Ryzen+ 2600x and 2300x cinebench/Cpu-Z results leak (probably fake)

[Prysin]

21 hours ago, cj09beira said:

This time around we have two videos of ryzen+ cpus running cinebench and Cpu-z.

the videos were submitted with a month between them, the first in October and the latest one in November 

 

the 2300x, is shown to be a 4c/4t part at 4ghz

results:

Cinebench: single core is 236cb and all cores is 855cb.

this puts it well above the record for a 1300x overclocked on hwbot.org which is at 4.5ghz with a score of 709cb

  Hide contents

Cpu-z: single core is 680 and all cores is 2585

 

 

the 2600x is shown to be a 6c/12t part with 4.2ghz clocks

results:

single core is 250cb and all cores is 1821cb.

the current 1600x cinebench record on hwbot.org is 1837 @ 5.445Ghz

  Reveal hidden contents

Cpu-z: single core 677 and all cores is 5180

which puts this cpu well ahead of a 8700k @ 5ghz 

 

verdict:

First the scores seem to be too high that alone would make people suspicious, but the cinebench program seems to detect the cpus far too well, as the 1600x record on hwbot has cinebench thinking its a 12c cpu with 12 threads, and shows the full name of the engineering sample instead of "Ryzen 1600x...."

these results really seem FAKE NEWS

 

personal opinion:

reaching a 5.4Ghz 1600x under ln2, with a 6 core ryzen+ chip seems excessive, even if the ryzen+ chip is overclocked

the benches are fake (probably) but i think its important to analyze them so that people stop using them too get hyped over ryzen+  

 

 

you do realize that just because a chip CAN reach 5GHz+ doesnt mean it PERFORMS like it "should" at 5GHz+

These scores may very well be true.

 

Cinebench also do NOT report on top turbo speed, it only reads base clock.

[Trixanity]

41 minutes ago, TheCherryKing said:

There's too much hype about Ryzen in general! Ryzen is just existing technology that Intel has for a few years at a lower price point. 

No, it isn't. You could say existing performance but not technology. In other words: the results are the same but the process isn't.

[cj09beira]

1 hour ago, Prysin said:

you do realize that just because a chip CAN reach 5GHz+ doesnt mean it PERFORMS like it "should" at 5GHz+

These scores may very well be true.

 

Cinebench also do NOT report on top turbo speed, it only reads base clock.

good point, so i went and checked against stock results, and the scaling is almost linear, 42% clock increase resulted in 40% score increase, so they still seem fake 

[TheCherryKing]

2 hours ago, Trixanity said:

No, it isn't. You could say existing performance but not technology. In other words: the results are the same but the process isn't.

What is the "new" technology?

[Trixanity]

Just now, TheCherryKing said:

What is the "new" technology?

Infinity Fabric for one. SenseMi is another. Completely changes the way AMD does chip design.

But hold on: are you saying Intel's Core uArch is identical to AMD's Zen uArch? If so, why don't they perform identically, have the same core and uncore configuration? Why does all the block diagrams look different? There are many pieces to processor design and they may share some common traits but even a quick glance at the core design would tell you how different they are. And if your point is that it isn't 'new' then a lot of things aren't new. Which would mean you're just arguing semantics for the sake of arguing.

[TheCherryKing]

Just now, Trixanity said:

Infinity Fabric for one. SenseMi is another. Completely changes the way AMD does chip design.

But hold on: are you saying Intel's Core uArch is identical to AMD's Zen uArch? If so, why don't they perform identically, have the same core and uncore configuration? Why does all the block diagrams look different? There are many pieces to processor design and they may share some common traits but even a quick glance at the core design would tell you how different they are. And if your point is that it isn't 'new' then a lot of things aren't new. Which would mean you're just arguing semantics for the sake of arguing.

You are putting words into my mouth that I do not agree with. The new features are not noticeable in everyday performance and most consumers wouldn't care as long as it performs well. Benchmarks have shown that "gluing together" multiple less complex dies doesn't perform as well as one die. 

[cj09beira]

19 minutes ago, TheCherryKing said:

You are putting words into my mouth that I do not agree with. The new features are not noticeable in everyday performance and most consumers wouldn't care as long as it performs well. Benchmarks have shown that "gluing together" multiple less complex dies doesn't perform as well as one die. 

games are basically the only thing were it makes a difference, most other workloads work just fine

[Trixanity]

38 minutes ago, TheCherryKing said:

You are putting words into my mouth that I do not agree with. The new features are not noticeable in everyday performance and most consumers wouldn't care as long as it performs well. Benchmarks have shown that "gluing together" multiple less complex dies doesn't perform as well as one die. 

I'm trying to argue the point you made from every possible angle. Either you recognize your argument made no sense or you elaborate how it differs from the non-sensical. We're not talking how the laymen views the technology. They see the performance. Nothing else. They don't care about what it is. So they don't see 'technology' as you put it. However Ryzen still presents a compelling selling point through core count, pricing and overall value. So the layman would see Ryzen as a compelling option despite performance being the the same.

That's not even mentioning that we're on a forum for enthusiasts where the technology suddenly does matter.

 

Benchmarks have shown disadvantages in latency-sensitive scenarios. True. But not all workloads are latency-sensitive however right now it would appear that the 'glue' offers an equal or more advantages. 

 

Besides, we've yet to see all of it unfold. It's still in its infancy.

[TheCherryKing]

17 minutes ago, Trixanity said:

I'm trying to argue the point you made from every possible angle. Either you recognize your argument made no sense or you elaborate how it differs from the non-sensical. We're not talking how the laymen views the technology. They see the performance. Nothing else. They don't care about what it is. So they don't see 'technology' as you put it. However Ryzen still presents a compelling selling point through core count, pricing and overall value. So the layman would see Ryzen as a compelling option despite performance being the the same.

That's not even mentioning that we're on a forum for enthusiasts where the technology suddenly does matter.

 

Benchmarks have shown disadvantages in latency-sensitive scenarios. True. But not all workloads are latency-sensitive however right now it would appear that the 'glue' offers an equal or more advantages. 

 

Besides, we've yet to see all of it unfold. It's still in its infancy.

You just restated what I just said. Ryzen is a very good value and it is very good that AMD is back in the market to make it more competitive. That doesn't change the fact Ryzen is over hyped and doesn't include any noticeable new technology. Ryzen is offering Intel Broadwell level performance from years ago at a bargain price. 

[Trixanity]

5 minutes ago, TheCherryKing said:

You just restated what I just said. Ryzen is a very good value and it is very good that AMD is back in the market to make it more competitive. That doesn't change the fact Ryzen is over hyped and doesn't include any noticeable new technology. Ryzen is offering Intel Broadwell level performance from years ago at a bargain price. 

What do you consider new technology? Laserbeams? It's a processor.

Infinity Fabric allows them to offer you up to 16 cores at half the price of the competitor. That's new technology. Intel did not offer beyond 10 cores to consumers before Ryzen. 

They offer SMT on almost every price point where Intel locks it up to select SKUs.

SenseMI allows fine grained frequency and temperature control giving you better thermals and lower power consumption.

They offer Vega graphics in the mobile market and soon will on the desktop which is also new technology.

It isn't overhyped. You just don't appreciate it because you're not in the market for a new processor apparently. 

 

If you're gonna argue the technology point you better tell me what new technology is because processors aren't necessarily new technology by your definition - however they enable it.

[Taf the Ghost]

7 hours ago, cj09beira said:

if they do make it, and it gets around 10% clock increase, it would be enough to make the single thread advantage of intel to become almost negligible 

Yup. Especially if they can get 4.7-4.8 on the binned chips. However, Zen+ isn't into full production yet, so I imagine they'll wait for yields before they commit. TR is a higher volume product than most expected, but it's still relatively low and the TR vs X299 serve slightly different markets at the high core count. Cascade Lake-X for X299 isn't until Q4 2018, so AMD has time to decide on whether to make a TR2 with Zen+.

[AresKrieger]

3 hours ago, Trixanity said:

Infinity Fabric for one.

It also is the main reason Ryzen has so many issues with memory speeds, I don't see amds methods to be a better option they are simply what they managed to make decent enough to compete with, now could they fix the issues with the design as launched, absolutely but you need to keep in mind that performance and reliability are all that matters everything else is just marketing bs

 

1 hour ago, Trixanity said:

nfinity Fabric allows them to offer you up to 16 cores at half the price of the competitor. That's new technology. Intel did not offer beyond 10 cores to consumers before Ryzen. 

That has nothing to do with intel not having the capability to do so more so it wasn't a profitable endeavor for them to do so as it would cut into xeon sales to serve a market that has been niche (video editing and streaming market), however it is obvious that if the market changes due to AMD pushing new products in Intel will adapt out of necessity.

 

This is why competitive markets are generally a good thing.

[DoctorWho1975]

4 hours ago, TheCherryKing said:

What is the "new" technology?

 

Not to have a management engine that allows take over of a box.

[TheCherryKing]

23 minutes ago, DoctorWho1975 said:

 

Not to have a management engine that allows take over of a box.

AMD has PSP which is just like management. It hasn't been hacked as much.

http://www.amd.com/en-us/innovations/software-technologies/security

[DoctorWho1975]

Just now, TheCherryKing said:

AMD has PSP which is just like management. It hasn't been hacked as much.

http://www.amd.com/en-us/innovations/software-technologies/security

 

At all

[TheCherryKing]

Just now, DoctorWho1975 said:

 

At all

It's just a matter of time. Hackers didn't bother to hack a processor with low market share. Once more people use AMD the hackers will target AMD and Intel.

[DoctorWho1975]

Just now, TheCherryKing said:

It's just a matter of time. Hackers didn't bother to hack a processor with low market share. Once more people use AMD the hackers will target AMD and Intel.

 

It is not in every single processor made in the past 9 years unlike Intel.

[TheCherryKing]

Just now, DoctorWho1975 said:

 

It is not in every single processor made in the past 9 years unlike Intel.

That's true but AMD had very little market share from 2012 to 2016. As stated earlier, hackers will only bother hacking if their hacks will effect a lot of people. 

[DoctorWho1975]

You can keep saying blah blah market share blah blah blah. They still sold CPU's from 2012 to 2016. Doesn't matter, the fact that AMD hasn't left their CPU's anus open wider then goatse with some bullshit "management" engine is in fact new technology. You asked for new technology.. you got answers. Its new not to have an a massively dangerous backdoor wide the fuck open at such a absurdly low level.

[Salacious B Crum]

5 hours ago, TheCherryKing said:

 "gluing together" multiple less complex dies doesn't perform as well as one die. 

That there is nothing more than intel fear mongering don't be using intel's slimy PR crap come up with real facts

[cj09beira]

2 hours ago, TheCherryKing said:

This is not about me. I'm not going to argue with you if you continue to make this argument personal. 

from all he wrote thats what you picked up, lol

 

1 hour ago, AresKrieger said:

It also is the main reason Ryzen has so many issues with memory speeds, I don't see amds methods to be a better option they are simply what they managed to make decent enough to compete with, now could they fix the issues with the design as launched, absolutely but you need to keep in mind that performance and reliability are all that matters everything else is just marketing bs

 

That has nothing to do with intel not having the capability to do so more so it wasn't a profitable endeavor for them to do so as it would cut into xeon sales to serve a market that has been niche (video editing and streaming market), however it is obvious that if the market changes due to AMD pushing new products in Intel will adapt out of necessity.

 

This is why competitive markets are generally a good thing.

infinity fabric is basically the only reason they can compete at all, if it wasn't for infinity fabric they wouldn't be able to afford to launch this many products, 

and the problem ryzen has with higher speed ram comes from the imc not IF, 

IF allows a single die to compete and well at that in the 150 dollar range all the way up to 5000 dollar range, while undercutting intel on most ranges, and offering more IO also on most ranges, if that isn't a awesome new tech i don't know what is.

also dont forget this is the first generation of both ryzen and IF, there are bound to be small querks needing fixing 

[Guest]

Haters will say AMD's performance is fake.

[AresKrieger]

4 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

snip

I'm simply saying that to the end user infinity fabric is meaningless, all that matters is how good the product as a whole, how they get there doesn't matter too much but it is clear infinity fabric is a tradeoff not a magic solution to all of AMD's problems, and yes it will likely improve with refinement I said such in that statement I made

Quote

now could they fix the issues with the design as launched, absolutely

However I wouldn't be be surprised if it has a hard limit that is below these hyped up "leaks" that keep popping up, as refinement often allows for improvement but rarely does it allow for leaps.

[Taf the Ghost]

38 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

from all he wrote thats what you picked up, lol

 

infinity fabric is basically the only reason they can compete at all, if it wasn't for infinity fabric they wouldn't be able to afford to launch this many products, 

and the problem ryzen has with higher speed ram comes from the imc not IF, 

IF allows a single die to compete and well at that in the 150 dollar range all the way up to 5000 dollar range, while undercutting intel on most ranges, and offering more IO also on most ranges, if that isn't a awesome new tech i don't know what is.

also dont forget this is the first generation of both ryzen and IF, there are bound to be small querks needing fixing 

IF only runs into issue beyond 2666 Mhz memory. All of which are Memory OC, which is never guaranteed. And the only place it's really an issue is high FPS DX11 gaming, so it's as much a Game Engine and Nvidia driver issue as it is the technology.

 

I do look forward to an improved IMC for AMD, as it's a place they've been behind for years on Intel, but unless you have at least a 1070 or Vega 56, you're going to get minimal uplift from going past 2666.

[Drak3]

4 hours ago, mrbilky said:

That there is nothing more than intel fear mongering don't be using intel's slimy PR crap come up with real facts

Except it is true. Not once in history has an x86 MCM design performed at the same level as a monolithic design where the core and subsystems are effectively the same. Talk between the dies incurs latency, and there are bandwidth limitations, more so than the bus that allows CPU cores to communicate. Some tasks don't take a meaningful hit. Some tasks, like gaming, do. Ryzen comes close, but that's it.

 

4 hours ago, cj09beira said:

if that isn't a awesome new tech i don't know what is.

It's awesome, but not new. Infinity Fabric is nothing more than a Mesh interconnect, and functions not dissimilarly than Intel's QPI or AMD's older HyperTransport when either were used for multiple NUMA systems.

 

4 hours ago, DoctorWho1975 said:

You asked for new technology.. you got answers. Its new not to have an a massively dangerous backdoor wide the fuck open at such a absurdly low level.

Nothing on Ryzen is actually new. SenseMI, Infinity Fabric, XFR, MCM, are all AMD's latest iteration of existing technologies. And IME is not a present factor on all Intel CPUs, just like AMD's counterpart.

 

It's the equivalent of Dodge throwing a larger turbo and an after market super on a Cummins engine, and calling it the Cerberus. It's not a new engine.