Soldato
Can you try ECO 65W, would be good to find out if they do better at low power. 7950X at ECO 65W get ~31K in CB23 and all-core clocks to ~4.1 - 4.2Ghz.
Will test that tonight when I get back from work
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.
Can you try ECO 65W, would be good to find out if they do better at low power. 7950X at ECO 65W get ~31K in CB23 and all-core clocks to ~4.1 - 4.2Ghz.
I was looking at the 7800X3D to replace my 5 7600 but after watching this ime not sure
eny thoughts im on a 4k monitor
Is it unreasonable to suggest that AMD are simply hitting the limits of safety on this node process, and wish to avoid a similar physically destructive issue that Intel are dealing with?
Yeah, Anad might be on to something.Consider - we still don't know exactly why AMD recalled/delayed initial launch, as far as I'm aware there's zero evidence to suggest a significant change in the bus technology, the TDP/power delivery has been cut. Quite late on I may add, and I'm not convinced this is purely for "efficiency" claims, the 9950X should have the top binned cores for at least one of it's CCXs. If this theory of aggressive core parking due to deliberate software changes pans out to be true then the next question is what do all of these things suggest?
Is it unreasonable to suggest that AMD are simply hitting the limits of safety on this node process, and wish to avoid a similar physically destructive issue that Intel are dealing with?
Compared to the Ryzen 9 7950X, we are seeing a slight increase in latencies within a single CCX. The SMT "advantage", where two logical cores sharing a single physical core have a lower latency, appears to be gone. Instead, latencies are consistently around 20ns from any logical core to any other logical core within a single CCX. That average is slightly up from 18ns on the 7950X, though it's not clear what the chief contributing factor is.
More significantly – and worryingly so – are the inter-CCD latencies. That is, the latency to go from a core on one CCD to a core on the other CCD. AMD's multi-CCD Ryzen designs have always taken a penalty here, as communicating between different CCDs means taking a long trek through AMD's Infinity Fabric to the IOD and back out to the other CCD. But the inter-CCD latencies are much higher here than we were expecting.
For reference, on the Ryzen 9 7950X, going to another CCD is around 76ns. But in Ryzen 9 9950X, we're seeing an average latency of 180ns, over twice the cost of the previous generation of Ryzen. Making this all the more confusing, Granite Ridge (desktop Ryzen 9000) reuses the same IOD and Infinity Fabric configuration as Raphael (Ryzen 7000) – all AMD has done is swap out the Zen 4 CCDs for Zen 5 CCDs. So by all expectations, we should not be seeing significantly higher inter-CCD latency here.
Our current working theory is that this is a side-effect of AMD's core parking changes for Ryzen 9000. That cores are being aggressively put to sleep, and that as a result, it's taking an extra 100ns to wake them up. If that is correct, then our core-to-core latency test is just about the worst case scenario for that strategy, as it's sending data between cores in short bursts, rather than running a sustained workload that keeps the cores alive over the long-haul.
more suspicious is increase in latency between two SMT threads on same core from 5-6 to 18-1920ns from 18ns is nothing
more suspicious is increase in latency between two SMT threads on same core from 5-6 to 18-19
this smells like a result of vulnerability mitigation, spending time to synchronise with higher lever memory
and maybe the real reason why Intel gave up on hyperthreading, unable to solve this problem without taking same kind of penalty
yeah, thats definitely driven by server worldTrue, i missed that bit.
I do find some of these security mitigations a bit OTT, if someone can hack in to my computer from the Internet then yeah, fix that _____ but if it takes someone with equipment needed to hack in to my motherboard physically at my computer..... i'm not worried about that.
and maybe the real reason why Intel gave up on hyperthreading, unable to solve this problem without taking same kind of penalty
Might be better as you had a 7x3D chip before the swap, AMD is been silly trusting game bar, MS ***** everything up.Note: This is not a clean OS install. Just took my 7950X3D out and installed the 9950X.
Looks like you got a good one!Added more screenshots to my post above as I tried out some negative curve optimiser.