300W for 16C SKU overclocked probably means pushing the chip to max OC on all cores (which is hopefully close to 4.7-4.8Ghz). This is completely expected power consumption given the fact that all cores are running at increased clock and Vcore.
It would be stupid to make the SC turbo much lower than 5GHz if the CPU could OC to it. Losing against the 9900k in benchmarks for no reason by doing that makes no sense. Doesn't follow AMD's recent MO either, the SC turbo on the highest clocking SKUs is now beyond what you can reach by overclocking all cores, they don't leave much performance on the table at stock...Yes it does that is overclocking headroom, or by defoult you have higher IPC+not very high stock CPU clocks.
Ryzen 7 2700X is 4ghz all core turbo+overclocking headroom is 200mhz
Ryzen 7 3700X is 4.3ghz all core turbo+10-15% higher IPC+overclocking headroom is 400-500mhz
Ok, but what is the max? Adored said 16C was 16/32 @ 5.1Ghz with less than half that wattage. So, 5.8Ghz @ 300W?? Lol, I'm getting confused. But maybe 6ghz is on the table heheh.
Old Jim claims at 135W at stock.
So do you think power consumption is going to more than double when overclocked?
When was that pretty clear? If they have similar IPC (they do) and they are rumoured to hit similar clocks, why wouldn't we expect them to perform similarly?.. Only difference is Mt and efficiency, which AMD should win easily.what? I mean that was pretty clear that won't happen mainly due to clocks. however it will be close enough and you get double the cores for same power use.
Nothing is decided that far out yes, but meetings and idea's are, placeholder internal road maps are, this doesn't invalidate anything so far.If they were over half a year ago, naming, prices, clocks and anything would not exist. AMD dosent do that, the product lineup, clocks and prices are decided at the very last moment. Just accept it.
facepalm.jpg
Nothing is decided that far out yes, but meetings and idea's are, placeholder internal road maps are, this doesn't invalidate anything so far.
If we don't get to a 5ghz turbo then that will be a black mark.
Dates, names and pricing can be expected to be changed, clocks can be adjusted, but if there is too much of a difference in the actual specs then we will have to say his source was wrong.Will it? If so it will be one entirely created by a number of online individuals. What can intel CPUs overclock to, and is there boost equivalent to their capable overclcocks? I suspect not, but of course the shills have already set those arbitrary expectations.
IMO this is ridiculous.
If we don't get to a 5ghz turbo then that will be a black mark.
Give him a break. He passed on the best information that he had. That information changed, so now he is changing what he is saying. Nothing was known before. It still isn't.Old Jim/AdoredTV is a fraud.
He's now backpedaling, on twitter, almost everything he said.
That includes now upping the price of the 12-core to now $400.
How is he a fraud? Don't make things personal mate, either his sources are correct or they are wrong, doesn't mean he is a fraud.Old Jim/AdoredTV is a fraud.
He's now backpedaling, on twitter, almost everything he said.
That includes now upping the price of the 12-core to now $400.
Give him a break. He passed on the best information that he had. That information changed, so now he is changing what he is saying. Nothing was known before. It still isn't.
How is he a fraud? Don't make things personal mate, either his sources are correct or they are wrong, doesn't mean he is a fraud.
The only one inventing things is you.
Firstly how do you know that 'random guy' is not a legit person with legit knowledge?His "source" is some random guy on Reddit.
The guy even posted emails showing him exchanging messages with old Jim.
Unfortunately, both the guy and old Jim deleted their reddit accounts, so it's now hard to find.
Dates, names and pricing can be expected to be changed, clocks can be adjusted, but if there is too much of a difference in the actual specs then we will have to say his source was wrong.
He said 5ghz for the 12 core, so if we get 4.9ghz and it OC to 5ghz that could be within margin, but any less than that and it is off.. At least on that detail.
Of course he got a few things right if we get 6 core as lowest end 7nm part until renoir, also he got the IO die/chiplet thing right, 12 and 16 core.
APISAK has also found a 6/12 chip that matches his speculated clockspeeds of a SKU.
Firstly how do you know that 'random guy' is not a legit person with legit knowledge?
Second; Jim has stated he has multiple sources.
Thirdly; You are throwing out the fact he has leaked multiple details that have been correct, so either these 'random guys' are fortune tellers, or at least some of their information has been correct.
Like I said, only errors on the hard specifications will be a black mark in my eyes, as those take years to plan, dates, names and prices can and do change on a whim.
Like has been said, he got multiple things right, things you can't guess really, so the black mark is on his source getting up to date and correct information on all things.I think I misunderstood, the black mark will be on Jim? If yes, then I do 100% agree. He is responsible for hyper inflating expectations which will enable a wave of faux 'disappointed' reactions across the web (exactly how I would do it if I was an opposition PR firm hired by the competition). Whether it be Jim or his sources is irrelevant, unless he were to reveal his 'source' which certainly he won't, he will be the person responsible. The rumor mill is toxic to the tech community, yet they keep on keeping on.
As for the boost to 5GHz mark, i was referring to the numerous posts around that seem to question why a certain chip wouldn't boost to 5 GHz if it can overclock to 5 GHz. I can't believe this actually needs a response, but is there any precedence ever for this being the case? I can't remember any conditions placed on any other chip or chip release that claims if a chip can OC to a certain amount then it should be able to boost to that state as well.
He was the first leaking the chiplet design and hinting at 2 chiplets on AM4 (16C)
This is my point.. That is YOUR conjecture and guess work, you even admit to it! Lol.It's probably 20% leaks and 80% speculation.
He uses bits and pieces of information along with his own conjecture to construct his "leaks"
Speaking of leaks... I read one here in the last few hours that says only the x570 motherboard will bew discussed, and reviews on June 10th, and preoerders on the 1st of July. again, LEAKS, not fact. I am waiting, but not as sure as I was that it will all come out.This is my point.. That is YOUR conjecture and guess work, you even admit to it! Lol.
Be objective and take leaks with a grain of salt, we will see what is right in a few hours.