Yeah I agree. Most people would need a phone and a laptop/tablet for their computing needs. School, work, games etcMy hot take
phones are poor peoples primary computing device, and a not poor persons convenience. Take my 15 and 17 year old children , They both have mobile , iPad and laptop , we have desktops and PS4 + PS5. They do all there real work on the laptop , do most of their creative work on the laptop ( they have drawing tablets ) but some on the ipad and all their games on the Desktop + PS5. Phone is primarily music + video player.
i dont see AMD or x86 caring to race to the bottom against budget arm SOC's that go into budget phones........
These are the benchmarks I want to see most!RPCS3 will see some obscene gains thanks to this.
It would sell at a higher cost if people only cared about power efficiency and reliable performance. But whatever. This would have been a good time to be a data center owner or being a private supercomputer maker. Pick up all the 7950X CPUs on the market cheap!Cannot believe 7950X is under $500 right now, lol.
All of those things are pretty big differences compared to previous small steps and launches. We’re going back on TDP because it turns out our eight cores are so good we don’t need higher TDP, so I think it’s a pretty stark comparison,
– David McAfee – AMD Corporate VP and General Manager of the Client Channel Business
David McAfee further states that lower power targets allow AMD to deliver more performance without increasing power and heat. The Ryzen 9000 SKUs have the same maximum frequency, but the frequency residency, efficiency of the lid, and thermal changes allowed AMD to lift the performance higher.
To me that's pr talk. At the end of the day they only managed a +16% from a basically ground up design. That's very mediocre.AMD's manager on why 8 cores GNR doesn't need higher TDP:
AMD explains why Ryzen 9000 with 8 cores doesn't need higher TDP but lower - VideoCardz.com
Ryzen 9000 brings more performance without increasing power, gaming experience very close to X3D series In a recent interview with Tom’s Hardware, AMD talked about the upcoming Ryzen 9000 series, scheduled for release next month. A very popular topic that was discussed extensively later was the...videocardz.com
That raises more questions than it explain anythingAMD's manager on why 8 cores GNR doesn't need higher TDP:
Obviously, what else should it be, as this was said on a press briefing in preparation of the Computex keynote (which itself was not the product launch).To me that's pr talk.
Much like the keynote itself did.That raises more question than it explain anything
But, it looks like the CPU design team greatly improved efficiency. Not great for enthusiasts, but great for those buying servers. I assume that their are hotspots, timing issues or other limitations that prevent AMD from clocking enthusiasts CPUs up to a higher frequency that those lower power consumption limits would tend to imply.To me that's pr talk. At the end of the day they only managed a +16% from a basically ground up design. That's very mediocre.
No. ARM won't be faster. It will also (on top of not being faster) have an additional 30-50% penalty for emulating X86, which will also hurt perf/watt.is there some major FOMO in the air that the next ARM supermiracle will outperform X86?
strong investment into the absolute BEST CPU should be a no-brainer no? it will buy the whole market
I'm expecting MSRPs similar to the Zen 4 launch. Prices might be slightly higher due to inflation. Prices will come down once Intel has something that can compete.Pricing guesses here, since AMD marketing is referencing a Zen2 ! product as a surprise sales sweet spot (the 3700X).
Reasoning: I don't think Zen4 prices will go much lower in the next few weeks, and if Zen5 is too high, people will not buy it.
9950X $699
9900X $499
7800X3D $339 as of this post
9700X $299 - $329
9600X ~$249
I think the 9700X has to launch cheaper than what the 7800X3D is going for right now, if it is only a little slower in gaming.
Maybe 9950X and 9900X could be cheaper? Cannot believe 7950X is under $500 right now, lol.
I'm curious as to how well Zen 5 will scale with increasing power limits. Knowing PR/corporate speak, I suspect there are other reasons.AMD's manager on why 8 cores GNR doesn't need higher TDP:
AMD explains why Ryzen 9000 with 8 cores doesn't need higher TDP but lower - VideoCardz.com
Ryzen 9000 brings more performance without increasing power, gaming experience very close to X3D series In a recent interview with Tom’s Hardware, AMD talked about the upcoming Ryzen 9000 series, scheduled for release next month. A very popular topic that was discussed extensively later was the...videocardz.com
That is a pretty significant Gen-on-Gen increase!To me that's pr talk. At the end of the day they only managed a +16% from a basically ground up design. That's very mediocre.
Well, TDP is kind of a crazy measurement, but. Max watts should be at max clocks (under load), so I'd think that would be sustained max freq. Or, it could be based on something else. Did AMD say? We will be waiting for 3rd party benches to really find out what the performance envelope of Zen5 CPUs is.Isn't the lower TDP on 9700X (65W) compared to 7700X (105W) due to the lower base clock on the former?
9700X: Base clock 3.8 GHz
7700X: Base clock 4.5 GHz
I think those pricing look slightly too generous for current AMD.Pricing guesses here, since AMD marketing is referencing a Zen2 ! product as a surprise sales sweet spot (the 3700X).
Reasoning: I don't think Zen4 prices will go much lower in the next few weeks, and if Zen5 is too high, people will not buy it.
9950X $699
9900X $499
7800X3D $339 as of this post
9700X $299 - $329
9600X ~$249
I think the 9700X has to launch cheaper than what the 7800X3D is going for right now, if it is only a little slower in gaming.
Maybe 9950X and 9900X could be cheaper? Cannot believe 7950X is under $500 right now, lol.
ARM. If you consider they do yearly architectural upgrades instead of every ~2 years, they're doing better than AMD.EDIT: Find me one vendor that routinely drops 15+% IPC or performance increases for CPUs without driving power consumption through the roof. I'll wait.
Well, TDP is Thermal Design Power, which can be sustained (at base clock?). Actual power consumption will be higher than TDP.Well, TDP is kind of a crazy measurement, but. Max watts should be at max clocks (under load), so I'd think that would be sustained max freq. Or, it could be based on something else. Did AMD say? We will be waiting for 3rd party benches to really find out what the performance envelope of Zen5 CPUs is.
Nope because it's throughput per core has doubled, want to make a bet 256 bit simd clocks significantly higher then base clock?Isn't the lower TDP on 9700X (65W) compared to 7700X (105W) due to the lower base clock on the former?
9700X: Base clock 3.8 GHz
7700X: Base clock 4.5 GHz
ARM. If you consider they do yearly architectural upgrades instead of every ~2 years, they're doing better than AMD.
Edit: doesn't mean zen 5 with its 16% improvement will be that bad though, considering the overall competitors landscape.
Zen 5 is the first major core designed from Ryzen/EPYC money. Its development took a while. It features rather notable changes to the core. Yet, the IPC gain is not really notably higher than that of its predecessors'.Seriously; saying Zen 5 is a disappointment because it "only" gave us a 15% gen-on-gen improvement is forgetful of the all-too-recent dark days of 14nm Intel metaphorically nickel-and-diming us with 5ish percent for more than 5 years.
I don't know in which cases base clocks actually apply but the 7700 in default configuration (65W TDP 88W PPT) stays over 5GHz running an AVX workload on all cores.Isn't the lower TDP on 9700X (65W) compared to 7700X (105W) due to the lower base clock on the former?
9700X: Base clock 3.8 GHz
7700X: Base clock 4.5 GHz
Isn’t the base clock the frequency that can be sustained on all cores regardless of workload, assuming cooling as specified by the TDP is used?I don't know in which cases base clocks actually apply but the 7700 in default configuration (65W TDP 88W PPT) stays over 5GHz running an AVX workload on all cores.
I note this because it also has a 3.8GHz base clock.
No, they will definitely clock above that if the workload allows even if you set PPT to 65W too.Isn’t the base clock the frequency that can be sustained on all cores regardless of workload, assuming cooling as specified by the TDP is used?
I don't know how it's determined now-a-days. Years ago it was a pretty screwy measurement, wrt clock frequencies. That and Intel and AMD used different parameters. Since I don't mind shelling out decent money on a HSF/AIO, I only care about sustained perf - mainly in games.Well, TDP is Thermal Design Power, which can be sustained (at base clock?). Actual power consumption will be higher than TDP.
If it is not at base clock, then why specify any base clock at all? The CPU will be able to run at max clock forever, if sufficient cooling is available.