Rumor: AMD Seeds Board partners Ryzen 3000 Samples - Runs 4.5 GHz and show 15% Extra IPC

Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Apr 29, 2019.

  1. Hilbert Hagedoorn

    Hilbert Hagedoorn Don Vito Corleone Staff Member

    Messages:
    48,392
    Likes Received:
    18,565
    GPU:
    AMD | NVIDIA
    chispy likes this.
  2. Dazz

    Dazz Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,010
    Likes Received:
    131
    GPU:
    ASUS STRIX RTX 2080
    So just as i predicted 4 months ago then by taking the 9900K core from benches with the average clock speed which matched the Intel show cased from power consumption and the clock speed it would be running in all core turbo then comparing to the 2700X adding average 13% IPC well i said 4.4GHz so i am 100MHz off. However what i am interested in in the 2 core max frequency.
     
  3. vestibule

    vestibule Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,090
    Likes Received:
    1,328
    GPU:
    Radeon RX6600XT
    Diminishing returns!!!!
     
  4. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Guest

    Messages:
    11,808
    Likes Received:
    3,371
    GPU:
    6900XT+AW@240Hz
    15% IPC boost is a lot. 4,5GHz * 1.15 = 5,175GHz performance equivalent of Zen+.
    That would definitely match everything intel has. May be interesting.
     
    Maddness, schmidtbag and chispy like this.

  5. Reddoguk

    Reddoguk Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,661
    Likes Received:
    593
    GPU:
    RTX3090 GB GamingOC
    I can see 5.2 on 2 cores being a possibility for the new high end Zen2.

    Zen2+ is looking very competitive. Low power usage, high clocks and plenty of cores for under £300. I want one already. 6-12 or 8-16 is the question. We'll see....
     
    chispy likes this.
  6. H83

    H83 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    5,465
    Likes Received:
    3,003
    GPU:
    XFX Black 6950XT
    15% IPC increase means AMD has a real winner with ZEN2! It also means Intel is going to lose their performance crown after a very lengthy rein...
     
  7. TestDrivers

    TestDrivers Guest

    Messages:
    109
    Likes Received:
    4
    GPU:
    MSI 980Ti Gaming 6G
    If this is correct I'm not sure Intel is feeling zen now o_O
     
    BReal85 and chispy like this.
  8. EspHack

    EspHack Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,795
    Likes Received:
    188
    GPU:
    ATI/HD5770/1GB
    15% IPC is more than twice what intel has managed to produce in the last half decade, very skeptical
     
  9. Embra

    Embra Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,601
    Likes Received:
    956
    GPU:
    Red Devil 6950 XT
    It's possible, Ryzen design is still maturing and going through some changes.
     
  10. Jagman

    Jagman Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,264
    Likes Received:
    328
    GPU:
    16GB RX6800
    Intels IPC advantage is around 5%. Their main advantage is in outright clock speed and has been for some time.
     
    carnivore and chispy like this.

  11. chispy

    chispy Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,979
    Likes Received:
    2,693
    GPU:
    RTX 4090
    Key word " samples " = meaning they are lower clocked than Full retail chips. Samples clocking already at 4.5Ghz points to the right direction for AMD ;) add 15% ipc and we have a real winner right there :) , price accordingly around $329 US Dollars a 8 core 16 thread will be a real competitor to Intel 9900K $550 US dollars 8 cores 16 threads chip for or more less the same performance. Good for everybody , we all winners here as competition brings lower prices and innovation !
     
    Last edited: Apr 29, 2019
    Maddness, Jagman and Embra like this.
  12. D3M1G0D

    D3M1G0D Guest

    Messages:
    2,068
    Likes Received:
    1,341
    GPU:
    2 x GeForce 1080 Ti
    I find the 15% claim too good to be true. According to Guru3D's benchmarks, the 9900K is only about 3.4% better in IPC compared to the 2700X. A 15% boost would mean Zen 2 will have a 11.6% IPC advantage over the 9900K!

    A 15% boost in single-threaded performance would be more realistic (that would make it nearly as fast as the 9900K), based on both IPC and clock speed improvements.
     
    HandR likes this.
  13. nizzen

    nizzen Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,416
    Likes Received:
    1,149
    GPU:
    3x3090/3060ti/2080t
    I believe it when I'm benchmarking it myself ;)

    Going to upgrade my TR 1950x anyway to TR gen 3 .
     
  14. nizzen

    nizzen Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,416
    Likes Received:
    1,149
    GPU:
    3x3090/3060ti/2080t

    What we want right now, is performance of 2700x + 15% ipc with frequence of 5Ghz +, and support for 4400+ mhz memory
     
    Jagman likes this.
  15. Aura89

    Aura89 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    8,413
    Likes Received:
    1,483
    GPU:
    -
    9900k doesn't have an IPC advantage over 2700x. Sure, in some areas it does, and some areas it doesn't, and some areas they are equal. This is called, equal, as nothing is ever "exactly the same"

    What the 9900k DOES have over the 2700x is clock

    9900k = 3.5Ghz base, 5Ghz 2-core boost, 4.7Ghz 8-core boost and i believe a 4.4 All-Core Boost

    2700x = 3.7Ghz base, 4.3ish 2-core boost, 4.2ish 8-core boost and 4.1ish all-core boost

    If the 2700x could match the boost frequencies of the 9900k, they would be very similar in performance, as again, their IPC is very similar. Yes, there would be areas where one would win out over the other, again, this is normal, nothing can do everything exactly the same being different architectures. Yes, there are likely some scenarios where one wins out significantly. Remember, GPUs do this as well.

    So lets say this rumor is true, 15% IPC with 4.5Ghz, like above stated, that'd be similar to 5.175Ghz Zen+, which would be similar to 5.175Ghz 9900k. We don't know if this is a base speed or not. Usually from what i have seen, rumors come out with base speeds, so that leads me to believe that, it's possible 4.5Ghz will be base.

    But lets say its not, lets go with worse case scenario, if this rumor is true, and the all-core boost is 4.5Ghz, remember, the 9900k is 4.4Ghz all-core boost, and doesn't have the advantage of a 15% IPC improvement.

    Obviously, all of this is rumor, and we need to wait till its release, but please, stop spreading misinformation around, as your statement that the 9900k has 15% more IPC then 2700x, is purely wrong. 9900k has a FREQUENCY advantage over the 2700x, and IF Zen 2 were to even MATCH that frequency advantage with the rumors 15% IPC increase, it will not be "slightly slower than a 9900k"

    Even if you believe that the 9900k intel has a 5% IPC advantage over the 2700x, which i wouldn't say is untrue, in some circumstances, as again, it's IPC increase between architectures, especially competing companies architectures, is circumstantial, a 15% overall average IPC increase from Zen+ to Zen 2 with similar clock speeds to the 9900k would not be "slightly slower than a 9900k"



    Get your facts straight.
     
    Last edited: Apr 30, 2019

  16. JamesSneed

    JamesSneed Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,690
    Likes Received:
    960
    GPU:
    GTX 1070

    Yeah i'm skeptical too. Of course the IPC could be taking the increased clock speed into account meaning at 4.5Ghz the CPU can complete more cycles per second(I do realize that isn't the spirit of saying 15% better IPC but you never know with leaks). Will have to wait and see how this pans out.
     
  17. Jagman

    Jagman Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,264
    Likes Received:
    328
    GPU:
    16GB RX6800
    I can't disagree with that, how sweet that would be.. :D
     
  18. GamerNerves

    GamerNerves Master Guru

    Messages:
    354
    Likes Received:
    102
    GPU:
    RX 5700 XT Nitro+
    I don't believe these news, but I do believe AMD is aiming for the laptop market more than ever with 7 nm. It is hard not to raise the power consumption level when you up clocks, even with 7 nm. People usually forget that bumbing clock speeds for total of 8 cores or more is totally different than raise clocks for dual core or quad core.

    I expect IPC gain of ~3 %, which is impressive I would say for the expected price. These are very impressive chips overall and we will likely see the first affordable twelve core chip too, but not for laptops though. Eight cores is possible for laptops.
     
  19. Aura89

    Aura89 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    8,413
    Likes Received:
    1,483
    GPU:
    -

    Not saying you are wrong, because who knows until they are released. However, AMD i believe have publically stated that the IPC, not clock, increase and surpassed their expectations, and if their expectations were less then 3%, that'd be pretty sad. Remember, zen is brand new unlike intels architecture, meaning there is generally a lot of room for improvement on brand new architectures. You don't get it perfect, or near it, the first time.
     
  20. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Guest

    Messages:
    11,808
    Likes Received:
    3,371
    GPU:
    6900XT+AW@240Hz
    Mere 3% is hardly unlikely. That's what AMD can gain from increasing memory clock from 2933MHz to 3200MHz and enabling bit tighter timings. Even from macroscopic design point of view, AMD did huge design changes. We do not really know where that lands chip in terms of memory access, cache latencies. But I would say that AMD aims to improve.
    What AMD did with cores themselves?
    Zen 2 addresses this shortcoming by doubling each core's SIMD register width to 256 bits. The floating-point side of the Zen 2 core has two 256-bit floating-point add units and two floating-point multiply units that can presumably be yoked together to perform two fused multiply-add operations simultaneously.
    ...
    To feed those 256-bit-wide execution engines, AMD also widened the load-store unit, load data path, and floating-point register file to support 256-bit chunks of data.
    Source.
    I would expect around 10% IPC gain on average (depending on workload). But 15% is not out of question and some workloads may do even better.
     
    chispy and Aura89 like this.

Share This Page