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

261–270 of 278 posts

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

#261

Post by floatboth »

vetinari wrote: post #214
floatboth wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many more people care about core count than PCI-E lanes… Core count is the probably the most important thing about a CPU.

If you want to keep these 8 cores busy, you need I/O to feed them. Otherwise, your cores will be either waiting for something or just getting hot running synthetic benchmarks.

What I/O are you going to do with all these PCI-E lanes? 16 for a graphics card, 4 for an NVMe SSD if you have one (still 2x as expensive as a SATA SSD at the same capacity), a couple for a network card maybe… The only reason to have ~40 lanes is multi-GPU setups, which are absolutely not necessary to keep 8 cores busy.

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

#262

Post by vetinari »

floatboth wrote: post #261
vetinari wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you want to keep these 8 cores busy, you need I/O to feed them. Otherwise, your cores will be either waiting for something or just getting hot running synthetic benchmarks.

What I/O are you going to do with all these PCI-E lanes? 16 for a graphics card, 4 for an NVMe SSD if you have one (still 2x as expensive as a SATA SSD at the same capacity), a couple for a network card maybe… The only reason to have ~40 lanes is multi-GPU setups, which are absolutely not necessary to keep 8 cores busy.

Where I live, NVMe and SATA drives are at the same price and many boards come with two M.2 slots (plus of course you can put additional drive with adapter into plain old PCIE slot). Network card or two, maybe thunderbolt port or two...

All the other chips have 16 PCI-E lanes, which you max out just with the graphic card.

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

#263

Post by NTripleOne »

pikzen wrote: post #135
mindcrime wrote: post #4

Wow... I really hope this is true and that it's a sign that AMD have their mojo back. Partly because I have a sentimental favoritism towards AMD, and partly because Intel (and Nvidia) need competition.

AMD giving competition to NVidia would require them to actually put some effort into their drivers to get tolerable performance and a list of bugs that isn't as long as my arm.

You say that as if nvidia's drivers aren't also utter trash.

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

#264

Post by pikzen »

NTripleOne wrote: post #263
pikzen wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AMD giving competition to NVidia would require them to actually put some effort into their drivers to get tolerable performance and a list of bugs that isn't as long as my arm.

You say that as if nvidia's drivers aren't also utter trash.

NVidia's drivers aren't regularly blacklisted[1] or complained about[2] for being absolute crap

[1] https://github.com/PCSX2/pcsx2/commit/26993380b16487649c2ae5... [2] https://dolphin-emu.org/blog/2013/09/26/dolphin-emulator-and...

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

#265

Post by lightedman »

masklinn wrote: post #97
lisivka wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no idea, why you downvoted. Stability test is important step of cluster building. If probability of something broken in new server is 10% then probability of something broken in new cluster of 10 servers is 1-(1-0.1)^10 = 65% .

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."

Cosmic radiation bitflips are BS. No cosmic rays reach ground level. The chance of a, say, Al-28 nucleus successfully penetrating the entire atmosphere is as close to zero as it could be possible to get. Basic physics. Something with such a high charge density won't penetrate ~100km of atmosphere and magnetic field. Even a basic muon wouldn't get through a sheet of aluminum foil and those are still capable of actually getting (barely) through the atmosphere.

The chances of cosmic radiation causing a bitflip are pretty much in the range of "Elvis coming into town on Nessie." Radiation originating from inside the system itself is much more likely a cause.

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

#266

Post by lightedman »

lightedman wrote: post #265
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." Cosmic radiation bitflips are BS. No cosmic rays reach ground level. The chance of a, say, Al-28 nucleus successfully penetrating the entire atmosphere is as close to zero as it could be possible to get. Basic physics. Something with such a high charge density won't penetrate ~100km of atmosphere and magnetic field. Even a basic muon wouldn't get through a sheet of aluminum f…

Attention downvoters: Cosmic rays don't even make it through the atmosphere. They are depleted atomic nuclei which essentially smash into another atom and that's the end of it. Not even multi TeV cosmic rays, which are rare, get through. They never "pass straight through the Earth" either, that's pretty much reserved for neutrinos only. Particles with energies of about 10^18 eV arrive at the rate of about one per square kilometer of atmosphere per century. These very high energy cosmic rays are detected at the ground by looking for the secondary photons, electrons, muons and neutrons that shower large areas of the ground after the primary particle impacts the atmosphere.

Your ground-level bit flips are most likely caused by terrestrial radiation sources, not extra-terrestrial ones. This is just basic physics.

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

#267

Post by floatboth »

vetinari wrote: post #262
floatboth wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I/O are you going to do with all these PCI-E lanes? 16 for a graphics card, 4 for an NVMe SSD if you have one (still 2x as expensive as a SATA SSD at the same capacity), a couple for a network card maybe… The only reason to have ~40 lanes is multi-GPU setups, which are absolutely not necessary to keep 8 cores busy.

Where I live, NVMe and SATA drives are at the same price and many boards come with two M.2 slots (plus of course you can put additional drive with adapter into plain old PCIE slot). Network card or two, maybe thunderbolt port or two... All the other chips have 16 PCI-E lanes, which you max out just with the graphic card.

Intel's desktop (not X99) boards have some extra lanes on the chipset, Ryzen will be a similar setup. (Also graphics cards perform fine with 8 lanes, the performance difference from 16 is tiny)

Where I live, the price of a 256GB NVMe drive == 512GB SATA drive :(

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

#268

Post by arcanus »

angry_octet wrote: post #182

Looking forward to the day when reviews include HPCG (the replacement for LINPACK) as a benchmark, with a little animation showing how hot the different bits of the core run.

Should be soon.

HPCG is a memory bound application so I doubt it runs the system as hot as HPL (high performance linpack)

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

#269

Post by EdHominem »

lisivka wrote: post #239
masklinn wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Did you use a geiger counter to verify the dust was hot? Would something large enough to cause problems with the ram be large enough to detect?

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

#270

Post by crowbahr »

grogenaut wrote: post #258
crowbahr wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope. Just tried and I'm still capping at around 100 fps. I don't know what's going on. It'll fluctuate wildly and still uses 100% cpu.

Sorry to say this but "Reinstall windows" is a good place to start. How much ram do you have?

16gb ram.

It's DDR3 1600.

Reinstalling windows is not really something I want to do.

Post reply on HN