• 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.

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

Page 609 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
ST is in line with what AMD presented (~17% faster) while MT is a bit lower, maybe because of a more limited PPT for 9900X?
 
I don't see 7900X Linux scores 10% higher than Windows one. But I might be missing something; looking into GB database is such a pain 🙁
Earlier in the thread I demonstrated a 5-6% ST uplift from W11 to Linux on my 7950X.

5% on Debian, 6% on Manjaro (Arch)

 
Last edited:
If you look at the result @yuri69 posted above you can guess 😉
The largest outlier is Object Remover.
Yeah but how much does the weighting of the tests meaningfully affected change the actual score? We'd need a run with and without AVX512 enabled to really know.

I could do that on my 7950X but I'm not sure how valuable it would be over having a Zen 5 sample to run.
 
Yeah but how much does the weighting of the tests meaningfully affected change the actual score? We'd need a run with and without AVX512 enabled to really know.

I could do that on my 7950X but I'm not sure how valuable it would be over having a Zen 5 sample to run.
Indeed. But that still helps estimating what the improvements are for tests that don't benefit from AVX-512. And here clang is a bit of a disappointment while HTML5 is a surprise. Let's wait a few more days to get a more accurate picture.
 
Isn't clang going to need compiler patches for Zen 5 support? That also means that GB6 may need a revision.
Do you realize that'd mean all legacy code would need recompilation to be fast on Zen5?

That's not how things work. And that's why OoOE is required to have a fast CPU (until things change dramatically in the HW/SW space...): to let a beefed up core benefit from its extra ressources without having to recompile everything. And all modern CPU are good at that.

I can't remember when was the last time, recompiling with instruction scheduling for native CPU brought any significant speedup (>2%, that is not in measurement noise) for code I run. Of course native instruction selection is a different story but that doesn't apply to clang.
 
A bit unrelated, but does mention Zen 5 :

The slide AMD used shows the previously disclosed IPC figure, so it seems they are sticking to it
1720452648757.png
 
Indeed. But that still helps estimating what the improvements are for tests that don't benefit from AVX-512. And here clang is a bit of a disappointment while HTML5 is a surprise. Let's wait a few more days to get a more accurate picture.

W10 AVX 512 on/off. Hardly any difference. Ignore comparison to previous W11 scores, W10 seems to score slightly better for ST.
 
Back
Top