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

Page 228 - 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.

itsmydamnation

Platinum Member
Feb 6, 2011
2,853
3,399
136
Honestly both are correct as long as you say it right. I.e. KL is 40% faster compared to XV. Or XV 60℅ slower compared to KL


Actually , i think we are all wrong....lol with inf and I being the wrongest... the reason why is that an IPC increase is compounded over time because you are continually starting instructions earlier as the old ones complete earlier.
 

Gideon

Golden Member
Nov 27, 2007
1,702
3,905
136
i7 5930K at 3.5GHz is 1667/10806. (CPU-Z reference)
According to the TPU thread, one poster with an i7 6850K 4.6GHz got 2137/13526.

Color me impressed!

A comparable Haswell (4790, 3.6/4.0 stock) seems to do worse in both ST and MT:
@stock: 1795/7099
@5.0Ghz: 2270/9669
(per core, same thread, page 27)



I wonder if XFR was working on that 1600X?
Regardless, now we only need to know how well Ryzen overclocks :D
 

Gideon

Golden Member
Nov 27, 2007
1,702
3,905
136
CPU-Z probably isn't reporting that voltage correctly, IMHO there is no way this chips would be 65W TDP then
 

inf64

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2011
3,759
4,208
136
Is that voltage a tad low at 0.374v?
It is not reported correctly. Here is my 4690K @ 4.4Ghz, all with results.

rfPNU8r.png



The Vcore reported is continuously fluctuating between 0.5 and 1.16V while actual Vcore is 1.29V.

As for the results they are indeed impressive. Judging by the screenshots base seems to be 3.4Ghz even though the "real' base is 3.3Ghz, while the ST Turbo is 3.7Ghz.
I roughly calculated that the effective SMT gain should be 10% if we take 3.7Ghz and 3.4Ghz as Turbo and base clocks in 2 benchmarks. I believe this is on par with Skylake's SMT gain or even better.
If the ST score was done at 3.7Ghz then Ryzen at 4.4Ghz would score 2245 which would be roughly 10% better than my Haswell @ 4.4Ghz with super fast DDR3-2400Mhz RAM. Impressive.
 

ShintaiDK

Lifer
Apr 22, 2012
20,378
145
106
So Skylake IPC already with CPU-Z bench. Still time to pass it before release. Choo choo!

Then we can all wonder why we keep being shown small cache loop benches.
 

Tup3x

Golden Member
Dec 31, 2016
1,008
996
136
Ryzen 1600X CPU-Z
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/5ul5yt/ryzen_1600x_cpuz_benchmark/

SfFIl57.jpg

4G8zvTS.jpg


EDIT:
Stock 7700K is 2254/10038 (source)
6700K @ 4GHz is 2031/8554 (same "sauce")

So not too shabby at all. In fact, as I posted in the other thread, per-core scaling on Ryzen seems to be extremely good compared to intel.

EDIT2: is that a 3.4Ghz clock on 0.374V ? That can't be correct, right? right?!
That's really nice. My i7-3770K @ 4,4 GHz with 1600 MHz 9-9-9-24 1T RAM gets the following:
ivy0sreb.png
 

ShintaiDK

Lifer
Apr 22, 2012
20,378
145
106
EDIT2: is that a 3.4Ghz clock on 0.374V ? That can't be correct, right? right?!

You are right it cant be that low. I dont even think transistors on 14LPP is even capable of switching at any speed at that voltage. Its more around 1-1.2V.
 

psolord

Platinum Member
Sep 16, 2009
2,015
1,224
136
Small caches or not, that cpuz benchmark is really impressive.

This is my 2500k@4.8Ghz! Jesus



I am very OK with my sandy's IPC as it is. I just need more cores. So AMD is going to sell 8cores with better IPC than sandy at less than 400? Choo choo indeed!
 

inf64

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2011
3,759
4,208
136
If this kind of (or similar) ST performance is reflected in most desktop workloads, I will dump my Haswell 4690K in a blink of an eye for 12T Ryzen. It will cost me some 500 euros but I can maybe get 350 for my current setup, so 150e for 50% more cores and similar ST perf. with smallish OC is a great deal.
 

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
23,486
13,075
136
You know the Malkowich line from RED Retired Extremely Dangerous.. Something bad is going to happen very soon!..
 
  • Like
Reactions: inf64

Lovec1990

Member
Feb 6, 2017
88
17
51
You know the Malkowich line from RED Retired Extremely Dangerous.. Something bad is going to happen very soon!..

well this is what worries me the most we are getting too many good news about Ryzen and little too no bad news or its just that we are so used too intel being best CPU maker that thougt that AMD can produce CPU that is better than Intels couses us too be too sceptical about AMD
 

inf64

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2011
3,759
4,208
136
Has anyone posted this link before?
http://www.overclock.net/t/1623292/lets-talk-about-a-ryzen-es

The guy seems to have Ryzen (check pics of his setup in the topic).
In his own words:
"
- IPC is at the least Ivy Bridge-E and higher
- SMT for Ryzen is more efficient then Intel's HyperThreading
- Ryzen has no cold Bug
- Cinebench R15 hits 145 single thread @ 3.4GHz on ES, earlier models hit 130-140, retails should hit 140-150
- Most Ryzen ES samples hit 4.3-4.5GHz MAX on Air with all core enabled
- Intel is testing out Skylake-X, and beats out current 6950X with 8C/16T because it can hit higher clocks."

So lower end of the IPC scale is IVB-E, upper end is SKL.
No cold bug, OCing on par with BDW-E if not better.
Cinebench R15 score at 3.4Ghz seems a bit high at 145pts. SKL gets 37% boost from SMT, if Zen gets the same(similar) boost then 3.6Ghz base clock model(top SKU) should score 1682pts provided clocks do not go above 3.6Ghz. That is 9% higher than stock 6900K that runs @ 3.5Ghz in this benchmark.

Hype train has been shifted in the next gear. Nobody can get aboard since it is going too damn fast.


edit:
Same user posted this also: "The 179.99 Dollar R3 1300 is going to be 5-8% slower than a 7700K and be 150 dollars cheaper". <- I assume he is talking about OCing on air this sucker to 4.3Ghz? Has to be since base and Turbo of this poor chip are very low.

Hype level over 9000!!!
 

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
23,486
13,075
136
I originally wanted to include Dolphin, but I ended up dropping it due to the issues.
I couldn't get the Dolphin 5 to run properly, no matter if I used a public or custom binaries.
The issues ranged from missing dll's to black screens and constant crashes.

... Does it crash on a intel rig as well?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.