AMD Zen Discussion Thread

Redfox25

Inviere wrote: »

The male mantra of accepting that nonsense is worse again

Totally agreed

wotzgoingon

Ryzen 5 2600 engineering sample spotted witha Asus crosshair hero VII.


https://overclock3d.net/news/cpu_mainboard/amd_ryzen_2600_and_asus_crosshair_vii_hero_spotted/1

wotzgoingon

New Ryzen + Vega 2000G APU's still on the older 14nm process but with all the enhancements of Zen+

https://overclock3d.net/news/cpu_mainboard/amd_reveals_the_specifications_of_their_upcoming_ryzen_vega_2000g_series_cpus/1

L

Well that's interesting, leaked benches suggest the Ryzen 2600 is going to be 30% faster than the 1600.

TerrorFirmer

Well it says single thread is just 15% faster, and given that it's a few hundred mhz faster at stock than the 1600, I think the real question will be how it overclocks to set it apart from 1600. But in fairness, it's pretty much identical in that sense to say Skylake v Kabylake processors.

Slutmonkey57b

Well it's pretty much given at this point that Zen1 is voltage limited and 4ghz is about the limit regardless of binning, and I think AMD's messaging about Zen+ so far has been consistent; small boost to stock clocks, better management of boost clock behaviour. I'm not expecting to see all-core base overclocks of 4.5ghz, for example. I was sceptical about AMD's slipping timeline for Zen before launch, but it's hit all their targets and done exactly what they said it would (and would not) do, so I think it makes sense to take them at their word, and not expect miracles for Zen+

wotzgoingon

Slutmonkey57b wrote: »

Well it's pretty much given at this point that Zen1 is voltage limited and 4ghz is about the limit regardless of binning, and I think AMD's messaging about Zen+ so far has been consistent; small boost to stock clocks, better management of boost clock behaviour. I'm not expecting to see all-core base overclocks of 4.5ghz, for example. I was sceptical about AMD's slipping timeline for Zen before launch, but it's hit all their targets and done exactly what they said it would (and would not) do, so I think it makes sense to take them at their word, and not expect miracles for Zen+

I'm hoping for miracles with Zen 2 though in 2019. I'd say they will up the core count to maybe 12 core 24 thread. So upping the CCX to 6 core for each and higher speed and less latency. But 8 cores would still be fine with the same improvements with higher speed and lower latency.

wotzgoingon

Ryzen 2700X specs leak but no performance numbers. By looking at the numbers I'd say they will reach 4.5GHz all core on the best chips which I said previously but hopefully I am wrong and all chips hit 4.5Ghz and the best of the best 4.6-4.7GHz.

Serephucus

I'd say that's wishful thinking, to be honest.

We don't know much yet of course, but in reality this is only some minor tweaks with a small process node shrink. I'd be surprised if 4.4GHz isn't the absolute highest people can get out of these (think current Ryzen chips getting 4.1)

Lukker-

I don't think we can expect the average processor to hit 4.5 Ghz until Zen 2. With Zen+ I think you are probably looking at 4.3 Ghz for the average chip, 4.4/4.5 if you are extremely lucky.

wotzgoingon

Zen+ info leaked. If true AMD are doing away with a 1800X successor which kinda makes sense as the 1700, 1700x, and 1800x were all pretty much the same in the first generation.

https://overclock3d.net/news/cpu_mainboard/amd_ryzen_2nd_gen_400-series_chipset_leaks_-_performance_pricing_and_more/1

Lukker-

wotzgoingon wrote: »

Zen+ info leaked. If true AMD are doing away with a 1800X successor which kinda makes sense as the 1700, 1700x, and 1800x were all pretty much the same in the first generation.

https://overclock3d.net/news/cpu_mainboard/amd_ryzen_2nd_gen_400-series_chipset_leaks_-_performance_pricing_and_more/1

They were close for sure, but 1800x were definitely better binned than 1700's. I would say on average you could get a 1700 to 3.8/9 on all cores, where-as an 1800x should get to 4.1

We might see an 2800x down the line which would just be the best binned chips re-branded.

wotzgoingon

Lukker- wrote: »

They were close for sure, but 1800x were definitely better binned than 1700's. I would say on average you could get a 1700 to 3.8/9 on all cores, where-as an 1800x should get to 4.1

We might see an 2800x down the line which would just be the best binned chips re-branded.

If they were better binned then the 2700X should be also if that leak is true regarding no 2800X as it will be the newest highest end chip. Regarding 1800X reaching 4.1GHz that was very rare as the best binned went to Threadripper as most of those hit 4.1-4.2GHz.

wotzgoingon

Sorry for spamming but here a Adored video regarding the new leaks.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UDxLk-QBHx8

K.O.Kiki

First Ryzen 7-2700X review:
https://elchapuzasinformatico.com/2018/04/review-amd-ryzen-7-2700x-x470/

https://videocardz.com/75920/amd-ryzen-7-2700x-review-with-x470-motherboard-published

jebidiah

Why is there no on-board graphics in these chips? I suppose it makes them cheaper.

I wonder if by the time Zen 2 comes around there will be a Ryzen 5 3600G with on-board graphics (at launch).

K.O.Kiki

jebidiah wrote: »

Why is there no on-board graphics in these chips? I suppose it makes them cheaper.

Product differentiation.

If you just want a PC to browse the internet - you might be ok with a €50-60 A6-9500 or A8-9600.

Occasional gaming, Ryzen 3-2200G/5-2400G for €90-110.

Hardcore users will be using a GPU that costs more than the CPU so no need to have an iGPU.

wotzgoingon

From that review there is damn all difference between coffee lake and second gen Ryzen. I'm all for AMD but some how I will wait for other reviews to get the full picture.

Also why test some of Intel CPU's with 3600 RAM speed and Ryzen with only 3200. I seen reports online of Ryzen 2nd gen hitting those speeds so it is not a Ryzen limitation like there was at launch last year.

K.O.Kiki

wotzgoingon wrote: »

From that review there is damn all difference between coffee lake and second gen Ryzen. I'm all for AMD but some how I will wait for other reviews to get the full picture.

Also why test some of Intel CPU's with 3600 RAM speed and Ryzen with only 3200. I seen reports online of Ryzen 2nd gen hitting those speeds so it is not a Ryzen limitation like there was at launch last year.

Possibly BIOS limitation, or maybe the reviewer got a bad sample.

Lukker-

I'd take those reviews with a few pinches of salt. Promising nonetheless.

Cuddlesworth

K.O.Kiki wrote: »

Product differentiation.

If you just want a PC to browse the internet - you might be ok with a €50-60 A6-9500 or A8-9600.

Occasional gaming, Ryzen 3-2200G/5-2400G for €90-110.

Hardcore users will be using a GPU that costs more than the CPU so no need to have an iGPU.

Not even that, AMD's "glued together" design allows them to pick and choose what to implement on package. Intel's design means the chip design either has or doesn't have a IGP from the start. So AMD can add a IGP or not to their existing chips, Intel has it regardless on the desktop lineup. And its wasted silicon a fair bit of the time for them.

K.O.Kiki

Some more stuff from GN, seems they're going to honour the review embargo even though they don't have to.

https://www.gamersnexus.net/news-pc/3283-ryzen-2-pre-test-x470-vs-x370-scaling-memory-r7-2700x

briany

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

Not even that, AMD's "glued together" design allows them to pick and choose what to implement on package. Intel's design means the chip design either has or doesn't have a IGP from the start. So AMD can add a IGP or not to their existing chips, Intel has it regardless on the desktop lineup. And its wasted silicon a fair bit of the time for them.

I might occupy a bit of a niche market, but I like having the backup of some onboard graphics. It means the PC's at least still usable while you're getting a new GPU, when the old one goes bad.

Lukker-

briany wrote: »

I might occupy a bit of a niche market, but I like having the backup of some onboard graphics. It means the PC's at least still usable while you're getting a new GPU, when the old one goes bad.

I see where you are coming from, but there'd be a cost. Either less cores/performance or a more expensive CPU. I'm OK with them leaving it out, as I think the iGPU on Intels is a waste of space (not counting the Vega iGPUs)

Inviere

Really looking forward to the reviews, Ryzen 2 is on paper very attractive. While not probable, I'd love if they could match Intels IPC figures. Truthfully though I don't think I'll be building this year, so Zen 2 is what I'm really waiting for.

Lukker-

Inviere wrote: »

Really looking forward to the reviews, Ryzen 2 is on paper very attractive. While not probable, I'd love if they could match Intels IPC figures. Truthfully though I don't think I'll be building this year, so Zen 2 is what I'm really waiting for.

If they can get within 5% the extra cores will make the difference in the long run IMO. Intel is pushing multithreading now so adoption has been rapidly increasing.

The leaked gaming benchmarks are very promising so far.

wotzgoingon

Intel are pushing for more multithreaded applications alright they are even planning on releasing a 8 core mainstream CPU.

Zen+ is looking promising from the leaks so far. 4.3GHz looks to be the max speed though so Intel still have a edge on clock speed when overclocked but I would rather buy a AMD CPU tbh.

Lukker-

wotzgoingon wrote: »

Intel are pushing for more multithreaded applications alright they are even planning on releasing a 8 core mainstream CPU.

Zen+ is looking promising from the leaks so far. 4.3GHz looks to be the max speed though so Intel still have a edge on clock speed when overclocked but I would rather buy a AMD CPU tbh.

R5 2600x looks tempting.

So far we haven't seen any benches with XFR2 on the X470. So that should squeeze a bit more out OC wise, we might see 4.4 Ghz on stock on a few cores.

Inviere

Lukker- wrote: »

R5 2600x looks tempting.

Indeed, that chip stood out to me as serious value.

Cuddlesworth

It does look like oc for Zen+ is 4.3 at absolute max for all cores.