GoodRevrnd
Diamond Member
- Dec 27, 2001
- 6,801
- 581
- 126
Eh? I thought AMD said there were zero changes to the memory controller. Works be nice if there was improvement here.
The current I/O die can already do >5GHz memory clocks if needed. It's not the bottleneck.
Fabric clock tied 1:1 to mclk and uclk is, that's what got a ~100MHz uplift through refinements. Faster fclk is always welcome!
So, if you get a good sample, it'll do 2000MHz fclk just like a good 3rd gen sample can do 1900MHz fclk.
Mmm there's some chats on twitter about Zen3 having a much redesigned pipeline.
Very interesting. Wanna know the details
That was a very interesting thread.
Can't wait to read the architecture deep dive with a nice cup of coffee.
-------------------------------------
iMacPro1,1 - Geekbench
Benchmark results for an iMacPro1,1 with an AMD Eng Sample: 100-000000059-37_46/35_N processor.
browser.geekbench.com
iMacPro1,1 - Geekbench
Benchmark results for an iMacPro1,1 with an AMD Eng Sample: 100-000000059-37_46/35_N processor.
browser.geekbench.com
5950x GB5. DDR4-2400
~2022-2024 single core
~17400-17800 multi core
That is an absolutely ridiculous single core result. This thing is built on the same f*** node as the 3rd gen XT parts?? F*** hell.
A good 3900x-3950x will do 1350-1400 points.
+49.7%???
Either AMD is sandbagging with that +19% IPC increase, or there's something fishy going on.
Last edited:
Well, there goes ARM's claim to fame as the highest single threaded performance CPU; using Richie Rich's definition at least
5950X processor_frequency .gb5 :
~6022 MHz
3950X processor_frequency . gb5:
~4600 MHz
~6022 MHz
3950X processor_frequency . gb5:
~4600 MHz
Those gb5 results seem rather fishy. It being identified as a iMacPro device and running at 6 GHz doesn't seem legit but maybe gb5 is just not reading the system accurately at all. I'm inclined to believe it's just not a legitimate score though. We'll find out soon enough.
Maybe. But then, both the 3900x and 3950x are specified for ~4.65GHz and ~4.75GHz max boost which they can't really hold, more like ~4.5GHz steady
+200-250MHz holding steady near 4.9GHz can't really explain the remaining uplift from the provided +19% IPC figure
~1350 * 1.19 = 1607 points
~2022/1607 = +25%
5950X processor_frequency .gb5 :
~6022 MHz
3950X processor_frequency . gb5:
~4600 MHz
Oh, you're right. The 5950x eng sample gb5 does report ~6GHz
Hmm, I can't imagine a mac on LN2, can these boards even overclock? lol, this is definitely fishy, but then maybe GB5 can't quite read Zen3 parts correctly yet
Could this be a hackintosh? There are no AM4 macs out there IIRC...
----------------------------------------------
That sample's part number states 4.6GHz as the boost frequency...4.6GHz + 25% = 5.75GHz
Well, that's closer.
3800x @ 5.85GHz does 1725 single core, assuming linear scaling (which it isn't) @ 5.75GHz that would be 1695 points, +19% for IPC = 2017.5 points which is dead on to 2022 points, but then the sample is running 300MHz faster... need more coffee
napkin math says it mostly adds up... It does seem to be an overclocked 5950x sample.
Someone's having fun!
Last edited:
Might also explain the low memory clocks, since reducing how hard the memory controller has to work should improve stability.
Of course, it's possible things aren't being reported correctly, but I think you're right. Linear scaling would put a 4.9 GHz Zen 3 core at 1651 points then, but scaling isn't going to linear and you'll gain points from faster memory. I'm guessing in the range of 1700-1750 for a stock 5950X.
DrMrLordX
Lifer
- Apr 27, 2000
- 22,251
- 11,962
- 136
Actually that's what I was referring to, though I was expecting more like +15% IPC and MT clockspeed increases courtesy of N7+. Now I'm not sure where AMD's custom N7 process lies in TSMC's hierarchy. Maybe N7+ would actually perform worse?
Ryzen was never particularly good in GeekBench, so could be that its perf increase is like CS:GO vs Battlefield (~50% vs ~5%). OK maybe not 50% but it seems to be affected by the improvements a lot heavier than the 19% average.
There you go, it's ~20%5950X processor_frequency .gb5 :
~6022 MHz
3950X processor_frequency . gb5:
~4600 MHz
Det0x
Golden Member
- Sep 11, 2014
- 1,352
- 4,573
- 136
Something strange with these scores, why do i match the "5950X @ 6ghz" multicore score with my PBO 3950x on ambient cooling ?
1439
Single-Core Score
17206
Multi-Core Score
System manufacturer System Product Name - Geekbench
Benchmark results for a System manufacturer System Product Name with an AMD Ryzen 9 3950X processor.
browser.geekbench.com
The 5950x only have one core @ 6 ghz ?
But it should still beat my 3950x multicore score by around 19% thanks to the IPC gain, or is there really zero IPC gain to be had in the geekbench 5 benchmarks (?)
Last edited:
You're running DDR4-3666, probably with decent timings. That 5950x sample is running DDR4-2400 with probably vomit inducing timings... On top of that, it's clocked @ 6GHz.
In other words, it'd take you less time to go shopping for groceries than for that CPU to get what it needs from memory to work with... apart from the fabric clock being ~1.2GHz, which caps performance for the entire chip. Despite having an 8 core CCX now with a 32MB L3 cache mitigating these kind of low performance memory situations, low fabric clock can't really be dealt with.
It'd probably be a very different picture if it wasn't hamstrung by memory+fabric performance and all those 6GHz cores could better stretch their legs.
Whoever is playing with that LN2 pot was likely just aiming for single core testing
I usually get around 1379 SC on my 3900X.
The chip was overclocked to 6 Ghz. Pretty amazing if you ask me.
Yep, they likely overclocked a single core. It may not even be on LN2.
The 5xxx series presents some very unique opportunities for overclocking.
Surely it's tuned for st score here, these chips operating at close to space temps don't necessarily work / function the way they normally do
In hindsight this estimate seems to have been a "lowball" to put it in a manner that someone else could similarly describe as just a bit of an understatement.
Get some old DEC engineers to StrongARM him into it and I think we'll have established a decent containment zone.
The 5600X is an interesting chip now that I think about it. They increased the boost clocks, very slightly reduced the base clocks, and dropped the TDP from 95W to 65W vs. the XT.
Possible Cezanne leak. A 6C12T model with a base of 2.3 and a turbo of 4.2. Same 10-25 W TDP.
coercitiv
Diamond Member
- Jan 24, 2014
- 6,795
- 14,851
- 136
That would be a decent clock jump if we were to compare with 4600U which has 2.1 base and 4.0 turbo. Roughly 25% ST performance jump over Renoir.
At LEAST 25%. The unified cache will help Cezanne quite a bit, and AMD could very well increase the amount of cache.
I hope we get a bit of surprise with Zen 3 multicore performance. AMD has done a ton of work on power efficiency, and I am curious to see where the multicore boost lands.
That should manage to keep it on par and ahead of Tiger Lake for their 4 and 6 core SKUs. Just the CCX reorganization should make a big difference for performance for effectively doubling the L3 visible to each core, which is far more importantat 4/8 MB than the 16/32 of desktop.
znver3 does indeed support VEX-encoded versions of VAES and VPCLMULQDQ.
Last edited:
Is that a good thing?znver3 does indeed support VEX-encoded versions of VAES and VPCLMULQDQ.
It should help out in encryption related workloads.
For example 7-zip:
The speed of zip AES encryption and 7z/zip/rar AES decryption was increased with the following improvements: 7-Zip now can use new x86/x64 VAES (AVX Vector AES) instructions, supported by Intel Ice Lake CPU.
ipsec:
New AES-GCM, AES-CBC and AES-CTR implementations for VAES and VPCLMULQDQ extensions
On the side, music encoding/decoding can use VPCLMULQDQ for faster CRC I think.
net:
VPCLMULQDQ support for CRC32-Ethernet and CRC16-CCITT.
So, Vermeer and Cezanne should be able to use that.
Last edited:
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 18K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Discussion Speculation: Zen 4 (EPYC 4 "Genoa", Ryzen 7000, etc.)- Started by Vattila
- Replies: 13K
Facebook
Twitter