- Mar 3, 2017
- 1,747
- 6,598
- 136
That's the only metric that really matters in client CPUs.
I think that Intel and Microsoft are the only ones that think AI is the next coming.Not anymore. It's all about AI, and that's the only thing that matters
Qualcomm and AMD and Nvidia and a whole lot of other vendors.I think that Intel and Microsoft are the only ones that think AI is the next coming.
MT performance is almost completely useless and is on the path to becoming even more useless as more workloads are accelerated by GPU. I can’t think of a time where I’ve actually been bottlenecked by MT performance recently and I’m a developer. My bottlenecks have been memory bandwidth and PCIe lanes.+20-25% multithreaded improvement would be disappointing imho. Many people including me would be happy not paying the zen5 tax and simply buy a discounted 7950X(3D), or an equivalent Intel.
So hopefully the MT improvement is very close to the ST one, or it's at least reachable with a bit of undervolting and overclocking. Not everyone spends hundreds of $ to brag about single core scores a bit higher than those of an ipad (or to game at uselessly high fps).
Okay that's dumb.as more workloads are accelerated by GPU
Talking about client in particular.Okay that's dumb.
No, SIMD machines aren't all that useful.
Client is javascript and video games.Talking about client in particular.
Sort of? Blender is a useful proxy for nT FP perfDo the popular MT benchmarks like Vray, blender or video encoding performance really matter?
Client is javascript and video games.
And teams 3*3 conferencing yea.And Office 364.
A whole lot higher than 4,000 GB 6.3 ST? 😲It doesn't matter.
That's the only metric that really matters in client CPUs.
A whole lot higher.
With Ln2 sureA whole lot higher than 4,000 GB 6.3 ST? 😲
Let’s say that’s a score of 4200, that’s ~40% increase from 7950X.A whole lot higher than 4,000 GB 6.3 ST? 😲
4200 is not possible.Let’s say that’s a score of 4200, that’s ~40% increase from 7950X.
ARL-S is supposed to be ~3750 or so. That’d be a really good result if Zen 5 got a full +10% or more lead. Only 2 weeks left to get proper answers.
Since earlier today a bunch of people were making predictions on Zen 5 performance I’ll go out on a limb and predict it won’t outperform the M4 by a meaningful margin (if at all).
Well, the hype has been +40% 1T perf and a score of 4200 is what it’d take to reach that.4200 is not possible.
Well, the hype has been +40% 1T perf and a score of 4200 is what it’d take to reach that.
the reddit atheism of tech discourse.You shouldn't listen to the hype train
yeeeeeeeeeeesssssssssss why do you think it won so many slots kek.if that 40% is true then AMD will have the fastest CPU core on the market and that will trickle down to their laptop SKU. This means that AMD can beat M4 even with the lower clocks than a supposed 9950X in a laptop Zen 5 SKU in every performance benchmark.
From previously in this thread:You shouldn't listen to the hype train. The highest I remember anyone claiming was @adroc_thurston at 32% I believe.
Adroc's claim has always been 32% IPC iso/clk.
Looks like you missed it when he admitted that his 32% IPC Claim was made up BS because the real number is so high that people would think it's made up BS. And no, this is not a joke.
I remember it, but the claim not being a concrete number makes it impossible to evaluate whether the statement ends up true or not.
I believe the M4 is still faster in GB5 and 6if that 40% is true then AMD will have the fastest CPU core on the market and that will trickle down to their laptop SKU. This means that AMD can beat M4 even with the lower clocks than a supposed 9950X in a laptop Zen 5 SKU in every performance benchmark.
But we must manage our expectations like Thunder said. We can get excited after the June keynote.
Why do you keep doing this , spec intFrom previously in this thread:
I’m not claiming anything myself. I only quoted what others wrote previously. Don’t shoot the messenger.Why do you keep doing this , spec int
Then it's quote it as IPC
Spec int doesnt do simd fp (funny that). so non avx512 simd workload will be less IPC then spec int and your avx512 enabled could be up to 100% more.
Thats not the way the real world works , otherwise i can just Quote Nazi's and say dont shoot the messenger , yep thats right i just went full Godwins Law.I’m not claiming anything myself. I only quoted what others wrote previously. Don’t shoot the messenger.
According to those quotes it was IPC. But like the quotes also say, the 32% number was made up BS anyway, so it doesn’t matter whether it was IPC or SpecINT. If you want to argue about that, bring it up with the persons I quoted or adroc.
You would've known Zen5 perf targets for all segments if you were obsessed with that as much as you're obsessed with me. Please don't.According to those three quotes it was IPC. But like the quotes also say, the 32% number was made up BS anyway, so it doesn’t matter whether it was IPC or SpecINT. If you want to argue about that, bring it up with the persons I quoted or adroc.
So how well does "any kind of serious work" done on desktops and workstations, in IRL, scale past ≈eight threads?[Multithread performance] matters to me and every single person I know irl that uses a desktop or workstation. […] The vast majority of people that do any kind of serious work on a PC can't afford a Threadripper or an Epyc.