Gamers who buy day 0 already has the 7800X3D, so there's really no need to rush. Productivity day 0 buyers are waiting for 9900X and 9950X and possibly for stability bios updates.Current Sales at Mindfactory after 5 hours:
Not even 10 sold for both 9600X and 9700X.
No, I didn't miss a 0, it says "more than 5 sold" and next step would be "more than 10 sold".
Thats exactly what i meant.I think he means to say that RAM speed is meaningless when the required data cannot be found in RAM. That's when the perceptible delay is felt. If more RAM allows more data to be held in RAM and prevents going to disk, then in that case, it's better to have more RAM than speedier RAM. This obviously is for limited cases where the application preloads the entire working set into RAM and then works on that exclusively, without needing to go to disk until the task is finished. He does have a point that speedier RAM may not help in limited RAM capacity scenarios.
No man. From an AMD fan.The chiplet crap and higher RAM latency will nullify any compute advantage it has.
I guess my point was, you can have use for more cores without the need for more bandwith - as is clearly the case of rendering. In which case i dont need Threadripper, neither i am inclined to pay premium for it.
I get why its tough luck and AMD wont do it (want to force people to buy TRs to extract more money), why do you care though, if it does not concern you, and feel a need to defend them, thats truly beyond me.
3D stacking! Coming soon near you, brought to you by TSMC!How would they even fit 3-4 CCD's...
These are pricey, but still, that s about 2x more sales per hour than Intel s whole line up for the last week wich was an average of 2 CPUs per hour over 168 hours, so even at this rate there s nothing that will be left for the competition...Current Sales at Mindfactory after 5 hours:
Not even 10 sold for both 9600X and 9700X.
No, I didn't miss a 0, it says "more than 5 sold" and next step would be "more than 10 sold".
Possibly moronic question but does Zen 5 qualify as an architecture or a micro-architecture?
There's enough changes in the frontend (and the back too to be fair) to completely change the performance expectations vis à vis the Zen 1 -> Zen 4 era.
It's just semantics but I'm not even sure if it qualifies as "reworking an arch" or "is a new arch" entirely. It feels very new to me.
| CPU | GB6.2 1T Pts | Peak 1T Freq. (GHz) | Pts / GHz | Pts / GHz % |
| Apple M4 | 3715 | 4.400 | 844 | 118.7% |
| Apple M3 Pro (12C) | 3138 | 4.056 | 774 | 108.8% |
| Apple M2 Pro | 2663 | 3.504 | 760 | 106.9% |
| Apple M1 Pro | 2409 | 3.220 | 748 | 105.2% |
| Qualcomm X1E-80-100 | 2845 | 4.000 | 711 | 100.0% |
| Arm Cortex-X4 (8G3 Galaxy) | 2287 | 3.390 | 675 | 94.9% |
| Arm Cortex-X3 (8G2 Galaxy) | 2107 | 3.360 | 627 | 88.2% |
| AMD 9700X | 3372 | 5.525 | 610 | 85.8% |
| Arm Cortex-X2 (8+G1) | 1806 | 3.200 | 564 | 79.3% |
| AMD HX 370 | 2877 | 5.100 | 564 | 79.3% |
| Intel i9-14900K | 3294 | 6.000 | 549 | 77.2% |
| AMD 7950X | 3083 | 5.700 | 541 | 76.0% |
| Arm Cortex-X1 (G3X G1) | 1596 | 2.995 | 533 | 74.9% |
| Intel i9-12900HK | 2611 | 5.000 | 522 | 73.4% |
| Intel Ultra 185H | 2573 | 5.100 | 505 | 71.0% |
| Intel Ultra 125U | 2163 | 4.300 | 503 | 70.7% |
| AMD 7840U | 2562 | 5.100 | 502 | 70.6% |
| Intel i7-1365U | 2583 | 5.200 | 497 | 69.9% |
| Intel i5-1255U | 2313 | 4.700 | 492 | 69.2% |
| AMD 6800H | 2063 | 4.700 | 439 | 61.7% |
I'm talking this because i think that the GPU is the next big thing to be integrated to processors.May be a little OT, but i think that the ps5pro with rdna 3.5 plus rdna 4 RT means that the PS soc mean AMD will jump from there to RDNA5. Anyone that constantly saw amd putting their product roadmap got that the jump to RDNA3.5 next gen means that they are enforcing the personel and opening the money faucets for the RDNA5, a.k.a. the Zen of AMD GPUs.
Edit: Nevermind.I'm talking this because i think that the GPU is the next big thing to be integrated to processors.
You guys live mostly at 1st world countries where these products are not so costly that i(a 3rd world citizen) can't buy a decent GPU without using a crap mobo in an aging platform. If Strix Halo shows that no dGPU is necessary to 1080p ultra playing, so is likely that will sell a lot if not priced as a real Halo product.
That figure for the 7950X is really not accurate.FWIW, Zen5 is unequivocally a microarchitecture; any front-end or back-end changes → a new uArch (aka microarchitecture).
AMD certainly follows that industry standard convention, e.g., the Zen4 microarchitecture.
//
I'll update this chart later when the bigger SKUs launch, but thought I'd share my updated GB6.2 1T "IPC" chart with Zen5 numbers. The relative 100% is QC's Oryon 80 SKU, but I'm a bit lazy to change it atm.
CPU GB6.2 1T Pts Peak 1T Freq. (GHz) Pts / GHz Pts / GHz % Apple M4 3715 4.400 844 118.7% Apple M3 Pro (12C) 3138 4.056 774 108.8% Apple M2 Pro 2663 3.504 760 106.9% Apple M1 Pro 2409 3.220 748 105.2% Qualcomm X1E-80-100 2845 4.000 711 100.0% Arm Cortex-X4 (8G3 Galaxy) 2287 3.390 675 94.9% Arm Cortex-X3 (8G2 Galaxy) 2107 3.360 627 88.2% AMD 9700X 3372 5.525 610 85.8% Arm Cortex-X2 (8+G1) 1806 3.200 564 79.3% AMD HX 370 2877 5.100 564 79.3% Intel i7-14900K 3243 6.000 541 76.0% Arm Cortex-X1 (G3X G1) 1596 2.995 533 74.9% Intel i9-12900HK 2611 5.000 522 73.4% AMD 7950X 2975 5.700 522 73.4% Intel i5-1355U 2595 5.000 519 73.0% AMD 7840U 2562 5.100 502 70.6% Intel i3-1215U 2082 4.400 473 66.5% AMD 6800H 2063 4.700 439 61.7%
610 (9700X) / 522 (7950X) → a quite substantial 16.9% uplift in Pts / GHz. Mobile chips are often a tad lower.
EDIT: forgot my sources! TweakTown for the 9700X; Notebookcheck for the HX 370.
Really? I get that in Linux but about 3100 in Windows. You're not using PBO or offsets?That figure for the 7950X is really not accurate. I see 3250-3300 single with my 7950X at stock 6000C30 EXPO in windows 11
Memory issue - http://www.portvapes.co.uk/?id=Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps&exid=thread...ranite-ridge-ryzen-9000.2607350/post-41238682Really? I get that in Linux but about 3100 in Windows. You're not using PBO or offsets?
Is any validation 100% successful? By Puget data 4% of Zen4 chips are DOA. Why start another fear mongering discussion in a thread that is already full of disappointment? I bet we are still not done with people coming to post about underwhelming gaming performance, so it's not like this thread is going to die out any time soonI'm going to start my own rumor that Gamer's Nexus getting a seemingly defective 9600X (They said the replacement AMD sent is stable and testable as expected) despite AMD recalling and sending them new units means that AMD's increased QC/validation is not quite 100% successful at screening for these defective samples.
In b4 users start posting complaints about their Zen 5 CPU's not working/being unstable.
That s not CPUs but full systems, so it s either the CPU or the MBs or anything else.Is any validation 100% successful? By Pudget data 4% of Zen4 chips are DOA.
Why do you call it Pudget? I thought it was Puget. As in Puget Sound.Is any validation 100% successful? By Pudget data 4% of Zen4 chips are DOA. Why start another fear mongering discussion already in a thread that is full of disappointment? I bet we are still not done with people coming to post about underwhelming gaming performance, so it's not like this thread is going to die out any time soon
that was a typo on my part, I hoped I have corrected it soon enough, but turns out it's not the caseWhy do you call it Pudget? I thought it was Puget. As in Puget Sound.
You’d think they’d be able to QC a handful of reviewer samples correctly especially after the previous delay/recallI'm going to start my own rumor that Gamer's Nexus getting a seemingly defective 9600X (They said the replacement AMD sent is stable and testable as expected) despite AMD recalling and sending them new units means that AMD's increased QC/validation is not quite 100% successful at screening for these defective samples.
In b4 users start posting complaints about their Zen 5 CPU's not working/being unstable.
I can’t remember which review I watched, but they showed 9600x attaining significantly higher ST boost clock (200-300 mhz more) than 9700x at stock power limits. Does seem strange but I’m sure that would explain the discrepancy. Why the 9700x isn’t hitting ST boost I have no ideaView attachment 104848
It really bothers me that the 9600x is almost 10fps faster than the 9700x in this bench by TPU. Even at different resolutions spiderman RT has an odd effect on the current Zen 5 CPUs. But also, for some reason this seems to be the only condition they tested that has this anomaly.
I think there is either a major bottleneck in the architecture somewhere or the firmware/bios/AGESA isn't working at 100%.
That's exactly why it stands out to me as a risk.You’d think they’d be able to QC a handful of reviewer samples correctly especially after the previous delay/recall
No problem then I was wondering because I have seen it a few times now.that was a typo on my part, I hoped I have corrected it soon enough, but turns out it's not the case
Don't want them to. They should be picked randomly from the general CPU inventory. Right? They are samples not golden samples.You’d think they’d be able to QC a handful of reviewer samples correctly especially after the previous delay/recall