Det0x
Golden Member
- Sep 11, 2014
- 1,028
- 2,953
- 136
This is a huge gamechanger (phun intendedGet ready for software fixes which will likely impact ST and light threaded performance.
View attachment 8143
This is a huge gamechanger (phun intendedGet ready for software fixes which will likely impact ST and light threaded performance.
View attachment 8143
These can't even beat an i5 9600K in gaming, and that's before overclocking. They OC like crap and need 1.4v to hit 4.3. Same old story as before. As soon as Intel gets their new node up and running, AMD will be right back in the moar cores bargain bin. I didn't want this to happen. I wanted AMD to run over Intel like a truck. No use in lying about the way I feel regarding these new CPUs. I wouldn't buy them for anything but maybe a dedicated video encoding rig or something and we already had threadripper for that, so...DOA IMO.
This is like Zen all over again, glad I'm not an early adopter. It will take a while for the dust to settle so we can see the "real" performance of these chips, and which of the reviews are accurate. Different BIOSes, cooling, applied security mitigations, etc. all paint a very different picture.Get ready for software fixes which will likely impact ST and light threaded performance.
View attachment 8143
I predict video-documented consumption of a c.2021 Intel CPU box in your future.
This is like Zen all over again, glad I'm not an early adopter. It will take a while for the dust to settle so we can see the "real" performance of these chips, and which of the reviews are accurate. Different BIOSes, cooling, applied security mitigations, etc. all paint a very different picture.
Hopefully, AMD works on making their launches better in the future, since first impressions mean a lot. Thought that they would avoid stuff like this this time around.
Yeah lets not confuse the usual early bios quirks with what happened with Ryzen 1k and the X58 (or was it the x79) platforms launches. As the margins lower in the difference the output is magnified making it the differences seem larger than they are. This is 2% here, -3% there type stuff, near margin of error. It does imply that there is a little more to be eeked out, but that doesn't mean there is a real problem with the platform at launch.Honestly, it's way better. How many months was it before a decent stock (not simply fully functional) MoBos were available for Zen 1? A lot more kinks out there for that release, and wildly inconsistent reviews from shop to shop, and just very real stock issues with inventory. The industry wasn't willing to bet on AMD at that time, and it showed.
It's kind of a big deal that this part has changed so quickly in 2 years, and it looks like these sort of BIOS releases and tweaks will be along much sooner. I mean, these results are already stunningly good compared to the competition.
I agree, it's nowhere near that (though I am seeing people with some issues), but I think this still matters for how the product is received. I'm more than satisfied with the performance, but just look at a few people's rather negative reactions here and elsewhere, mostly the gaming types - getting a few percent more performance across the board matters when the differences compared to the competition are small begin with. I'm seeing results that range from Ryzen trailing behind the competition by a solid bit to being within spitting distance in that particular area, *if* this update could have made more reviews show the latter, that would have been a good thing. Can't ever extract every drop of performance out of a chip at launch, I guess...Yeah lets not confuse the usual early bios quirks with what happened with Ryzen 1k and the X58 (or was it the x79) platforms launches. As the margins lower in the difference the output is magnified making it the differences seem larger than they are. This is 2% here, -3% there type stuff, near margin of error. It does imply that there is a little more to be eeked out, but that doesn't mean there is a real problem with the platform at launch.
Looks like this 7/7 release was rushed/too early for both Navi and Ryzen 3.
I doubt we'd get 3% in games. Similar to MT results in rendering, we'd get nothing.
Ubless you are deaf like me and can't get cationing to work. What does it say ? Please paraphrase"You only need to serve him this useless video", and this is end of the debate.
https://forums.anandtech.com/thread...mark-thread-open.2566782/page-4#post-39864288
Looks like this 7/7 release was rushed/too early for both Navi and Ryzen 3.
Gross incompetence ?This is what I was waiting for:
It's really funny, but honestly I don't understand how someone can say something like this.
Ubless you are deaf like me and can't get cationing to work. What does it say ? Please paraphrase
His material must be good, my guess is 14nm +++2iGross incompetence ?
Ubless you are deaf like me and can't get cationing to work. What does it say ? Please paraphrase
So I'm right in reading this that I'm not going to be meaningfully hampered on a 3700X if I keep my current DDR4-3000 CL15 Corsair Vengeance LPX sticks, right (for 1440p gaming with a card that's not a 2080 ti)?
Also, is the funny Zen quirk that runs 3000 MT/s memory at 2933 MT/s ironed out now?
Indeed. Hardware Unboxed also confirmed this. Between potato memory and 3600 low latency even, there was like 1% to see between it (in real world benches of productivity and gaming).
Indeed. Hardware Unboxed also confirmed this. Between potato memory and 3600 low latency even, there was like 1% to see between it (in real world benches of productivity and gaming).
How is it like Zen all over again? Must some of you by all means be so hysterical?This is like Zen all over again, glad I'm not an early adopter. It will take a while for the dust to settle so we can see the "real" performance of these chips, and which of the reviews are accurate. Different BIOSes, cooling, applied security mitigations, etc. all paint a very different picture.
Hopefully, AMD works on making their launches better in the future, since first impressions mean a lot. Thought that they would avoid stuff like this this time around.
the funniest part is, even random redditters know that improving the cache subsystem has one of the greatest effect on IPC - and this guy is supposed to be like the biggest professional of all times... honestly, he is basically juanrga with even worse EnglishThis is what I was waiting for:
It's really funny, but honestly I don't understand how someone can say something like this.
Reported for reading my mind!I plan to use that cpu for a plex encoder later.
I agree, it's nowhere near that (though I am seeing people with some issues), but I think this still matters for how the product is received. I'm more than satisfied with the performance, but just look at a few people's rather negative reactions here and elsewhere, mostly the gaming types - getting a few percent more performance across the board matters when the differences compared to the competition are small begin with. I'm seeing results that range from Ryzen trailing behind the competition by a solid bit to being within spitting distance in that particular area, *if* this update could have made more reviews show the latter, that would have been a good thing. Can't ever extract every drop of performance out of a chip at launch, I guess...