Orrrrr you just ride the HYPE train till launch and then cope with the retail performance...I wonder, now that the Strix results are out, if folks will perhaps use a tiny bit more skeptical thinking when someone on a forum starts claiming Zen 6 will offer +85% iso-clock perf or whatever.
We already have the Zen 6 estimate of 10% from the same slide that had Zen 5 right so there is little chance we can get a good hype train going even if the usual suspects try.I wonder, now that the Strix results are out, if folks will perhaps use a tiny bit more skeptical thinking when someone on a forum starts claiming Zen 6 will offer +85% iso-clock perf or whatever.
We still got Strix Halo fantasies to cling to, broso there is little chance we can get a good hype train going even if the usual suspects try.
Everything is really weird. In NBCs Zenbook S16 Review, there is a Cinebench 2024 result (1099 points) of ProArt, which isn't in the ProArt test itself. 1099 is only 10% higher than Computerbase result of 33W Version.
Guess that they are messing with the power profiles, if around 30W the score is about 1000 then at roughly twice the power is should be at 1400
Based on what?
Based on mosfets transistors physics and observations of the actual power vs frequency curves of TSMC s process.
LOL.
Man, I wish it was that easy.
Yeah, it's really strange. He even talks how "the ones with the lines" were laptops where they tested all power levels on the same device, and then doesn't notice that this puts the white line in a strange spot. Later, he explains how with Apple you basically can't change the power consumption, but you buy another device if you want more performance. So yes, the white dots absolutely are the fixed values for different M3 chips.Holy bizarre cow.
We already have the Zen 6 estimate of 10% from the same slide that had Zen 5 right so there is little chance we can get a good hype train going even if the usual suspects try.
Something funky going on with that int score looks like (the HXL dude pointed this out):
View attachment 104056
Looks more normal there:
View attachment 104057
That s not that difficult when one is aware of the subjacent laws of physics, but sure that a few of those who dont understand those matters can be skeptical and rely on an "argument" like "lol" even if they are completely cluless about the thing.
Yeah, it's really strange. He even talks how "the ones with the lines" were laptops where they tested all power levels on the same device, and then doesn't notice that this puts the white line in a strange spot. Later, he explains how with Apple you basically can't change the power consumption, but you buy another device if you want more performance. So yes, the white dots absolutely are the fixed values for different M3 chips.
That being said, @Hitman928 could you perhaps not only remove the question marks but also the white line between the white dots? 🤣
The "spherical cows in a vacuum" energy here is amazing
There's a problem with that Math and that Problem is ZEN5c. Clocks of 8 of the 12 Cores are Limited to 3.7GHz. Computerbase got an avg core clock of 3.43GHz at 33W. So starting at 40W, there's only 4 of 12 Cores that can scale further. So basically at that point every scaling is gone. Even if those 4 Cores got to 5.0 GHz that's only a 11-12% uplift over 40W. No matter how much power you throw in there. 1400 isn't possible.Guess that they are messing with the power profiles, if around 30W the score is about 1000 then at roughly twice the power it should be at 1400,
Shouldn’t that affect the fp score as well? Seems particular to just int.From the tests so far, it seems like the Zenbook model doesn't allow the HX 370 to sustain its single core boost. Add to that, the 7940HS has a 5.2 GHz boost versus 5.1 GHz of the HX 370, and you are looking at ~7% IPC increase, assuming the 7940HS holds its single core boost and the HX 370 at Anandtech is ~5 lower than boost clock (according to other ST tests from other outlets). I think this actually matches the previous ES Strix measurements done for Spec Int IPC.
Shouldn’t that affect the fp score as well? Seems particular to just int.
~5, percent?
There's a problem with that Math and that Problem is ZEN5c. Clocks of 8 of the 12 Cores are Limited to 3.7GHz. Computerbase got an avg core clock of 3.43GHz at 33W. So starting at 40W, there's only 4 of 12 Cores that can scale further. So basically at that point every scaling is gone. Even if those 4 Cores got to 5.0 GHz that's only a 11-12% uplift over 40W. No matter how much power you throw in there. 1400 isn't possible.
I have doubts for actually ran this themselves they just copied those numbers from cpu-monkey who just applied amd 17% ipc uplift to zen 4 numbersGPD displayed a run that scored 1525, so that s outright possible, beside the 8500G APU wich is 2 + 4, so half the 370, can go above 45W according to Phoronix review.
AMD's Radeon 890M RDNA 3.5 GPU Obliterates 780M In Early Benchmarks
GPD, of GPD Win fame, has just dropped some early benchmarks for AMD's Strix Point, and they look stellar.hothardware.com
The darker purple HX 370 ones are from two different models, one more geared to being quiet, one towards higher performance. The X Elite numbers are estimations since HWiNFO still has no way of reading package power for the Qualcomm chips. So JustJosh had to go from wall power readings and then substract estimates for the notebook baseline based on models as similar as they could find. But they say that the yellow values are probably best case values for the X Elite.I also added a fitted line for the HX 370 and X Elite, though it's just eyeballed and the lower power levels for the X Elite numbers are weird. I'm guessing it's different SoCs at the bottom, similar to the M3 issue.
I have doubts for actually ran this themselves they just copied those numbers from cpu-monkey who just applied amd 17% ipc uplift to zen 4 numbers
I have doubts for actually ran this themselves they just copied those numbers from cpu-monkey who just applied amd 17% ipc uplift to zen 4 numbers