AMD's 'RYZEN' Detailed - Octacore, 3.4GHz + & Dynamic Overclocking

[MageTank]

2 hours ago, Mr.Meerkat said:

Delidded is probably the main word you're looking for  

 

Phenom 2 wasn't bad to be fair, nor was bulldozer (and whatever FXx1xx CPUs were called) as ya know, a 8320 is able to beat a 6600K at a few specific scenarios  

No. I am aware of his delid and he is aware of mine. The result has not changed. Under 48k FFT at 5ghz (1.43v) his average core package temp is 67C. Under 48k FFT at 4.2ghz (1.12v) my 6700k's average core package temp is 76C. Granted, the difference between a custom 1080mm loop and a 45mm ITX vapor chamber is extremely large, it does not change the fact that under the hottest possible stress, his chip runs cooler than mine at higher voltages and clock speeds.

 

Most people at 5ghz, cannot handle AVX2 load at all, let alone 48k FFT Prime95 or custom Linpack. They would hit thermal junction within seconds, or worse, let out the blue smoke. Skylake runs cooler than Haswell in that regard, as FIVR is no longer present. Overclocked memory also tends to add to the total package heat, with there being a 6-8C difference in package temps, going from 2133 JEDEC to 3600 C14 in my setup. Seeing as @Lays runs ram at 3600 C16, it means his 67C result was with the added temperatures of the faster ram. 

 

You are correct though. Not a single person will convince me that they have a 5ghz Haswell+ i7, and not have CLU on the die. People running 5ghz Haswell+ i7's without a delid, are clearly not stable. 

[AnonymousGuy]

I'm not going to believe AMD has a play until review samples end up getting independently benchmarked.  AMD's marketing team is way too good at building hype trains (they've done it every fucking year since bulldozer) for me to take any of their claims seriously.

 

I'm already betting it's not that good or else they'd be throwing review samples like candy out. But what we actually have is tightly controlled black box benchmarks.

[vorticalbox]

7 hours ago, leadeater said:

Personally for me it still means nothing but if something has good power efficiency I won't be complaining, everyone wants different things so it's damn hard to please everyone .

it still means nothing most computers run on 500 watts or less. Compared to most things in your house its relatively small. microwaves are around 800 watts, my cooker is 2200watts. Also add in the fact that computers lower there power draw during light loads it means very little.

 

take CPU 65 watts or 120watts its around twice the power draw but that extra draw costs very little.

[leadeater]

Just now, vorticalbox said:

it still means nothing most computers run on 500 watts or less. Compared to most things in your house its relatively small. microwaves are around 800 watts, my cooker is 2200watts. Also add in the fact that computers lower there power draw during light loads it means very little.

 

take CPU 65 watts or 120watts its around twice the power draw but that extra draw costs very little.

Hmm 500W, my dual 290X laughs at that . Measured my system drawing around 800W doing both a Prime95 + furmark lol. It does idle at 80W-110W though which I think isn't too bad for a not very power efficient system.

[vorticalbox]

6 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Hmm 500W, my dual 290X laughs at that . Measured my system drawing around 800W doing both a Prime95 + furmark lol. It does idle at 80W-110W though which I think isn't too bad for a not very power efficient system.

I have no idea what my system pulls but I have 550 watt psu with an 8350 and a 7770. I have seen hw monitor say my cpu was pulling 180 watts overclocked lol

[Space Reptile]

22 hours ago, iamdarkyoshi said:

The name though. Why the fuck??? Zen sounded so much better

Zen R7

or

Ryzen R7 

 

what sounds better? 

 

#bringbackPhenom 

[Phate.exe]

12 minutes ago, Space Reptile said:

#bringbackPhenom 

Phenom for ever and forever, 100 years, Phenom.

[Space Reptile]

1 minute ago, Phate.exe said:

Phenom for ever and forever, 100 years, Phenom.

Athlon X2 4400 for 2 years i think , Phenom 9600 for 2 years , Phenom II X4 940BE for 5 years , FX 6100 for 4 months  

 

now on an I7 2600 in an ITX system 

[Void Reaper]

It was somewhat weird that they had the taskbar on the Intel Screen hidden away, and also that they said their CPU had boost disabled and yet still beat the i7. I don't know what to make of it, but i'll wait until reviewers got theirs to have an objective baseline on where it sits.

[JefferyD90]

On ‎12‎/‎12‎/‎2016 at 10:26 PM, lilbman said:

That + could mean anything so I assume it's the boost clock.  It would make more sense this way because a + means more or faster

They said that it will be ABOVE 3.4Ghz.  The slide itself said 3.4Ghz +, but Lisa said the words ABOVE.

[Guest lilbman]

7 hours ago, JefferyD90 said:

They said that it will be ABOVE 3.4Ghz.  The slide itself said 3.4Ghz +, but Lisa said the words ABOVE.

kool

[NumLock21]

Close up of that system, at AMD's New Horizon event.

• AMD Wraith Cooler
• Some ES motherboard with ports at odd places, like the blue SATA above the GPU and front USB 3, between 2nd x16 and chipset w/fan.
• AMD VEGA?

[Drak3]

7 hours ago, NumLock21 said:

Close up of that system, at AMD's New Horizon event.

• AMD Wraith Cooler
• Some ES motherboard with ports at odd places, like the blue SATA above the GPU and front USB 3, between 2nd x16 and chipset w/fan.
• AMD VEGA?

That was a system from an earlier AMD press event (I believe it was a Polaris event, or the first demonstration of Zen vs an unnamed 6900K).

[Kamina]

Here hoping 6-core/12 threads CPUs become mainstream. 

[DrM]

On 12/12/2016 at 6:53 PM, HKZeroFive said:

20MB COMBINED L2+L3 CACHE

6900k has 20mb of l3 cache and 2mb of l2 cache (256kb per core). not sure how much difference 2mb less would make, but it is definately an odd way to measure cache. its normally just l3, though this may just be to make it seem at least comparable to intel offerings

[Mihle]

I dont understand what problems some people has with the name Ryzen. I like it,

[ARikozuM]

4 minutes ago, Mihle said:

I dont understand what problems some people has with the name Ryzen. I like it,

I think it has to do with the marketing aspect of the CPU.

[deviant88]

We are missing the most important parttt the fucking price, thats the only thing that matters that will decide AMD's future in CPU business.

Will it be affordable or not, im actually much more interested in the 4-6 core models if they drop it under intel i5's price point.

Nowdays it doesn make sense anymore to pay so much for a chip, where are the good old days when i could buy an i5 for 120$ and amd phenom II for 100$.

Any decent cpu nowdays seems to be well over 200$.

[79wjd]

19 minutes ago, deviant88 said:

where are the good old days when i could buy an i5 for 120$

Literally non-existent? An i5 has never been cheaper than $176. 

 

The cheapest i5's each generation: 

• 1st gen: 
  • i5-650 (2c/4t) - $176
  • i5-750 (4c) - $196
• 2nd gen: 
  • i5-2300 - $177
• 3rd gen: 
  • i5-3350p - $177
  • i5-3330 - $182
• 4th gen:
  • i5-4430 - $182
• 5th gen: 
  • only -k SKUs
• 6th gen: 
  • i5-6400 - $182

[leadeater]

10 hours ago, DrM said:

6900k has 20mb of l3 cache and 2mb of l2 cache (256kb per core). not sure how much difference 2mb less would make, but it is definately an odd way to measure cache. its normally just l3, though this may just be to make it seem at least comparable to intel offerings

L3 cache is actually a rather new thing, or extremely old if you go back far enough. Intel used to just have a unified shared L2 cache but now has had L3 cache on their CPUs for a little while. CPUs have L1, L2 and L3 cache all getting slower as you go up in level but comparatively cheaper in capacity so they get larger.

 

L2 shared cached start on the mainstream (Desktop) CPUs with Conroe (Core 2, 2006) and L3 on mainstream with Clarkdale (Nehalem, 2010). Previous to 2006 if Intel CPUs had multiple cores the L2 cache was not shared between cores. Granted 6 years and 10 years is a very long time in the CPU architecture world.

[Space Reptile]

On 16.12.2016 at 6:37 PM, NumLock21 said:

• AMD Wraith Cooler
• Some ES motherboard with ports at odd places, like the blue SATA above the GPU and front USB 3, between 2nd x16 and chipset w/fan.
• AMD VEGA?

its a test board , seen and pictured before 

GPU is a 480 

[NumLock21]

Ryzen CB15 benchmark

 

7700K 966 stock, 1083 oc at 5ghz

6900k 1500

6950x 1800

 

Wccf

 

 

[ivan134]

29 minutes ago, Thread212 said:

Will there be another ryzen variants from amd?

We think Ryzen is just the name for the highest end Zen CPU. There will be other lower priced Zen CPUs. We just  don't know when those will launch.

[TOMPPIX]

If these rumors are to be believed, amd's 8/16 cpu get similar score as intel's 4/8 cpu. Disappointing, but it's an improvement.

[NumLock21]

18 hours ago, leadeater said:

L3 cache is actually a rather new thing, or extremely old if you go back far enough. Intel used to just have a unified shared L2 cache but now has had L3 cache on their CPUs for a little while. CPUs have L1, L2 and L3 cache all getting slower as you go up in level but comparatively cheaper in capacity so they get larger.

 

L2 shared cached start on the mainstream (Desktop) CPUs with Conroe (Core 2, 2006) and L3 on mainstream with Clarkdale (Nehalem, 2010). Previous to 2006 if Intel CPUs had multiple cores the L2 cache was not shared between cores. Granted 6 years and 10 years is a very long time in the CPU architecture world.

L3 cache goes way back to socket 478 with the Pentium 4 Extreme Edition. Back then cpus have L1 and L2 cache, want L3, then pay Intel $1,000 just to get it. The Pentium Extreme Edition ran at 3.4GHz and it came with 2MB of L3 cache. Compare to today's cpu of 25MB like the 6950X, the 2MB L3 seem small. But back then when cpus only have like 512KB L2, that 2MB is a lot.