David89

16 hours ago, Karthanon said:

(Oh noes, a whole 4 cents a mile / 2.5c a kilometer, whatever shall I do).  Consumable, like electricity. Not caring.  Sure, you may pay less per km, but on a long trip I don't need to worry about range anxiety, nor sitting in one place for an hour while my car charges.

You can say the word 'gas', you know. You won't get struck down by the EV Fairy.
 

To me, the funniest thing about that argument is, one can apply that to everything. Why use a 7950X, when a 7600 is more than sufficient?

The simple fact of the matter is: We could all go back to planned economy and only produce that, that's actually needed and "the best" for all. Does anyone in their right mind want that? No. Thing x is more expensive, yes, does it matter? No, if that's what i want or if that product is better suited for what i need it do to.

Apart from that, that number is mighty different in all parts of the world. For the BEV example, if you rent an apartment in Germany, you have to drive to chargers. Most of these are fast chargers, making them ridiculously expensive (like 80 cents per kwh). Even with projected E-Fuel/Synthetic Fuel prices of ~ 2,50 Euro per Liters, a BEV that averages 18 kWh/100km  would cost in excess of 14 Euros per 100 km. My Mazda CX-60 Diesel can be driven with less than 5 l/100 km, at 2,50 Euro per Liter that would make for 12,50 per 100 km. The funny thing is, I'm fueling up with HVO Diesel at the moment (synthetic fuel, 90% less Co2)...for 1,82 Euros per Liter. It's expected that the price rises to roughly 2 Euros, but not much more than that, making it 10 Euros per 100 km. Sure, there are BEVs that are using only 14 kWh per 100 km and you could argue that most flats/apartments will get chargers that are a lot cheaper...but that's at least 10 years off.

Now - if we do that exact calculation with used cars...BEVs are even more expensive. One of the cheapest BEVs right now is the Fiat 500E or in Europe especially the Dacia Spring (which is not a car i would driven, even gifted). The Fiat in Germany is roughly 30k Euros. No idea how it is in Canada, but for 10k Euros you get lot's of cars, like a Golf 1.6 TDI that's really easy to drive at around 5 l/100km (probably even less). Let's add 5k in savings to keep the car "alive" for the next 10 years and add the costs for driving it 200.000 km (20k per year is on the upper end for Germany...probably the same for canada?) - plus 18k in fuel, plus let's say 14k in upkeep (insurance, tax, etc). 34k in 10 Years - that's pretty cheap (roughly 280 Euros per Month)

Every single BEV will be more expensive...hence, buying a new car is stupid.

Meh. Another one of those Intel Videos. 56 Cores are great and such, but they are getting actually boring. I'd really like to see EPYC in one of those Videos.

Although i get, that there is no Motherboard on AMDs side, that can compete with that. Still. A comparison between the Opteron Piledriver and EPYC would also be...uh...Epic.

Interesting. Anyone noticed, that Gadi Evron was in the same military unit, as the other guys from CTS...?
Also, that BOTH Ido Li On and Yaron Luk-Zilberman contradicted Gadi Evron, who said "I can confirm they have a PoC on everything."

Quote

 

ILO: We are in touch them, but they have not gone through the materials yet. They might decide to do that – we are going to see.

YLZ: They are a collaborating with us, so they have seen quite a bit of the findings, but unlike Trail of Bits they have not got the full information, the step-by-step.

 

I'm still going with my first assessment of the whole ordeal: Gadi Evron was part of the whole thing from the beginning...

And Trail of Bits right away said, it's no where near as bad, as they say.

And that's exactly why there are different stages of severity of Bugs. This whole thing is just not a security issue. Those are some very nasty and bad bugs - but you can't to anything with them, unless you actually got in to the system with some security holes.

They need to be fixed, yes, but they are rather low on the priority list. Although, as we have come to know AMD, i'm pretty sure there is a new AGESA in a few Weeks, that completely fixes those issues.

8 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Already talked about that earlier.

1) I think it is only a partial disable of it, not fully.

2) Disabling security features because they do more harm than good is not exactly a great situation to be in.

1) I have it disabled and don't have any devices relating to the PSP in Device Manager, or even DMESG on Linux. Nothing. Enabled there are a few things that hint at the PSP.

2) IMHO that's a design flaw with X86. Has been the case with many, many things over the years. Intel ME, many TPM devices, DRM functions or even Kinibi.

Quote

IC: As some of these attacks go through TrustZone, an Arm Cortex A5, and the ASMedia chipsets, can you speak about other products with these features can also be affected?

ILO: ...The client works on AMD Ryzen machines but it also works on any machine that has these ASMedia chipsets and so quite a few motherboards and other PCs are affected by these vulnerabilities as well. If you search online for motherboard drivers, such as the ASUS website, and download ASMedia drivers for your motherboard, then those motherboards are likely vulnerable to the same issues as you would find on the AMD chipset. We have verified this on at least six vendor motherboards, mostly the Taiwanese manufacturers. So yeah, those products are affected.

Quote

IC: ...How do you marry the fact that you are requesting mitigations and not providing any detail for anyone to replicate the issues? ...

YLZ: I would add that we can’t assume that we are the only people who have been looking into those processors and found problems there. So what we are saying is that in addition to ourselves, if anyone has mitigations against them, we are happy to share them with the company and to receive it from individuals.

IC: Even though that not producing the details actively limits who can research the vulnerabilities?

YLZ: Yes.

Man. Those guys are absolutely laughable.

Hey, maybe i should search for some random fourth stage attacks, that haven't been fixed for years. For those who do not know what the stages are:

Although you could even argue, that those are stage six attacks, since you are corrupting "something" (be it the ASMedia Controller or the PSP)

I also just had a bit of a play with deactivating the PSP in my UEFI. That works and there is no PSP and TPM Device anymore.

Edit: Even Trail of Bits says, those attacks are not viable. https://blog.trailofbits.com/2018/03/15/amd-flaws-technical-summary/

Quote

This level of effort is beyond the reach of most attackers

15 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

[SNIP]

the FRACK? Are you for real? The whole reason why "we" defend AMD is because THE ONLY thing that may be a real problem for AMD is the ASMedia Shit - and even that is probably not even AMDs fault. It's about the "HOW" this is going down. If there are security flaws - so be it. But that whole smear campaign against AMD is an absolute shitshow, because Intel has the same vulnerabilities in their ME. That's btw one big reason why many thousands signed an open letter to AMD to make their PSP OpenSource to prevent this kind of stuff.

The rest of all of those "vulnerabilities" are present on EVERY FRACKING system! Holy mother of Jesus are you dense. Btw, for a good read about why you are already FUC**D big time when code is running at those kinds of levels: https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20060508-22/?p=31283

I'm done here.

33 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

I don't have to repeat my claim to be right, because I am right.

Do you not understand how computers work? There is nothing here which requires physical access to the computer. Nothing at all. Not even the BIOS attack.

Can you please explain what you think is possible with physical access that isn't possible remotely on a computer?

 

Are you really going to try and discredit Dan Guido by saying he was paid by them? He is a security consultant which verified their findings as an independent third party.

He is also very known in the security industry.

First of all: Dan Guido said that himself.

Second: You just disqualified yourself from EVERY viable discussion with that kind of statement. How old are you? 14?

Third: I'm a Sysadmin, so i do actually know a few things about computers. I may not be a security expert, but i do know my way around secure systems. Let's assume those vulnerabilities are real. For Ryzenfall 1-4 the first step is to get through the VSM, which was introduced with Windows 10. After that, you'll need to get access to the LSASS (Local Security Authority Subsystem Service), which has also been reworked with Windows 10 (split in different and isolated threads that can't be accessed directly) and makes it pretty much impossible to gain any access to anything hardware related without any Admin rights. Now, even if you have full Admin rights: You need a driver that has write access to the PSP. After that you have to get the right Bios hashes for the bios in question.

Same applies to Fallout 1-3 - only difference is that it uses the Bootloader of the SP.

ALL of that implies however, that you've cracked the Microsoft VSM, which would give you access to EVERY system and not only AMD based ones. And you even need Admin rights to put Chimera to "use" - you'd also need physical access, because you have to restart Windows without the Driver Protection. Which is the case for all of those attacks, btw. So: you need physical access to ALL of those attacks, UNLESS someone has already deactivated the driver protection on that system.

So: 3 of those attacks need a bios flash. The rest of those need drivers. Ever tried to install drivers remotely on Windows? Ever tried to install - even signed but not vendor correct - drivers?

Basically, if you go through all of that trouble, EVERY System is vulnerable, not just an AMD one.

Still: There are NO technical details inside the Whitepaper from CST, so all of that are just assumptions based on what the results "should" be.

Just now, Razor01 said:

 

 

Can you do bios flashes over the inet?  You have your answer then.

No. I don't, because either i completely misunderstood how the PSP and UEFI work, or i am right in that those are separated "enough" so that this can't be exploited in that way. Also, at least on my board i have to have the UEFI Network stack enabled to flash over the Internet, which i don't and as a Sysadmin it is standard policy in many companies to also turn that feature off.

3 minutes ago, dtaflorida said:

The Tomshardware article states that:

A PSP security flaw was disclosed in the beginning of this year, but everyone’s attention quickly moved to Meltdown and Spectre after that.

So maybe they did give more than 24hr of notice?

Timeline
========
09-28-17 - Vulnerability reported to AMD Security Team.
12-07-17 - Fix is ready. Vendor works on a rollout to affected partners.
01-03-18 - Public disclosure due to 90 day disclosure deadline.

Everyone's attention moved to Meltdown and Spectre, because the PSP was already fixed.

1 minute ago, LAwLz said:

This is completely false. You do not need physical access to use these exploits.

I repeat, you do NOT need physical access to use these exploits. Please stop saying this because it is false.

 

And "many other security experts" are saying that this is not absolute bullcrap.

Why are you so hellbent on defending AMD and spreading misinformation about this?

Please prove me wrong with data. I'm sorry, but i give a crap about your statement if you can't back it up with something else than one guy on Twitter saying he had access to the technical reports. And i don't care if he has 13 years of experience, he's still only one guy.

And you repeating your claim won't make it right.

Those "many other security experts" are still (it's around 23:20, 13th March of 2018, Euro Time) only that one guy. Where as at least four (!) said, that it's highly unlikely to be having any impact.

And why are you so hellbent on making sure everyone believes ONE source?

9 minutes ago, Energycore said:

For me the biggest tell on this one is that the researchers violated standard procedure on the time given before public disclosure.

[snip]

Alright, definitely comforting when someone expert in the matter agrees with one

I expect this to die off by thursday.

Not only did they violate standard procedure, they made an extremely bad choice to be in the same bed with a shady companie that has a known history of manipulating stock markets with false claims.

I'm not that optimistic though. The only real positive thing is, that AMD's PSP doesn't have the Network stack built in, like Intel's ME. Even if AMDs PSP is as pitted as swiss cheese, it won't matter, because they are not vulnerable from the outside.

Edit: About Dan Guido - he specifically states, he has been paid by CST and "all 13 Flaws have been confirmed", while others already laid waste to some of those flaws, because they are simply not flaws "per se".

Personally, i REALLY would like to know, how and why Dan Guido has said anything at all. Many other Security Experts are saying that pretty much all of that is - at least until now - absolute bullcrap.

BTW, The much bigger question is: IF there is some merit to the PSP being vulnerable (read: Same problem as Intels ME, that STILL haven't been fixed fully, mind you!) - how can it be possible to bypass the Windows 10 VSM, that Microsoft praised as one of the absolute killer security features? By design it should be impossible to run unprotected code, that isn't hashed correctly by the LSASS.

Having to need physical access to the machine is a must in all of those cases, so even IF there are real flaws in the System from "the inside" - what do they matter if the attacker has physical access to your machine?

2 hours ago, LAwLz said:

Edit: Also, regardless of whether or not it is a smear campaign (and regardless of who is behind it), the information and potential exploits should be taken seriously. You don't ignore potentially serious issues just because you don't like how the information was presented or obtained.

No. It doesn't, especially not if the Whitepaper is as badly written as that. Especially considering what background "Viceroy" (the company behind CST) has. They have a background of manipulating stock and are currently under investigation from many around the world. Most notably Germany for crashing the ProSieben stock last week.

53 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

AdoredTV is a drooling moron who doesn't know what he is talking about 80% of the time.

And yes, "glued together" is in fact the correct term for what AMD is doing with their processors.

Can you do something else, or is throwing swear words and bad mouthing people everything you can do? Have you studied that somewhere? I'd like to know that course, maybe i can jump down to your standard.

43 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Ah yes, because we all know how reliable and unbiased /r/AMD are when it comes to AMD news.

Anyway, even if the research firm is shady, doesn't mean they might be correct in their findings.

Many at /r/AMD are everything but biased. They heavily favour AMD - me included - which COULD be bias, but most definitely isn't. Same goes for AdoredTV. "Bias" is something extremely unreasonable, but "we" (those, who favour AMD over Intel under many, many circumstances) have reasons for it. Which makes it - by definition - unbiased.

@Topic: It's absolute BS.

https://www.moneyweb.co.za/in-depth/investigations/viceroy-unmasked/

Their Office is made up from stock photos and green screen.

Basically, if you've got Admin rights on a PC, you can do everything you want with that thing. No shit...

5 minutes ago, JDE said:

The Ryzen 3 1200 has IPC between Has well and Broadwell. The i5 4460 is certainly much better in most tasks over the FX 8150. I'd like to know where YOU got that information.

 

A old i7 goes for $150, not 250.

Yeah, sorry, i just realized, i accidentally switched charts. But:

https://www.techspot.com/review/1474-ryzen-vs-older-budget-cpus/

https://www.techspot.com/review/1546-intel-2nd-gen-core-i7-vs-8th-gen/

Therefore, i still don't think going with an 4460 is a good choice. (Unless you absolutely do not want to spend the money for DDR4...)

On 2/4/2018 at 7:58 AM, JDE said:

1200 is slightly better than the i5 4460. Nothing to look for.

Edit: Yes, yes, i realized i switched charts.

23 hours ago, LAwLz said:

You can't be serious, right? You don't actually believe this verbal diarrhea that you just posted?

 

Intel posted a fairly detailed explanation of the issue very quickly after it was announced, and ever since then they have been working hard creating patches for the issues.

They have also already announced that their upcoming chips will have implemented hardware level fixes. They announced that last week as you can see in this thread titled "Upcoming Intel CPUs to address Meltdown and Spectre vulnerabilities on sillicon level".

On top of that they have worked with several vendors (software and hardware partners) to make sure the updates work and gets applied.

 

Intel really has done everything in their power to make the best of the situation.

If there is one company that has "kept their mouth shut and counted their money" throughout this incident it's AMD.

I'll fire that right back: You can't be serious, right?

Intel did everything in their power to make the best of the situation - yes, that is the only thing in your post i agree with.

Intel knew about the Problem for at least 8 Months and they did absolutely nothing. They didn't make Microcode updates before hand, they where caught "off guard".

Intel made Microcode Updates that bricked computers.

Intel tried to sling mud against other manufactures.

Intel tried to cover things up.

And the worst of all: Intel tried to make the patches Optional. Linus Torvalds doesn't explode like that without any reason. The Kernel Patches Intel supplied where absolute pieces of impudence. Intel is probably the most childish company on this god damn planet - they can't take responsibility unless forced to as has been proven many many times over the years. IMHO it's even worse than Volkswagen, but since nearly every Computer runs with an Intel "thing" inside, nobody seems to care as Intel's PR Department is rather good in covering things up.

Intel does damage control, but those are no solutions to their abominable business practices. Even the google researchers said, that with a Ryzen, they couldn't replicate the attack - unless you set Kernel Parameters in Linux, which on most distributions are turned off by default. And Spectre 1 is easily fixed with a Software Update.

Question is: What's your budget limit?

AMD Epyc 7281 + Supermicro H11DSi + a 128 GB ECC Kit...that's around 2900€ in Germany right now. Not sure what the price is going to be for you.

49 minutes ago, mihapiha said:

 

Your advice is much appreciated and I would like to make sure you understand, I haven't made up my mind. I am still torn; very much so.

Sorry - i've read what i wrote again - sounds a bit "mean". Wasn't my intention.

49 minutes ago, mihapiha said:

The TR4 Build I'm looking at ist the following:

 

- Asus ROG Zenith Extreme

- Corsair Vengeance RGB DIMM Kit 32GB (DDR4-3200 MHz)

- AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X

- EK Water Blocks EK-FB ASUS ROG ZE RGB Monoblock

 

Total cost locally: about 1.750 - 1.800 EUR 

 

Alternatively I was looking at a X299 core system:

 

- ASUS ROG Strix X299-E Gaming

- Corsair Vengeance RGB DIMM Kit 32GB (DDR4-3200 MHz)

- Intel Core i9-7900X, 10x 3.30GHz

- EK Water Blocks EK-FB ASUS Strix X299-E RGB Monoblock

- EVGA Pro SLI-HB-Bridge, 60mm (due to the new MB PCIe layout)

 

Total cost locally: about 1.750 - 1.800 EUR 

 

Alternatively, I could get the 8-core i7-7820X or the 8-core Threadripper 1900X and save a couple hundred EUR. And the third option I see is a pretested i7-7820X from Der8auer which I know I'll be able to run at 4.9 GHz.

That's a pretty unfair comparison, TBH. The ROG Strix X299-E Gaming is a totally different class of Board. You need to compare it with the ASUS ROG Rampage VI Extreme.

At least around here, both boards are around 500 €, i guess that's roughly the same range everywhere else. But the Strix X299-E is nearly 250€ cheaper. (as is the Strix X399-E Gaming)

But buying any of those CPUs for Gaming while arguing about better Framerates is - pardon my language - is stupid. Because if that is your intention, you need to get a 7700K (the 8700K is slower in some games even overclocked - unless you get it to 5 GHz).

Let's use the all time favourite Car comparison. The i9 is like a Bentley, the Threadripper is the Rolls-Royce. Both are extremely comfortable and can get you to your destination extremely fast. The Power of the RR is "adequate" and the Bentley is faster - but does anyone care about that in those regions? No. Because you buy those cars for other reasons, NOT performance.

Difference is: In the RR you can just swap the engine if something more suitable comes along. While on the Bentley, you will need to buy everything new.

49 minutes ago, mihapiha said:

The X299 makes much more sense gaming wise, however is yet again, Intel. And after I think more than a decade I do want to switch, especially because AMD is competitive. The recent Intel news in terms of security aren't good, nor is the fact that I need the damn 10-core CPU for 44 lanes seem reasonable. The MB doesn't even remotely get me excited and the new Rampage's RGB is just annoying. I know I can run that system for probably 3 years gaming wise, and probably I won't change much on it for the next couple to 3 years and then replace the core components again. Also proper memory support can't possibly be an issue @ 3200 MHz with an Intel CPU.

I'd love to have the Zenith MB, with the single core performance of the 7820X wihtout it being an Intel CPU, with all the annoying crap that Intel has.  Basically as soon as the Ryzen 2 comes out and hopefully allows clocks to 4.5 GHz, I will be more than happy. Either way I will not buy a CPU with a low core count anymore and I wan't to disable HT/SMT for 24/7 use, something I can't do with the 6-core 4930k I've been using now, without significant changes in performance.  

Well, in the end you have to prioritize if you are okay with 10-15 FPS less in games but - considering Intel finally putting more cores on their cpus - far better multi threading, and being able to just slot in a new CPU in 2 years and use it for another 2 years, or having to change the core components in 3 years again.

There are other reasons, why i would get the Threadripper. One pretty big one is Power Draw and the potential TR has in terms of optimizing. Even if it only gains 10% over the next few months.

2 hours ago, mihapiha said:

The benchmark which made me consider Intel over AMD was Civ 6: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-threadripper-1950x-cpu,5167-5.html

My current CPU needs about 21 seconds for that AI Benchmark. 19 if I turn off HT. That game loves high frequencies apparently, and the idea was getting a very capable CPU and because I hardly ever need more than 8 cores for gaming, I'd deactivate HT. A Core i7-7820X could be overclocked past 4.5 GHz with my cooling (I hope) and with HT off I could improve the round time from 21 down to around 15 seconds, which would be nearly 30% faster. And that does feel like money well spend and me actually noticing a difference in gameplay.

The TR4 CPUs are at around the 20 seconds to maybe 18 second mark with SMT turned off and an overclock around the 4 GHz, which doesn't really make it that much of an improvement. However it would be so nice to switch to a TR4...

Actually, Civ 6 loves Clock and especially I/O. For that reasoning, you could go with an i3-8350K: http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/intel-core-i3-8350k-cpu,review-34095-4.html

Funny thing with Civ 6 Turn-Times is: They are heavily depended on SSD-Speeds, because it writes all those bits in the save file (apparently deactivating virus protection does help, as well as indexing). Especially 4k write. So first of all, i'd like to see a Benchmark AFTER Meltdown patches for Intel (AMD isn't affect by Meltdown, and Spectre 1+2 are not nearly as much of a performance penalty). So not only are they absolutely dependent on the SSD, they are rarely even tested. Also, Civ 6 is absolute crap. It runs on max. 4 Threads and even then it doesn't use them properly. Apparently in 2016 the game run a lot faster, than it does now.

2 hours ago, mihapiha said:

Indeed the Ryzen 2 and especially newer Threadripper generation will run on that MB, so I could change parts much more easily. Also the TR4 has no PCIe lane limitations, which is something Intel just doesn't want to provide unless you pay premium money. That is the big big plus point for any AMD rig. But I'd also have to worry about the possibility that the newer Gen will still be quite a few 100 MHz behind Intel, which really sucks. And who knows whether these CPUs (which are high-end) will be resellable in a few months time when the newer gen comes out. If you spend premium money on a MB would you buy a cheap used CPU?

Depends. If i plan to upgrade in a few months? Yes, i would. But: You have pretty much made up your mind, they way you are arguing. Because all those concerns you have: I bet you a whole new TR System, that you won't notice them, unless you put an FPS counter at the top and measure the time between turns in Civ 6.

2 hours ago, mihapiha said:

 

Ideally My rig will hold up for a few more months, but I am legit torn between the two systems and I cannot find the right solution. 

I really don't play any other game that utilises the processor that much. I only know that No Man's Sky, which I also play on a regular bases (even after +300h) won't run stutter-free with HT turned off. That means 6 cores + 2 GPUs for a game that poorly optimized is also no good, and I think it will benefit form additional cores.

I tell you if I could push the AMD CPUs to 4.2 GHz to 4.5 GHz than I'd absolutely favor the AMD TR4 over Intel. With the short-comings of AMD in terms of OC potential I am not sure if an TR4 would be justified right now.

Strictly speaking, even a 8700K i7 doesn't make any sense, if you just game. If you really just game, get an i5-8600K, overclock it to 5.1 GHz and be done.

For me, buying Intel is out of the question. There is not a single reason, why i would care for 10% more performance with that many trade-offs. Meltdown, Intel ME, Intel's business practice, Intel doesn't care shit about us gamers, many many bugs in Intel Software, horrible TIM and so on - the list goes on and on for me personally, to not buy anything from Intel ever again. Well - i guess it shows i'm kind of an AMD Fanboy as well, but i have reasons and facts for it.

Bottom line is: If you only play Civ 6 - just get a cheap i3 System with a good GPU and keep your other system for productivity. Or: Get an iPad Pro and play Civ 6 on that. I have no idea why, but turn times on that thing are around 10 seconds.

Basing your decision on turn times alone in Civ 6 is...well, not a good idea.

On 1/30/2018 at 6:44 PM, mihapiha said:

That does sound very AMD Fanboy-ish indeed. I am looking at reasons how to justify AMD, because I do like what the Ryzen has done for AMD and competition is always good. Unfortunately, due to the lower clock-speeds, specifically for gaming in the high-end sector, I cannot justify investing more money into a TR4 build, if a Core i7-7820X, 8x 3.6 GHz is basically just as expensive of a setup, however better for gaming...

By 5%.

As i said, the biggest reason to go TR/Ryzen is because you can simply upgrade, probably until Ryzen 4 comes out. TR4 and AM4 are just sockets, bot could run without the Chipset, because both are SOCs.

And lets be honest: Unless you are gaming at 720p or 1080p - there is simply no difference. Even at 1440p the difference is minute to say the least. At 4k it simply isn't there anymore. Also, the 99 Percentile FPS numbers are better or on par with the Intel for TR and Ryzen. Yes, they may not have the "leading" AVG Fps numbers, but who cares if the game has micro stutters? (although, with a four way SLI System, i don't think you'll notice them..)

Apart from that, in pretty much every Benchmark i've seen, the 7820X is slower than any TR, except Project Cars 2. But even there it's ~ 10%.

Considering what Intel has done over the last few Weeks/Months/Years, the question is: Do you have other means to justify buying Intel again, EXCEPT Gaming?

53 minutes ago, QuantumBit said:

Idk if we wanna risk it.. Last time this happened since he tried to OC.. Maybe I'll try to help him next time

Then he OCed wrong The only thing you have to do on those Asrock Boards is put the Clock Speed in and the Voltage. Try "3600" in the Frequency and "1.3" Volts on the VCore, save, reboot and run OCCT with the small preset. I like to Test day to day overclocking with the worst possible case, so i run the small preset for 60 Minutes and then AVX for another 60 Minutes. However, to dial in the OC, i just run it till the Temps are equalized (which takes generally 2-3 Minutes on Air), see if i'm okay with the Temps and either Dial back the VCore more OR ramp up the frequency. In Theory the 1200 should do 1.3V just fine on 3.6 GHz. However, i've seen 1200s even do 1.25V on 3.6 Ghz which is actually pretty damn impressive.

Anyway, you can't really destroy something as long as you don't go over 1.4VCore - so just try it^^ If it isn't happy, it just won't clock above a certain point (and obviously crash ). You can "lock" it on that Frequency, but the nice thing about Ryzen is - if you dial in the Frequency like that at least in my opinion it's a lot more forgiving about not enough Voltage. At this point, i'm pretty sure this has to do with XFR still "working" in terms of power regulation. (Came to that conclusion while logging the frequency changes with linux...)

5 minutes ago, QuantumBit said:

Thanks! It runs at 3.1 GHz and never goes above 50-60C

 

Good - but it can do so much more Even on that board you should get it to run at 3.6 GHz without any problem. Maybe even 3.7.

I kind of disagree with everything said in this thread Reasons why are as following:

• Gaming at 4K with two 1080s will STILL be a GPU Bottleneck. Every Benchmark i have seen, at 4k with a 1080ti, there is simply no difference.
• Ryzen+, 2 and 3 have been announced. Since Ryzen is an SOC, Motherboard doesn't make much difference any more. (Except DDR5) So switching from Ryzen to Ryzen+ or 2 on an X370 Board will still be a huge performance benefit.
• There are a number of reviews out there, that measure time under 30 FPS for any given CPU. Interestingly enough, on Anandtech the 8700K was actually pretty bad and had very high numbers of frames under 30 FPS. Interestingly enough, at release Ryzen was absolute crap in ROTR, even at 4K. With the 8700K review from Anandtech, Ryzen was at the top of the list - so either Anandtech "tuned" the results (which i highly doubt), or the updates helped pretty damn well. Oh and the 7700K has lost a few %.
• Biggest reason why for me is: Bang for the buck. For me personally i could not justify buying in to a platform, that has absolutely no upgrade path.

But - that is just my Opinion, based on the Reviews I've read.

In the end, the simple answer to the Question "When is a 4930K outdated" is: When you feel like it is. You have to do some testing for yourself, watch how the GPUs are loaded and so on.

Nope. Not worth it and probably won't work. Unless you get the2600K for free - then go for it

Right. First of all, Check if "OC Mode Change Switch" is on "ASROCK Settings"

Then go to "Advanced"

"Custom Pstates/Throttling" and Accept the Disclaimer

And check the settings here

It should be all on "Auto".

I also don't think it's a heat issue, because the lowest Ryzen can clock to, is 1.3 GHz and CPU-Z tends to be more "correct" than Task Manager.