Associate
At least you’re honest about it
-
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 4" thread (inc AM5/APU discussion) ***
Caporegime
Intel's CPU's have been pulling multiple 100's of watts for some years now, some Xeon's were pulling 500 watts, the 10900K pulled over 200.
Again why would this be a problem now? Now that AMD are doing it, why was it not a problem in all of the years Intel have been doing it?
Steve Burke never gave AMD any kudos for the efficiency of their CPU's during the previous years compared with Intel, instead he tried to manipulate in such a way as to make you believe AMD was somehow being dishonest while at the same time his own testing, which he can't fake without looking like a blatant lair, showed he was talking absolute nonsense.
That question is obviously not aimed at you, its rhetorical
Last edited:
The difference between the X3D and zen4 just seems to be on a few games. From what I've seen they generally go blow for blow, at the moment anyway.Ryzen 9 7950X Techspot review up now:
Link:
https://www.techspot.com/review/2535-amd-ryzen-7950x/
Newsflash, it runs hot.
Intel's CPU's have been pulling multiple 100's of watts for some years now, some Xeon's were pulling 500 watts, the 10900K pulled over 200.
Again why would this be a problem now? Now that AMD are doing it, why was it not a problem in all of the years Intel have been doing it?
Steve Burke never gave AMD any kudos for the efficiency of their CPU's during the previous years compared with Intel, instead he tried to manipulate in such a way as to make you believe AMD was somehow being dishonest while at the same time his own testing, which he can't fake without looking like a blatant lair, showed he was talking absolute nonsense.
That question is obviously not aimed at you
TBF I think AMD overstated Zen4 efficiency in the build up to this launch. I generally trust Steve to be unbiased, though his choice of thumbnail for the 7950X was clickbait in the extreme - fireball background graphic, 95c the first thing mentioned etc. Eventually his review did end up showing this CPU is by far the best thing out there (if you have deep pockets!)
Last edited:
Soldato
Makes no difference to me personally, only professionally. Vast majority of my life is spent with 1U systems, and very small boxes so working with 35w and under CPU's is what I spend most of my time doing. So far the 6xxx Ryzen mobile/embedded parts are the ones making waves in what I do, but the Zen4 parts are showing real promise. I would like to see what the work per watt is, but it'll be 6-12 months from now before we get the chips we want.
Zen 4 is efficient. e.g. try it at 65w. Performance to power curve. Choose the efficiency that you want. If you want to emulate Intel that's ok choose 95c. Sorted.
I think we all hyped that we still pretty much top dogs for gaming.
Just shows intel can't compete and now more expensive than intel to boot by a huge margin.
I remember AMD users claiming intel CPU were hot.... I'm 45c in games enjoy your 75c AMD pilot lights
Last edited:
Maybe AMD didn't design it for the ~5% of PC owners that already have a 12700K or 12900K?
tbh, the marketing slides are all about selling the new AM5 platform, discussing the awesome engineering etc etc etc
Basically, buy a X670E or you aren't a real gamer
B650 is for plebs and gopniks
Last edited:
Caporegime
The 7950X has a TDP rating of:
170 watts to 225 watts boost
Maximum tested power consumption is 226 watts
The 12900K has a TDP rating of
125 watts to 242 watts boost
Maximum tested power consumption is 260 watts
All that's fine ^^^
AMD claimed Zen 4 is a more effient architecture than Zen 3.
At 120 watts the 5950X scores about 26,000 in R23
Locked to 65 watts the 7950X scores between 28,000 and 31,000 depending on whose review it is.
At the same wattage the 5950X scores about 15,000, half.
That's nothing short of amazing efficiency, a 12900K can't even do that at 300 watts. He has no right to bemoan AMD's architectural claims, its wilful ignorance, unlike a lot of others he hasn't even done any apples to apples testing for architectural efficiency.
Last edited:
Soldato
That applies to the 12900k back a year ago, you could run it at 125w and be more efficient than the 5900x and a little behind the 5950x
Yet people kept insisting that you should run it out of the box ar 240w. Now suddenly people reinvented power limits. Its freaking amazing
good stuff can set PBO thermal limit to 75c and slightly performs better than stock
www.reddit.com
Reddit - Dive into anything
www.reddit.com
Last edited:
Soldato
Can you explain to me how is it possible for the 12900k to pull 260 watts at stock? It cant.
Gnexus showed that the 7950x broke the record on power draw btw, check his review. It scored 250w, wiping the floor with the 12900k at 240. So yeah...
Maybe AMD didn't design it for the ~5% of PC owners that already have a 12700K or 12900K?
tbh, the marketing slides are all about selling the new AM5 platform, discussing the awesome engineering etc etc etc
Basically, buy a X670E or you aren't a real gamer
B650 is for plebs and gopniks
Well i just mean, a year later and its just sort of on a par for the same money.
Caporegime
Yes, I've done it many times, for you even, in the same way that a power supply is not a 1:1 of what the system is pulling vs what the PSU is pulling at the wall, there are efficiency looses in the components and circuitry, so a CPU pulling 242 watts at the socket is pushing a fistful more watts at the power rail.
Last edited:
Isn't it the case that different motherboards apply different power/boost behaviours? What does 'stock' mean?
Intel Did It: Core i9-12900K CPU Review & Benchmarks vs. AMD
This review of the Intel Core i9-12900K CPU (Alder Lake) includes benchmarks versus AMD’s R9 5950X, 5900X, and more. Intel is gunning for position as the bes...
www.youtube.com
245watt in this review, and I've seen similar elsewhere - including up towards 300 and beyond when the motherboard fails to apply restrictions properly (what's going on here in the Multi thread load chart - edit, that's total system consumption)
Lucky it's significantly faster then at pretty much the same draw! efficiency FTW
Last edited:
It was Intel's move to start building space heaters. Wonder why?
If rumours of 13900K (Raptor Lake) running 70-80C at full load are correct, then it would seem AMD have started building space heaters! Perhaps they hired the Bulldozer design team back, after Jim Keller left.