71–80 of 359 posts
If I read the specs correctly, Ryzens don't have GPUs integrated. Are there any motherboards out there with GPUs on board? Or do you always have to add a 150EUR+ graphics card to it (assuming I want at least 2x 4K display support)? The 1800X does seem like a killer value for the money for us C++ people :)
https://www.purepc.pl/procesory/premiera_i_test_procesora_am...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Doesn't Prime95 use AVX2 and FMA3 since version 28.5, which pushes Intel's power consumption higher? Can that be disabled?
Yes, that's probably the reason for the increased power consumption. But Ryzen also supports AVX2, doesn't it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does anyone has a reddit account ? And know how AMA's work ? I'd love to get some input here. Or at least show we care. Edit: Account made, instructions received. If all goes well I should be asking later today.
Making one takes 5 seconds and AMA = Ask Me Anything. You reply to the top post with your question and wait for a response.
Wow. AMD has really pulled through on this one. They are really giving Intel a run for their money. This is going to be great for consumers. What is interesting is the HUGE jump in multi-threaded performance on AMD. Very interesting.
But it's still losing in every web and office single threaded benchmark. EDIT: compared to 7700k that costs about the same
For the first time in a decade, AMD are seriously competing at the high end. That's great news for everyone except Intel.
If I read the specs correctly, Ryzens don't have GPUs integrated. Are there any motherboards out there with GPUs on board? Or do you always have to add a 150EUR+ graphics card to it (assuming I want at least 2x 4K display support)? The 1800X does seem like a killer value for the money for us C++ people :)
AFAIK, a $90 AMD RX460 should be able to output to dual 4K monitors.
If neither monitor has HDMI 2.0 then an RX470 would be required to get dual DisplayPort outputs.
Looking at those gaming benchmarks. Turns out the single core performance is still more important than having more cores. https://www.purepc.pl/procesory/premiera_i_test_procesora_am...
> ... this means that the base memory controller in the silicon should be able to support ECC. We know that it is disabled for the consumer parts, but nothing has been said regarding the Pro parts. ECC should be a standard feature. If you don't want it you don't have to use it but to disable simply for market segmentation is lame.
>ECC should be a standard feature. If you don't want it you don't have to use it but to disable simply for market segmentation is lame. I agree ECC should be a standard feature, but it follows the same marketing patterns (in that industry) as disabling multi-processor support or artificially limiting clock speeds.
Without ECC you may get a completely wrong answer when the increasingly small, vulnerable, and numerous dram cell is flipped.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But it's still losing in every web and office single threaded benchmark. By ~15% compared to >160% for Bulldozer. And this is day zero before any applications have been optimized for the new microarchitecture, compared with Core which everything has been targeting for more than a decade. They did good.
I don't think spending time and effort to optimize code for Ryzen will be time well spent. Would you do it if you had the choice between that or adding new money making features/fixing bugs?
Of course I would, because people are going to benchmark my software against my competitor's software and choose the one that runs faster on their hardware.
Especially if my software is a compiler and people are benchmarking the programs it produces against other compilers, which is where most of the optimizing actually happens these days.