Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 35

Thread: AMD Prank King 2016, FAIL!!

  1. #1
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    245

    AMD Prank King 2016, FAIL!!


  2. #2
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    1,706
    All I'll say is, AMD better find a way to crank up the clock speeds or get boost working correctly in the final silicon. Not impressed with the games, in the encoding department it seems to be doing as advertised, however, not so good in the power draw.

    Intel Core i7-3770K
    ASUS P8Z77-I DELUXE
    EVGA GTX 970 SC
    Corsair 16GB (2x8GB) Vengeance LP 1600
    Corsair H80
    120GB Samsung 840 EVO, 500GB WD Scorpio Blue, 1TB Samsung Spinpoint F3
    Corsair RM650
    Cooler Master Elite 120 Advanced
    OC: 5Ghz | +0.185 offset : 1.352v

  3. #3
    Xtreme Guru
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Ace Deuce, Michigan
    Posts
    3,660
    Can you provide the source on this?

    Also if I'm reading the graph correctly (which is a big if, it's not very clear), it appears the listed frequencies are 3.15/3.4 GHz. I'm under the impression that AMD is bumping up the base clock to 3.4 GHz, and boost higher from there. Even if I'm entirely wrong on the frequencies, the fact it slots between the 6800k and 6900k means it'll still take a lot of server market share if the pricing rumors are true. If I'm right, then it should be directly inline with the 6900k.

    Not discounting their results, these could be very real ES benchmarks. Just trying to get a better picture of where production silicon should fit.
    Last edited by AliG; 12-23-2016 at 10:25 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Hans de Vries View Post

    JF-AMD posting: IPC increases!!!!!!! How many times did I tell you!!!

    terrace215 post: IPC decreases, The more I post the more it decreases.
    terrace215 post: IPC decreases, The more I post the more it decreases.
    terrace215 post: IPC decreases, The more I post the more it decreases.
    .....}
    until (interrupt by Movieman)


    Regards, Hans

  4. #4
    Xtreme Guru
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Ace Deuce, Michigan
    Posts
    3,660
    Found the source:
    http://www.overclock.net/t/1619110/c...zen-benchmarks

    For the record, clocks are 3.1/3.3 with this sample - which actually paints a very different performance picture. Most people on the other forum seem pretty optimistic (with the expectation the clocks will be 3.4 GHz+).
    Quote Originally Posted by Hans de Vries View Post

    JF-AMD posting: IPC increases!!!!!!! How many times did I tell you!!!

    terrace215 post: IPC decreases, The more I post the more it decreases.
    terrace215 post: IPC decreases, The more I post the more it decreases.
    terrace215 post: IPC decreases, The more I post the more it decreases.
    .....}
    until (interrupt by Movieman)


    Regards, Hans

  5. #5
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    353
    Canard PC/Doc Teraboule.

  6. #6
    Xtreme Member EternityZX9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Nursing Student/CNA
    Posts
    313
    Exciting times if true...but I'm not going to believe anything until legit reviews come out.

  7. #7
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    1,706
    Quote Originally Posted by EternityZX9 View Post
    Exciting times if true...but I'm not going to believe anything until legit reviews come out.
    I suppose it depends on what people use their PCs for, but when it comes to the games (what I mainly use my PC for) I can't be more disappointed. That power draw is a bit nasty too.

    Intel Core i7-3770K
    ASUS P8Z77-I DELUXE
    EVGA GTX 970 SC
    Corsair 16GB (2x8GB) Vengeance LP 1600
    Corsair H80
    120GB Samsung 840 EVO, 500GB WD Scorpio Blue, 1TB Samsung Spinpoint F3
    Corsair RM650
    Cooler Master Elite 120 Advanced
    OC: 5Ghz | +0.185 offset : 1.352v

  8. #8
    Xtreme Guru
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Ace Deuce, Michigan
    Posts
    3,660
    Quote Originally Posted by Tim View Post
    I suppose it depends on what people use their PCs for, but when it comes to the games (what I mainly use my PC for) I can't be more disappointed. That power draw is a bit nasty too.
    Why?

    You can't possibly expect an underclocked octo-core to compete against the 6700k? Not even the 6900k does as well in games.

    Wait for the quadcore cutdown versions for gaming comparisons.
    Quote Originally Posted by Hans de Vries View Post

    JF-AMD posting: IPC increases!!!!!!! How many times did I tell you!!!

    terrace215 post: IPC decreases, The more I post the more it decreases.
    terrace215 post: IPC decreases, The more I post the more it decreases.
    terrace215 post: IPC decreases, The more I post the more it decreases.
    .....}
    until (interrupt by Movieman)


    Regards, Hans

  9. #9
    I am Xtreme
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    France
    Posts
    8,827
    Quote Originally Posted by AliG View Post
    Why?

    You can't possibly expect an underclocked octo-core to compete against the 6700k? Not even the 6900k does as well in games.
    6900K can be easily overclocked to similar levels, though.

    IMO, Intel artificially limits the clock rates of these chips.
    Donate to XS forums
    Quote Originally Posted by jayhall0315 View Post
    If you are really extreme, you never let informed facts or the scientific method hold you back from your journey to the wrong answer.

  10. #10
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    526
    Sooo.... Whats with the title ?
    Given that this ES Sample has lower clocks than the "advertised" in Zen promo results are inline with what was shown ...
    MT Performance inline with 1000$ chip .
    Gaming Performance around Haswell with same frequency ...
    So whats exactly bad ?
    Am i missing something ?
    Did people expect MT performance of Broadwell-E AND AT THE SAME TIME ST performance of a full blown skylake ?
    Intel 5820K@4.2Ghz[Prime stable]@4.4 [XTU stable] 1.24v NB@3.5ghz Asrock X99 Extreme 3 4x8GB Ballistix LT 2400Mhz@2666 15-15-15
    ATI 290X Samsung SSD 850 256GB Crucial MX100 512GB Seagate 8Tb 6TB WD 5TB

  11. #11
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    526
    Quote Originally Posted by zalbard View Post
    6900K can be easily overclocked to similar levels, though.

    IMO, Intel artificially limits the clock rates of these chips.
    I was under the impression that Broadwell-E doesnt overclock particurarly well, worse than haswell-E even.
    But yes, if AMD wants to compete on not default settings, they must be able to do at least 4.0ghz.
    Intel 5820K@4.2Ghz[Prime stable]@4.4 [XTU stable] 1.24v NB@3.5ghz Asrock X99 Extreme 3 4x8GB Ballistix LT 2400Mhz@2666 15-15-15
    ATI 290X Samsung SSD 850 256GB Crucial MX100 512GB Seagate 8Tb 6TB WD 5TB

  12. #12
    Xtreme Guru
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Ace Deuce, Michigan
    Posts
    3,660
    Quote Originally Posted by zalbard View Post
    6900K can be easily overclocked to similar levels, though.

    IMO, Intel artificially limits the clock rates of these chips.
    I don't think it's fair to compare overclocked results vs a stock 6700k. 6700k can easily be overclocked to 4.5 GHz, with good chips hitting 5 GHz. With that logic, there's no point to the 6900k because it can't hit 5 GHz 24/7.

    2 very different chips with different target audiences. I think it's perfectly fine to expect quadcores to compete in gaming, and octocores to be kings of server computation.
    Quote Originally Posted by Hans de Vries View Post

    JF-AMD posting: IPC increases!!!!!!! How many times did I tell you!!!

    terrace215 post: IPC decreases, The more I post the more it decreases.
    terrace215 post: IPC decreases, The more I post the more it decreases.
    terrace215 post: IPC decreases, The more I post the more it decreases.
    .....}
    until (interrupt by Movieman)


    Regards, Hans

  13. #13
    Xtreme 3D Team
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    8,440
    I don't see anything fail about these benchmarks.
    Rumors are 3.15 base, 3.3 Turbo / 3.5 single core turbo, same OPN as the Cinebench leak that was cropped and called out as fake (I had a hunch that it might not be)

    Launch speeds are going to be 8% higher, and the results here are normalized to the 6600K.
    At 3.4 GHz I suspect that productivity "percentage" number to be in the 180's, gaming at least @ 6800K level, and power consumption roughly equal to the 6900K.

    Looks fine to me.
    Intel all dey erry dey
    AMD all nite erry nite party party party

  14. #14
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Ankara Turkey
    Posts
    2,492
    It all depends on pricing...


    When i'm being paid i always do my job through.

  15. #15
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    604
    With AMD it always seems to depend on pricing , never on performance


    Main rig 1: Corsair Carbide 400R 4x120mm Papst 4412GL - 1x120mm Noctua NF-12P -!- PC Power&Cooling Silencer MK III 750W Semi-Passive PSU -!- Gigabyte Z97X-UD5H -!- Intel i7 4790K -!- Swiftech H220 pull 2x Papst 4412 F/2GP -!- 4x4gb Crucial Ballistix Tactical 1866Mhz CAS9 1.5V (D9PFJ) -!- 1Tb Samsung 840 EVO SSD -!- AMD RX 480 to come -!- Windows 10 pro x64 -!- Samsung S27A850D 27" + Samsung 2443BW 24" -!- Sennheiser HD590 -!- Logitech G19 -!- Microsoft Sidewinder Mouse -!- Fragpedal -!- Eaton Ellipse MAX 1500 UPS .





  16. #16
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Ankara Turkey
    Posts
    2,492
    Actually amd havent offered anything for me even they were not price dependent.


    When i'm being paid i always do my job through.

  17. #17
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    1,263
    Quote Originally Posted by vario View Post
    I was under the impression that Broadwell-E doesnt overclock particurarly well, worse than haswell-E even.
    But yes, if AMD wants to compete on not default settings, they must be able to do at least 4.0ghz.
    Based on what I've gathered the 6/8 core Broadwell generally do at least 4.2 and good samples top out at 4.4. 4.5+ generally takes excessive voltage and heat dump goes through the roof. Haven't had my CPU up and running long enough to fully collaborate this but seems about right.

    I'm with you on Zen needing to have head room at 4+. I'll be bummed if the 16 thread part can't crack 4 but without a doubt the 8s should. Turbo on the mid range parts will likely flirt with 4 on their own.

    If the mid range parts can sneak up to haswell level overclocks and the price is right, they'll give x99 and upcoming X299 a good kick in the pants. Should have most of the benefits of intels HEDT and a lower platform cost. I wrestled with wether it was worth it to me to go broadwell e over skylake but in the end the added pcie lanes and 4 threads sold me. Zen should hopefully make that an even more interesting situation in the near future.
    Feedanator 7.0
    CASE:R5|PSU:850G2|CPU:i7 6850K|MB:x99 Ultra|RAM:8x4 2666|GPU:980TI|SSD:BPX256/Evo500|SOUND:2i4/HS8
    LCD:XB271HU|OS:Win10|INPUT:G900/K70 |HS/F:H115i

  18. #18
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    526
    Quote Originally Posted by Chickenfeed View Post
    Based on what I've gathered the 6/8 core Broadwell generally do at least 4.2 and good samples top out at 4.4. 4.5+ generally takes excessive voltage and heat dump goes through the roof. Haven't had my CPU up and running long enough to fully collaborate this but seems about right.

    I'm with you on Zen needing to have head room at 4+. I'll be bummed if the 16 thread part can't crack 4 but without a doubt the 8s should. Turbo on the mid range parts will likely flirt with 4 on their own.

    If the mid range parts can sneak up to haswell level overclocks and the price is right, they'll give x99 and upcoming X299 a good kick in the pants. Should have most of the benefits of intels HEDT and a lower platform cost. I wrestled with wether it was worth it to me to go broadwell e over skylake but in the end the added pcie lanes and 4 threads sold me. Zen should hopefully make that an even more interesting situation in the near future.
    Thing is, AMD is going to use defective (or non defective if they will have more orders for them) 8 core chips to make 4 and 6 core chips.And hopefully they will have some sort of automation to select stronger cores , but it could mean they wont clock much higher, as FX4xxx series was only marginally better clocker than the 8xxx .I hope im wrong, but it seems the process is still being tuned in.All in all it could mean 4 core Zens can be similar clockers to the 8 core ones, with something along the 100-200Mhz uplift.Still, it would grant them decent standings in the not overclocked chips, but it wont be enough to close the gap to the K chips.
    Historically speaking, AMDs SECOND attempt at a chip was much more successful , tbred B, X2 F3s , phenom C3 and some others comes to mind ;-) .
    However they can again do what i call AMD promotions, unlocking lost cores ...
    Intel 5820K@4.2Ghz[Prime stable]@4.4 [XTU stable] 1.24v NB@3.5ghz Asrock X99 Extreme 3 4x8GB Ballistix LT 2400Mhz@2666 15-15-15
    ATI 290X Samsung SSD 850 256GB Crucial MX100 512GB Seagate 8Tb 6TB WD 5TB

  19. #19
    Xtreme X.I.P. Particle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    3,156
    I'm not yet convinced that AMD is going to offer 6-core SKUs. They have historically offered products in core counts matching a multiple of the base module size. With Stars that was one core so we saw 2, 3, 4, and 6 core offerings over time. With BD/PD/SR/EX that was two cores so we saw 4, 6, and 8 core offerings. With Zen that will be four cores, so we may only ever see 4 and 8 core products depending on if they stay with that trend.
    Particle's First Rule of Online Technical Discussion:
    As a thread about any computer related subject has its length approach infinity, the likelihood and inevitability of a poorly constructed AMD vs. Intel fight also exponentially increases.

    Rule 1A:
    Likewise, the frequency of a car pseudoanalogy to explain a technical concept increases with thread length. This will make many people chuckle, as computer people are rarely knowledgeable about vehicular mechanics.

    Rule 2:
    When confronted with a post that is contrary to what a poster likes, believes, or most often wants to be correct, the poster will pick out only minor details that are largely irrelevant in an attempt to shut out the conflicting idea. The core of the post will be left alone since it isn't easy to contradict what the person is actually saying.

    Rule 2A:
    When a poster cannot properly refute a post they do not like (as described above), the poster will most likely invent fictitious counter-points and/or begin to attack the other's credibility in feeble ways that are dramatic but irrelevant. Do not underestimate this tactic, as in the online world this will sway many observers. Do not forget: Correctness is decided only by what is said last, the most loudly, or with greatest repetition.

    Rule 3:
    When it comes to computer news, 70% of Internet rumors are outright fabricated, 20% are inaccurate enough to simply be discarded, and about 10% are based in reality. Grains of salt--become familiar with them.

    Remember: When debating online, everyone else is ALWAYS wrong if they do not agree with you!

    Random Tip o' the Whatever
    You just can't win. If your product offers feature A instead of B, people will moan how A is stupid and it didn't offer B. If your product offers B instead of A, they'll likewise complain and rant about how anyone's retarded cousin could figure out A is what the market wants.

  20. #20
    I am Xtreme FlanK3r's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Czech republic
    Posts
    6,683
    Its solid CPU, this was ES with lower clocks, not finals silicon And of course, the clocks are lower, because CPU is not high clocking Kaby. But the oponent is example i7-6850K.
    ROG Power PCs - Intel and AMD
    CPUs:i7-6950X, i7-5960X, 4x i7-7700K, i3-7350K, 2x i7-6700K, i5-6600K, R7-1800X, R7-1700X, 3x AMD FX-9590, 1x AMD FX-9370, 4x AMD FX-8350,1x AMD FX-8320,1x AMD FX-8300, 2x AMD FX-6300,2x AMD FX-4300, 3x AMD FX-8150, 2x AMD FX-8120 125 and 95W, AMD X2 555 BE, AMD x4 965 BE C2 and C3, AMD X4 970 BE, AMD x4 975 BE, AMD x4 980 BE, AMD X6 1090T BE, AMD X6 1100T BE, A10-7870K, Athlon 845, Athlon 860K,AMD A10-7850K, AMD A10-6800K, A8-6600K, 2x AMD A10-5800K, AMD A10-5600K, AMD A8-3850, AMD A8-3870K, 2x AMD A64 3000+, AMD 64+ X2 4600+ EE, Intel i7-980X, Intel i7-2600K, Intel i7-3770K,2x i7-4770K, Intel i7-3930KAMD Cinebench R10 challenge AMD Cinebench R15 thread Intel Cinebench R15 thread

  21. #21
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    526
    Quote Originally Posted by Particle View Post
    I'm not yet convinced that AMD is going to offer 6-core SKUs. They have historically offered products in core counts matching a multiple of the base module size. With Stars that was one core so we saw 2, 3, 4, and 6 core offerings over time. With BD/PD/SR/EX that was two cores so we saw 4, 6, and 8 core offerings. With Zen that will be four cores, so we may only ever see 4 and 8 core products depending on if they stay with that trend.
    Well AMD has 3 tiers SR3 SR5 and SR7 .Only one die fabricated initially .It would be dumb not to follow Intels way of having 4-6-8 cores (yes intel has also 2 and 10 and many more but they are not competing in these segments for now) .Im pretty sure AMD can disable whichever cores they like on a chip , also doesnt that mean that 4 core versions will have larger L3 cache per core ? Could be interesting.
    Of course Sr5 could be just HT disabled part :-/ with slashed L3.Your way of thinking can be backed up little by this french article, they had 4 samples, 2 4 core and 2 8 core ones...
    http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/french-magazing-posts-engineering-sample-amd-ryzen-processor-benchmarks.html

    Anyhow, i hope for 6 core parts, OR attractive 8 core price because its gonna be tough to compete without 6 core one.
    Maybe 8 core NO HT part is the supposed 300-400$ one.
    Intel 5820K@4.2Ghz[Prime stable]@4.4 [XTU stable] 1.24v NB@3.5ghz Asrock X99 Extreme 3 4x8GB Ballistix LT 2400Mhz@2666 15-15-15
    ATI 290X Samsung SSD 850 256GB Crucial MX100 512GB Seagate 8Tb 6TB WD 5TB

  22. #22
    Xtreme 3D Team
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    8,440
    Are we sure there is only one die? There are quad core ES out there AFAIK. If AMD thinks they can competitively sell the quad core parts I don't think they want to cannibalize margins by selling gimped 8 core dies.
    Intel all dey erry dey
    AMD all nite erry nite party party party

  23. #23
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    515
    Quote Originally Posted by BeepBeep2 View Post
    Are we sure there is only one die? There are quad core ES out there AFAIK. If AMD thinks they can competitively sell the quad core parts I don't think they want to cannibalize margins by selling gimped 8 core dies.
    Taping out a new 14-nm design is very costly.

  24. #24
    Xtreme 3D Team
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    8,440
    Quote Originally Posted by qcmadness View Post
    Taping out a new 14-nm design is very costly.
    Sure it is, but we've already seen quad core ES (allegedly existing), and AMD has positioned itself to sell a lot of these if the performance is good.
    I don't think AMD would want to sell 8c/16t ~200-250mm dies when they could sell 4c/8t dies at half the area and greatly increase margins on the lower end of the addressable market. What would it cost AMD to create the 4 core die, another $100m? It seems to me like that would be the smartest choice if they are expecting several billion USD in revenue.

    Expensive wafers on an expensive process, fitting twice as many dies on a wafer reaps rewards with high volume. Not everyone is going to want a $300-600 8c/16t, I think a lot of people will also be interested in a $150-250 4c/8t.
    Intel all dey erry dey
    AMD all nite erry nite party party party

  25. #25
    Xtreme Guru
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Ace Deuce, Michigan
    Posts
    3,660
    Quote Originally Posted by qcmadness View Post
    Taping out a new 14-nm design is very costly.
    True, but finalizing transistors leakage and density is the hard part, not necessarily scaling chip size. I would assume that if an octo-core can be made with reasonable yield (i.e. they can pack enough efficiently running transistors into the desired wafer space), cutting the design down to a quadcore with less cache should be rather doable.

    Quote Originally Posted by BeepBeep2 View Post
    Sure it is, but we've already seen quad core ES (allegedly existing), and AMD has positioned itself to sell a lot of these if the performance is good.
    I don't think AMD would want to sell 8c/16t ~200-250mm dies when they could sell 4c/8t dies at half the area and greatly increase margins on the lower end of the addressable market. What would it cost AMD to create the 4 core die, another $100m? It seems to me like that would be the smartest choice if they are expecting several billion USD in revenue.

    Expensive wafers on an expensive process, fitting twice as many dies on a wafer reaps rewards with high volume. Not everyone is going to want a $300-600 8c/16t, I think a lot of people will also be interested in a $150-250 4c/8t.
    I agree with this. You may see some 8 cores that don't meet voltage spec be cut down to 6 cores to improve manufacturing yield, but that's assumes AMD has a horribly inefficient manufacturing process to not have a single native quadcore chip.
    Quote Originally Posted by Hans de Vries View Post

    JF-AMD posting: IPC increases!!!!!!! How many times did I tell you!!!

    terrace215 post: IPC decreases, The more I post the more it decreases.
    terrace215 post: IPC decreases, The more I post the more it decreases.
    terrace215 post: IPC decreases, The more I post the more it decreases.
    .....}
    until (interrupt by Movieman)


    Regards, Hans

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •