They said march for server chips...
They also said October and then 2016 for Summit Ridge too.
They said march for server chips...
Well, the GB4 leak had ridiculously bad memory characteristics, considering it was running a 128GB setup (your example with bad memory performance runs a 1TB setup).I picked the E5 with the best MT score when i did my comparision, the one you have picked for whatever reason is an outlier compared to the other 44 core E5 results.
https://browser.primatelabs.com/v4/cpu/45716
but then look at the sub score differences between your one and my one and you will see the likely difference is memory speed. So what speed memory is Zen running?
Post a link, please.Who knows. Anyway, I'm going to run my BDW-E at 1.44GHz (DDR4-2400) and see what single core score I get...
Well, the GB4 leak had ridiculously bad memory characteristics, considering it was running a 128GB setup (your example with bad memory performance runs a 1TB setup).
So, Desktop 6-core Coffee lake will come first (H2 2017) but its the Laptop 6-Core SKU coming one year later (Q2 2018) thats the reason we have the desktop part ??? is this some form of surrealism or what ??
No, it's actually very simple. The reason you see 6C/12T Coffe Lake for desktops is - mobile is getting it - Intel might be confident about its performance at 35-45W TDP level. They wouldn't bother otherwise, especially with 6C/12T HEDT coming close to LGA 115x i7 pricing. And let me refresh your memory: Skylake launched first for desktop PCs so don't play surprised here. I expect the same for Coffee Lake based on the DigiTimes rumor.
Wait, you are thinking Intel will release Coffee Lake in 2017 on the desktop? Uh, no. Kabylake-S in January, yes, and then Kaby/Skylake-X in the middle of the year.
In GB4 Zen @ 1.44GHz gets a single-core score of 1141.
https://browser.primatelabs.com/v4/cpu/488835
Xeon E5 2699v4 @ 3.6GHz single core gets a single core score of 3616. 3616*(1.44/3.6) = 1446.
Well, the GB4 leak had ridiculously bad memory characteristics, considering it was running a 128GB setup (your example with bad memory performance runs a 1TB setup).
Post a link, please.
I'd say the Naples rig that did a re-appearance in the Geekbench database is still either doing some low-level debugging in the background (SBDAR), or alternatively operating at significantly lower speed than we are expecting (based on the SKU) it to. In case the result would represent the actual relative performance on Zeppelin, AMD's board better start packing. Including the CEO.
Geekbench 4 seemed to detect that my 6950x was running at 1.4GHz, so I think it was running at 1.44GHz.
Anyway, it could very well have been doing some stuff in the background or something else to nuke the performance. If these results really are representative of the kind of perf/MHz that Zen will deliver, then...yeah, that'd be really bad.
Did you adjust the frequency in flight (i.e after Windows has loaded) or did you boot at that speed?
AFAIK Geekbench shows the frequency which the system has been booted at.
But yeah, their hardware detection / monitoring is pretty pathetic / obsolete. They aqquire the hardware information with CPU-Z SDK, which is dated to 2013 IIRC (i.e extremely outdated), even in Geekbench 4.
I put the data in a nice chart to compare with the leaked Zen GB4 results:
Anyway, it could very well have been doing some stuff in the background or something else to nuke the performance. If these results really are representative of the kind of perf/MHz that Zen will deliver, then...yeah, that'd be really bad.
They also said October and then 2016 for Summit Ridge too.
Geekbench 4 seemed to detect that my 6950x was running at 1.4GHz, so I think it was running at 1.44GHz.
.
If it was running at 1.44GHz it would match BDW in the FP tests, or at least in the ray tracing test, yet according to your graph even if Zen had 100% scaling in SMT it would still be roughly 30% below BDW in the Blender test displayed by AMD.