Except? You are funny. Take away Intel's cache advantage over non V-Cache Ryzens and compare at the same memory specs and AMD still at least trades blow with Intel's offerings on average. In fact we are not far from the Bulldozer situation. It's almost the same, just vice versa. If you want the...
No, definitely not. Netburst was a complete failure. The concept, the implementation, just everything. It was destined to fail. The biggest garbage in the x86 history. Bulldozer is a different story. The concept was actually really good. But it failed because of mainly two factors. First, the...
We don't know for sure yet. There are also rumors that say Intel only disabled it because it wasn't working on the new architecture. And there was no time to fix it without massive delay. It might be fixed on the successor.
My guess would be not before Zen 6.
I don't think that Intel will go >8 p-cores anytime soon. They will likely push e-cores. And I think that even 15th gen won't have more than 8p+32e on the mainstream desktop platform. Which is expected when? Somewhere 2025, about one year after Zen 5? So, I...
It all depends on the overall package. I'd rather take +35% IPC at 5 GHz than +20% IPC at 5.7 GHz. Which usually means better average power efficiency and more improvements by increasing clock speeds in the future. AMD increased clock speeds with Zen 4 quite substantially. But that's not...
Not really. And better than Bulldozer. Which had like 15% IPC reduction and 20% clock speed improvement. Which means it wasn't faster than its predecessor at all in 1T. And for how long was Bulldozer in the development?
Raptor Lake is not the benchmark. Zen is the benchmark. Intel needs a...
Actually there is not much capacity difference between the L3 cache of one Zen 3 CCD and Alder Lake S, 32 vs 30 MB. Zen 3 also can greatly benefit from faster RAM. https://github.com/xxEzri/Vermeer/blob/main/Guide.md
Sure. But that's mainly the strength of the Zen 3/4 V-Cache SKUs, not the...
They are not focusing on frequency in general. Since the first Zen generation the design clearly had some speed path limits. With Zen 4 AMD seems to eliminate most critical speed path limits before focusing on a wider design for more IPC (Zen 5). Which absolutely makes sense. And btw, up to 10%...
That guy from ComputerBase used overclocked 12th gen models with faster memory. 12900K +42% faster DDR5, 12700K +25% faster DDR4, 5800X3D +19% faster DDR4. That comparison doesn't say much about Ryzen 7000. The advantage of the 12900K in that test is clearly based on OC and fast DDR5. Ryzen 7000...
After Intel's disastrous results I thought AMD might be negatively affected as well. But holy redacted, didn't expect that. +70% y/y, impressive numbers!
No profanity in tech allowed.
esquared
Anandtech Forum Director
It depends. If your application is memory bottlenecked then those peasant cores won't offer much less performance than current p-cores. If your application is compute bottlenecked then the difference can be huge. As some reviews showed you will need more than two of those peasant cores to...
In the "good old days" you didn't even need a new CPU to increase performance by 50%. You just needed to press the turbo button on my 286 system, going from 8 to 12 MHz. 😂
Do I see correctly? They compare single core spec2006 and claim they match AMD with half the cores and power consumption / TDP? That's pure clickbait. According to the spec2006 scores such a Zhaoxin core offers less than half the performance of a current AMD or Intel core (w/ SMT). So no, this...
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.