Zen 3-based Ryzen detailed, 16-core model with 4.6GHz boost and rumored 20% IPC increase

Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, May 20, 2020.

  1. DownwithEA

    DownwithEA Member

    Messages:
    25
    Likes Received:
    18
    GPU:
    1060 6GB
    I'm right there with ya. It's almost as if Keller is playing a chess game against himself. Very interested to see what he'll crank out on the Intel side. Which hopefully will cause AMD to need to grab him back. Either way, big wins for all of us :D
     
    Venix likes this.
  2. Fediuld

    Fediuld Master Guru

    Messages:
    544
    Likes Received:
    274
    GPU:
    AMD 5700XT AE
    Zen 3 is on N7+ so yes is the EUV process.
     
  3. Venix

    Venix Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,595
    Likes Received:
    610
    GPU:
    Palit 1060 6gb
    interesting times ahead of us ! honestly after that i would love to see him on a project like risk 5 ... both amd and intel will hug each other in fear and will be screaming " no keller staaaaaph developing for the open source cpus staaaaaaaaaaaph "
     
  4. Astyanax

    Astyanax Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    10,117
    Likes Received:
    3,601
    GPU:
    GTX 1080ti

  5. GarrettL

    GarrettL Master Guru

    Messages:
    207
    Likes Received:
    105
    GPU:
    Asus Strix 2070S
    A previous post stated little to no noticeable difference when going from an i7 960 x58 to a Ryzen build.

    I did the same thing, x58 i7 960 to a 3800x, x570 Asus TUF and 2070S for 1440p.

    The 2070S first went into the x58 i7 960 platform using SSD's. When playing BF5 I would get frequent micro-stutters. Gaming in general was ok but not very smooth. You could tell her gaming days were about over.

    Then put the same 2070S in the Ryzen build, MASSIVE difference when gaming compared to the i7 960. I have higher frame rates and extremely smooth game play compared to the i7 960 as expected.

    For general use the Ryzen is a bit quicker opening/loading files and programs a tad quicker. My i7 is still chugging away as a spare system and it has been great.

    I'm 52 and been gaming a long time. Glad to see AMD making great products again.
     
  6. isidore

    isidore Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    6,276
    Likes Received:
    58
    GPU:
    RTX 2080TI GamingOC
    I upgraded to a 3800X 4.2ghz all cores from a 2700k running at 4.7ghz all cores. The difference in any given task (game or windows) is HUGE. So upgrading from a 960 probably blew you away. :)).
    The new 4000 series due look nicely. 20% ipc over my series its big but i really doubt there will be any difference gaming wise.
     
  7. EspHack

    EspHack Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,660
    Likes Received:
    113
    GPU:
    ATI/HD5770/1GB
    now that intel is matching AMD's lineup core/thread offering and AMD still wants that sweet marketshare maybe they switch things up again

    r3 = 6c
    r5 = 8c
    r7 = 12c
    r9 = 16c

    thats at least what I would do, I would prefer to have intel nailed to the wall while I can keep it up, every dollar they lose to me in sales means 1 less dollar they will send to R&D to bomb me in a couple years, and marketshare is hugely important, intel's gaming & old apps lead is probably in large parts thanks to intel being the target platform for software development for the last decade, if it now becomes AMD, it really starts looking like an uphill battle for intel

    and thats okey for everyone, intel has nand flash & network equipment to fall back on, AMD has what else? graphics division? lol...
     
    CPC_RedDawn likes this.
  8. GarrettL

    GarrettL Master Guru

    Messages:
    207
    Likes Received:
    105
    GPU:
    Asus Strix 2070S
    Yes, yes it most certainly did blow me away. I got out of gaming for a few years and when I tried with the i7 960 it was a poor experience. I was way out of touch about PC tech and what improvements had occurred. Being an Intel guy for so long I thought the 9700k was the obvious gaming choice, but it wasn't thanks to AMD once again. This Ryzen PC is the fastest and snappiest PC i have ever used.

    While the 4000 series appear to be very interesting, having the 3800x I really don't see the need to upgrade until the 4000's drop in price in a year or two. But anyone with a 2000 series is going to love the 4000 jump in performance.
     
  9. asturur

    asturur Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,052
    Likes Received:
    310
    GPU:
    Geforce Gtx 1080TI
    For me the jump between 990x intel first gen and 2700x wasn't enormous.
    The 990x is on a sata2 ssd and the 2700x on a fast nvme, i think all the difference i see is disk based.
     
    geogan likes this.
  10. 0blivious

    0blivious Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    3,114
    Likes Received:
    607
    GPU:
    5700XT / GTX1070
    I've been wanting to upgrade my 4790K for awhile (mostly out of sheer boredom). The 4800x/4900x on x670 should be a solid upgrade. I also want to go with all nvme drives on my next build.
     

  11. BuildeR2

    BuildeR2 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,904
    Likes Received:
    151
    GPU:
    MSI 2080 Ti GX Trio
    I honestly didn't expect it to feel much different, I'm really just setting up for when I can buy an 8 core Zen 3. Even before I enabled XMP, so sitting at 2133/CL15, I could feel a difference at the desktop even though I'm using the same NVMe drive I used for my OS drive on the 4770k.
    This is what I did this time around. I had 1 NVMe and 2 SATA on my 4770k setup, now I'm running 1TB PCIe 4.0x4 as OS drive and 2 1TB PCIe 3.0x4 as game and storage drives. A big part of the reason I got the MSI X570 ACE was for the 3 NVMe, I don't see the 4 SATA as a downside since I won't use them.

    Lastly, as @GarrettL was saying gaming on Sandy/Haswell era stuff was generally fine there were stutters here and there. My gaming on the R5 3600x has been much smoother so far, in anything from GTAV campaign to Breakpoint under Vulkan. I mostly notice the decrease or entire lack of stutters and the much higher 1% lows. I only intend to upgrade to 8 core Zen 3 to be in line with the consoles core/thread wise.
     
  12. sykozis

    sykozis Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    21,798
    Likes Received:
    1,056
    GPU:
    MSI RX5700
    Software development favors the most common platform, which is Intel. That's not going to change anytime soon. A lot of compilers also contain Intel specific optimizations.....and little to nothing that benefits AMD.
     
    carnivore likes this.
  13. Aura89

    Aura89 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    8,157
    Likes Received:
    1,274
    GPU:
    -
    I always find it funny when people think that threadripper prices "skyrocketed". Where can you get a 64 core processor for $4000? Nowhere but AMD. And it's not that you can't get an intel processor setup with near similar specs/performance to it, it's just going to cost you a heck of a lot more.

    Tying costs to naming is rediculous. You compare like-products with like-products. When threadripper first released, they didn't have a product that could justify a $4000 price tag, it would have made zero sense and wouldn't get a sale. Now they do, a much stronger product then their highest end 3 years ago. More then 4 times as powerful. Yet they are pricing it far below what Intel has to offer, still.

    AMD isn't a charity. Stop acting like them getting into more market segments is somehow a bad thing.
     
    carnivore likes this.
  14. wavetrex

    wavetrex Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,409
    Likes Received:
    1,045
    GPU:
    Zotac GTX1080 AMP!
    Actually that $4000 CPU is very cheap.
    No, I'm not joking ...

    To get similar processing power from Intel one would need two highest-end Xeons, costing upwards of $11000 each, and a very expensive and giant dual-socket motherboard in an expensive case, you need to double the memory modules to maintain the bandwidth requirements for both CPUs, powerful PSU, powerful cooling, and they STILL wouldn't be as fast as that one single 64-core from AMD.

    So, the highest-end Threadripper platform is still 6-7 times cheaper than Intel's equivalent.
    Anyone saying that 3990X is "expensive" is simply ignorant.
     
    carnivore, Nicked_Wicked and Aura89 like this.
  15. NCC1701D

    NCC1701D Master Guru

    Messages:
    241
    Likes Received:
    142
    GPU:
    RTX 2080 Ti
    I came from a 4790K to a 3700X out of boredom. The difference wasn't as big as I thought it would be. Some heavily multi-threaded games saw less stutter, but other than that it wasn't a huge benefit other than being a little more future-proofed and grabbing a few extra frames here and there depending on the game. I'd definitely wait for Zen 3 or Intel's next arch if you're just gaming. 4790K is still a decent chip for the majority of games.
     

  16. 0blivious

    0blivious Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    3,114
    Likes Received:
    607
    GPU:
    5700XT / GTX1070
    That's mainly why I've held off. The 4790K is still a really good chip. The z97 motherboard on the other hand, is starting to become my limiting factor. I already had to buy an adapter to run my nvme drive at full speed. But, I don't just game. I built a Ryzen system for my son last year. It's only an R5 2600 but playing with that a bit, I felt a bit of what I'm missing out on, making it a challenge to not buy a 3800x/3900x while waiting on the 4000 series.

    Just a few more months...

    I also need a new video card. Just upgraded from 2560x1080@200hz to 3440x1440@144hz. But prudence dictates patience. New stuff is imminent.
     
    NCC1701D likes this.
  17. fantaskarsef

    fantaskarsef Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    12,160
    Likes Received:
    4,318
    GPU:
    2080Ti @h2o
    If true, I'd gladly jump on that train. Already waiting for Ryzen 4K CPUs, and I can't say I've waited for anything AMD had in a long time.
     
  18. CPC_RedDawn

    CPC_RedDawn Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    8,493
    Likes Received:
    849
    GPU:
    6800XT Nitro+ SE
    Never ever count Intel out. But I strongly agree with the Zen 3 we will see that exact core setup. With 2c and 4c CPU's becoming either obsolete or only being used for the entry level/office level Athlon series using something like VEGA 3 or 8 iGPU.

    Intel clearly have the clockspeed advantage, AMD has core count advantage. The clockspeed is so large it gets that 10c/20t Intel chip close to the 12c/24t AMD chip.

    AMD needs to counter this, its obvious now they are struggling with higher clock speeds on these chips. That could be a number of factors, it could be the architecture, the silicon, the process node, or many many other limitations. So efficiency and IPC is where AMD can claw back the crown. Then throw in high core counts moving down the product line and you have a winner.

    I see this changing in the coming years. Unless AMD seriously screw up. Many many companies are currently in the process of using AMD for their servers and cloud solutions. Nvidia just showed off AMD Epyc for the A100, Google are using AMD for their cloud, and Amazon are also using them too. I am sure Microsoft is also deploying AMD in their Azure server cluster too. Not to forget Sony and Microsoft using ALL AMD again in the new consoles, and the rumours Samsung will be using AMD in their new phones for an insane graphics performance increase.

    It always happens from the top down. Servers get the new good stuff and then over time it filters down to the mainstream once it become more viable from a cost perspective. With all these companies (and there are more) moving over to AMD they are going to need to implement AMD optimisations for the software. Which will eventually filter down to the mainstream. We are already seeing it, with some games using that cool Ryzen/Radeon logo at startup.

    Will this hurt Intel, maybe financially a little but it won't remove their software optimisations that already exist.
     
  19. EspHack

    EspHack Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,660
    Likes Received:
    113
    GPU:
    ATI/HD5770/1GB
    software development is moving towards multi threading, which coincidentally favors AMD, hopefully they increase core count for zen 3 so that we continue to see that trend
     
  20. geogan

    geogan Master Guru

    Messages:
    814
    Likes Received:
    156
    GPU:
    3070 AORUS Master
    That's exactly what I meant. When going from i7 970 to 3900X based system, the disks I used were exactly the same - so Windows is as slow as ever constantly reading/writing its stupid caching mechanisms. I'm sure if I upgraded my old SATA based Sandisc 480G SSD to some blazing fast NVME based SATA4 SSD I would notice Windows 10 being a bit nippier, but as it is Windows is more of less programmed using "wait() timers" so things generally happen at same speed no matter what.

    Obviously any calculation or CPU intensive tasks are much faster, I'm talking about day to day usage of normal non-cpu intensive tasks.
     

Share This Page