AMD Ryzen (Summit Ridge) Benchmarks Thread (use new thread)

[superstition]

Zen was supposed to launch in Q4 2016 so this is definitely no "early ES" we are talking about here.

Launch in Q4 but mainstream retail availability in Q1 2017?

Broadwell C launched and was only available in ES form (mainly from Japanese sellers) for quite some time after the first chips sold out I think.

Even if a small number of chips are put on Newegg in Q4 it may be that Zen won't ship in volume until later, giving AMD and GF more time to tweak things.

 

[The Stilt]

You need to have the final silicon roughly 6 months prior shipping even the first ones to the customers.
That's the time the validation of silicon and manufacturing / assembly takes, at minimum.

 

[Sweepr]

Another comparison using stock Intel chips:

- Summit Ridge 8C/16T ES - 2.8-3.2 GHz (2016/2017 Zen)
Average: 58.9 FPS
Normal batch: 65.8 FPS
Medium batch: 62.8 FPS
Heavy batch: 50.5 FPS

- Core i7-4770 4C/8T 3.4-3.9 GHz (2013 Haswell)
Average: 66.0 FPS
Normal batch: 74.5 FPS
Medium batch: 69.5 FPS
Heavy batch: 56.6 FPS

The Haswell score is based on the latest version of the benchmark included in the search engine (1.24.20823.0). And just in case, an extra benchmark proving it scales with more than 4C/8T:

3.0 GHz Haswell-E beating 4.0 GHz Skylake-S.

 

[superstition]

You need to have the final silicon roughly 6 months prior shipping even the first ones to the customers.
That's the time the validation of silicon and manufacturing / assembly takes, at minimum.

If there are small tweaks perhaps the validation time can be reduced. How long did it take AMD to fix the TLB bug (Phenom B3 stepping)?

 

[Abwx]

Another comparison using stock Intel chips:

Your call this a comparison..?.

Zen is coupled with a RX480 while your 6700K "comparison" use a GTX1080...

 

[The Stilt]

If there are small tweaks perhaps the validation time can be reduced. How long did it take AMD to fix the TLB bug (Phenom B3 stepping)?

Around 4 months. But that was when AMD was running with ample resources, not on a skeleton crew like they now do.

 

[Sweepr]

Your call this a comparison..?.

Zen is coupled with a RX480 while your 6700K "comparison" use a GTX1080...

We're comparing the CPU scores/FPS, different GPUs won't change the end result. The i7-4770 result I just added above uses a slower GTX 970.

 

[Zstream]

So, it's around haswell v3-1231 levels (my current cpu), in terms of IPC and frequency. That's not bad at all (non-biased) for pre-production silicon. I bet they can squeeze 5-10% more out of it by final silicon, that is, if this isn't already final.

 

[know of fence]

We're comparing the CPU scores/FPS, different GPUs won't change the end result. The i7-4770 result I just added above uses a slower GTX 970.

That's the question, isn't it? I'm fairly certain this isn't a CPU benchmark like 3D mark, but some kind of combined meta nonsense.

I tried comparing the scores of the same type CPU, but the CPU Framerate results are all over the place. Ranging from 71 to 37 "CPU framerate". Narrowed criteria to the Version 1.24, DX12 as well as a non-K CPU i5-6500.

Here are four results I've found.
http://www.ashesofthesingularity.com/metaverse#/ladders/benchmark/overall/Medium_1080p?viewType=myself&filters={"cpu":"Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-6500 CPU @ 3.20GHz","api":"DirectX 12","gameVersion":"1.24.20823.0"}

The takeaway is we can't rely on CPU-score, but must treat this like every other "Game benchmark".

 

[CHADBOGA]

These benchmarks are hardly conclusive at this stage, so I would be holding my fire for a little while longer.

 

[Asterox]

And the game definitely takes advantage of more than 4C/8T:

The number of CPU Cores/Threads in not important, because AOTS game optimally uses maximum 6 threads.Do you remember PS4, yes it has 8 Core CPU but only 6 cores in used for gaming.For the end carefully look at the link, and pay attention to the Phenom II X4 955 FPS score in DX12 test.

https://semiaccurate.com/2016/02/24/looking-at-directx-12-performance-in-ashes-of-the-singularity/

If ES Zen CPU has 8 Cores /16 Threads 2.8ghz stock, and game is optimally using 6 Threads then the situation is very clear.

 

[sm625]

I dont think people are seeing just how bad this is.

When I look at those two screenshots I am seeing the 4670K being more than 60% faster than Zen! What am I not seeing? This is such an epic disaster I'd be dropping 6 figures on AMD puts right now if I didnt think the market was totally broken. AMD stock should be down 80% tomorrow, because they are donezo. But being in the twilight zone that we are, I wouldnt be surprised if it went up 20% just for kicks. Swiss Central Bank > fundermentals.

 

[Abwx]

I dont think people are seeing just how bad this is.

When I look at those two screenshots I am seeing the 4670K being more than 60% faster than Zen! What am I not seeing? This is such an epic disaster I'd be dropping 6 figures on AMD puts right now if I didnt think the market was totally broken. AMD stock should be down 80% tomorrow, because they are donezo. But being in the twilight zone that we are, I wouldnt be surprised if it went up 20% just for kicks. Swiss Central Bank > fundermentals.

http://www.ashesofthesingularity.co...-details/45895c0c-0deb-467c-8a94-87f3c1356ffe

 

[ffleader1]

I dont think people are seeing just how bad this is.

When I look at those two screenshots I am seeing the 4670K being more than 60% faster than Zen! What am I not seeing? This is such an epic disaster I'd be dropping 6 figures on AMD puts right now if I didnt think the market was totally broken. AMD stock should be down 80% tomorrow, because they are donezo. But being in the twilight zone that we are, I wouldnt be surprised if it went up 20% just for kicks. Swiss Central Bank > fundermentals.

I created a whole new account just to make this comment:
On Standard 1080p, why don't you use the latest (8/9) benchmark for comparison, but rather used the oldest one. On the latest one, it scored 58 FPS. The OP already said that.

 

[swilli89]

My guess is that final retail silicon won't be much better. At this stage of the development process, it's too late for sweeping changes.

This. Is. Zen.

Man that's a grim outlook over an unconfirmed rumor about a supposed 3ghz super early engineering sample with unknown system configuration.

 

[Abwx]

That's the question, isn't it. I'm fairly certain this isn't a CPU benchmark like 3D mark, but some kind of combined meta nonsense.
.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/3039...es-you-really-need-for-directx-12-gaming.html

Again, like 3DMark, I ran the test with a single AMD Radeon Fury X card and varied the CPU and Hyper-Threading. What you’re seeing is the “average CPU frame rate” result, which the developer Stardock said is an indicator of performance if you had infinite GPU resources.

The OP should be corrected as it s not the benchmark results that were posted as already pointed in many posts, apparently posting fraudulous info is not a problem for some member..

Man that's a grim outlook over an unconfirmed rumor about a supposed 3ghz super early engineering sample with unknown system configuration.

Even at 2.8GHz numbers are good :

http://wccftech.com/amd-zen-es-benchmarks/

This explain the fud that is enginered by here..

 

[jhu]

Any actual CPU (non-gaming) benchmarks?

 

[bystander36]

The number of CPU Cores/Threads in not important, because AOTS game optimally uses maximum 6 threads.Do you remember PS4, yes it has 8 Core CPU but only 6 cores in used for gaming.For the end carefully look at the link, and pay attention to the Phenom II X4 955 FPS score in DX12 test.

https://semiaccurate.com/2016/02/24/looking-at-directx-12-performance-in-ashes-of-the-singularity/

If ES Zen CPU has 8 Cores /16 Threads 2.8ghz stock, and game is optimally using 6 Threads then the situation is very clear.

As you can see from a few different graphs, the game clearly uses at least 8 cores, if not more. Where much lower clocked 8 core/16 thread CPU's are beating out Skylake 4 core/ 8 thread CPU's.

 

[HiroThreading]

Hardly surprising.

I'm just bemused at all the people who expected Zen to perform around Haswell/Sandy Bridge levels.

It's a new architecture on a new process, AMD's R&D budget is significantly cash strapped relative to Intel's and the design is designed for many cores at lower speeds. Just think how much money and engineering man-hours Intel had to spend to get their wide uarchs to clock at 4.20GHz while battling the leaky 14nm process. Yet, you expect AMD to do the same with double the cores and one-tenth the resources?

Also, the design was set over a year ago -- there's no way to change it now to get higher performance. The only improvements that could possibly be achieved would come from clock speeds increases from a silicon respin and process improvements. But you're not going to see an improvement from 3.00GHz to 4.00GHz. It's never going to happen. Ever.

 

[SPBHM]

I think this is not to bad, I would assume this benchmark doesn't really scale well beyond 8 threads, so it's decent enough to compare Zen ES with the FX 8350 from the WCCF graph, that's 58 vs 43 FPS, with 3 vs 4GHz +-

hopefully the final hardware is going to be clocked higher.

 

[jpiniero]

The only improvements that could possibly be achieved would come from clock speeds increases from a silicon respin and process improvements. But you're not going to see an improvement from 3.00GHz to 4.00GHz. It's never going to happen. Ever.

It may still be capable of hitting 4 Ghz; just not at anywhere near 95W.

 

[Markfw]

I don't understand why everyone is worried. What are the system configs ? what video cards are used ? Why are there no CPU benchmarks ?

This appears to be a very heavily tweaked bunch of stats to make a product look bad. I used to work in statistics, and you can make anything look good or bad if you design the test badly.

When a real site benchmarks it, talk to me, until then this is just flame fodder.


Mod note: I have had numerous reports on this thread, and what I posted attempts to summarize what everyone has said. I have restrained myself from infracting more members, but note that my patience is wearing thin. If you disagree or agree, say so without talking about people, and state that its opinion.

 

[RussianSensation]

As you can see from a few different graphs, the game clearly uses at least 8 cores, if not more. Where much lower clocked 8 core/16 thread CPU's are beating out Skylake 4 core/ 8 thread CPU's.

Did no one in this thread bother to ask the question of how a 4.2Ghz 6700K is 63% faster than a 4.5Ghz i7 2600K? That's almost a 75% increase in IPC for Skylake over Sandy.

Before we even try to compare Zen, I dare anyone in this thread to find me 1 AAA PC game made in the last 10 years where a stock 6700K is 63% faster than a 4.5Ghz 2600K....Go ahead, I'll be waiting.

While at it, then explain to me as well how i5-6400 gets leveled by i5 2500K 4.5Ghz in the same benchmark after seeing > 70% IPC advantage for Skylake over Sandy....

I have 0 interest in Zen as I already bought a 6700K a long time ago but CPU benchmarks from Ashes are about as useful as used toilet paper to me. I don't know a single game in the world where a stock 6700K would level a 4.5Ghz 2600K by more than 60%. The only way I see something like this happen is with the latest AVX/2 instruction set(s). What developer makes AAA games with that?

Finally, we know that 6700K can't overclock much beyond 4.8Ghz on air. How do we know that 3.2Ghz 8-core Zen cannot overclock to 4.8Ghz? I am not saying it can, but we also cannot yet rule out that Zen could have a lot better % overclocking headroom than Skylake.

Either way, I would pick 6700K over 6900/6950X, which means Zen was always a non-starter for me. Even if 8-core Zen matched 6700K in IPC, I still wouldn't buy it since 99% of PC games don't use more than 4C+HT, which means I'd be wasting $$$ I could use to get a 4K monitor or a faster GPU instead. That's why to me AMD should have went all in on 4 core fast IPC CPU. I have 0 use for an 8 core CPU as I have moved away from distributed computing over the years.

OTOH, let's say I actually needed an 8-core CPU -- Intel's cheapest is $1089 USD. That gives AMD room to price Zen between $350-699 and still undercut the 6900K to the point where they aren't competitors. Thus, for me Zen was never going to live up to gaming expectations but for someone who wants a multi-threaded CPU for [insert whatever tasks] a $545 8-core Zen would cost 1/2 of a 6900K. Is that a FAIL? I don't know, I don't buy $1090 CPUs for productivity but on paper if 6900K isn't 2x faster, 8-core Zen priced < $600 has a market.

 

[Markfw]

Well said RS

 

[NostaSeronx]

Did no one in this thread bother to ask the question of how a 4.2Ghz 6700K is 63% faster than a 4.5Ghz i7 2600K? That's almost a 75% increase in IPC for Skylake over Sandy.

DX12 Math Dispatcher => AVX2(256-bit Integer) or AVX(128-bit Integer).

It is also why the dual-core and quad-core part is about as fast as the 8-core Piledriver with 2 128-bit packed integer units per module.