Jay is so novice on the AM5 platform that it hurts my brain watching these videos from him, he have no idea how to setup/tweak these platforms
9700X PBO Performance Gained and Efficiency Hit - is PBO worth it?
Wait..., curve optimizer settings for Zen5 are now in mv's, not in VCO counts?Jay is so novice on the AM5 platform that it hurts my brain watching these videos from him, he have no idea how to setup/tweak these platforms
9700X PBO Performance Gained and Efficiency Hit - is PBO worth it?
More misinformation.. Its CO values not undervolt mv, just like you sayWait..., curve optimizer settings for Zen5 are now in mv's, not in VCO counts?
Maybe this will help you understand the different bands of curve shaper better
Between the different temperature bands -5, 50 and 90 the values are extrapolated
I use it as a final trim after i have completed my normal CO curve.. Normally you have to make sacrifices in regard to your curve..
If you have tuned for max MT performance with CO, often your cpu can be unstable at max frequency / or you have to limit your fmax
Or when you have tuned your system for stability at max frequency, it can happen you are leaving headroom on the heavy MT workloads (think linpack extreme for example)
Now with the curve shaper you optimize the region you normally would have to leave untapped headroom in
Now more concrete how i would do it:
First i start working on my curve for ST workloads with apps such as GB6, corecycler and 3dmark profiler.
After iam done with that i will try to lower the CO values with shaper in lets say "medium frequency" and "high frequency", in the mid to high temp bands until system starts failing in MT workloads such as y-cruncher, linpack and OCCT large etc. After system starts locking-up/bluescreening in the MT workloads you can back alittle up and hopefully have a fully stable system.
This is feature new for all of us, so this will take some time figuring out the best way.
And as we know, the forum hivemind works best when we are all sharing information
Exactly my thoughts after watching the vid. Does he do this on purpose cause' he's a closet Intel guy? who knows! but just like you say there's some easy optimizations he could have done before hand it make you think..Jay is so novice on the AM5 platform that it hurts my brain watching these videos from him, he have no idea how to setup/tweak these platforms
And instead of using Hynix A-die / M-die like everyone else, he is running some subpar d-die micron memory @ 5600MT/s at so bad timings its not even funny..
These are the timings used ? (i run tighter timings than this at 8800MT/s on a-die)
View attachment 105150
Gods knows that FCLK he is using for the reviews?
Nah, he's just an average guy who doesn't really delve into things and does low-effort OC etc. Pretty much no english-speaking reviewer actually tunes memory or does proper testing that minimizes the influence of GPU (in games) or IO (in software) on the test results. On the other hand, that's what the average Joe/Jay (pun intended) would get when he tries to tinker with his newly bought Walmart PC etc (provided Walmart didn't cheap out on MB (and not just on memory) so it actually supports some tuning instead of none).. Does he do this on purpose cause' he's a closet Intel guy? who knows!
...this might actually be a blessing in disguise because with that lower clocked memory we get to see 4.65 GHz all-core @88W where most other publications got around 4.4 GHz. I see a "CPU Power" of 71W in Ryzen Master which by looking at some combined screenshots in Image Search seems to adhere pretty close to the "CPU Core Power" in HWiNFO and that's just around 60W for those other publications, for example 58W at ComputerBase. ComputerBase didn't test CB R23 but the 20,524 are fittingly 3-5% higher than some of the lower results in reviews.he is running some subpar d-die micron memory @ 5600MT/s at so bad timings
Zen5 single CCD memory bandwidth is actually worse than Zen4 at same settings, while dual CCD Zen5 is better than Zen4, as strange as it may sound..I've not seen any reviews testing Zen 5 memory scaling performance but W1zzard from TechPowerUp has told me that it's coming.
From what I've heard/understood Zen 5's relatively "poor" performance uplift could be explained by its IO die that hasn't seen any improvements for this generation and was taken from Zen 4 as is.
Yeah, I remember that. Yet HUB missed this fact in their last video - 17:33 , where Tim talked about Zen5 launch issues, and that's doing them no credit.
of course he is doing it on a purpose, he´s secret Intel agent and so did HWU with their testing , I am getting feeling, that everybody want´s to hurt poor AMDDoes he do this on purpose cause' he's a closet Intel guy? who knows! but just like you say there's some easy optimizations he could have done before hand it make you think..
Do these objectively awesome RAM numbers translate to any kind of real gaming / perf gains for Zen 5? Any crazy Geekbench gains? What kind of difference do you you see vs the standard EXPO DDR 6000 CL30 settings?Zen5 single CCD memory bandwidth is actually worse than Zen4 at same settings, while dual CCD Zen5 is better than Zen4, as strange as it may sound..
8core single CCD Zen4 @ 6600/2200 1:1 (v-cache dont affect the memory bandwidth numbers)
View attachment 105161
8core single CCD Zen5 @ 6600/2200 1:1
View attachment 105160
I cannot show numbers for 16 core Zen5 yet
My interest is piqued. I doubt that makes a ton of difference in gaming, but I guess one advantage of the Youtube drama stuff going on is that this will be analyzed to death.Zen5 single CCD memory bandwidth is actually worse than Zen4 at same settings, while dual CCD Zen5 is better than Zen4, as strange as it may sound..
L1 tech has 2133/6400 vs 5600 in of the 1080p game-chartsDo these objectively awesome RAM numbers translate to any kind of real gaming / perf gains for Zen 5? Any crazy Geekbench gains? What kind of difference do you you see vs the standard EXPO DDR 6000 CL30 settings?
no wait for ZEN6 X3D²L1 tech has 2133/6400 vs 5600 in of the 1080p game-charts
But these are also just junk EXPO timings vs EXPO timings
But as ive said many times already, if your looking for a gaming cpu --> wait for X3D
Not so obvious to me what the difference would be between office vs home PC, except for the gaming part. But not everyone that uses home PC use it for gaming either. Photoshop / 3D rendering is not so common in home either, at least not much more common than in office.1). No gaming on corpo desktops. Also probably no encoding/transcoding, Photoshop, or 3d rendering. Maybe PS but that really depends on the work being done.
2). Lots of Office365
3). Lots of in-house apps which were probably cobbled together using electron
Responsible ...? He could have just taken it into account at least, and why not if that "someone" is the TH managing editor? Besides it's no more reckless than interpretingWhy would HWUB be responsible for what AMD told someone else?
as "the 9700X is 2% faster than the 7800X3D" without any supporting evidence provided."if you were to look at this [the chart comparing 9700X vs. 5800X3D in a number of cherry-picked games ] versus the 7800x3d uh again an AM5 processor in um in the Zen 4 generation you'd see a a couple percentage points advantage for the 9700X over the 7800x3d."
It's weird. I was looking through lkml for zen related changes for months. I find no changes in lkml that mention scheduling to accommodate Zen 5 or znver5 or any code names I knew of.Ryzen 7 9700X im Linux-Test: Schneller als unter Windows? [Update]
Nachdem der Ryzen 7 9700X und Ryzen 5 9600X unter Windows nicht ganz das halten konnten, was AMD versprochen hat, muss sich der 9700X unter Linux beweisen.www.pcgameshardware.de
They only test a handful of games but every game has a performance improvement in lows and averages on Linux with Proton vs Windows 11. An issue with scheduling is beginning to look more likely to me as a major culprit for the performance differential from official figures to actual reviews.
I've been thinking the same thing. Microsoft seems to have focused a bunch of their resources in WoA instead of windows for x86. Pure speculation but Linux tests so much better, I can't think of another reason. Hope CnC does a deep dive on gaming performance. It's a real conundrum what's holding zen5 back.Ryzen 7 9700X im Linux-Test: Schneller als unter Windows? [Update]
Nachdem der Ryzen 7 9700X und Ryzen 5 9600X unter Windows nicht ganz das halten konnten, was AMD versprochen hat, muss sich der 9700X unter Linux beweisen.www.pcgameshardware.de
They only test a handful of games but every game has a performance improvement in lows and averages on Linux with Proton vs Windows 11. An issue with scheduling is beginning to look more likely to me as a major culprit for the performance differential from official figures to actual reviews.