Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)

Page 723 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

leoneazzurro

Golden Member
Jul 26, 2016
1,051
1,709
136
AT SPECint showing 13% improvement overall. The 9700x has a slight clock speed advantage according to boost specs, but without knowing actual running clock speeds, we can't calculate IPC. It is 9% improvement if we assume spec boost speeds, but With Zen 4/5, that's not a safe assumption (could be higher than spec). SPECfp showed significantly higher improvement at 26% overall. For consumer purposes, too many resources were used to improve FP versus INT. For some server customers, maybe AI (?), this will be really good.

Hwupgrade review found a substantial clock difference between the 7700X-7600X and 9700X-9600X, because the TDP holds back the performance for these SKUs. In Cinebench they foung 500MHz all-core clock difference between the 7700X and 9700X, with the 7700X consuming 40W more, and the 9700X was slightly faster.
 

Hitman928

Diamond Member
Apr 15, 2012
6,049
10,379
136
Expectation: Zen 35%
Reality: Zen 5%
THE HARSH REALITY: Zen -5%

Reality: Zen 10% at greater efficiency.
Harsh Reality: Lowered TDP requires PBO on to see performance improvements in many cases.

The browser benchmarks from Phoronix are so interesting. I don't know what sets these tests a part so much. From what I understand, browsing can be very branchy and hard to predict, but I don't know if that holds true for these scripted benchmarks. Maybe the improved branch predictor and dual decoder front end shines here?


 

CouncilorIrissa

Senior member
Jul 28, 2023
520
1,995
96
Reality: Zen 10% at greater efficiency.
Harsh Reality: Lowered TDP requires PBO on to see performance improvements in many cases.

The browser benchmarks from Phoronix are so interesting. I don't know what sets these tests a part so much. From what I understand, browsing can be very branchy and hard to predict, but I don't know if that holds true for these scripted benchmarks. Maybe the improved branch predictor and dual decoder front end shines here?

View attachment 104651
View attachment 104652
BPU is great if you look at the tests done by Huang.
It's something else that holds everything back.
 

Hitman928

Diamond Member
Apr 15, 2012
6,049
10,379
136
Hwupgrade review found a substantial clock difference between the 7700X-7600X and 9700X-9600X, because the TDP holds back the performance for these SKUs. In Cinebench they foung 500MHz all-core clock difference between the 7700X and 9700X, with the 7700X consuming 40W more, and the 9700X was slightly faster.

That's all core load. I'm talking single core clocks.
 
Reactions: Tlh97 and yuri69

branch_suggestion

Senior member
Aug 4, 2023
372
829
96
The worst part is that we’ll be stuck with this total dud of a core for years and Zen6 will only bring iterative improvements over it. At least improvements to the uncore will be something to look forward to.
Z6 is by the Z4/Z2 team, they know how to iterate on an existing core, just hope they get a nice bump in area to play with.
If they can reintroduce a lot of the Z4 refinements and optimisations than Z5 is missing that would be fantastic.
 
Reactions: exquisitechar

In2Photos

Golden Member
Mar 21, 2007
1,969
2,006
136
Der8auer tested the 9700X against 3 other AMD chips and looked at power draw for all tests. Shows productivity between 7700X/9700X is similar with 30-40% less power consumption on the 9700X. But for gaming, the performance is roughly the same, with very little difference in power consumption. He then plays around with PBO. Was able to get ~5.3GHz all core. Saw a 21% increase in Cinebench R23 MT, but nearly doubled the power consumption. PBO didn't help much in games.

Yeah, this is a weird release. I guess these would make good office/productivity chips with lower power consumption, but for gaming, they suck!!!

 

gdansk

Platinum Member
Feb 8, 2011
2,838
4,221
136
Looking like a long reign for the 7800X3D gaming champ.

Other tests show web browser performance improvement. I guess they did figure out a way to target improved interpreter and JIT performance.
 
Reactions: lightmanek

Hitman928

Diamond Member
Apr 15, 2012
6,049
10,379
136
I was right! I guess this is an apt demonstration of the phenomenon "hyped to the death". First try was done with N31, but at least there were some performance gains, although at big W cost, lul.

No one is showing -5%. Why are a couple of posters trying to gaslight, lol.

GN plotted thermals. Temps have been improved with Zen 5. Could just be down to more accurate sensor placement, but either way, Zen 5 shouldn't be as hard to cool. Hopefully this is true for the 3D cache models as well.

 

tsamolotoff

Member
May 19, 2019
174
304
136
No one is showing -5%. Why are a couple of posters trying to gaslight, lol.
Of course, it's a joke, just a reference how unmet expectations form opinions. Same people that hyped the current gen GPUs and CPUs fomented unrealistic expectations of huge gains that ultimately soured the mood among reviewers and potential buyers alike.

Also, it's very puzzling why AMD opted for this 'efficiency-first' PPT approach with such small gains in highly visible usecases (or if they just waited and released it with x3d SKUs then the middling 'gaming' "IPC" wouldn't be so jarring)
 

IEC

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Jun 10, 2004
14,436
5,410
136
From AT's review - there are some workloads (e.g. AVX512) where the new architecture truly shines...


My take:
At stock TDP, comparing 9700X to vanilla 7700 gives a more accurate generational Zen 4 v 5 comparison

The good:
Power efficiency is WAY better than my 7700X stock - there's a reason why I ran it in ECO mode
Some workloads (like above) show huge leaps in performance vs Zen 4

The bad:
SEP prices still a tad high given the lower absolute increases in performance IMO. We all know that a few months after launch prices will trend down so I expect it will be on sale before Xmas

The ugly:
I think we've seen for multiple generations now (both CPU and GPU) that it's generally not worth it to upgrade every gen. The low-hanging fruit for improvement has been plucked already and physical limits are making it harder to get the big gains we all want. Which means waiting at least 2 gens for a meaningful upgrade.
 

gdansk

Platinum Member
Feb 8, 2011
2,838
4,221
136
What I'm really wondering is if the X3D cache uplift will be as much as the previous generation, it might be somewhat less if its the exact same cache.
I think the TSVs are in different locations so it is probably not the exact same cache die. Whether it ends up with more capacity or not is an interesting question.
 
Reactions: Joe NYC

reaperrr3

Junior Member
May 31, 2024
14
37
51
While Zen5 is certainly a far cry from what some of the earlier hype suggested, I honestly think some posts here (and some of the somewhat clickbaity YT reviews) are more negative than is justified.

- the Computerbase review clearly shows IPC is a double-digit increase over Zen4, including in games. It even blows Raptor IPC out of the water by quite a bit, despite only half the L2 and 67% the L3 per core.
Clockspeed (especially all-core) is all it's lacking, which is partially the result of the low default TDP, partially due to the backport from N3E to N4P.
- 9700X's MT problem is clearly the low TDP/PPT, it's running up to 500 MHz (!) below a 7700 and up to 900 (!) MHz below a 7700X with all cores under full MT load. I don't get why AMD didn't just go with at least 95W TDP/125W PPT for this one, would've still been cooler and more efficient than a 7700X while beating it much more clearly in MT.
- despite only a slightly better process and nearly 30% bigger cores, it doesn't consume much more power per clock than Zen4 and beats it in Perf/W.

The SKUs are somewhat poorly chosen/configured (and too expensive for the performance) and from what I read on the computerbase review, the AGESA/memory support situation was pretty much a nightmare until a couple of days ago, sure.
But that's all "only" poor SKU and launch management by AMD (which is disappointing in its own way, of course).
Zen5 as such isn't a dud as some people are claiming, and certainly no Bulldozer.
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |