Lawliet93

I see a 0% increase in non Amd games and a 19% increase in an Amd optimized game... Som joke's on you.

Nope, they said it is about 25% faster than a Vega64 not the rtx 2080. They specifically said it's in Paar with a rtx 2080.

They have never shown any performance numbers, where the radeon 7 would be 20%+ faster than the rtx 2080. What they did, is basically thrn being on paar.

It definitely does not have a disabled CCX, any core count would be made in a linear fashion. So for a 12c CPU it means, that they are using two six-core dies. It also makes more sense in terms of yields. Using defective dies for such a multi chip approach reduces costs in the long run. And they can be binned for speed, so we shouldn't sacrifice singlethreaded performance.

Amd is actually growing in the GPU market, currently they have about 36% of the market and Nvidia has lost some share. And if you take into account how many GPUs they have sold via consoles, than it's a totally different ballgame.

Nah, the next slide actually talks about nda and stuff and the one for the coffee lake family lifts on October, so Q4 release with limited availability https://www.cnews.cz/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/intel-roadmapa-procesory-cervenec-2018-hkepc-01.png

The first sentence in the roadmap literally says that intel is going to start manufacturing those 8c/16t CPUs at the end of Q3... Not that they are going to release them.

Why now? Those eight core CPUs are not coming out in Q3, so, yeah...

Could be a power limitation, my gtx 965m exceeds the limit of my power supply when I overclock it. Is your laptop plugged in, when you are gaming?

I expect a marginal, maybe 10-15% increase over the Pascal generation, something similar to the Fermi generation.

The gtx 1080 is basically on par with Vega 64, although the second one consumes much more power. Vega 56 is faster or equally fast as the gtx 1070. Rx 580 faster than the gtx 1060 6GB. Rx 570 faster than the gtx 1060 3GB. The rx 560 1024 competes well with the gtx 1050-1050ti. And the rx 550 trades blows with the gtx 1030.

Tell me how is there a lack of competition, when Amd actually has a similarly or brtter performing card in almost every price segment, except for the absolute high end.

You are, AMDs GPUs are great at undervolting and in the case of laptops, everyone should just undervolt their CPUs. Skylake, kaby Lake and coffee lake are great at it and you can reduce your temperatures by 5-10 °C.

But when, that's the question ?

Wtf are you talking about? Clock for clock, Amd is about 3% behind intel, there are only two reasons why intel is better let's say at gaming. They use higher clockspeeds and they are using a ring bus architecture which has lower latencies between cores when compared to AMDs infinity fabric and latencies between two ccxs. That's the only reason why Amd is behind, where have you found that type of information about the ipc difference? Do you even know what ipc means?

No, they are not more efficient than AMDs Ryzen chips.

You are wrong... The 7nm process offers clocks close to intels 14nm ++++ and they are actually increasing ipc by about 15%(according to Oc3d.com) so they might have an advantage over intel by about 10%. If they also change infinity fabrics latencies, they could have a winner in their hands.

AMD has made its Q3 financial results public, which show a dramatic increase in overall revenue and profits, even going over what Amd has estimated prior to this quarter. In my opinion, Amd is coming back to it's old results prior to bulldozer, which is great, because more revenue means more R&D, and thus more competition with better products. I hope, that we will see more revenue from epycs side of things and some much needed competition in the GPU market. Source oc3d.

How could they put so over 3500 Cuda cores in a 400mm2 die? The gp102 needs like 472mm2 for the same amount of cores. The 12nm process does not offer that type of density improvement when using high performance oriented libraries. However, it can offer up to 10% improvement in density.

I kinda hopped for more, like 15% higher clocks, but anything better than the original Ryzen is an improvement in my opinion. As for the intel is so much better than Amd in single core... Well, da... It's using like 30% higher clockspeeds, hell even ore in the case of the 8700k (hehe auto overclocking to 47GHz). Intel is reusing the same architecture for the third time... Like Wtf? No ipc gains since skylake. And using 720p for benchmarks is a fundamental error, because it only increases the number of drawcalls a cpu should do (no changes to the physics, AI, nothing). Having that, the limitation must not always be the cpu, it can be the API (anything lower than dx12, Vulkan is bad at managing those), the code, specific optimizations for an architecture, like in intels case... So the most accurate way to benchmark games are realword examples of actually playing the game (some games get hit the cpu harder, when using higher detail levels).

Did you undervolt your cpu? Have you changed your thermal paste for some liquid metal? What temperature is your GPU running at? Any pointers or words of advice you could give me before I try to do something similar?

Hi, do you have more pictures? Or even better, do you have a guide about the process making this mod?

Well, you can make them run on their max turbo speed, which is kind of similar to overclocking

Every intel cpu in the mobile space is overclockable, sort of. You can use throttlestop to make it run at its max turbo frequency and at the same time, you can undervolt it. Intel uses really voltage settings for their skylake and kaby Lake. I got mine i7 6700hq to 3,1GHz with - 165mV on the vcore and - 145mV on the cache

This is hard to believe, with my i7 3770k and a gtx 980ti I get around 120fps in bf1 using the highest graphics preset, so the issue is definitely not with your hw (ad it should be more powerful, than my combo). Try resetting your os and after that, do some changes to it, as described in the windows 10 optimization guide from tech yes city.