Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)

Page 615 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

CouncilorIrissa

Senior member
Jul 28, 2023
339
1,200
96
As I wrote above, if you look at the ray tracing score, you get more or less what you expected.

As I wrote dozens of times: don't concentrate on aggregated scores, study subtests results. GB6 global MT score doesn't reflect perfect scaling at all, that was a huge departure from GB5, and IIRC this was explained by PrimateLabs.
The GB6 MT score change bugs me a little. I understand where they're coming from. It's just that people have a mental model of what a MT score usually means (embarassingly parallel workloads), and they hijacked the term and replaced it with something else entirely.

I think Userbenchmark of all places had the right idea: they had separate scores for single-core, quad-core and multicore performance. Too bad the site is garbage otherwise.
 

StefanR5R

Elite Member
Dec 10, 2016
5,725
8,336
136
I'm looking forward to the SP6 Zen5 products. I wonder if, for this generation, AMD will bless us with a 4 CCD full fat Zen5 product with 32 Zen5 cores running at decent speeds? It would be a nice replacement for older Threadrippers out there. Even the 64 core Zen5c parts would provide a lot of grunt for workstations that use AVX-512 heavily. There are some nice SP6 workstation ATX boards out there...
Asymmetric architecures are probably fine for low performance edge servers, but this might not be good for workstation performance. Also, current 8004 processors top out at 200 W. SP6 is meant to be a low power socket.
7k TR's are SP6 for both platforms and they're 350W just fine.
Are SP6 and sTR5 power pinouts the same though?

(Purely going by what's taken up by I/O, SP6 could actually have at least as many power pins as sTR5.
SP6 = LGA4844 = 96 PCIe 5.0 lanes and 6 DDR5 channels
sTR5/WRX90 = LGA4844 = 128 PCIe 5.0 lanes and 8 DDR5 channels)
 

StefanR5R

Elite Member
Dec 10, 2016
5,725
8,336
136
Does RAID5 mean that Zen 5 has hardware RAID support???
NVME RAID 10 and 5 look to me as if these are features which were developed with EPYC 4004/4005 in mind.
What about that NVMe RAID 5? AMD not including it on 7950X product page means that Zen 5 has special hardware instructions to speed up XOR operations?
The wider vector pipelines should help with that, shouldn't they?
 

Josh128

Member
Oct 14, 2022
52
73
51

So this is PPT power and not TDP. Looks to be within 10% on monster and classroom, iso for junkshop vs 7950X 230 PPT. However, the use of unknown curve optimizer offsets renders the result absolutely useless for comparison. Im sure a 7950X could be aggressively CO tuned to very similar scores at 120W PPT.

Its time to just rip the bandaid off, this smoke and mirrors stuff is a major buzzkill.
 

Kryohi

Member
Nov 12, 2019
32
72
91
The GB6 MT score change bugs me a little. I understand where they're coming from. It's just that people have a mental model of what a MT score usually means (embarassingly parallel workloads), and they hijacked the term and replaced it with something else entirely.

I think Userbenchmark of all places had the right idea: they had separate scores for single-core, quad-core and multicore performance. Too bad the site is garbage otherwise.
IMHO the approach of GB6 is extremely dumb. For actual MT workloads where high performance is needed I've never seen such a bad thread scaling. Even some mixed ST/MT algorithms (UMAP is an example) with a big serial part of the code overall scale better than whatever GB is doing, on desktop CPUs. If they want to keep doing this honestly they should at least create a true MT benchmark and rename the current one.
 

Makaveli

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2002
4,769
1,170
136
This is how GB6.3 reports 2 dimms being populated on a dual channel memory system. This is full memory bandwidth results.
Why do the other leaks show 4 channels and this one 2? and I see different versions of GB being used also so maybe that is the reason.

1720622612619.png

1720622706795.png
 
Last edited:

Hail The Brain Slug

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 2005
3,345
1,986
136
I'll run these when I have a chance later. After some discussion in the GB6 thread I'm going to set aside my tuned ram config and just set it to EXPO 6000C30 to get a more accurate representation of a "stock 7950X". I was already running the CPU itself fully stock with no PBO, but the ram and fclk setup may have been inflating some scores.

Problem is, in a PPT limited scenario like this my uncore power will be much less than that Zen 5 sample seems to be running, giving me more power per core to boost higher. Even at my tuned 6400/2133 config with a bunch of voltages jacked my uncore was using less power.
 

Josh128

Member
Oct 14, 2022
52
73
51
I'll run these when I have a chance later. After some discussion in the GB6 thread I'm going to set aside my tuned ram config and just set it to EXPO 6000C30 to get a more accurate representation of a "stock 7950X". I was already running the CPU itself fully stock with no PBO, but the ram and fclk setup may have been inflating some scores.

Problem is, in a PPT limited scenario like this my uncore power will be much less than that Zen 5 sample seems to be running, giving me more power per core to boost higher. Even at my tuned 6400/2133 config with a bunch of voltages jacked my uncore was using less power.
Could you possibly run JDEC speeds, vs EXPO 6000C30, vs your tuned setup? Honestly, I have no feckin clue the difference this makes in this ridiculously finicky benchmark.
 

Hail The Brain Slug

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 2005
3,345
1,986
136
Could you possibly run JDEC speeds, vs EXPO 6000C30, vs your tuned setup? Honestly, I have no feckin clue the difference this makes in this ridiculously finicky benchmark.
I can run JEDEC 4800 but official support is 5200 and I don't have any ram with that profile. Not really sure what value thing presents, however, since on AM5 I have never seen anyone running JEDEC ram except when populating 4xDR dimms for maximum capacity.
 
Jul 27, 2020
18,297
12,052
116
I can run JEDEC 4800 but official support is 5200 and I don't have any ram with that profile. Not really sure what value thing presents, however, since on AM5 I have never seen anyone running JEDEC ram except when populating 4xDR dimms for maximum capacity.

1720623771409.png

That's the one you will have to do, if you want to try JEDEC. You will need to set voltage to 1.1V
 

Hail The Brain Slug

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 2005
3,345
1,986
136

Philste

Member
Oct 13, 2023
139
280
96
So this is PPT power and not TDP. Looks to be within 10% on monster and classroom, iso for junkshop vs 7950X 230 PPT.
Yeah but:
Im sure a 7950X could be aggressively CO tuned to very similar scores at 120W PPT.
You don't even need to tuned it: According to launch reviews a 7950X just set to Eco Mode (142W PPT) loses only 5% performance compared to 230W PPT. So if you manually tuned it even further it's probably better than that ZEN5 sample.
Why do the other leaks show 4 channels and this one 2?
Because the correct memory Channel Reporting came with 6.3. Your first screenshot is 6.2.1
 

tsamolotoff

Member
May 19, 2019
102
154
116
Could you possibly run JDEC speeds, vs EXPO 6000C30, vs your tuned setup? Honestly, I have no feckin clue the difference this makes in this ridiculously finicky benchmark.
Probably it has close to zero impact, as mem bw is fairly low during the rendering itself (idk, ~5gbps ish from hwinfo metrics)