New CPU-Z Upgrade Lowers Ryzen performance

I know and that's why I am hoping this month update will help. For now, automatic profiles does not work for me at all, 2666 does not boot and 2400 is sometimes unstable even with relaxed timings. (Using 2x16GB 3200CL16 Dual rank modules from Gskill).


At a times processors like Athlon 64/Dualcore Opteron, Q6600, i7-2600k.
Right now probably none, perhaps Zen based APU with Vega and HBM2 but that we have yet to see.

 

You understand that IPC is just matter of specific benchmark being used?
In one Intel will have an advantage, in other it can be AMD, it really depend on operations you use, and that's also the reason why there are so many different benchmarks with different results.

 

Depends what kind of retardation you feel,dude.Looks like you are a truly fanboy,choose what color you like.
But wake up and learn something in this real world.
I guess you what CPU Dispatcher it is.
http://www.agner.org/optimize/blog/read.php?i=49#49

Or take this:

Intel finally agrees to pay $15 to Pentium 4 owners over AMD Athlon benchmarking shenanigans
Intel has agreed to settle a class action lawsuit that claims the company “manipulated” benchmark scores in the early 2000s to make its new Pentium 4 chip seem faster than AMD’s Athlon.
https://www.extremetech.com/computi...ners-over-amd-athlon-benchmarking-shenanigans

Do you think Intel has no interest to cripple every benchmark which hurt them?

Intel Sending Out Last Minute Emails To AMD Ryzen Reviewers To Discuss Something Mysterious
http://segmentnext.com/2017/02/27/intel-email-amd-reviews/

Intel is Trying to Manipulate AMD Ryzen Launch?
https://www.guru3d.com/news-story/intel-is-trying-to-manipulate-amd-ryzen-launch.html

 

All of these things are true. I question the "timing" of the developer more than anything. Luckily, not too many people care.

The Biostar ITX 370 came in stock at newegg and I got my order in. 5 minutes later, out of stock. Either they're sending extremely small quantities, or there is high demand.

 

I've got Hynix-based HyperX Predator 3000CL15. Mobo is on the way, I'll see this weekend how it goes. The Biostar ITX isn't built for a lot of OC'ing so we'll see how it goes. I'm going to take a 1700 to at least 3.7.

 

to the dude who doesnt know about intels ongoing compiler "optimizations" debacle, its well documented...has been for years...well beyond idle chatter or gossip, at that. how much difference it makes is quite frankly irrelevant to the fact that it occurred in the first place. i also dont see how its a hard pill to swallow when intel has been taken to court & lost half a dozen times for anticompetitive practices exactly like that.

i really do appreciate that youre readily capable of critical thinking, because honestly thats beyond many folks who, despite their limitation, continue talking or god forbid drawing conclusions regardless...but that being said...youre hyperbolizing & i cant bite my tongue here.

this is totally independent of whether or not anything shady @cpuz is going on...but AMDs stock was not overvalued at all, nor is goldman sachs blameless - in fact, theyre quite clearly half at fault for triggering sensitive investors who bought low in bulk & were simply waiting for the first sign that AMD stock would plateau. GS gave them that sign wrapped with a bow by publicly trashing AMD in a diplomatic but still heavy-handed fashion.

misrepresenting the details of what occurred is not helping anyone, & simply perpetuates the very common habit of uninformed people parroting unsubstantiated opinions presented as facts. if you feel that your rash summation of events is accurate, id suggest keeping an eye on AMD stock as it will assuredly normalize & then fully recover from the panic-sell of short term (1yr) investors who know nothing of ryzens building momentum, nor naples lofty potential. for further evidence id recommend sitting tight until the Q2 financial reports hit.

 

Wow, wouldn't have expected this kind of overt marketing garbage from CPU-Z. All synthetic benchmarks are synthetic--and therefore it is very difficult to compare them to real-world applications--all of them, and when running Intel processors, too. CPU-Z has *never* been any different. This smacks of someone from Intel complaining or paying this guy to change the results of the benchmarks--Intel is well known for its dirty tricks. What a stupid, stupid thing to do.

Thanks, CPU-Z, for making sure that your results are untrustworthy and unbelievable. Good job. It's just revealing synthetic benchmarks for what they are, however--Fake News. People everywhere are finally catching on to how they have been manipulated for so long. What a dunce--that is the lamest excuse I've ever heard.

What is this clod trying to say, that AMD designed Ryzen around CPU-Z for better CPU-Z scores? What a dummy!...I've seen it all, now.

 

*sigh*
When are people going to take a step back and realize the chip didn't live up to expectations and get off this notion that there is some grand conspiracy every time things dont work out their way. You guys look just like these rabid Trump haters who continue to think Russia "hacked" the election even though the FBI, NSA, etc have all said there is no evidence of collusion whatsoever.

Funny how you say that when AMD\ATi has been caught cheating many times in the past.

https://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=20819604

They also got caught disabling tessellation in 3dmark a year later.

The reason analysts knocked AMD was due to the recent earnings numbers not living up to expectations in addition to the fact that the stock tripled in value over the previous two years based on these expectations. The market could have set the price back to where they were two years ago, so if anything i'd say they have been overly generous to AMD lately.

 

It is so fascinating, this post. The Trump thing, which you opted to bring up for no reason except baiting, then immediately into Whataboutism. It's just a textbook troll post. It couldn't be anymore textbook except to end it with a trollface.jpg

 

throwing around the word "conspiracy" repeatedly doesnt actually discredit people raising valid concerns about an ambiguous "unexpected sequence of integer instructions" that zen is apparently """"disproportionally efficient"""" at crunching.

i literally just explained how thats not true, but if you want, i could delve into more detail so that its even clearer. just say the word.

 

Ryzen and Trump it has a meaning ... it doesnt pleast just stop in on tech forums. It really doesn't mix

 

You're kidding right? Ryzen has exceeded most expectations. The only expectation it didn't live up to are 1080p gaming benchmark expectations. All Ryzens go toe to toe or outright beat Intel processors that cost in excess of $1000.

 

This,


only bad thing is it doesn't OC much, Zen+ will hopefully fix that :nerd:

 

We can only hope. This 2600k is getting tired.

 

Seems to effect 5930K also.

 

I would not stress over this tiny little synthetic benchmark

 

My thoughts too. Not sure if CPUz clarified things, but Finalwire warn not to compare results of different versions of their Aida64 benchmarks as they are always trying to improve them.

 

Firstly, I don't know exactly what your problem is but next time you might want to read between the lines.
I said that it sounds retarded, that it's stupid, that it's silly from a software perspective - because it's coming from Microsoft and I don't understand why Microsoft would help Intel's shenanigans.
I didn't even dismiss it, I merely asked for proof. If asking for proof of something makes one a fanboy, then I'm one of the biggest fanboys on this forum.

Secondly, you didn't even read what I was replying to, your 'proof' is something I already knew. You don't need to educate me in Intel's bullsh!t, I am well aware of the crap they did in the past and are still trying to do on every occasion, especially when they're backed into a corner.
"btw any program compiled with ms visual c++ is optimized for intel..." is what I was replying to. You replied with proof that Intel's compiler did/does shenanigans. How is that relevant when we're talking about the Visual C++ compiler?

I asked for proof that the Intel C++ compiler comes as the default C++ compiler of Visual Studio. Because as far I as know, Microsoft has been using their own Visual C++ compiler for a very long time now. Do you have such proof?

Maybe next time you can learn how to read instead of inventing conflicts.

Read above. And read my initial post, not Turanis' reply. The guy can't read.

Yeah but we're referring to IPC as an average of benchmarks, evidently.
Just like in any benchmark. For example nobody cares that Nvidia does tessellation well, they care whether on average their cards are good or bad.

Hah, maybe in 2 years time we'll see some good Ryzen overclockers. My finger is already on the upgrade trigger but I'm waiting it out for the next gen. I've a hunch that stuff will get interesting.

 

That's a myth. Below is a quote directly taken from memcpy.asm in the comments as distributed by VS. The code implements memcpy(), which is responsible for copying stuff from one place to another. It is most likely the most used function in all of C and C++.

Microsoft does not penalize Intel either. Those have their own optimizations in their code path.

It is just an example. What needs to happen, though, is that Windows and the compiler will take advantage of the new Ryzen and Intel processors. That will take some time though.

BTW: There is an Intel optimized compiler for VS, but it doesn't come by default. You'll have to get that one from Intel.

 

I think the biggest problem here was changing the benchmark scale at the same time as dramatically alerting the relative performance. Had the scale remained the same if would have been clear if the Intel results suddenly got better due to enhancing the code. As the scale changed it makes it look suspiciously like the AMD results have been hamstrung.

If it is the case that AMD chips really does perform certain code sequences very efficiently, then it would have been better for the developer to publish this as something for other developers to exploit and enhance their code rather than disabling it.