Just came to post it. This looks to finally be retail silicon.There are some new Geekbench 6 results for AMD Ryzen 9 9900X (link):
View attachment 102582
It looks pretty good
3401 is exactly 16% better than 2925 which is the 7900X value according to Geekbench.It looks pretty good
A random cmp with a 7900X (couldn't find an exact version match in 2mins): https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/compare/6826690?baseline=6628147There are some new Geekbench 6 results for AMD Ryzen 9 9900X
No need for random pick when you have this page that gives you the average score for 7900XA random cmp with a 7900X (couldn't find an exact version match in 2mins): https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/compare/6826690?baseline=6628147
Can we just agree that Geekbench 6 MT is just not a viable score?while MT is a bit lower, maybe because of a more limited PPT for 9900X?
That comparison looks a bit more promising.A random cmp with a 7900X (couldn't find an exact version match in 2mins): https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/compare/6826690?baseline=6628147
I posted above the avg 7900X score in GB6:That comparison looks a bit more promising.
there is it is. Not bad but certainly not breathtaking if you know I what mean.There are some new Geekbench 6 results for AMD Ryzen 9 9900X (link):
View attachment 102582
It looks pretty good
I don't see 7900X Linux scores 10% higher than Windows one. But I might be missing something; looking into GB database is such a painLinux scores should be 10% higher so ~3740.
Earlier in the thread I demonstrated a 5-6% ST uplift from W11 to Linux on my 7950X.I don't see 7900X Linux scores 10% higher than Windows one. But I might be missing something; looking into GB database is such a pain
I don't see 7900X Linux scores 10% higher than Windows one. But I might be missing something; looking into GB database is such a pain
That's exactly what I needed: a user testing on the same machine. ThanksEarlier in the thread I demonstrated a 5-6% ST uplift from W11 to Linux on my 7950X.
5% on Debian, 6% on Manjaro (Arch)
Page 586 - Discussion - Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)
Page 586 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.forums.anandtech.com
If you look at the result @yuri69 posted above you can guessOkay to spice things up. How much of the GB uplift is due to AVX-512?
Zen 5 should be a PS3 emulator king!
Yeah but how much does the weighting of the tests meaningfully affected change the actual score? We'd need a run with and without AVX512 enabled to really know.If you look at the result @yuri69 posted above you can guess
The largest outlier is Object Remover.
Indeed. But that still helps estimating what the improvements are for tests that don't benefit from AVX-512. And here clang is a bit of a disappointment while HTML5 is a surprise. Let's wait a few more days to get a more accurate picture.Yeah but how much does the weighting of the tests meaningfully affected change the actual score? We'd need a run with and without AVX512 enabled to really know.
I could do that on my 7950X but I'm not sure how valuable it would be over having a Zen 5 sample to run.
Isn't clang going to need compiler patches for Zen 5 support? That also means that GB6 may need a revision.And here clang is a bit of a disappointment
Do you realize that'd mean all legacy code would need recompilation to be fast on Zen5?Isn't clang going to need compiler patches for Zen 5 support? That also means that GB6 may need a revision.
Indeed. But that still helps estimating what the improvements are for tests that don't benefit from AVX-512. And here clang is a bit of a disappointment while HTML5 is a surprise. Let's wait a few more days to get a more accurate picture.
Both your scores show AVX2. Is that expected?
W10 AVX 512 on/off. Hardly any difference. Ignore comparison to previous W11 scores, W10 seems to score slightly better for ST.