• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

AMD Ryzen (Summit Ridge) Benchmarks Thread (use new thread)

Page 218 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.
If anything is going to benefit from 4K and high refresh rates it's VR, you literally have two displays shoved right next to your eye and unlike a monitor almost every pixel is spread across your eyes entire field of view, so you really need extra resolution in that case.
 
unseenmorbidity said:
Well, the deluded ppl here ran off anyone that wasn't horribly biased towards intel, so that extremely pessimistic outlook makes sense given this environment.

This "official" zen benchmark thread was a troll thread ffs!

I have been saying 5960x performance for months. I also told people that not only would it match that performance, but the flagship would be under $600!
Click to expand...

Seriously?? Right now I see 4 Zen threads in this forum, so I hardly think the poor, abused amd fans have been "run out". And FYI, that so called "troll thread" has been taken over long ago with Zen hype.
 
The difference is at 144fps most games need to add artificial motion blur so you don't get a headache as your brain can't process or your eyes track that fast. The other difference is a synched 60 hz IPS panel's image is just going to look a shit load better than a washed out crappy viewing angle 144hz TN panel. Now when they make REAL 120hz IPS panels, not that fake shit on HDTVs, then I would consider it for my next upgrade IF my gpu could drive it in the most demanding modern games. Anywho, back to Ryzen speculating on stable overclock speeds for 8 core/16 thread 1800X!
 
hotstocks said:
The difference is at 144fps most games need to add artificial motion blur so you don't get a headache as your brain can't process or your eyes track that fast. The other difference is a synched 60 hz IPS panel's image is just going to look a shit load better than a washed out crappy viewing angle 144hz TN panel. Now when they make REAL 120hz IPS panels, not that fake shit on HDTVs, then I would consider it for my next upgrade IF my gpu could drive it in the most demanding modern games. Anywho, back to Ryzen speculating on stable overclock speeds for 8 core/16 thread 1800X!
Click to expand...
wat
 
j3m7t4g52sfy.png
 
Hey. AMD sandbagged. That's not 40% increase, that's more than 100pc compared to PD

Also the ram is 17-17-17. On a A320 board
 
So a very different architecture than Intel's core indeed: at times better than Haswell (first two test), similar or worst in some cases. I wouldn't take take passmark as absolute benchmark value anyway given how it shows Haswell with better single thread performance (same clocks) than Kabylake in the slides above, we know that never happens in 99% of apps, so yeah it's a good indicator for Zen but that's all.
Anyone worried by prime numbers score? Branching etc, compared to brute calculus like integer test, where even old FX is shown to beat Kabylake already?
 
SAAA said:
Anyone worried by prime numbers score? Branching etc, compared to brute calculus like integer test, where even old FX is shown to beat Kabylake already?
Click to expand...
Yes. This will be the downfall I am afraid. "Neural net" is not as good as Intel's. Its not much better than a FX

Also KL does not have lower score when you consider it has half as much cores compared to 5960x
 
Agent-47 said:
Yes. This will be the downfall I am afraid. "Neural net" is not as good as Intel's. Its not much better than a FX

Also KL does not have lower score when you consider it has half as much cores compared to 5960x
Click to expand...

If it's a prime sieve algorithm it's probably more sensitive to memory latency than branching.
 
ancapdev said:
If it's a prime sieve algorithm it's probably more sensitive to memory latency than branching.
Click to expand...
I've already tested and provided details in this thread...... you people are like GOLD FISH i tell ya.

yes prime and the physics test are memory latency bound

again: ivb @ 4.3

i've got to go grab dinner, once i get back i'll run a 2133 or 2400 at high cas ( i have to my memory is rated 1800 10-11-10) to show 100% for sure its 100% latency because people keep trying to pretend the quad channel of broadwell-E actually matters.

Code: 
##1066 10-11-10 (18.7ns)
CPU Mark This Computer 9230
Integer Math This Computer 19408
Floating Point Math This Computer 8121
Prime Numbers This Computer 19.8
Extended Instructions (SSE) This Computer 225.8
Compression This Computer 14193
Encryption This Computer 2024
Physics This Computer 359.7
Sorting This Computer 8723
CPU Single Threaded This Computer 2370




##1066 7-7-7 (13ns)
CPU Mark This Computer    9932
Integer Math This Computer    19862
Floating Point Math This Computer    8305
Prime Numbers This Computer    25.5
Extended Instructions (SSE) This Computer    227.5
Compression This Computer    15206
Encryption This Computer    2078
Physics This Computer    413.9
Sorting This Computer    8589
CPU Single Threaded This Computer    2327

###1333 8-8-8 (12ns)
CPU Mark This Computer    10140
Integer Math This Computer    17076
Floating Point Math This Computer    8182
Prime Numbers This Computer    29.1
Extended Instructions (SSE) This Computer    220.0
Compression This Computer    14959
Encryption This Computer    2040
Physics This Computer    476.2
Sorting This Computer    8557
CPU Single Threaded This Computer    2367

###1333 7-7-7 (10.5ns)
CPU Mark This Computer    10516
Integer Math This Computer    19445
Floating Point Math This Computer    8457
Prime Numbers This Computer    29.9
Extended Instructions (SSE) This Computer    228.5
Compression This Computer    15119
Encryption This Computer    2074
Physics This Computer    503
Sorting This Computer    8761
CPU Single Threaded This Computer    2375

##2000 10-11-10 (10ns)
CPU Mark 10673
Integer Math 19504
Floating Point Math 8336
Prime Numbers 31.5
Extended Instructions (SSE) 219.1
Compression 14806
Encryption 1944
Physics 597
Sorting 8577
CPU Single Threaded 2358
 
SAAA said:
So a very different architecture than Intel's core indeed: at times better than Haswell (first two test), similar or worst in some cases. I wouldn't take take passmark as absolute benchmark value anyway given how it shows Haswell with better single thread performance (same clocks) than Kabylake in the slides above, we know that never happens in 99% of apps, so yeah it's a good indicator for Zen but that's all.
Anyone worried by prime numbers score? Branching etc, compared to brute calculus like integer test, where even old FX is shown to beat Kabylake already?
Click to expand...
It's really strange. Passmark says that their prime numbers bench is pure integer, so it should do very well here based on the Integer Math bench.

All operations are performed using 64-bit integers. This test uses about 4MB of memory per core. The specific formula used for this test is the Sieve of Atkin with a limit of 32 million.
Click to expand...

Maybe it's a memory bottleneck after all...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top