Ryzen 4000 IPC boost could be around 20%

[porina]

13 minutes ago, CTR640 said:

Why is Intel still the best for gaming? If 1440p and higher, you don't really need an Intel cpu, right? Or am I missing something?

What I gathered from the others is Intel is great for 144+ fps and I don't game at 144 and higher.

There's two parts to this.

 

Most people buying a system wont have top dollar (or other local currency unit) so they will look to get good enough. I'd argue any Ryzen era 6 core is "good enough" for most gaming uses most of the time. Only dropping to 4 cores if budget is really tight.

 

The other part is a kinda of fanboyism I guess. They want their chosen side to "win". Personally I couldn't tell the difference say 105fps and 100fps, but if the difference is there and measurable, fans of the winning side are going to shout about it.

[Guest]

Well Intel is technically and mesurably faster than AMD in most games. That's still true to this date.

But the price they are asking for those 5-10% higher frames is absurd. Ryzen 3600 goes for 170€, a 10600k for 270€. Anyone with a brain goes for the 3600 in that scenario and either save 100€ or use that money for a better GPU where you actually gain frames for 100€ more.

[CTR640]

21 minutes ago, porina said:

There's two parts to this.

 

Most people buying a system wont have top dollar (or other local currency unit) so they will look to get good enough. I'd argue any Ryzen era 6 core is "good enough" for most gaming uses most of the time. Only dropping to 4 cores if budget is really tight.

 

The other part is a kinda of fanboyism I guess. They want their chosen side to "win". Personally I couldn't tell the difference say 105fps and 100fps, but if the difference is there and measurable, fans of the winning side are going to shout about it.

Sad to hear that. So envy is a part of it?

 

10 minutes ago, Medicate said:

Well Intel is technically and mesurably faster than AMD in most games. That's still true to this date.

But the price they are asking for those 5-10% higher frames is absurd. Ryzen 3600 goes for 170€, a 10600k for 270€. Anyone with a brain goes for the 3600 in that scenario and either save 100€ or use that money for a better GPU where you actually gain frames for 100€ more.

That's totally true. I upgraded from 780 to 1080Ti and framerates has been much higher and better and graphics settings veryhigh/max.

The cpu? A weak ass shit i7-4770 I'll upgrade whener I feel the need AND it has to be a very huge bump.

[RejZoR]

This is the whole reason I'm still sticking with 5820K. And if it was stock, I'd even say fine, maybe it would make sense upgrading CPU. But in overclocked state, buying new GPU just makes more sense because from new GPU I'll gain 30-50fps more depending on title. With new CPU I'd maybe gain 20 fps in best case scenarios.

[CTR640]

16 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

This is the whole reason I'm still sticking with 5820K. And if it was stock, I'd even say fine, maybe it would make sense upgrading CPU. But in overclocked state, buying new GPU just makes more sense because from new GPU I'll gain 30-50fps more depending on title. With new CPU I'd maybe gain 20 fps in best case scenarios.

I'm the guy "if works, don't fix" and in this case "if works, don't upgrade". Your 5820K still rocks.

[porina]

28 minutes ago, CTR640 said:

Sad to hear that. So envy is a part of it?

I'm not sure I'd used the word envy, but whenever people pick a side, it often follows for them to want that side to "win". This applies to both sides, picking which area they want to compete and win in. 

 

19 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

This is the whole reason I'm still sticking with 5820K. And if it was stock, I'd even say fine, maybe it would make sense upgrading CPU. But in overclocked state, buying new GPU just makes more sense because from new GPU I'll gain 30-50fps more depending on title. With new CPU I'd maybe gain 20 fps in best case scenarios.

Way back in the day, I did wonder if I should get a 5820k or 6700k, and in the end opted for the latter. No regrets on that choice, it was better for gaming at the time. However I do think the 5820k has aged better simply from having more cores, especially with a bit of an overclock to help it keep up in speed. 5820k's were really cheap last time I looked on ebay. I do wonder if combined with the "new" Chinese X99 mobos they could still be a value option today.

[cj09beira]

2 hours ago, D13H4RD said:

I'll believe it when I see it. Not saying it won't be good, just that I always take any rumor with a grain of salt. 

 

Also, if all this pans out to be true, Intel still won't be crushed. No one should wish for Intel to be defeated to the point where they can't compete.

 

They will be shaken but they will also fight back. We want competition, not an utter massacre. 

thing is amd is much much smaller, their production is much smaller as well, and limited by how much tsmc can make, have just now finished paying their shit ton of loans, and the next 10 years will be brutal, as we are entering very turbulent waters in terms of what's next, silicon is at its limits, and there are many ways around it, new packaging tech, new interconnects, new fabrics, the multiple choices of new materials, so when that time comes we need amd to have a good amount of money in their pockets. so that in the long term amd will survive.

TL;DR a short term massacre could be the best for long term competition

[pas008]

27 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

thing is amd is much much smaller, their production is much smaller as well, and limited by how much tsmc can make, have just now finished paying their shit ton of loans, and the next 10 years will be brutal, as we are entering very turbulent waters in terms of what's next, silicon is at its limits, and there are many ways around it, new packaging tech, new interconnects, new fabrics, the multiple choices of new materials, so when that time comes we need amd to have a good amount of money in their pockets. so that in the long term amd will survive.

TL;DR a short term massacre could be the best for long term competition

exactly many think intel is in trouble but their r n d is for many other products by far not just CPUs and GPUs

hopefully amd can bank and get involved in other areas

 

cpus(x86 or whatever) can be in trouble in 10 yrs alone considering we might see everything moving to ARM and cloud which seems like these are going ARM too not to mention fastest supercomputer is ARM now lol

gaming is prolly going to hit that mark in 10yrs too considering high res and cpus dont matter much

 

[Vishera]

20% is a lot,perhaps too good to be true.

My expectation is around 5% improvement,but i could be wrong,it's possible.

 

The formula of single core performance (which many games rely on) is: Clock speed x Instructions per cycle = Single core performance

In case of boost it may cause variance in clock speed so you can use the consistent clock speed values under the intended load instead.

A nice way to benchmark IPC is to change the clock speed to a fixed 1GHz clock speed or 2GHz since many motherboards won't allow you to go to 1GHz (all CPUs must be the same frequency!),

Disable SMT and Hyper Threading,and run a benchmark like Cinebench on single core,Cinebench is really nice and accurate in measuring performance,

Make sure the RAM,power supply,and as much components as possible are identical in the test systems to eliminate variance as much as possible,and you are done.

[Vishera]

28 minutes ago, pas008 said:

cpus(x86 or whatever) can be in trouble in 10 yrs alone considering we might see everything moving to ARM and cloud which seems like these are going ARM too not to mention fastest supercomputer is ARM now lol

gaming is prolly going to hit that mark in 10yrs too considering high res and cpus dont matter much

For compute you need a lot,but a lot of ARM processors to achieve the same results as X86,

iPad Pro (8 cores ARM): https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/compute/4862921

My PC (6 cores X86): https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/compute/4714310

[Enderman]

3 hours ago, LAwLz said:

Intel do have major IPC improvements in the pipeline. It's just that they haven't released it for desktops yet.

Sunny Cove has a 18% higher IPC than Skylake, and around 7% higher IPC than Zen 2.

My point was that intel isn't going to do a new CPU release months after the release of the 10k series.

It's going to be at least a year or two.

 

 

Also, any sources other than the self-reported 18%?

Cause if you look at the benchmarks of the mobile CPUs they're ususally 10% or less improvement.

[RejZoR]

58 minutes ago, porina said:

I'm not sure I'd used the word envy, but whenever people pick a side, it often follows for them to want that side to "win". This applies to both sides, picking which area they want to compete and win in. 

 

Way back in the day, I did wonder if I should get a 5820k or 6700k, and in the end opted for the latter. No regrets on that choice, it was better for gaming at the time. However I do think the 5820k has aged better simply from having more cores, especially with a bit of an overclock to help it keep up in speed. 5820k's were really cheap last time I looked on ebay. I do wonder if combined with the "new" Chinese X99 mobos they could still be a value option today.

I was actually deciding between "old" 5820K and brand new 6700K. In a way, to my luck, new 6700K were unobtainable at the time so I said, ok, so it's older 5820K but costs the same and has 2 more cores and 4 more threads. That will be more future proof, especially since back then more cores meant something. Turns out it overclocked really well. Been running it at 4.5GHz basically since beginning and like a year ago managed to push it to 4.6GHz at under 1.2 volts which is just outstanding. It has so much speed this old clunker I'm having hard time justifying a 500€ or more new CPU as an "upgrade". I want to have something new, but I just can't really justify it. Maybe Ryzen 4800X or 4900X will be it lol. The old CPU's had charm of overclock, but new ones have the charm of sticking them in and they go as fast as they can out of the box. Which is cool in a way for people who can't be bothered or don't know how to overclock.

[Curufinwe_wins]

1 hour ago, RejZoR said:

This is the whole reason I'm still sticking with 5820K. And if it was stock, I'd even say fine, maybe it would make sense upgrading CPU. But in overclocked state, buying new GPU just makes more sense because from new GPU I'll gain 30-50fps more depending on title. With new CPU I'd maybe gain 20 fps in best case scenarios.

Yeah I only upgraded because my x99 motherboard died for the third time. Mind you all under warranty, so that 5820x is in a home media pc with my parents, but still. Painful and annoying. And now that I've gone through that horror so many times, I'm not going to buy another cpu without integrated graphics honestly. It's just too frustrating/painful to troubleshoot without tons of spare parts around. Still sortof regret the 9700k though (had to buy in March of this year). Oh well.

 

Hope AMD keeps pushing, and also hope that AMD gets its gpu act together (as in drivers that aren't walking disasters of crash-fests) that way I can actually choose a good zen3 apu for that upgrade. 

[LAwLz]

2 minutes ago, Enderman said:

My point was that intel isn't going to do a new CPU release months after the release of the 10k series.

It's going to be at least a year or two.

 

 

Also, any sources other than the self-reported 18%?

True that. It will probably take some time before we see Skylake being replaced in Intel's desktop chips, and also them moving to smaller processing node. 

 

The source for the IPC is from Anandtech. They got to preview ice lake which is based on sunny cove. Here is the article if you want to look into it more. 

https://www.anandtech.com/show/14664/testing-intel-ice-lake-10nm

[Enderman]

9 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

True that. It will probably take some time before we see Skylake being replaced in Intel's desktop chips, and also them moving to smaller processing node. 

 

The source for the IPC is from Anandtech. They got to preview ice lake which is based on sunny cove. Here is the article if you want to look into it more. 

https://www.anandtech.com/show/14664/testing-intel-ice-lake-10nm

No, they clearly said in the article "Intel is touting a median IPC advantage on the new Sunny Cove cores of +18% against Skylake. That isn’t something we were able to test in the short time we had with the system"

 

The 18% is the number self-reported by intel.

And everyone knows that any self-reported benchmarks from AMD or intel are just BS, as you can see in real world benchmarks from reviewers.

[Helpful Tech Witch]

6 hours ago, mr moose said:

Without the gamer market and some of the content creator workstation market Intel have only got their NUC/thinclient, server/data, lidar, AI, GPGPU, Memory and SSD markets left to draw revenue from.   I guess they have to consider filing for bankruptcy.

Intel does have those markets, but their cpu profit margins are the highest. In SSDs the big company is Samsung. In DRAM it's Samsung. Intel is largest in NUC and GPGPU, but those are much smaller markets than CPU, SSD, DRAM, ECT.  If it becomes fliped, so Intel becomes a CPU manufacturer you only get if you are a huge fanboy, and you don't care about greatest price to performance, that will hurt Intel. A lot. 

[porina]

14 minutes ago, Enderman said:

The 18% is the number self-reported by intel.

And everyone knows that any self-reported benchmarks from AMD or intel are just BS, as you can see in real world benchmarks from reviewers.

While we shouldn't rely on them as a sole source of truth, they can be taken as part of a wider picture.

 

Intel's 18% over Skylake slide is shown on https://www.anandtech.com/show/14514/examining-intels-ice-lake-microarchitecture-and-sunny-cove/10 and it lists the tests they used as: SPEC2006, SPEC2017, SYSMark 2014 SE, WebXPRT, and Cinebench R15. Of course, you can argue the choice of test, but they didn't focus on a single or limited test, and there is a variety of workloads within those.

 

I haven't looked recently, what's the cheapest way to get an Ice Lake core these days? I really don't want to buy another laptop but doing some IPC testing isn't too hard if I can just get my hands on one. Example previous test of Zen 2 vs Skylake I did:

 

[Helpful Tech Witch]

27 minutes ago, Andrew Systems said:

Im still using a ryzen 1600 as my desktop cpu awaiting the 4600 ( assuming it will be called that ) cant wait for my performance uplift, also still using a 980ti that i put an aio onto via a nzxt g12. Lisa really got me my the chain xd

Im running a core 2 quad and an rx480. I'm hoping to get a 4300x and a 1080. Mabey a 1080ti, once the rtx3000 comes out.

[pas008]

1 hour ago, Enderman said:

My point was that intel isn't going to do a new CPU release months after the release of the 10k series.

It's going to be at least a year or two.

 

 

Also, any sources other than the self-reported 18%?

Cause if you look at the benchmarks of the mobile CPUs they're ususally 10% or less improvement.

didnt they release broadwell next to dc or haswell refresh?

 

maybe?

 

https://www.guru3d.com/news-story/intel-to-share-‘something-big’-on-september-2nd.html

[Vishera]

3 minutes ago, TheTechWizardThatNeedsHelp said:

Im running a core 2 quad and an rx480. I'm hoping to get a 4300x and a 1080. Mabey a 1080ti, once the rtx3000 comes out.

It took AMD almost a year after the launch of Zen 2 to release the 3300X,so it will take some time until the 4300X will be released.

[Helpful Tech Witch]

3 minutes ago, Vishera said:

It took AMD almost a year after the launch of Zen 2 to release the 3300X,so it will take some time until the 4300X will be released.

And the 3100 isimpossibe to get now.

[dfsgsfa]

very wierd approach from AMD.

 

things we already know , 4000 is last gen supporting am4, ipc over 3000 is 12%- 20% if rumors arr true

 

while new am5 shall at least have 2 gen , new tech introduce?

 

so in amd marketing point of view, how much % ipc should 5000 be better than 4000 if the increment is already as high as 20%, can they really keep the trend?, thats very worrying

[StDragon]

2 hours ago, dfsgsfa said:

while new am5 shall at least have 2 gen , new tech introduce?

DDR5, and maybe PCIe 5.0. But it will be the memory throughput that will have a larger impact on CPU performance. 

[Vishera]

Just now, StDragon said:

DDR5, and maybe PCIe 5.0. But it will be the memory throughput that will have a larger impact on CPU performance. 

This time AMD will need to implement at least triple channel support into the consumer space.

[dfsgsfa]

41 minutes ago, Vishera said:

time AMD will need to implement at least triple channel support into the consumer space.

the 1st gen new tech is very underwhelming, 1st gen ryzen /7nm gpu etc