AMD Demos 7nm Ryzen 3000 processors (and kicks a bit of ass)

Man, AMD has been really impressive on the CPU front for quite some time. Takes on back to the AMD64 days when Intel was quite a bit lost.

 

You can clearly see the mounting for the 2nd chiplet on this screen shot from PCworld Hands on video:

https://i.**********/QtZJmz17/Ryzen3000.jpg

 

Can't wait for benchmarks and 3rd party reviews with them, not much more to say really.

So now I'm curious... how did you do your testing? I know you're under NDA but I don't want to draw any false conclusions and disregard any intel I don't even know
But honestly, I doubt that the Vega2 will outperform the 1080TI every time. DX11 for instance... did you test it in all of those games as well? And don't even get me started on AotS... I learned to doubt that game's benchmarks as it usually does not reflect the performance situation in any other game tested as well. Just curious, if it really beats the 1080TI in every test under any circumstance, soon we will see that it does so in every review too, anyway

 

i m really sorry of all i read here.
People trolling each other on cpu and gpus.

look at where amd was with bulldozer and where they are now.
If they perform a bit less and cost less you are not happy
If they perform a bit better and use a better production process you are not happy

AMD is doing both GPUs and CPUs, and they are doing great at it.
I never heard anyone comparing how intel gpu suck compare to nvidia or how nvidia cpus ( the arm one ) sucks compared to an intel 9900k right?

Reading all around `this gpu is a joke` or `this cpu is a disappointing for the 7nm` ( like if who writes it knows how a transistor at 7nm looks like )

Also people writing `i see no upgrade path on my 8700k at 4.7`. No there is no upgrade path for cpus of the previous generation since 2012.
There was no upgrade path from 2600k to 6600k that was worth building a whole new system, unless you have money in excess. And if you have money in excess, then 8700k to 9900k is a nice hobby.

I kept my old 990x up to december where i switched to ryzen, because moving from a 6c/12t to another 6c/12t, even 6 year newer was not that exciting.

 

oh boy, Lisa Su in leather jacket for the conference - the meme is real

 

How could I miss that in the first place?!?

 

What are you talking about? There are no benchmarks for the Radeon VII?

 

He was at their booth and tested himself, idk that seems legit enough.



Also speaking of this new CPU, well done AMD. Better then expected. Usually they tire up with older gen, almost expected them to put it against 8700k not 9900k.


Some people are just trolling for the sake of trolling and because its AMD and because they actually feel threatened as well just like intel does. Or nvidia for that matter with that stupid CEO remark recently. I rolled my eyes hard when I've read that.

 

I'm not so impressed because this test lacks the single core performance benchmark. This is where AMD suffered the most against Intel and a lot of games and applications are still single core or two cores intensive.

Why AMD avoided this benchmark???

 

Wait! AMD now incorporates a bit of ass into CPUs?

 

i9-9900K is running all cores under load at 4,7GHz and has single core boost at 5.0GHz.

AMD matches that 4,7GHz performance on all cores. let's presume worst case scenario and that chip will not boost above clock all cores are running. In that case single threaded performance of intel's chip is 5,0/4,7 => 1,064 And that's 6,4% higher ST performance than when MT is fully used.

Not hard to realize that due to intel's chip having very close all core and single core clock, AMD is pretty close in single core performance or even better if it boosts by higher percentage.

 

I'm honestly super excited for these processors - haven't had an AMD CPU in my machine since Athlon 64. Just wish they'd come out sooner than later.

 

Only a little so when someone asks do you you have "Intel inside" they have a nice little response.

 

Can't wait to see more numbers like SingleThread benchmarks, watts and frequencies. One thing is for sure is that if frequency is lower than 9900k but achieve the same performance, I'm sold...I'm still on 2600k and I want to upgrade this year.

 

Can one of you be the bigger person here? Just stop for the love of god! You're both what's wrong with the internet.

 

no, no no. there wasn't any controlled anything. there is a lounge set up with gaming stations preloaded with certain games.

i have had a 1080ti since two months after release. it is in a loop with a (right now) Ryzen 7 2700x... but it was also in a loop with a I-7 7700k.

my comments were based on three hours of gameplay and examining a torn down card.

and if AMD chooses the best games for performance at C.E.S. , that is expected and the standard for all companies is to show their product in the best light.
and the light looked damn good to me.

 

Because some people are not stuck in 2004.

You don't make a product and then say "hey! Lets cripple it to see what the performance of 1/8th of it is!"

 

Or it's due to the CPU not having boost clocks set yet, just an all core clock, so a single thread CB run would just show 1/8th of the MT score. While the 9900K can still boost to 5GHz on single core making the product look inferior.

The other problem is that it would take quite a while to run single threaded vs the relatively short MT run. Taking that much time up during the presentation wouldn't have looked too good.

 

Why didn't they benchmark Quake 3 at 640x480??? What are you worried about AMD??

 

i know brother .. i am just impatient i want to know more ! if anything i will be pumped to put on a 12 or 8core ryzen 3xxx on my b350 msi ...as far they do not go over 95 watts tdp to blow up my mb's vrms !