a look at (ry)Zen's IPC - from Excavator to KabyLake

[zMeul]

1 minute ago, Master Disaster said:

To be fair Jay wnt on to say a few studios have already said there is definitely some Zen specific optimisations they can make to help out gaming performance.

or, they're talking shit because they need to brush off the CPU's deficiencies 

[MorganO]

Just now, zMeul said:

later this year Intel will release their new X platform X299

it also depends on what your workload is, is it dependent on the CPU, can be accelerated with a video card (CUDA/OpenCL)

 

but you should open a thread on new builds forums, not here

i should have but idk

 

i use vegas pro 14 so afaik it cant use gpu acceleration on newer gpu

[79wjd]

2 minutes ago, TOMPPIX said:

yes today it is, but what about 2 years from now?

In two years a 7700k is just as likely to be superior (in gaming) as a 6900k is. Unless of course you have a crystal ball and can see into the future. 

 

As it stands right now, it's a complete crapshoot as to whether multi-threaded performance will overtake single threaded performance (in gaming).

[MageTank]

Oh great. Now people are going to believe Kaby has a 30% IPC advantage over Haswell. So many potentially disappointed customers inbound. 

[ace_cheaply]

4 minutes ago, smokefest said:

why, I think its close

Well, given that kaby lake is the same ipc as skylake, with skylake being 5% faster than broadwell and broadwell 5% faster than haswell, that would put kaby/skylake at about 10.25% faster ipc.

 

If haswell ipc =1, then skylake ipc= 1*1.05*1.05= 1.1025.

 

1.1025*100%= 110.25%.

 

I have a 4790k and a 6700k and the difference is no where near 30% in any scenario I've encountered.

 

@Misanthrope I see the comparison is about right in the other graphs, but the first one still puzzles me a little.  I'll admit percentage comparisons usually don't come natural to me so I'm probably misreading it.

[2FA]

Just now, Wolther said:

What do you mean? Why would I wait 2 years to get the performance I want? Half the lifetime of a cpu (from when most people upgrade) right there 

Hell, even Zen+ will be out by then.

[PCGuy_5960]

1 minute ago, KOMTechAndGaming said:

i do game, i just aint overly bother that x cpu will get 75fps and y cpu get 60 (if you get what i mean?)

Because you game, get the 6850K or the 5930K

[MorganO]

Just now, smokefest said:

Ryzen would fit you nicely I believe...

 

I understand people see a gain from 80 to 90 irelevent,

 

But lets face a game that you get barely 65 fps, that would put you at 55 fps with the other cpu, so, gotta think about that, for now, ok, but in 1 year, you could regret

i have a 980 and i game at 60fps on 99% of games on a 3930k

[Master Disaster]

Just now, zMeul said:

or, they're talking shit because they need to brush off the CPU's deficiencies 

Why would unrelated game developers be concerned with Ryzens deficiencies though?

[Mr.Meerkat]

Hmmmm...cherry picking benchmarks are we now?

Yes those 2 benchies looks horrendous but there are also graphs showing Zen being able to out perform haswell slightly (okay, sometimes a bit more than just slightly)...

 

i.e.

Spoiler

Spoiler

 

 

 

Spoiler

 

 

 

Spoiler

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And yes, there were a couple more benchmarks where Zen was out performing haswell but I got lazy...

 

I mean something just doesn't add up, how can it out perform Haswell in many of the benchmarks and get it's ass completely handled in a few very specific benchmarks? Plus when Excavator can beat it, something is up...

Maybe AMD is right, maybe it is optimisation, maybe it's due to it being a new arch...

I mean there is a benchmark where Excavator beats Kabylake...that's not supposed to happen...

[Misanthrope]

1 minute ago, Master Disaster said:

To be fair Jay wnt on to say a few studios have already said there is definitely some Zen specific optimisations they can make to help out gaming performance.

 

This is a ground up brand new architecture and its only to be expected that some things have to be tweaked for it.

Why would anyone buy now for just the promise of future software improvements? 

 

1) It would hurt the adoption rate at launch which is important

2) I doubt they'll get many ready for holiday season so that hurts even more

3) It completely ignores the large catalog of games and software that already exists today and are extremely unlikely to get a patch that greatly improves things.

[zMeul]

2 minutes ago, KOMTechAndGaming said:

i should have but idk

 

i use vegas pro 14 so afaik it cant use gpu acceleration on newer gpu

maybe there is someone out there that has/will do Vegas benchmarks

 

but .. on what's available right now and considering the prices, R7 1800X

[79wjd]

3 minutes ago, ace_cheaply said:

Well, given that kaby lake is the same ipc as skylake, with skylake being 5% faster than broadwell and broadwell 5% faster than haswell, that would put kaby/skylake at about 10.25% faster ipc.

 

If haswell ipc =1, then skylake ipc= 1*1.05*1.05= 1.1025.

 

1.1025*100%= 110.25%.

 

I have a 4790k and a 6700k and the difference is no where near 30% in any scenario I've encountered.

 

@Misanthrope I see the comparison is about right in the other graphs, but the first one still puzzles me a little.  I'll admit percentage comparisons usually don't come natural to me so I'm probably misreading it.

Haswell = 150%, Skylake = 150%*1.1=165%~. So Kaby Lake is a bit high, but look at how "absolute IPC" was determined:

 

The full suite of IPC @ 3.5ghz tests:

https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/ryzen-strictly-technical.2500572/#post-38770109

[MorganO]

Just now, zMeul said:

maybe there is someone out there that has/will do Vegas benchmarks

 

but .. on what's available right now, R7 1800X

and what difference between the 1700x and 1800x is there or is it minimal difference?

[smokefest]

2 minutes ago, KOMTechAndGaming said:

i have a 980 and i game at 60fps on 99% of games on a 3930k

depends on the settings  I could get u to 20 fps easily in many games by cranking up settings  

[MorganO]

Just now, smokefest said:

depends on the settings  I could get u to 20 fps easily in many games by cranking up settings  

med-high

[zMeul]

3 minutes ago, ace_cheaply said:

I have a 4790k and a 6700k and the difference is no where near 30% in any scenario I've encountered.

get LinPack and test it, I suggest you test it under W7 

[Master Disaster]

2 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

Why would anyone buy now for just the promise of future software improvements? 

 

1) It would hurt the adoption rate at launch which is important

2) I doubt they'll get many ready for holiday season so that hurts even more

3) It completely ignores the large catalog of games and software that already exists today and are extremely unlikely to get a patch that greatly improves things.

Completely agree with everything.

[Wolther]

1 minute ago, KOMTechAndGaming said:

and what difference between the 1700x and 1800x is there or is it minimal difference?

marginal frequency increase ( .2 ghz) for $100 extra 

[zMeul]

1 minute ago, KOMTechAndGaming said:

and what difference between the 1700x and 1800x is there or is it minimal difference?

as I'm aware, only clock speeds

[MorganO]

Just now, Wolther said:

marginal frequency increase ( .2 ghz) for $100 extra 

and thats it? does this .2ghz equate to any tangible benefit?

[smokefest]

Miss the good old times...

 

Buy a pentium 2 or an athlon

[Mr.Meerkat]

1 minute ago, KOMTechAndGaming said:

and thats it? does this .2ghz equate to any tangible benefit?

Not really, just get a motherboard that supports overclocking and bam, the .2GHz difference is made up  

[smokefest]

1 minute ago, KOMTechAndGaming said:

and thats it? does this .2ghz equate to any tangible benefit?

5% gain

[Master Disaster]

Just now, smokefest said:

Miss the good old times...

 

Buy a pentium 2 or an athlon

Back in them days the Athlon K6/2 destroyed the Pentium.