much lower clock speed that the 3600 is performing at this level.

Yeah....

 

[Perfect_Chaos]

Exactly this! Not sure why people just pick the more core option if it could possibly mean that each core was worse? More cores sound better on paper, but its obviously a bit more complicated than that

Try telling that to console fanboys. Over 1Ghz less speed for PS5 and a potential 15+% IPC with the next chips over PS5 8 core chip.

 

[humbug]

Try telling that to console fanboys. Over 1Ghz less speed for PS5 and a potential 15+% IPC with the next chips over PS5 8 core chip.

I think the PS4 are still Jaguar based which is a late iteration of Bulldozer so the performance gain they are getting is huge given the Zen 2 core is literally 2X as fast.

 

[4K8KW10]

Exactly this! Not sure why people just pick the more core option if it could possibly mean that each core was worse? More cores sound better on paper, but its obviously a bit more complicated than that

It is more complicated and this is why you should consider the overall responsiveness of the system, not the individual performance of apps which are poorly optimised for multi-threading, or optimised for 4-core in the best case.
Google Chrome as the most simple example eats CPU cores for breakfast.

I think the PS4 are still Jaguar based which is a late iteration of Bulldozer so the performance gain they are getting is huge given the Zen 2 core is literally 2X as fast.

XBox Next-Gen will be 4 times more powerful than XBox One X:

"Microsoft and Sony have not started duking it out over the next generation of consoles yet, but Xbox boss Phil Spencer might have just thrown the first punch. He recently revealed Microsoft’s vision of a console four times more powerful than the Xbox One X."
https://www.techspot.com/news/81422-microsoft-vision-xbox-scarlett-console-four-times-powerful.html

 

[Deleted member 209350]

Try telling that to console fanboys. Over 1Ghz less speed for PS5 and a potential 15+% IPC with the next chips over PS5 8 core chip.

Hahaha imagine tryin to compare jaguar cores to Zen2!

 

[TNA]

It seems 4K8K cannot resist reading my posts even though I am on his ignore list. Love it!

How is it more complicated when I just said if both the CPU's perform the same? Only thing complicated here is the way 4K8K arrives at his conclusions. He just says things but cannot back them up. If he were to back them up dozens of people here would not be giving him a hard time.

 

[Deleted member 209350]

I think the PS4 are still Jaguar based which is a late iteration of Bulldozer so the performance gain they are getting is huge given the Zen 2 core is literally 2X as fast.

Im pretty sure its way more than just 2X as fast, Im thinking pure CPU performance is at least 4-5x better and obviously storage performance is like 100x better

 

[TrM]

It is more complicated and this is why you should consider the overall responsiveness of the system, not the individual performance of apps which are poorly optimised for multi-threading, or optimised for 4-core in the best case.
Google Chrome as the most simple example eats CPU cores for breakfast.

Sorry but what? Overall responsivness of the system IM gonna use @humbug Becouse its christams and i know he has a 3600. But i bet his 3600 vs my 3900x on a system you could't tell the differnce on day to day things at all only time you can relly tell the differnce is we both try something that uses our cores heavly.

The post did say if all was equal going for less cores is better and it is. even a 2700 vs 3600 is complex becouse 3600 is much faster per core yes if all cores are 100% a 2700 will eek out a win but everything else that 3600 is simply faster. Now its also a cheaper launch price so why go for a 2700 over a 3600? And chrome really doesn't eat cores for breakfast it loves ram not cores and the benifits in chrome you get from faster cores is next to 0% notice for the end user.

i have a 2400g used for a plex machine with ssd and 16 gb of ram and i cant tell the differnce on that system using normal programs vs my 3900x chrome etc run really fast that my 3900x doesn't feel like its adavantge. I did say feel like it is not that benchmarks will show my 3900x is 2.75x as fast to load pages.

One last thing and ive allways wanted to know everytime i see one of your posts. Are you sure you don't work for intels marketing deparment? allways just wondered

 

[humbug]

Im pretty sure its way more than just 2X as fast, Im thinking pure CPU performance is at least 4-5x better and obviously storage performance is like 100x better

You're probably right.

 

[Perfect_Chaos]

I think the PS4 are still Jaguar based which is a late iteration of Bulldozer so the performance gain they are getting is huge given the Zen 2 core is literally 2X as fast.

Yep but I'm talking about the PS5 not PS4 still behind desktop chips because of the clock speed, and Zen 3 rumours of 15+% IPC on top.

 

[TNA]

Sorry but what? Overall responsivness of the system IM gonna use @humbug Becouse its christams and i know he has a 3600. But i bet his 3600 vs my 3900x on a system you could't tell the differnce on day to day things at all only time you can relly tell the differnce is we both try something that uses our cores heavly.

The post did say if all was equal going for less cores is better and it is. even a 2700 vs 3600 is complex becouse 3600 is much faster per core yes if all cores are 100% a 2700 will eek out a win but everything else that 3600 is simply faster. Now its also a cheaper launch price so why go for a 2700 over a 3600? And chrome really doesn't eat cores for breakfast it loves ram not cores and the benifits in chrome you get from faster cores is next to 0% notice for the end user.

i have a 2400g used for a plex machine with ssd and 16 gb of ram and i cant tell the differnce on that system using normal programs vs my 3900x chrome etc run really fast that my 3900x doesn't feel like its adavantge. I did say feel like it is not that benchmarks will show my 3900x is 2.75x as fast to load pages.

One last thing and ive allways wanted to know everytime i see one of your posts. Are you sure you don't work for intels marketing deparment? allways just wondered

Well said. The reason he is so confused is he is comparing his laptop to desktop cpu's. He talks with zero experience as all he has is laptop that does not come close to a 3600 in performance. He just goes on about whatever he finds on google. He ignores anyone else who says otherwise.

If he learnt to use google, he would not be having these problems. He seems like one of those people who google's something like "is the earth flat" and finds tons of links that back this up and comes away believing it. Then comes away feeling special and thinks he is more clever than everyone else that thinks the earth is round. Which would explain why he keeps saying things like AMD are stupid, they should do this or they should do that, like it was that easy...