Info 64MB V-Cache on 5XXX Zen3 Average +15% in Games

[Kedas]

Well we know now how they will bridge the long wait to Zen4 on AM5 Q4 2022.
Production start for V-cache is end this year so too early for Zen4 so this is certainly coming to AM4.
+15% Lisa said is "like an entire architectural generation"

 

[Doug S]

At some point soon (or just recently) the exclusivity agreement with Qualcomm expires. It is my opinion that Microsoft wants to move forward with a big WARM (windows on ARM) initiative to better compete with Apple. They are establishing the MS Surface line as a premium solution with similar levels of "nearly impossible to repair or upgrade" associated with each one. They have a store like Apple's walled garden. If they can take control of their silicon, they can make themselves independent of Intel and AMD and operate on their own schedule. Vertical integration is the name of the game at the top. The only piece that MS will be missing is mobile phones. Google isn't too far from that level of integration either. They have the phones, they have the Chromebook ecosystem, and they have a software stack. They are moving back into the tablet space now and are getting a smart watch as well.

I feel strongly that we are moving to a world that's largely built around Apple, MS and Google/Alphabet from the top down. Where that leaves Linux/Intel/AMD is anyone's guess.

Microsoft's hardware is generally about on the level of Samsung's software. Some companies need to stick with what put them in the position they're in today, and quit trying to be something they're not.

I agree with the other posters who suggest this has to do with cloud and not Microsoft wanting to be Apple.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

I don't know if there are any games that see that much of a difference, only in Intel's favor. I haven't looked into it extensively, nor do I care about trying to defend Intel. However, I think some people are exaggerating the effect of the results that adding MS Flight Simulator will have.

LTT benchmarked the game and saw a 22% (at 1080p) advantage for the 5800X3D over the 12900KS.

View attachment 62766

Add it to the 40 game benchmark from Techspot/HUB (who I believe said they didn't include the game because they couldn't get it running correctly on their Intel platform) and it doesn't change the overall average by a noticeable amount. This comped the 12900K to the 5800X3D, so it's not quite Intel's best, but I don't think it changes the overall results by much. Maybe it's 1% in Intel's favor, or even just flat even.

From their results it wouldn't even be the biggest outlier in the list. Doesn't really move the overall average either because they have too many titles for even one more game, even one heavily favoring one CPU by 20% to matter. MS Flight Simulator certainly is a strong outlier, even among other outliers, it's not as though there aren't games where Intel does better that on average it comes out in the wash.

The only way it matters is if you throw it into a six game benchmark in which case it can swing it by 4% (or more depending on what you compare it against) but a small sample size like that isn't as good because of that very reason. Unless you're going to contend there are a lot of games like MS Flight Simulator where AMD wins hard enough to make it an extreme outlier that are being excluded then your own argument can be used against you. Maybe there's some game out there that heavily favors Intel by that much, but I don't care to go looking for it. If it does exist, it may be just as or even more niche than Flight Simulator so I'm not eve sure you could make a compelling argument to include it as part of a benchmark suite other than to show the extremes that might exist at the other end.

My conclusion is still the same. MS Flight Simulator doesn't matter as much as people think if we're just considering averages. By all means get the 5800X3D if that's your game because it's hands down the best you can get. Otherwise adding it to a massive list of other benchmarks isn't going to move the average more than a fraction of a percentage point. Because it can't meaningfully change that average result the argument shifts to other factors and AMD kills it on cost, especially if you already have an AM4 board.

Let me provide a different perspective. And this is not aimed at you personally. It is a response to the entire way most treat these reviewers results.

We have been conditioned by decades of doing it this way, to accept it. The mentality is summed up in the tag line from the old man yells at clouds Dana Carvey character from SNL. "Because that's all there was! And we liked it!" Well that's not all there is anymore. So I do not rely on their extremely limited testing. Too many streamers and youtubers are playing the games, especially the most demanding parts and MP. Having a daily driver setup with discord, Spotify, RGB apps, and whatever else running may not be as reproduceable as what the big reviewers spit out, but it sure is way more realistic and useful to me.

For example: There is no way Aussie Steve jumped in a 64P map on Battlefield 5. Then did the same on the Alder Lake. Then did it 2 more times on each to get a fairly accurate idea of what each can do. Making his BF5 gaming data irrelevant for the BF5 MP crowd. Also potentially altering the advantage one or the other CPU truly has. Which can further skew average performance charts. He is one of the many, that runs canned benchmarks or does 60 second runs for almost every title. He obviously does not even monitor the benchmarks with sound on. Or he would know how badly the Pentiums and old Haswell and Skylake i3s he posted results for, can do, in even the canned bench of Shadow of the Tomb Raider. Failing to render scenes properly, missing NPCs, and audio issues. But hey, they do spit out some fairly nice numbers at the end. No thanks!

And I think it is incorrect to take the percentage advantage the 3D has in LTT's testing and add it to HUB's/Tech Spot's. Most of these big reviewers rationalize that they test the way they do, to control variables, and get reproduceable results that can easily be verified by others. Part of that scientific methodology should include that they share all their data. Which Steve did not do. Omitting the results was egregious. Particularly given he provided that data when comparing AMD CPUs. Proper form would be to share MSFS results as - Did Not Run, on the 12900ks and the actual numbers for the 3D. THEN add both to the averages and report. That goose egg is going to look really bad for multiple reasons.

Doesn't matter that it's MS's fault for the log in loop bug. It is testing data, you can't omit it and give Intel a free pass. What about all the problems with other games on Alder Lake? There are members here that state Assassin's Creed Odyssey is still broken and requires a extra steps to get full performance. That's due to Denuvo, but that also doesn't matter. It is part of the normal gaming experience and consequently that data is need to know for owners of the game considering ADL. Since all these big reviewers claim to be looking out for our interest, why not investigate which games are truly fixed, instead of sharing Intel press releases stating they are? I have a hypothesis about that.

I also think average game performance charts are misleading and rather dumb. Just list the charts you compiled, of gaming data you collected without actually playing the games Then let viewers peruse the list for the games they play or want to, to see which CPU is best for their needs. At least in so far as your minute man approach to playing games can approximate.

Anyways, feel free to ignore yet another Punisher rant about how we don't seem to be able to move past old school testing. And instead, embrace more modern, and IMO, objectively better testing practices. Practices that involve playing the games. Including games that are not one of the heavily marketed AAA genres, but have loyal player bases. Games that can rely much more heavily on CPU performance than anything you will see being churned out by big reviewers on a time is money schedule. Again, they are great for evaluating and explaining the hardware itself, but taking them seriously about gameplay? GTFudgeO.

 

[DrMrLordX]

TBH I think people need to start looking at Battlefield 2042 data now instead of BF5 which is aging. If I recall correctly, BF5 can have even more people in it.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

TBH I think people need to start looking at Battlefield 2042 data now instead of BF5 which is aging. If I recall correctly, BF2042 can have even more people in it.

Fixed the typo. And LOL! No one plays 2042, it is THE biggest fail in a long time. Ironical memes showing influencer gamer/streamers reaction to the prelaunch trailer have been a source of LULZ since release.

It would be interesting for science. If the game was not a hot mess. And, you could get a high enough percentage of a 128 real players, close enough to each other, on the map, to evaluate performance under those intense conditions.

 

[DrMrLordX]

It would be interesting for science. If the game was not a hot mess

That's really what I was getting at. I played the beta and it was . . . kind of interesting? But messy, and it doesn't seem to have gotten any better as a game. But as a performance benchmark for where multiplayer can take you? Heck yeah, use it.

Even bots connected to other clients will still tax the CPU and dGPU of a benchmark client.

 

[Panino Manino]

From the posted rules in the CPU forum.
You must post commentary to all links and images.


esquared
Anandtech Forum Director

 

[IEC]

From the video above:
1800X to 5800X3D in Far Cry 6:

69 FPS to 144 FPS

Very nice...
We've come a long long way in CPU performance since 2017

 

[DAPUNISHER]

From the video above:
1800X to 5800X3D in Far Cry 6:

69 FPS to 144 FPS

Very nice...
We've come a long long way in CPU performance since 2017

Definitely.

Other comments - 69fps Nice!

Also for single player games 60+ consistent is all that's needed. Making that old Zen still fully capable. Especially as Far Cry 6 is a pretty bad case scenario for AMD CPUs.

 

[Mopetar]

Very nice...
We've come a long long way in CPU performance since 2017

It's not so much the CPU performance, but the fact that you could get that on the same platform. As amazing as Zen has been, AM4 is one for the history books. Platforms rarely see this kind of support and if AMD told me that AM5 would see this much love I'd gladly buy in immediately knowing that even if supplies are tight and I couldn't get the exact CPU I wanted at launch that I'd still be able to upgrade 5 years later.

 

[moinmoin]

The AM4 comparisons should be between 5800X3D and A12-9800E. 😏

 

[DAPUNISHER]

That's really what I was getting at. I played the beta and it was . . . kind of interesting? But messy, and it doesn't seem to have gotten any better as a game. But as a performance benchmark for where multiplayer can take you? Heck yeah, use it.

Even bots connected to other clients will still tax the CPU and dGPU of a benchmark client.

On the map being played in this vid, a 10700f can hit above 60% usage at times. Mostly in the busier sections with Michael Bay EXPLOSIONS! involved.

 

[DrMrLordX]

On the map being played in this vid, a 10700f can hit above 60% usage at times. Mostly in the busier sections with Michael Bay EXPLOSIONS! involved.

I can believe it.

The AM4 comparisons should be between 5800X3D and A12-9800E. 😏

That would be a massacre. Not many people ran an A12-9800E. At least not in the West.

 

[BTRY B 529th FA BN]

How long do you think some of you will hold on to your 5800X3D? This might be one of those 10yr chips for me

 

[gdansk]

How long do you think some of you will hold on to your 5800X3D? This might be one of those 10yr chips for me

It seems possible there will be Zen 4 3D in 2023 and Zen 5 3D some point after that too.

 

[blckgrffn]

How long do you think some of you will hold on to your 5800X3D? This might be one of those 10yr chips for me

I rolled my 3930K for ~6/7 years and upgraded to the 3600 only to see if it was really worth it (spoiler alert, it was).

I just bought a nice X570S board for my 3D and yeah, my goal is to get to price dropped Zen 5/2nd gen AMD chipsets at a minimum. I would also like to skip the next GPU generation with my 6800 if possible. I overpaid, but I feel given the consoles fire power it should remain very relevant for at least 3/4 years. And since I moved my PC back under my desk, it cooks my legs as is. Looking at the rumored power consumption of future GPUs, I feel like I want a bunch more performance at same or ideally lower power usage but I am not too interested in investing in that atm.

So, ten years? No. Getting me off the iterative upgrade treadmill? Yes.

 

[Timorous]

I expect around 5 years or so.

 

[igor_kavinski]

And since I moved my PC back under my desk, it cooks my legs as is.

That is good for your blood circulation

 

[Hail The Brain Slug]

It seems possible there will be Zen 4 3D in 2023 and Zen 5 3D some point after that too.

At the FAD they said zen 4 with 3d cache was coming this year. They didn't indicate if that meant desktop or epyc, or both.

 

[inf64]

At the FAD they said zen 4 with 3d cache was coming this year. They didn't indicate if that meant desktop or epyc, or both.

I really doubt that Zen 4 with V cache is a 2022 product. If we are lucky we might get it by Q2 2023.

 

[rainy]

I really doubt that Zen 4 with V cache is a 2022 product. If we are lucky we might get it by Q2 2023.

I agree, that we will not see V-Cache Zen 4 models this year and in 2023 Genoa-X would be most likely first.

 

[Hitman928]

At the FAD they said zen 4 with 3d cache was coming this year. They didn't indicate if that meant desktop or epyc, or both.

Did they say it was releasing this year or going into production this year?

 

[desrever]

I really doubt that Zen 4 with V cache is a 2022 product. If we are lucky we might get it by Q2 2023.

Zen 4 3d has a check mark already in their slide. Which means it's basically ready. It is likely to release in 2022.

 

[inf64]

Zen 4 3d has a check mark already in their slide. Which means it's basically ready. It is likely to release in 2022.

Sure, the design is 100% complete, but we cannot deduce the timetable just by looking at that vague slide. I'd be great to see Vcache models this year, but I doubt it.

 

[Hail The Brain Slug]

Did they say it was releasing this year or going into production this year?

The quote I was given by a friend who watched the presentation was:

"We are proud of what V-Cache technology is doing for us, and we are going to feature this in Ryzen 7000 series later this year."
-Saeid Moshkelani

I suppose the quote implies mainstream desktop ryzen.

 

[Hitman928]

The quote I was given by a friend who watched the presentation was:

"We are proud of what V-Cache technology is doing for us, and we are going to feature this in Ryzen 7000 series later this year."
-Saeud Moshkelani

I suppose the quote implies mainstream desktop ryzen.

Thanks for the direct quote. I think it's not a direct confirmation of it releasing later this year but may strongly suggest it (by feature he may just mean that they will preview it as they did for Zen3D before it launched). We'll find out soon enough!