Navi/Ryzen 3000 launch Megathread

[boey]

5 hours ago, MeatFeastMan said:

This was the first official review of Ryzen 3000 on youtube (literally hours even before timmy joe put his on and took it off):

 

He'll be forever remembered. Well, he thinks he will anyways. Cannot believe it hasn't been taken down yet. At least we know that THE HYPE IS REAL!

Why is the 8700k clocked at 4.3GHz tho

[Drak3]

1 minute ago, MMKing said:

I heard the 290x and the 390x was not the same product

They aren’t, one is an 8GB card with tweaks.

2 minutes ago, S w a t s o n said:

And yet you tried to claim that we are really past skylake when we arent.

Show me where I said that.

 

1 minute ago, 2Buck said:

I wonder what good ol' Zmeul is up to right about now...

Either killing himself because he can’t live in a world where AMD is a good option, or slandering AMD harder than ever before.

[cj09beira]

@MMKing pretty sure cobalt was a 7nm+ feature not 7nm 

[S w a t s o n]

3 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

@MMKing pretty sure cobalt was a 7nm+ feature not 7nm 

For TSMC, I believe that is correct. Samsung might be using it already as their plain old 7nm is EUV already too

Edit:

Maybe not? I cant say for sure

[MMKing]

3 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

@MMKing pretty sure cobalt was a 7nm+ feature not 7nm 

I seem to have been reading a bit fast. You are right.

[leadeater]

10 minutes ago, S w a t s o n said:

Ok cmon now you're getting into semantics. The limit that AMD artificially placed on the power the package can draw is what I was always referring to. I have never claimed it was electrically impossible.

Well it is incredibility important difference, why? Because 3950X. It's not semantics issue when using the wrong terminology or referring to the incorrect thing has such a drastic difference. I'm not being asinine, the difference between the word socket and package matters which is why I addressed it in the first place.

[S w a t s o n]

@MMKing @cj09beira

https://fuse.wikichip.org/news/641/iedm-2017-globalfoundries-7nm-process-cobalt-euv/

This says it is in 7nm. While the article also talks about 7nm+ the quote is
 

Quote

Cobalt introduced for liner and the caps at the SAQP-critical layers

SAQP is only used in normal 7nm or non EUV layers in 7nm+

 

1 hour ago, leadeater said:

Well it is incredibility important difference, why? Because 3950X. It's not semantics issue when using the wrong terminology or referring to the incorrect thing has such a drastic difference. I'm not being asinine, the difference between the word socket and package matters which is why I addressed it in the first place.

No it's definitely not important and is semantic. 3950x doesnt change anything. Why? Because it's a 105TDP part and all 105TDP parts are limited to 140W

[MMKing]

I believe the confusion stems from the rumor that Intel is moving to using cobalt, as the sole material in the metal layer. As opposed to using cobalt layered copper.

[Drak3]

6 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Well it is incredibility important difference, why? Because 3950X. It's not semantics issue when using the wrong terminology or referring to the incorrect thing has such a drastic difference. I'm not being asinine, the difference between the word socket and package matters which is why I addressed it in the first place.

 

Love the fact that the guy moving goal posts liked this, thinking I was talking about Lead moving the post.

Edited July 7, 2019 by Drak3

[leadeater]

2 minutes ago, S w a t s o n said:

No it's definitely not important and is semantic. 3950x doesnt change anything. Why? Because it's a 105TDP part and all 105TDP parts are limited to 140W

The 3950X may come out with a higher PPT, it's an unreleased product right now. And no because if it were a socket limit them every single product, generation would be limit to 140W and that isn't a thing. PPT is a package limit on Zen2 products only, it has nothing to do with AM4.

[S w a t s o n]

Just now, Drak3 said:

 

>All 105W TDP parts are limited to drawing 140 watts from the socket

>I say the chips are socket power limited

>3950x is 105W TDP, and will be limited to 140W

>Goalposts moved themselves I guess

[dfsdfgfkjsefoiqzemnd]

12 minutes ago, _d0nut said:

Why is the 8700k clocked at 4.3GHz tho

Might have been done to run them at the exact same speed so they could compare IPC. 

[MMKing]

On the topic of 9900k 5ghz all core. The claim is meaningless without written guarantee from Intel.

 

Silicon lottery does indeed sell 9900k with a guarantee. BUT. The guarantee is only valid if you use the equipment outlined on their web page. The 35% claim, comes with an asterix. It does not apply to every single motherboard or cooling solution. Intels stock setting guarantee, is significantly less strict, and any overclocking or boost does not come with guarantees.

[S w a t s o n]

5 minutes ago, leadeater said:

The 3950X may come out with a higher PPT, it's an unreleased product right now. And no because if it were a socket limit them every single product, generation would be limit to 140W and that isn't a thing. PPT is a package limit on Zen2 products only, it has nothing to do with AM4.

We have no reason to assume it would as the both the 8 core and 12 core both with 105W TDP are both limited to 140W. It would follow they would maintain consistency.

No one cares that the socket may be capable of more. The only "limit" is the one AMD applies, if you actually hit the "LITERAL CURRENT LIMIT OF THE POWER PINS PHYSICALLY ON THE SOCKET" your mobo just burns out. There's no actual power limit set for that. So when talking about the PPT, socket power limit is accurate.

AMD calls it socket power in the new PBO video.
 

 

[cj09beira]

4 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Well it is incredibility important difference, why? Because 3950X. It's not semantics issue when using the wrong terminology or referring to the incorrect thing has such a drastic difference. I'm not being asinine, the difference between the word socket and package matters.

he was referring to a software cap, you thought he was talking about something else, he corrected to what he meant, just move on guys ! 

 

all this is moving the talk from the interesting fact that if the cpus are needing 1.4-1.5v to reach 4.4ghz how much is amd pumping into it to reach 4.6

[Lord Letto]

Any reviews out yet specifically for people on the lower end/budget looking for a budget upgrade? I'm thinking OCed R3 1200 (3.9GHz) vs R5 2600X (perhaps include non-X also), R5 3400G & R5 3600, not just how they handle games but handle streaming using OBS at 1080p+, would be scored by overall CPU use & stream quality compared to cost for value/$.

[Anomnomnomaly]

Just now, Lord Letto said:

Any reviews out yet specifically for people on the lower end/budget looking for a budget upgrade? I'm thinking OCed R3 1200 (3.9GHz) vs R5 2600X (perhaps include non-X also), R5 3400G & R5 3600, not just how they handle games but handle streaming using OBS at 1080p+, would be scored by overall CPU use & stream quality compared to cost for value/$.

Gamers Nexus has done a 3600 review, every one else is concentrating on the 3700X & 3900X

[leadeater]

1 minute ago, S w a t s o n said:

>All 105W TDP parts are limited to drawing 140 watts from the socket

>I say the chips are socket power limited

>3950x is 105W TDP, and will be limited to 140W

>Goalposts moved themselves I guess

 

 

2 hours ago, S w a t s o n said:

Yes, yes that's how that works. It's definitely my bad that AMD set the socket power limit to 140W on AM4....

 

I addressed this post originally to say it's not socket power limit because the word socket was used, to clarify it's not a socket limit so as AM4 was not associated with a power limit figure that has nothing to do with it. I understand what you were meaning but there is still value in that clarification because a socket power limit has a wider implication than the CPU that goes in to it where those limits can change across generations, revisions, bios settings etc.

 

Wouldn't it suck if AM4 were 140W limited and Zen2+ couldn't be improved due to that power limit. Wouldn't also suck if everyone thought AM4 was limited to 140W and used that to knock down future AMD products on AM4 (if any).

 

I'm not trying to rail on you for saying socket so I'm not going to discuss it more, just be mindful that not everyone may know what you meant compared to what was said.

[S w a t s o n]

2 minutes ago, leadeater said:

I addressed this post originally to say it's not socket power limit because the word socket was used, to clarify it's not a socket limit so as AM4 was not associated with a power limit figure that has nothing to do with it. I understand what you were meaning but there is still value in that clarification because a socket power limit has a wider implication than the CPU that goes in to it where those limits can change across generations, revisions, bios settings etc.

 

Wouldn't it suck if AM4 were 140W limited and Zen2+ couldn't be improved due to that power limit. Wouldn't also suck if everyone thought AM4 was limited to 140W and used that to knock down future AMD products on AM4 (if any).

 

I'm not trying to rail on you for saying socket so I'm not going to discuss it more, just be mindful that not everyone may know what you meant compared to what was said.

Yea we're gonna have to agree to disagree. I wont be any more mindful and just chalk this up to you not wanting to agree with my initial post that you eventually in a round about way agreed with.

[leadeater]

10 minutes ago, S w a t s o n said:

No one cares that the socket may be capable of more. The only "limit" is the one AMD applies, if you actually hit the "LITERAL CURRENT LIMIT OF THE POWER PINS PHYSICALLY ON THE SOCKET" your mobo just burns out. There's no actual power limit set for that. So when talking about the PPT, socket power limit is accurate.

Pause that not addressing it again, 140W is not there to protect the socket. It's not close to electrical or thermal limits of the socket, neither is 300W.

[S w a t s o n]

Just now, leadeater said:

Pause that not addressing it again, 140W is not there to protect the socket. It's no close to electrical or thermal limits of the socket, neither is 300W.

I didnt say it was close....

I said the only fucking limit that exists on the power that socket can provide is the PPT, and therefore is the socket power limit. Dude just stahp

[leadeater]

1 minute ago, S w a t s o n said:

I didnt say it was close....

I said the only fucking limit that exists on the power that socket can provide is the PPT, and therefore is the socket power limit. Dude just stahp

Package*

[S w a t s o n]

3 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Package*

No, in that case it would be the limit the package can DRAW not how much the package provide. MMMM semantics.

AMD calls it socket power in their own materials. The only limit you can find other than manually calculating the failure amperage of the fucking power pins is the PPT. If AMD is fine with calling that socket power, and it is in effect the ACTUAL max the socket can provide, why would anyone keep arguing this?

[Drak3]

1 minute ago, leadeater said:

140W is not there to protect the socket.

At some point I would like someone to post an actual, reputible source saying that the hardware is actually limited to 140W.

 

Because I'm not finding jack shit through either Google or Bing that there is a 140W limit. Tom's Hardware as a review that have the 3900X PBO crapping out ~170W on the VRMs, which assuming your ~90% efficiency claim is correct, means the CPU is getting ~150W.

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ryzen-9-3900x-7-3700x-review,6214-3.html

 

GN is hitting 1.4+ volts on their 3600 OC for the 4.3GHz+ area.

https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/3489-amd-ryzen-5-3600-cpu-review-benchmarks-vs-intel

 

 

So, the goal post mover's previous claims that Ryzen 3xxx would be capable of 5GHz in any PRAGMATIC sense is looking like it be dead in the water.

 

 

 

Side note, having done the number crunching of AMD's IPC figures awhile back, matching Intel is a tad disappointing, IMO.

[S w a t s o n]

3 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

At some point I would like someone to post an actual, reputible source saying that the hardware is actually limited to 140W.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/14605/the-and-ryzen-3700x-3900x-review-raising-the-bar/19

Careful, I think you might get banned for trolling soon

Edit: You know what, reading doesnt seem to be a strong point for some people here. Read this pretty picture instead

 

Oh look it's actually defined as the power that can be delivered TO THE SOCKET. Say it with me again: PPT is the fucking POWER LIMIT OF THE FUCKING SOCKET.