I9 7960X benchmarks released on LN2

[Vode]

47 minutes ago, jasonc_01 said:

I don't see how a 7960x is on the "bleeding edge" of anything. Skylake x is not a magical unicorn processor that is a revelation to computing, not by a long shot. Whereas threadripper is a revelation in terms of price disruption. 

 

The performance increases is pretty in line with where ryzen is against Broadwell E.  

I agree. 

 

Ryzen is a major revelation in several aspects, mostly due to CCX design:

 

1) Yields, easy to manufacture, leads into->

2) Cost, relatively cheap, high margins still lower cost for consumer

3) Scalability, more cores neither mean less clock speed nor less efficiency, nor worse temps

4) Power consumption, efficiency, temperature

 

And they achieve all of the above on an objectively worse process node than Intel. That puts the whole thing on another level. It really speaks for how good the design is in these aspects. Now they need to focus on Single core performance with some kind of next level XFR so they can achieve something similar to what Intel have done with Skylake-X and their Single core Turbo. Which admittedly is one of the things Intel have done right with this architecture, although the process enabling higher frequencies is a big part in that.

 

Imagine if both Intel and AMD would both source their chips from TSMC for example... Oh boy.

[done12many2]

1 minute ago, Vode said:

I agree. 

 

Ryzen is a major revelation in several aspects, mostly due to CCX design:

 

1) Yields, easy to manufacture, leads into->

2) Cost, relatively cheap, high margins still lower cost for consumer

3) Scalability, more cores neither mean less clock speed nor less efficiency, nor worse temps

4) Power consumption, efficiency, temperature

 

And they achieve all of the above on an objectively worse process node than Intel has. That puts the whole thing on another level. It really speak for how good the design is in these aspects. Now they need to focus on Single core performance with some kind of next level XFR so they can achieve something similar to what Intel have done with Skylake-X and their Single core Turbo. Which admittedly is one of the things Intel have done right with this architecture, although the process enabling higher frequencies is a big part in that.

 

Imagine if both Intel and AMD would both source their chips from TSMC for example... Oh boy.

 

I think what everyone continues to miss is that making the single core performance better is the expensive part.  Stronger cores are harder to make than more cores.  

 

Be careful what you ask for as you may see those great savings disappear.  

[The Benjamins]

2 minutes ago, Vode said:

I agree. 

 

Ryzen is a major revelation in several aspects, mostly due to CCX design:

 

1) Yields, easy to manufacture, leads into->

2) Cost, relatively cheap, high margins still lower cost for consumer

3) Scalability, more cores neither mean less clock speed nor less efficiency, nor worse temps

4) Power consumption, efficiency, temperature

 

And they achieve all of the above on an objectively worse process node than Intel. That puts the whole thing on another level. It really speaks for how good the design is in these aspects. Now they need to focus on Single core performance with some kind of next level XFR so they can achieve something similar to what Intel have done with Skylake-X and their Single core Turbo. Which admittedly is one of the things Intel have done right with this architecture, although the process enabling higher frequencies is a big part in that.

 

Imagine if both Intel and AMD would both source their chips from TSMC for example... Oh boy.

It is nice it is a great foundation. we could see a 5-10% clock improvement when zen+ lands, and then another 5-10% IPC + 5-10% clock bump when zen2 lands. which by then the single core performance gap should shrink even more.

[done12many2]

1 minute ago, The Benjamins said:

It is nice it is a great foundation. we could see a 5-10% clock improvement when zen+ lands, and then another 5-10% IPC + 5-10% clock bump when zen2 lands. which by then the single core performance gap should shrink even more.

 

The shrink would of course require that Intel didn't improve IPC either.  5 to 10% increases could and should be expected from both.

[Vode]

1 minute ago, done12many2 said:

 

I think what everyone continues to miss is that making the single core performance better is the expensive part.  Stronger cores are harder to make than more cores.  

 

Be careful what you ask for as you may see those great savings disappear.  

Well it depends how you look at it. 

 

From a RND maybe ST performance needs more research and development, but from a manufacturing standpoint more cores mean bigger dies which translates into worse yields, higher cost for the manufacturer and less margin.

 

This is one aspect Ryzen almost completely negated with the CCX design. 

 

Factoring in how much semiconductor companies have to invest in manufacturing dies and how much money they make with selling chips it certainly can't be much less significant than the RND for ST performance.

[VagabondWraith]

2 minutes ago, done12many2 said:

 

I think what everyone continues to miss is that making the single core performance better is the expensive part.  Stronger cores are harder to make than more cores.  

 

Be careful what you ask for as you may see those great savings disappear.  

What I find funny is the power consumption argument. I see many people hoping Zen 2 raises clock speeds, yet in order for Zen to get near parity with Intel, you're looking at 4.5+ clock speed. By doing that, the AMD fanboy argument of power consumption goes completely out the window. It always gives me a good chuckle to see that mentioned.

[Vode]

4 minutes ago, The Benjamins said:

It is nice it is a great foundation. we could see a 5-10% clock improvement when zen+ lands, and then another 5-10% IPC + 5-10% clock bump when zen2 lands. which by then the single core performance gap should shrink even more.

Man this just gets me even more excited since these 10-15% in ST performance will almost 100% scale with well optimised MT workloads! No throttling, no bad temps, power consumption that scales in an almost linear fashion. 

 

How can people not get excited behind the technology behind Ryzen as a whole? LOL

[The Benjamins]

4 minutes ago, done12many2 said:

 

The shrink would of course require that Intel didn't improve IPC either.  5 to 10% increases could and should be expected from both.

I thought Intel improvements has been more around 4% IPC in the past few generations. 

 

I expect AMD to have bigger improvements, but not to the point we're they pass Intel.

[done12many2]

Just now, VagabondWraith said:

What I find funny is the power consumption argument. I see many people hoping Zen 2 raises clock speeds, yet in order for Zen to get near parity with Intel, you're looking at 4.5+ clock speed. By doing that, the AMD fanboy argument of power consumption goes completely out the window. It always gives me a good chuckle to see that mentioned.

 

Speaking from a purely performance standpoint, Intel will remain the strongest processor core for core and clock for clock for some time to come.  It will also remain the more expensive option.  That's just how shit works. 

 

I don't see any real problem with people hoping that AMD does better as I want it to happen myself.  The only problem I have is when we start theorizing what could happen in the future or just flat out exaggerating the current.  Leave that shit for the future and the real experts. 

[done12many2]

2 minutes ago, The Benjamins said:

I thought Intel improvements has been more around 4% IPC in the past few generations. 

 

I expect AMD to have bigger improvements, but not to the point we're they pass Intel.

 

How do you seriously expect it when you have absolutely no track record of their improvements to go on?  How long did it take them to simply catch up?

 

There is absolutely no indication that their IPC improvements will ramp at any rate better or worse than Intel so you are purely speculating at best.  

[Vode]

15 minutes ago, VagabondWraith said:

What I find funny is the power consumption argument. I see many people hoping Zen 2 raises clock speeds, yet in order for Zen to get near parity with Intel, you're looking at 4.5+ clock speed. By doing that, the AMD fanboy argument of power consumption goes completely out the window. It always gives me a good chuckle to see that mentioned.

AMD wouldn't do that. We'd see Zen+ at the same 95W TDP. Just don't expect 4.5Ghz. More like 4.2Ghz and maybe 4.4Ghz on 7nm. 

 

People are getting excited about core amount vs. power consumption in HEDT, where Ryzen smokes anything Intel currently has because it scales so well. The 1800X compares to the 7700k which has half the cores, it's ridiculous. And the 7700ks efficiency goes out the window as well when overclocking. Intel can achieve higher clock speeds before the efficiency takes a dive, currently about 600Mhz+. 

[done12many2]

2 minutes ago, Vode said:

AMD wouldn't do that. We'd see Zen+ at the same 95W TDP. Just don't expect 4.5Ghz. More like 4.2Ghz and maybe 4.4Ghz on 7nm. 

 

People are getting excited about core amount vs. power consumption in HEDT, where Ryzen smokes anything Intel currently has because it scales so well. The 1800X compared to the 7700k which has half the cores, it's ridiculous. And the 7700ks efficiency goes out the window as well when overclocking. Intel can achieve higher clock speeds before the efficiency takes a dive, currently about 500Mhz+. 

 

Your ability to know what AMD and Zen+ can and will do is impressive.  

[Vode]

2 minutes ago, done12many2 said:

 

Your ability to know what AMD and Zen+ can and will do is impressive.  

Thanks bro.

[Dylanc1500]

6 minutes ago, done12many2 said:

 

Your ability to know what AMD and Zen+ can and will do is impressive.  

IBM is going to have a 5.5 ghz, 24 core, 8 way multithreaded CPU that's overclockable and will kick Intel and AMD out.

 

 

hardly..

[done12many2]

1 minute ago, Dylanc1500 said:

IBM is going to have a 5.5 ghz, 24 core, 8 way multithreaded CPU that's overclockable and will kick Intel and AMD out.

 

 

hardly..

This is LTT bud. You can make up whatever you want here.

[The Benjamins]

16 minutes ago, done12many2 said:

 

How do you seriously expect it when you have absolutely no track record of their improvements to go on?  How long did it take them to simply catch up?

 

There is absolutely no indication that their IPC improvements will ramp at any rate better or worse than Intel so you are purely speculating at best.  

Ya it is mostly speculation.

 

The catch up was to abandoning the existing designs and start over.

 

I just figure AMD has more room to grow then Intel IPC wise which in turn usually would make it easier in the beginning.

 

Also I figure the move to more cores on Intel side would also allow AMD to catch up in single threaded performance.

[Dylanc1500]

1 minute ago, done12many2 said:

This is LTT bud. You can make up whatever you want here.

Hey if IBM wants to make a hop back in the consumer PC space (hell, even the just the prosumer/high-end enthusiast) I would be more than ok with it. 

[Princess Luna]

2 minutes ago, Dylanc1500 said:

Hey if IBM wants to make a hop back in the consumer PC space (hell, even the just the prosumer/high-end enthusiast) I would be more than ok with it. 

I think Qualcoom is more likely than IBM by nowadays.

[Vode]

3 minutes ago, Dylanc1500 said:

Hey if IBM wants to make a hop back in the consumer PC space (hell, even the just the prosumer/high-end enthusiast) I would be more than ok with it. 

lol what does IBM even do these days? Looking at their website trying to figure out what half of the stuff even means.

[Princess Luna]

1 minute ago, Vode said:

lol what does IBM even do these days? Looking at their website trying to figure out what half of the stuff even means.

IBM Watson, they are investing hardcore on self learning bots and all aside of course mainframes as always.

[Dylanc1500]

5 minutes ago, Vode said:

lol what does IBM even do these days? Looking at their website trying to figure out what half of the stuff even means.

Well they have power 9 out right now that is highly scalable both up and out. If you are in the database industry IBM is a pretty large deal, especially since they are the only one still making big iron. I deal with both POWER and x86 almost daily and I prefer dealing with power when it comes highly scalable workloads. Also the ease of use with NVlink and being the first ones with a release of PCIe 4.0 is a little significant.