• 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" thread (inc AM4/APU discussion) ***

Lol, not sure what your understanding of engineering samples are, but there are quite a few out there. All of which pretty much mirror the retail silicon for overclocking range in this instance. Just trying to put a plug on the misinformation that gets posted here.

The chap behind CanardPC(who leaked these scores) leaked the first Athlon 64 scores months before everybody else. They were clocked at 1.4GHZ and the interwebs had people saying AMD will fail because of low clockspeeds.

The Athlon 64 launched at 2.0GHZ and 2.2GHZ and the latter was the insanely priced FX51. OFC,we also had the first Phenom too,which did the opposite.

Hence,we can't really say AMD WON'T hit higher clockspeeds yet. ES are not really indicative of what final clockspeeds will be of Ryzen going by the history of AMD CPUs.

Plus AMD has is apparently using a new type of Turbo too - which looks very much like what Nvidia does for its GPUs,so you have a minimum range of base clock step-ups,but the max boost is more dependent on cooling,power,etc and none of these chips seem to have it working either.

The noise on forums is that these were motherboard validation CPUs which were tested.
 
Last edited:
BTW,here is the new type of Turbo AMD is using:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/10907...nvme-neural-net-prediction-25-mhz-boost-steps

SenseMI Stage 1: Pure Power

A number of recent microprocessor launches have revolved around silicon-optimized power profiles. We are now removed from the ‘one DVFS curve fits all’ application for high-end silicon, and AMD’s solution in Ryzen will be called Pure Power. The short explanation is that using distributed embedded sensors in the design (first introduced in bulk with Carrizo) that monitor temperature, speed and voltage, and the control center can manage the power consumption in real time. The glue behind this technology comes in form of AMD’s new ‘Infinity Fabric’.

sxE8dCz.jpg

‘What is this new Infinity Fabric?’ I hear you say. It was only explained in the context of that it provides control and through the Infinity System Management Unit it can adjust power consumption while keeping in mind everything else that’s happening. The fact that it’s described as a fabric suggests that it goes through the entire processor, connecting various parts together as part of that control. Whether this is something wildly different to what we saw in Carrizo, aside from being the next-gen power adjustment and under a new name, is hard to determine at this point but we are probing for more details.

The upshot of Pure Power is that the DVFS curve is lower and more optimized for a given piece of silicon than a generic DVFS curve, which results in giving lower power at various/all levels of performance. This in turn benefits the next part of SenseMI, Precision Boost.

SenseMi Stage 2: Precision Boost

For almost a decade now, most commercial PC processors have invoked some form of boost technology to enable processors to use less power when idle and fully take advantage of the power budget when only a few elements of the core design is needed. We see processors that sit at 2.2 GHz that boost to 2.7 GHz when only one thread is needed, for example, because the whole chip still remains under the power limit. AMD is implementing Precision Boost for Ryzen, increasing the DVFS curve to better performance due to Pure Power, but also offering frequency jumps in 25 MHz steps which is new.

L0M6QGg.jpg

Precision Boost relies on the same Infinity Control Fabric that Pure Power does, but allows for adjustments of core frequency based on performance requirements and suitability/power given the rest of the core. The fact that it offers 25 MHz steps is surprising, however.

Current turbo control systems, on both AMD and Intel, are invoked by adjusting the CPU frequency multiplier. With the 100 MHz base clock on all modern CPUs, one step in frequency multiplier gives 100 MHz jump for the turbo modes, and any multiple of the multiplier can be used on the basis of whole numbers only.

With AMD moving to 25 MHz jumps in their turbo, this means either:

The base frequency has reduced down to 25 MHz and AMD is able to implement a 136x multiplier to reach 3.4 GHz, or
AMD can implement fractional multipliers, similar to how processors in the early 2000s were able to negotiate 0.5x multiplier jumps, or
Precision Boost only applies to internal clocks that the user doesn’t see or control, but can assist with performance.

Without additional information, the second point in that list seems more in line with what would be possible. If we consider that Zen’s original chief designer was Jim Keller (and his team), known for a number of older generation of AMD processors, a similar technology might be in play here. If/when we get more information on it, we will let you know.

SenseMi Stage 3: Extended Frequency Range (XFR)

The main marketing points of on-the-fly frequency adjustment are typically down to low idle power and higher performance when needed. The current processors on the market have rated speeds on the box which are fixed frequency settings that can be chosen by the processor/OS depending on what level of performance is possible/required. AMD’s new XFR mode seems to do away with this, offering what sounds like an unlimited bound on performance.

VtulmgU.jpg

The concept here is that, beyond the rated turbo mode, if there is sufficient cooling then the CPU will continue to increase the clock speed and voltage until a cooling limit is reached. This is somewhat murky territory, though AMD claims that a multitude of different environments can be catered for the feature. AMD was not clear if this limit is determined by power consumption, temperature, or if they can protect from issues such as a bad frequency/voltage setting.

By the sounds of it, this is a dynamic adjustment rather than just another embedded look-up table such as P-states. AMD states that XFR is a fully automated system with no user intervention, although I suspect it will still have an on/off switch in the BIOS. It also somewhat negates overclocking if your cooling can support it, which then brings up the issue for overclocking in general: casual users may not ever need to step into the overclocking world if the CPU does it all automatically.

I imagine that a manual overclock will still be king, especially for extreme overclockers competing with liquid nitrogen, as being able to personally fine tune a system might be better than letting the system do it itself. It can especially be true in those circumstances, as sensors on hardware can fail, report the wrong temperature, or may only be calibrated within a certain range.

It does raise the question as to how overclockable Ryzen will be, how many SKUs will be unlocked, or if XFR may only be on certain processors. As the Zen microarchitecture is destined for server and mobile as well, XFR will have different connotations for both of those markets (some of which might not be welcome).

Apparently none of this was activated on ES and AMD said themselves no form of Turbo was activated on the ES they used.

Plus it makes more and more sense why the AMD Wraith cooler was introduced - its very close to £20 to £30 air coolers on the market. It does look like if you have reasonable cooling the CPU can actually boost past the defined base frequency range.

Until we can see leaks with all of this enabled,we can't really say exactly what clockspeeds Ryzen will boost to.

Only the 3.4GHZ base clockspeed number we do know from Lisa Su.

Edit!!

Another thing - we don't know the state of the AM4 motherboard stack either. For all of this tech to work,the motherboard BIOSes and power delivery needs to be in a decent state too.
 
Last edited:
its just same thing named differently.

look at all previous amd chips most did same.all smoke and mirrors and promos until we see the real figures.
 
@ CAT
Looks like if you use good cooling it could clock its self into the stratosphere ^^^^
Surly they are going to cap what it will clock its self to? i can see some people going to extra ordinary length for cooling to see how high it will clock its self.

Its great tech, interesting :)
 
Last edited:
None of the AMD samples tested actually have their fancy new Turbo boost activated either - even on 28NM bulk (which was a worse process than 32NM SOI),AMD managed to hit 4GHZ to 4.2GHZ boost clockspeeds with expanded BD cores(which were actually larger than the first ones).

If AMD can hit 4GHZ on 28NM bulk,I think they might probably be OK on 14NM.

I think there seems to be a hope for some reason AMD won't get the clockspeeds up.

Seems a weird hope,since we would actually want AMD to get reasonable clockspeeds,so Intel can drop prices on their SKUs,especially the 4C and 6C ones most of the people here want to buy.

I'm hoping for an affordable 6 core now, I can't afford to do a Zen platform change, 8 core chip and Vega all in one year so if I can replace my 4 core 8 thread chip with a 6 core 12 thread one that has slightly better core performance I'll be happy, If not I'll get Vega and wait until I can afford an 8 core (presuming it does what we hope).
 
They arent going to get away with close-to-Intel pricing in the enthusiast market if Zen overclocks poorly, ideally they want SR3 doing 4.5ghz+ and the SR7 which is probably going to be power constrained doing 4ghz+ with SR5 somewhere inbetween. If Zen tops out at 3.6-3.8ghz like the early Phenom II's did then they are going to have to be aggressive on pricing because people WILL pay extra for [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], average/typical overclocks are always a factor when buying.

Well we don't know how it will OC exactly yet, but a 30% to 40% cheaper CPU for equivalent performance is hardly "close to Intel pricing"! Of course, all this has to be taken with the caveat that Ryzen IS in fact a serious 6900k rival... we just don't know for sure. But if it is, then £700 will indeed be too expensive for many... but it's not for those people. But if the performance is there it WILL sell and see AMD resurge once again... then everyone wins.

The GPU argument has already been made, and it's totally valid. You wouldn't sniff at a Nvidia 1080 performance for £400-450 would you, because that's what a 30-40% price difference would equate to there. But somehow AMD need to be practically giving these chips away to get your interest. Right, makes sense lol!

Ryzen is an 8-core CPU... you can't fairly compare it to Kaby or anything other than the 6900k Broadwell-E as THAT is the market it will be targeting... all those high end well heeled enthusiasts who are looking at 6900k CPUs. THAT is where AMD will steal thunder from Intel. If the rumours are wrong though and they go REALLY aggressive with pricing, they could even undercut the 6-core 6850k, but that seems highly unlikely and unnecessary. Still, it will be targeting the lesser Intel chips with other products at lower price points further down the line, but it's just going for the big guns straight out the gate. Ryzen isn't just one single CPU lol! There will be a whole range.
 
Last edited:
6900k isn't really the broader target market. AMD have offered more cores for a considerable amount of time, if neither core or memory scale well with overclocking, you're left with something that's purely ok from a price perspective. I really wouldn't get overly excited, the least one expects the less disappointment you'll endure lol. Memory overclocking hasn't even been mentioned briefly here, which speaks words. This is the first platform to support DDR4. I would expect at least a few to be intrigued into how these things scale compared with Intel parts...
 
The boost scaling has been disabled in their hardware since carrizo, tonga and fiji,
It's called avfs, the fact that amd still haven't got it programmed is concerning for zen.
 
6900k isn't really the broader target market. AMD have offered more cores for a considerable amount of time, if neither core or memory scale well with overclocking, you're left with something that's purely ok from a price perspective. I really wouldn't get overly excited, the least one expects the less disappointment you'll endure lol. Memory overclocking hasn't even been mentioned briefly here, which speaks words. This is the first platform to support DDR4. I would expect at least a few to be intrigued into how these things scale compared with Intel parts...

It is if it scales and OCs well. If not, no, all this hype is going to deflate pretty quickly once proper reviews start to surface. We just have to hope they are smarter than this however, and have perhaps learned from previous errors. That may be asking too much from AMD though... I speculated months ago that they would screw this up somehow, but only time will tell...
 
I'm hoping for an affordable 6 core now, I can't afford to do a Zen platform change, 8 core chip and Vega all in one year so if I can replace my 4 core 8 thread chip with a 6 core 12 thread one that has slightly better core performance I'll be happy, If not I'll get Vega and wait until I can afford an 8 core (presuming it does what we hope).

I doubt you'll get much change out of £400 for a 6c/12t Zen.
 
BTW,regarding the sample its an A0 sample. Its stated in the CanardPC article,so is one of the early Ryzen samples,and that their motherboard cannot run later Ryzen ES.

So its not surprising Turbo is not fully functional and why the clockspeeds are so low.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom