Jump to content

This is a NUCLEAR BOMB !!! Ryzen 2600 gets 17% single core performance boost

Rakanoth

Only 17%? Pfff, wake me up when they can achieve 50% performance increase YoY

One day I will be able to play Monster Hunter Frontier in French/Italian/English on my PC, it's just a matter of time... 4 5 6 7 8 9 years later: It's finally coming!!!

Phones: iPhone 4S/SE | LG V10 | Lumia 920

Laptops: Macbook Pro 15" (mid-2012) | Compaq Presario V6000

 

<>EVs are bad, they kill the planet and remove freedoms too some/<>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NvidiaIntelAMDLoveTriangle said:

Yeah right.

Why are people falling for this? It's not going to get 17% more performance whether it's single or multicore. At best it's going to be maybe 5% faster, maybe.

Depends on what you mean but the new process node grants 10% higher performance on its own (if GloFo can deliver). Architecturally don't expect much and whatever gains are probably workload dependent. Overall expect 8-15% depending on benchmarks and clock speed. However don't trust this benchmark.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NvidiaIntelAMDLoveTriangle said:

Yeah right.

Why are people falling for this? It's not going to get 17% more performance whether it's single or multicore. At best it's going to be maybe 5% faster, maybe.

My money is on 7-8% average real world gains (expecting as high as 10-11% in bench marking).  You can quote me on that.   Looking at passmark figures (because they're all in one spot) you can see at least a 10% improvement with each new generation.

Grammar and spelling is not indicative of intelligence/knowledge.  Not having the same opinion does not always mean lack of understanding.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Because overhyped AMD hardware never turned out to be false advertisement, fake, flat out lies or restricted to a single bench with a single setting that would never be used in real use cases. Seriously, whenever it comes to AMD they push the hype to no end and never even once managed to actually show the same numbers later on.

 

Not that i don't HOPE it is true. I definitely do.

The past just showed that AMD and hype don't go well together. 

 

Unless Steve benchmarks it, i don't buy the hype even for a split second. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rattenmann said:

Because overhyped AMD hardware never turned out to be false advertisement, fake, flat out lies or restricted to a single bench with a single setting that would never be used in real use cases. Seriously, whenever it comes to AMD they push the hype to no end and never even once managed to actually show the same numbers later on.

 

Not that i don't HOPE it is true. I definitely do.

The past just showed that AMD and hype don't go well together. 

 

Unless Steve benchmarks it, i don't buy the hype even for a split second. 

well amd has been really quiet about new products ever since vega was released, they aren't hyping anything, this article is exaggerated as all it shows is 200mhz uplift from the 1600, but writers have to get their clickbait in there, you can't blame amd for that, if we filter that we can get a good idea of how the product might be.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mr moose said:

My money is on 7-8% average real world gains (expecting as high as 10-11% in bench marking).  You can quote me on that.   Looking at passmark figures (because they're all in one spot) you can see at least a 10% improvement with each new generation.

i myself believe it will be around 9-13% because of the more complex boosting algo which on lightly threaded benchmarks should help keep clocks a bit higher, plus the memory improvements

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Higher clock speed + improved IMC and fine tuned infinity fabric for lower latency?

... probably no IPC improvements.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

Because it's unattainable on current Ryzen and they're not changing it that much ... at least that's what I've heard.

 

6 hours ago, Mr.Meerkat said:

Zen+ was always going to have a bump in clocks so if this means 17% extra perf at the same power consumption or 17% higher clocks (i.e. we can now overclock to 4.5GHz+) or a mixture of higher perf and lower power consumption then we should get excited otherwise if its just higher stock clocks, it is nothing really interesting.

 

AMD says they are tweaking the IMC for lower latency , among other things . That could potentially bring improvements despite the same core

 

 

6 hours ago, RotoCoreOne said:

Ill wait for actual results rather than leaks. Don't get your hopes up and buy into any hype lol

Sure these are leaks . But Zen + is scheduled for april . Leaks this close to launcg tend to be fairly accurate

6 hours ago, NvidiaIntelAMDLoveTriangle said:

Yeah right.

Why are people falling for this? It's not going to get 17% more performance whether it's single or multicore. At best it's going to be maybe 5% faster, maybe.

12LP brings >10% clock speed imrpovements on its own...

AMD Ryzen R7 1700 (3.8ghz) w/ NH-D14, EVGA RTX 2080 XC (stock), 4*4GB DDR4 3000MT/s RAM, Gigabyte AB350-Gaming-3 MB, CX750M PSU, 1.5TB SDD + 7TB HDD, Phanteks enthoo pro case

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Rakanoth said:

Why is Geekbench meaningless? :S

I've gone into great details over this in the past. Rather than repeat that, I'll provide the mountain of evidence from my previous posts:

Basically, the TL:DR is, Geekbench is not reliable because it only grabs DMI strings for CPU speeds, not the actual clock speeds. This means you cannot know the CPU clock speed or memory clock speed, so it's impossible to directly compare scores from one Geekbench result to another, let alone extrapolate that data to compare against another benchmark or any real life workloads.

 

7 hours ago, Energycore said:

Because everything is meaningless #edgy

 

No but I think what they meant is that they're not as reliable as a benchmark / have less credibility than something like say, Cinebench or Futuremark.

Very rarely would I consider information "meaningless", but with Geekbench, it tends to be the case. Unless you happen to see the bench be ran with your own eyes to see the clock speeds beforehand, you will never truly know the results, lol. I really wish it was similar to CPU-Z, and would grab current clock values during the sysinfo part of the benchmark. 

My (incomplete) memory overclocking guide: 

 

Does memory speed impact gaming performance? Click here to find out!

On 1/2/2017 at 9:32 PM, MageTank said:

Sometimes, we all need a little inspiration.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Mr.Meerkat said:

Zen+ was always going to have a bump in clocks so if this means 17% extra perf at the same power consumption or 17% higher clocks (i.e. we can now overclock to 4.5GHz+) or a mixture of higher perf and lower power consumption then we should get excited otherwise if its just higher stock clocks, it is nothing really interesting.

It's hard to say with AMD. What I would hope is that they've tweaked manufacturing and improved yields and binning so that more of the chips clock higher without needing higher voltages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

i'm pretty sure glofo's 14nm FINFET was actually 20nm level FinFET

 

It's probably just glofo moving to actual 12/14nm

PSU Nerd | PC Parts Flipper | Cable Management Guru

Helpful Links: PSU Tier List | Why not group reg? | Avoid the EVGA G3

Helios EVO (Main Desktop) Intel Core™ i9-10900KF | 32GB DDR4-3000 | GIGABYTE Z590 AORUS ELITE | GeForce RTX 3060 Ti | NZXT H510 | EVGA G5 650W

 

Delta (Laptop) | Galaxy S21 Ultra | Pacific Spirit XT (Server)

Full Specs

Spoiler

 

Helios EVO (Main):

Intel Core™ i9-10900KF | 32GB G.Skill Ripjaws V / Team T-Force DDR4-3000 | GIGABYTE Z590 AORUS ELITE | MSI GAMING X GeForce RTX 3060 Ti 8GB GPU | NZXT H510 | EVGA G5 650W | MasterLiquid ML240L | 2x 2TB HDD | 256GB SX6000 Pro SSD | 3x Corsair SP120 RGB | Fractal Design Venturi HF-14

 

Pacific Spirit XT - Server

Intel Core™ i7-8700K (Won at LTX, signed by Dennis) | GIGABYTE Z370 AORUS GAMING 5 | 16GB Team Vulcan DDR4-3000 | Intel UrfpsgonHD 630 | Define C TG | Corsair CX450M

 

Delta - Laptop

ASUS TUF Dash F15 - Intel Core™ i7-11370H | 16GB DDR4 | RTX 3060 | 500GB NVMe SSD | 200W Brick | 65W USB-PD Charger

 


 

Intel is bringing DDR4 to the mainstream with the Intel® Core™ i5 6600K and i7 6700K processors. Learn more by clicking the link in the description below.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

lol, the hype. By the time most of us on current Ryzen actually needs an upgrade, the gen at the time will destroy Zen+. See ya in 3ish years when I upgrade again for some mad gainz bro.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Mooshi said:

lol, the hype. By the time most of us on current Ryzen actually needs an upgrade, the gen at the time will destroy Zen+. See ya in 3ish years when I upgrade again for some mad gainz bro.

Sadly AMD's track record suggests that by the time they change sockets you won't want to upgrade to what they're offering.

I REALLY REALLY hope that isn't what happens, but until they pull off another Athlon 64/Opteron gambit, I won't trust them to deliver.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, JDE said:

i'm pretty sure glofo's 14nm FINFET was actually 20nm level FinFET

 

It's probably just glofo moving to actual 12/14nm

Well, that's not true. 12nm is a small update. A move from 20nm to 14nm would be big. 12nm is 10% performance and 15% area. That's hardly even a half node.

 

Since the process is licensed from Samsung you're essentially saying Samsung is also on 20nm. Then comes the implication that TSMC is in the same ballpark which would also mean 20nm for them. That's one big rabbit hole you've created.

 

Then there's the fact that nm terminology is so arbitrary at this point that it's just a name and not much of an indication of silicon size.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Trixanity said:

Then there's the fact that nm terminology is so arbitrary at this point that it's just a name and not much of an indication of silicon size.

That's why I created this comment in the first place.

PSU Nerd | PC Parts Flipper | Cable Management Guru

Helpful Links: PSU Tier List | Why not group reg? | Avoid the EVGA G3

Helios EVO (Main Desktop) Intel Core™ i9-10900KF | 32GB DDR4-3000 | GIGABYTE Z590 AORUS ELITE | GeForce RTX 3060 Ti | NZXT H510 | EVGA G5 650W

 

Delta (Laptop) | Galaxy S21 Ultra | Pacific Spirit XT (Server)

Full Specs

Spoiler

 

Helios EVO (Main):

Intel Core™ i9-10900KF | 32GB G.Skill Ripjaws V / Team T-Force DDR4-3000 | GIGABYTE Z590 AORUS ELITE | MSI GAMING X GeForce RTX 3060 Ti 8GB GPU | NZXT H510 | EVGA G5 650W | MasterLiquid ML240L | 2x 2TB HDD | 256GB SX6000 Pro SSD | 3x Corsair SP120 RGB | Fractal Design Venturi HF-14

 

Pacific Spirit XT - Server

Intel Core™ i7-8700K (Won at LTX, signed by Dennis) | GIGABYTE Z370 AORUS GAMING 5 | 16GB Team Vulcan DDR4-3000 | Intel UrfpsgonHD 630 | Define C TG | Corsair CX450M

 

Delta - Laptop

ASUS TUF Dash F15 - Intel Core™ i7-11370H | 16GB DDR4 | RTX 3060 | 500GB NVMe SSD | 200W Brick | 65W USB-PD Charger

 


 

Intel is bringing DDR4 to the mainstream with the Intel® Core™ i5 6600K and i7 6700K processors. Learn more by clicking the link in the description below.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is probably just a result of higher stock clock speeds. I would be surprised if the 2600 overclocks past 4.1 or 4.2 GHz.

Current Build:

CPU: Ryzen 7 5800X3D

GPU: RTX 3080 Ti FE

RAM: 32GB G.Skill Trident Z CL16 3200 MHz

Mobo: Asus Tuf X570 Plus Wifi

CPU Cooler: NZXT Kraken X53

PSU: EVGA G6 Supernova 850

Case: NZXT S340 Elite

 

Current Laptop:

Model: Asus ROG Zephyrus G14

CPU: Ryzen 9 5900HS

GPU: RTX 3060

RAM: 16GB @3200 MHz

 

Old PC:

CPU: Intel i7 8700K @4.9 GHz/1.315v

RAM: 32GB G.Skill Trident Z CL16 3200 MHz

Mobo: Asus Prime Z370-A

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cute geekbench scores.  I'm betting Zen+ will just be higher base clocks...and maybe a slightly higher OC capability.  EIther way...let me know when AMD has something in the geekbench 6.5k+ or Cinibench 220cb single core range.

i9-9900k @ 5.1GHz || EVGA 3080 ti FTW3 EK Cooled || EVGA z390 Dark || G.Skill TridentZ 32gb 4000MHz C16

 970 Pro 1tb || 860 Evo 2tb || BeQuiet Dark Base Pro 900 || EVGA P2 1200w || AOC Agon AG352UCG

Cooled by: Heatkiller || Hardware Labs || Bitspower || Noctua || EKWB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is Ryzen 2000 silicon done at TSMC or GLOFO?

Somewhere I heard that they switched to TSMC but I am not sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, WereCat said:

Is Ryzen 2000 silicon done at TSMC or GLOFO?

Somewhere I heard that they switched to TSMC but I am not sure.

GloFo. Someone may have gotten it mixed up because TSMC also has a 12nm process or because they may switch some of their GPU designs back to TSMC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×