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

AMD Ryzen 9 3950X Review

anandtech.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 290 posts

Re: AMD Ryzen 9 3950X Review

#241

Post by gameswithgo »

seminatl wrote: post #236
gameswithgo wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

avx2 performance between the new amd cpus and intel is comparable. ive done some detailed comparisons with my own code that is tuned for intel and the ryzen is quicker in some places, slower in others.

AVX-512 is not AVX2.

I'm pretty well versed in the SIMD instruction sets, thank you. You might surmise that from the fact that I'm writing and benchmarking SIMD code....

I was responding to:

"Also not sure why they include the 3-d particle thing without AVX"

in which the op was not clear which AVX instruction set they were referring to. It seemed to be a difference benchmark from the one which had avx-512 disabled, due to the word "also"

Re: AMD Ryzen 9 3950X Review

#242

Post by bootloop »

gravypod wrote: post #193
bootloop wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am finally running a Ryzen 1700 + dual GPU system so I could get rid of dual-booting: CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 1700 Mainboard: GA-AX370-Gaming K5 (Bios: F25) GPU (Host): Gigabyte GeForce GTX 970 GPU (Guest): Gigabyte GeForce RTX 2060 OS (Host): Arch Linux OS (Guest): Win 10 As said it appears to me IOMMU grouping depends a lot on the board used. For mine it looks like all the chipset external PCIes are in one group and the…

Have you experimented with things like lookingglass? Is that stuff more streamlined now?

Personally I have no use for lookingglass. To make it work you need anyway a display connected (or something simulating a connected display) otherwise it will not render to the shared memory.

In addition to that I use the VM mostly for fullscreen application, either games or some windows only software so I don't get any advantage out of the windowing.

Instead I decided to take an auto-switching approach via CDD and some shortcut menus to switch GPU outputs on my main display, see in action here: https://gfycat.com/tepidliquidcero

Re: AMD Ryzen 9 3950X Review

#243

Post by linkgoron »

seminatl wrote: post #235
linkgoron wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could just buy a CPU for a third or fourth of the price if you want to just browse. You don't need a $750 16-core CPU. You can buy a $200 9600KF or a $240 3600x or something even cheaper. For anything multi-core the 3950X blows the 9900k out of the water, and for 1440p gaming the 3950x trades blows with the 9900k. If you want 1080p gaming, or web-browsing, this is not the CPU for you. That said, even for 1080p ga…

Ok but if it’s “trading blows with” and “within a few percent of” a CPU costing half the money, why is it rational to prefer it? I know why I want AMD parts and that is because of ECC memory support but this article doesn’t even mention it.

First of all, the 9900k doesn't cost half the money. Second, you can also buy a 3900x if you want 12 threads with similar ST characteristics and pricing closer to the 9900k. There are other options.

If you want to game @ 1080p and do mostly single threaded work (without parallelism), this CPU is not for you. If do a lot of single-threaded jobs in parallel (for example, gaming + being a server or gaming and streaming) or anything multi-threaded, this CPU destroys the 9900k, while being just a bit weaker when doing just one or two single-threaded tasks.

Re: AMD Ryzen 9 3950X Review

#244

Post by seminatl »

gameswithgo wrote: post #241
seminatl wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AVX-512 is not AVX2.

I'm pretty well versed in the SIMD instruction sets, thank you. You might surmise that from the fact that I'm writing and benchmarking SIMD code.... I was responding to: "Also not sure why they include the 3-d particle thing without AVX" in which the op was not clear which AVX instruction set they were referring to. It seemed to be a difference benchmark from the one which had avx-512 disabled, due to the word "also"

So aside from your irrelevant comments about AVX2 being about even between the two parts, what is a reasonable explanation for the second chart on page 4 of the article, assuming you can bother yourself to go read it. Their analysis seems to be essentially that if the Intel part wasn't 300% faster, then the AMD part would be 15% faster. But it is a fact that the Intel part is really three times faster on this benchmark, because of AVX-512. The only reason to include the chart with AVX disabled is to fit the article into a prejudiced narrative.

Re: AMD Ryzen 9 3950X Review

#245

Post by seminatl »

linkgoron wrote: post #243
seminatl wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok but if it’s “trading blows with” and “within a few percent of” a CPU costing half the money, why is it rational to prefer it? I know why I want AMD parts and that is because of ECC memory support but this article doesn’t even mention it.

First of all, the 9900k doesn't cost half the money. Second, you can also buy a 3900x if you want 12 threads with similar ST characteristics and pricing closer to the 9900k. There are other options. If you want to game @ 1080p and do mostly single threaded work (without parallelism), this CPU is not for you. If do a lot of single-threaded jobs in parallel (for example, gaming + being a server or gaming and streaming)…

Look I'm not arguing about which CPU is better. I'm arguing that taking the geometric mean of a bunch of completely unrelated benchmarks doesn't make any sense. There are clearly workloads in this very article where a cheaper part is better, sometimes even a cheaper AMD part.

Re: AMD Ryzen 9 3950X Review

#247

Post by linkgoron »

seminatl wrote: post #245
linkgoron wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First of all, the 9900k doesn't cost half the money. Second, you can also buy a 3900x if you want 12 threads with similar ST characteristics and pricing closer to the 9900k. There are other options. If you want to game @ 1080p and do mostly single threaded work (without parallelism), this CPU is not for you. If do a lot of single-threaded jobs in parallel (for example, gaming + being a server or gaming and streaming)…

Look I'm not arguing about which CPU is better. I'm arguing that taking the geometric mean of a bunch of completely unrelated benchmarks doesn't make any sense. There are clearly workloads in this very article where a cheaper part is better, sometimes even a cheaper AMD part.

And the article states clearly: "[the Core i9-9900KS] does pull out ahead in a number of ST tests as well as in low resolution (CPU-bound) gaming."

Regarding the geomean, they clearly state that their benchmarks prioritize multi-core benchmarks: "This metric also puts the 3900X above the 9900KS, because despite the 5.0 GHz all-core on 8-cores, moving to 12-core and 16-core at almost the same performance per core gives more of an advantage in our test suite's MT-heavy workloads."

They're not hiding behind anything. Everything is clearly stated.

Re: AMD Ryzen 9 3950X Review

#248

Post by bhauer »

oouiterud wrote: post #49

I read that all these new AMD CPUs support ECC, but it’s been hard finding verification. Can any one recommended a motherboard that both supports and uses ECC RAM with this new CPU?

I am using ECC memory with my 3900X on a Gigabyte Aorus X570 motherboard. Works great.

Re: AMD Ryzen 9 3950X Review

#250

Post by fierarul »

lliamander wrote: post #202
ibobev wrote: post #72

As a developer I am keen to see some compilation benchmarks. Unfortunately those kinds of benchmarks are almost never included in such reviews. Instead there are many gaming benchmarks which purpose is not exactly clear for me, after obviously gaming is not the primary target market for R9 3950X.

As a developer, other benchmarks I would like to see: * compile benchmarks for different mainstream languages (Java, C#, etc.) * IDE related benchmarks (i.e. how long does it take to index a large solution/workspace) * source control conversion tests (svn to git). Obviously not something that happens everyday, but I've done it at two different jobs, and generally when it happens you are often converting many repos as…

That makes two of us! Always wanted to see reviews/benchmarks from the angle of a software developer job.

I don't care how about video transcoding or most of the metrics such article show. But how long does my IDE take to index a big source tree? You bet!

Post reply on HN