Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

AMD Ryzen 7 1800X Benchmarked – Giving Intel’s $1000 Chips A Run For It

wccftech.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 278 posts

Re: AMD Ryzen 7 1800X Benchmarked – Giving Intel’s $1000 Chips A Run For It

#231

Post by kogepathic »

coredog64 wrote: post #229
seanp2k2 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great use-case for the server-grade Atoms. I have a freenas build with an Avoton 8-core and it's fantastic. Asrock Rack c2750D4i, check it out. Can't wait for the new Atom server chips as well, and I hope AMD launches a competitor in the low-power / storage server market.

Aren't the Avoton chips the ones that is causing Cisco to have to replace a crapload of network gear?

Yes. The C2xxx series Atom has the errata. [0] It's not just Cisco gear affected, but Cisco are being the most proactive about replacement.

[0] https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/02/06/cisco_intel_decline...

Re: AMD Ryzen 7 1800X Benchmarked – Giving Intel’s $1000 Chips A Run For It

#232

Post by clarry »

elementalest wrote: post #12

There is so much hype with AMD atm. In particular sites like WCCFTech have gone almost rabid with hype. My experience is that AMD tend to over promise with their marketing and rumours. So whilst the hype may well be warranted this time, I'm going to wait for the actual reviews to come through and take these leaks with a grain of salt.

To be honest, Intel marketing overpromises too. A lot. I think people are just so used to it happening all the time that it's nothing out of ordinary, so it doesn't even look like hype.

Re: AMD Ryzen 7 1800X Benchmarked – Giving Intel’s $1000 Chips A Run For It

#233

Post by chx »

rch wrote: post #197
olegkikin wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Server CPUs are often used in workstations, which are pretty much desktops.

I just speced a new laptop with a Xeon E3-1505M v6.

Xeon E3 desktop or mobile is just i5/i7 with ECC support. Your CPU falls square between i7 7820HQ and 7920HQ frequency wise (and 100 MHz at 3GHz is a negligible difference) and aside from ECC there's no difference: https://ark.intel.com/compare/97462,97496,97463

The big difference is in the E5/E7 chips.

Re: AMD Ryzen 7 1800X Benchmarked – Giving Intel’s $1000 Chips A Run For It

#234

Post by tbrowbdidnso »

Strom wrote: post #225
tbrowbdidnso wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I guess that decides it

The thing is, anyone with a 144 Hz monitor [1] knows from experience that what you're claiming here is complete bullshit. Then there's also the fact that 70 Hz causes demonstrably more nausea in VR users than 90 Hz or more. Beyond that, if you wanna act innocent and play a citation game, I can throw you a bone. I'll give you this [2], what do you give me in return? -- [1] This was already evident back in CRT days whe…

Really? Your first citation is youself[1] and the second one is a random website that's clearly not scientific or published.

How about the NIH? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2826883/figure/...

Gap detection thresholds for different age ranges. Notice that the average for vision is around 20ms, or 50fps. Yeah some people are lower but the large majority of people don't see any faster than 60fps

[1] so its not actually a citation it's just annoying.

Re: AMD Ryzen 7 1800X Benchmarked – Giving Intel’s $1000 Chips A Run For It

#235

Post by acqq »

TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #213
ndesaulniers wrote: post #73

Any thoughts on the huge discrepancy in SSE performance? Something seems wrong there.

As mentioned elsewhere, these chips only have a 128-bit SIMD unit (either for power or for space savings?) and so 256-bit SIMD executes half as fast as it would on Intel.

But if I read the picture properly, AMD appears to be 8 times(!) faster than anything else:

http://cdn.wccftech.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/AMD-Ryzen...

That seems to be untypically good, in the market where the new generations brought typically 10-20%.

I still wouldn't say it's impossible, as, for example, Intel had (apparently until Sandy Bridge) much slower NaN handling than AMD, at least without SSE2. So maybe AMD discovered some weak point like that. But until I read some explanation, it does seem to be too good...

Re: AMD Ryzen 7 1800X Benchmarked – Giving Intel’s $1000 Chips A Run For It

#236

Post by muyuu »

matt_wulfeck wrote: post #205

I can't help but feel AMD is shooting the puck where the goal was, but won't be in the next few years. We desparately need GPU-like devices for advanced ML/AI. Even intel knows this and is investing huge in that area to be competitive against NVIDIA[1]. I predict in the future that AMD will come to dominate the home/enthusiasts CPU market, and intel's low-power CPUs will dominate enterprise along with whoever comes o…

AMD already do that, but no it's not like ML/AI is the main market right now. Nowhere near.

Re: AMD Ryzen 7 1800X Benchmarked – Giving Intel’s $1000 Chips A Run For It

#237

Post by masklinn »

lisivka wrote: post #228
masklinn wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because they objection has nothing to do with the original comment. Bitflips are not a RAM stability issue.

Bitflips are not a RAM stability issue, they happen randomly due to radiation, but radiation is not random, especially in my area (I live not far from Chornobyl).

Sure, but you won't solve excessive ambient radiation by running a stress test on your RAM.

Re: AMD Ryzen 7 1800X Benchmarked – Giving Intel’s $1000 Chips A Run For It

#238

Post by flamedoge »

lisivka wrote: post #228
masklinn wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because they objection has nothing to do with the original comment. Bitflips are not a RAM stability issue.

Bitflips are not a RAM stability issue, they happen randomly due to radiation, but radiation is not random, especially in my area (I live not far from Chornobyl).

er.. you should probably move. Bitflips aren't the only things radiation does. Bitflips in DNA for example.

Re: AMD Ryzen 7 1800X Benchmarked – Giving Intel’s $1000 Chips A Run For It

#239

Post by lisivka »

masklinn wrote: post #237
lisivka wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bitflips are not a RAM stability issue, they happen randomly due to radiation, but radiation is not random, especially in my area (I live not far from Chornobyl).

Sure, but you won't solve excessive ambient radiation by running a stress test on your RAM.

A small radioactive («hot») dust particle will not change average radiation level a lot, but may cause problems with memory/cpu. Simple cleaning, by blowing dust out, fixes it. Saw that dozen of times, but years ago.
Post reply on HN