I'd say the real answer is if you do see any issues just turn the odd setting down a notch. I'm sitting it out on my 7600 until the next X3D chip has settled down in price.
-
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 5 rumours
- Thread starter Grim5
- Start date
Soldato
It's called thread balancing, just because a Core doesn't show as being 100% utilized doesn't mean it's not bottlenecking. You can easily test it just by - underclocking or overclocking. If you get more / less performance, then there you have it, you are running into a cpu bottleneck.
Associate
So there is no bottlenecking these graphs below? Just RT benchmark graphs? Which I am yet to see.
www.techpowerup.com
AMD Ryzen 5 7600 Review - Affordable Zen 4 for the Masses
Ryzen 5 7600 is AMD's most-affordable Zen 4 processor. It retails for only $230 and even comes with a heatsink. The testing in our review confirms that the performance difference to the more-expensive 7600X is minimal, and gaming performance even beats the 5800X3D.
Soldato
Well, Im not really desperate to convince you, you do you, but check the video below. It's in tom's dinner area, look at the load on 16 cores. Now imagine what happens when you only get 6. The framerate drops to below 60 in this area with a 7600 but whatever, you don't have to believe meSo there is no bottlenecking these graphs below? Just RT benchmark graphs? Which I am yet to see.
AMD Ryzen 5 7600 Review - Affordable Zen 4 for the Masses
Ryzen 5 7600 is AMD's most-affordable Zen 4 processor. It retails for only $230 and even comes with a heatsink. The testing in our review confirms that the performance difference to the more-expensive 7600X is minimal, and gaming performance even beats the 5800X3D.
Toms dinner sort test
youtu.be
That’s probably a sensible way to look at things for a system that’s main use is gaming. Stay a hardware generation behind and save a fortune. As you say, you’re only maybe sacrificing a few settings and it’s probably indistinguishable anyway.
Last edited:
Associate
Well, Im not really desperate to convince you, you do you, but check the video below. It's in tom's dinner area, look at the load on 16 cores. Now imagine what happens when you only get 6. The framerate drops to below 60 in this area with a 7600 but whatever, you don't have to believe me
Toms dinner sort test
No, same. I'd like a 7700 - if I can justify it.
Video above shows 7600 handling Cyberpunk RT fine @ 1440p, but there are no doubt heavier parts of the game and that drive around seems to be missing err all cars and people.
Soldato
Lol, in the video he is playing at 30-35 fps, sure, if you want to play at those framerates yeah, 6 cores are more than fine.. You can probably even get away with 4.
And yeah, city looks very empty, wtf did he do?
Last edited:
You've summed up my new strategy
I think that way you can stay current, have most of the bugs ironed out and not pay the FOMO tax
Associate
Well I don't know what RT framerates are supposed to be, I'd be playing with path tracing and DLSS, but I'd need a more playable framerate so that might not be for a while.
I did notice a core reach 99% in Spiderman RT though
but if Zen 5 gets the apparent 20% IPC uplift then that should be fine / back to 8600 / 6 cores.If however something like Starfield is a) good and b) needs 8 cores then I'll be all over the 8700, probably.
Last edited:
Associate
zen5 sounding better and better
Permabanned
I'm very interested in what kind of design they will use. Zen 2, Zen 3, and Zen 4 employ a very similar design where the memory controller is located in the middle, with chiplets positioned next to it. Although this design gives them an advantage over Intel, it has its drawbacks, such as relatively high latency. I assume that due to the distance, the memory controller cannot operate at very high speeds. Can they bring the chiplets closer to the controller, and how would that affect latency and the speed of the memory controller?
Don't expect any major design change.
Memory controller is rumored to be refreshed to support higher speeds than current DDR5-6400, but thats about it.
Infinity fabric could get faster and/or wider
Both would improve latency a little.
But no physical layout change
Associate
- Joined
- 28 Sep 2018
- Posts
- 2,424
IF will need more bandwidth if the mem speeds are going to go up.
also if performance is rumored to be 20-30% higher (IPC + clock improvement) need more bandwidth to not starve the cores
Permabanned
They will definitely have to improve the Infinity Fabric if they want to achieve such a significant performance leap. The question is how much the current design they have been using for years is a bottleneck for such a performance jump. Will they need to make drastic changes in order to more easily achieve all of this?
Massive amounts of cache most likely and also L4 like Intel is planning.
No cut down cores/e-cores for Ryzen 8000 series desktop CPUs confirmed:
wccftech.com
They say that the scheduling between larger and smaller cores can be tricky...
Max core count will be 16, still on track for 2024 release.
Might see e-core like cores used in lower power devices, maybe laptops? Seems appropriate.
AMD Says It Won't Follow Intel's P-Core & E-Core Hybrid Approach, Talks Zen 5, x86S & More
AMD has said they won't be following Intel's approach to Hybrid cores and architectures and also talked about what to expect from Zen 5 CPUs.
wccftech.com
They say that the scheduling between larger and smaller cores can be tricky...
Max core count will be 16, still on track for 2024 release.
Might see e-core like cores used in lower power devices, maybe laptops? Seems appropriate.
Last edited:
Some strange answers there
Like AMD saying they'd like to offer more than 16 cores for Ryzen 8000 desktop, but can't due to memory bandwidth restrictions on the dual channel platform. Mhm... that's odd given 16 cores worked fine on DDR4 with 30-40GB/s and now we have DDR5 doing ~100GB/s and he's saying it's too little bandwidth for increasing core count lmao
Like AMD saying they'd like to offer more than 16 cores for Ryzen 8000 desktop, but can't due to memory bandwidth restrictions on the dual channel platform. Mhm... that's odd given 16 cores worked fine on DDR4 with 30-40GB/s and now we have DDR5 doing ~100GB/s and he's saying it's too little bandwidth for increasing core count lmao
Last edited:
They should look at the design flaws with the existing 12/16 core CPUs. The latency problem means that the 8 core Ryzen 7000 series CPUs often outperform those with higher core counts in latency sensitive tasks like games.
Ideally you wouldn't split cores between different CCDs. Just design different types /sizes of single CCD. Performance should scale more linearly with higher core counts.
Higher core counts are not particularly desirable on vcache designs either.
Ideally you wouldn't split cores between different CCDs. Just design different types /sizes of single CCD. Performance should scale more linearly with higher core counts.
Higher core counts are not particularly desirable on vcache designs either.
Last edited:
You need to look into how the infinity fabric operates. Moving to 32 cores with the current configuration could essentially halve the performance. That’s my horribly over simplistic assessment.