Can't compare 9950X ES numbers to retail 9700X.So about that engineering sample from Igor Kavinski...
Do these review numbers line up with that?
AVX-512 is only a small part of RPCS3. A big uplift on it won't translate to the same uplift for the PS3 emulatorper TechPowerUp, 11% uplift 9700X (with unlimited PBO) over 7700X at RPCS3 PS3 emulation, AVX 512 enabled.... what is going on !?
View attachment 104647
? AMD is fine. Core will do well on servers, it will be competitive on mobile and they'll have a cost advantage there. And it's a much more efficient core for Office/General DT tasks. The only public that will be disappointed will be the gaming one.No way, no way!
AMD can't "survive" selling this for another 2 years! Not for "average consumers".
Zen 6 needs to come in 12 months at most!
and this even does not use Zen5 optimized Y-CruncherFrom AT's review - there are some workloads (e.g. AVX512) where the new architecture truly shines...
View attachment 104653
LOL:This y-cruncher result from AT makes me giggle. [For me AVX512 is the only reason to buy the chip,
and this even does not use Zen5 optimized Y-Cruncher
BTW nice in-depth analysis from y-cruncher creator but probably not useful to most people http://www.numberworld.org/blogs/2024_8_7_zen5_avx512_teardown/ it explains why RPC3 did not see a boost.
Could you post this in the architecture thread? This is very interesting.The 40% IPC improvement in SpecInt (an early leak) is consistent with my tests showing 30-35% improvement in raw scalar integer that isn't memory-bound.
Agreed, this started yesterday with the clowns who tweeted about 'failure' comparing it to the previous generation with X3D, which is misleading on so many levels. Just because X3D cache is an impressive addition for some usages, doesn't mean the base architecture is a failure. It just means the extra cache has a huge impact in those benchmarks. The right comparison would be to the vanilla models, and from what I see so far there may be some valid criticism to some multithread benchmarks over Zen4 vanilla (prob power limited), but overall it seems like a good iterative step.- 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.
What I don’t get is how / why Tom’s is showing a significant uplift in gaming with PBO on? Basically conflicting with every other source.
But it regressed in PowerPoint. Managers will never let this through to the purchasing department if it is slow at making slideshows.Every current x86 CPU dethroned in Microsoft Word!
View attachment 104657
Secretaries everywhere rejoice!
For gamers, there is the X3D variant to wait for.The only public that will be disappointed will be the gaming one.
But that doesn't mean they'll need to rush Z6. If anything, they need to make sure Z6 improves radically over Z5.
Will probably have 170W ppt, just to ensure it does not throttle as hard as vanilla 9700x9800X3D
View attachment 104609
@adroc_thurston only off by $350 on the 9950X price. I wonder how he's coping.
I concur, if I bought a new CPU solely for gaming, I would wait for x3d anyway even if the prophesized 40% (int) ipc was really there. Extra cache is basically heaploads of (almost) free performance, no sense in rushing and buying something that can be 50% slower in games where CPU performance really matters (extraction shooters, MMOs, various competitive games that x3d especially excels at)For gamers, there is the X3D variant to wait for.
That chart is a real eye opener, the core is future looking and as more programs are built with AVX-512 in mind, along with anything heavy on scalar INT, the thing will look better over time.BTW nice in-depth analysis from y-cruncher creator but probably not useful to most people http://www.numberworld.org/blogs/2024_8_7_zen5_avx512_teardown/ it explains why RPC3 did not see a boost.
Right, there's that too.For gamers, there is the X3D variant to wait for.
The chart was a laptop chart. But this is a Strix and Granite Ridge thread, so the argument is still valid.Pretty sure that was a laptop chart... This is also a Strix thread.
First of all, you can with regular Zen 5. Apple silicon is not a mobile-only solution, and so isn't Ryzen.You can’t do that with Strix or LNL either
ES had a not completed/final V/F curve affecting the results at lower power levelsSo about that engineering sample from Igor Kavinski...
Do these review numbers line up with that?
Yeah, showing the power-starved SKUs is nothing short of moronic.Not releasing the reviews of the whole lineup on the same day smells like a PR disaster for AMD, the higher models should be less power limited. You really don't want those (even if few) benchmarks that show a tiny regression to get much media attention.
Well Toms appears to be showing good sku vs sku performance.Performance gains are non-existent. lol