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

AMD Unveils Ryzen 9000 CPUs for Desktop, Zen 5

anandtech.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 297 posts

Re: AMD Unveils Ryzen 9000 CPUs for Desktop, Zen 5

#141

Post by KingOfCoders »

aurareturn wrote: post #123
KingOfCoders wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks, Clang looks good, now I need to check how to sort CPUs/systems by the Clang benchmark, no success for now. "Randomly" picking 14900K 215.3 Klines/sec 7950x 230.3 Klines/sec M2 Ultra 233.9 Klines/sec M3 Max 196.5 Klines/sec

Single thread: M3 Max: 3898 7950x: 2951 The ST advantage of Apple Silicon is real. 7950x does do better in highly parallel tasks. To me, Apple Silicon is clearly leading clients over AMD/Intel. Hence, my original reason for why AMD's announcement isn't "exciting". Because Apple Silicon is so far ahead in client. Of course, AMD can crank up the core via Epyc/Threadripper and Apple has no answer. For that, you'd need t…

Yes, and is great if you are a gamer / have software that doesn't multi-core.

Re: AMD Unveils Ryzen 9000 CPUs for Desktop, Zen 5

#142

Post by michaelt »

arvinsim wrote: post #12
gautamcgoel wrote: post #3

Surprisingly not that much to be excited about IMO. AMD isn't using TSMC's latest node and the CPUs only officially support DDR5 speeds up to 5600MHz (yes, I know that you can use faster RAM). The CPUs are also using the previous-gen graphics architecture, RDNA2.

TBH, CPUs nowadays are mostly good enough for the consumer, even at mid or low tiers. It's the GPUs that are just getting increasing inaccessible, price wise.

Yes - with more and more users moving to laptops and wanting a longer battery life, raw peak performance hasn't moved much in a decade.

A decade ago, Steam's hardware survey said 8GB was the most popular amount of RAM [1] and today, the latest $1600 Macbook Pro comes with.... 8GB of RAM.

In some ways that's been a good thing - it used to be that software got more and more featureful/bloated and you needed a new computer every 3-5 years just to keep up.

[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20140228170316/http://store.stea...

Re: AMD Unveils Ryzen 9000 CPUs for Desktop, Zen 5

#144

Post by re-thc »

fh9302 wrote: post #133
re-thc wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> which is still 400 points or so behind apple silicon for a much higher clock speed and a multiplier larger power draw Not a fair comparison. If we're on about Geekbench as per the announcement, it's +35%. The 15% is a geomean. It might not be better but definitely not far off Apple. In a similar manner, except Geekbench the geomean of M3 vs M4 isn't that great either.

+35% is for a single cherry-picked Geekbench AES subtest. AMD did not show the overall Geekbench improvement.

And in a way same applies to M3 vs M4 Geekbench scores. A few new instructions were added. Aside from those it's nowhere near the 25% improvement there either.

Re: AMD Unveils Ryzen 9000 CPUs for Desktop, Zen 5

#145

Post by MenhirMike »

gautamcgoel wrote: post #3

Surprisingly not that much to be excited about IMO. AMD isn't using TSMC's latest node and the CPUs only officially support DDR5 speeds up to 5600MHz (yes, I know that you can use faster RAM). The CPUs are also using the previous-gen graphics architecture, RDNA2.

Given that there are only 2 CUs in the GPU (and fairly low clock speeds), does the architecture matter much? Benchmarks were kinda terrible, and it looks to me that the intent of the built-in GPU is for hardware video encoding or to run it in a home server system, or emergency BIOS and the like. Compared to the desktop CPUs, even the lowest end mobile 8440U has 4 CUs, going up to 12 CUs on the higher end. Or go with Strix Point, which does have an RDNA 3.5 GPU (with 12 or 16 CUs) in it.

I guess you _can_ game on those 2 CU GPUs, but it really doesn't seem to be intended for that.

Re: AMD Unveils Ryzen 9000 CPUs for Desktop, Zen 5

#146

Post by _cenw »

user_7832 wrote: post #99
MaKey wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 780m is RDNA3 though.

Thanks, missed it. Is the steamdeck rdna2? That's also decently capable.

Sort of. The generation is RDNA2, but it's unlike all other RDNA2 chips because the focus is so much on energy efficiency (and the APU has its own codename, van gogh)

Re: AMD Unveils Ryzen 9000 CPUs for Desktop, Zen 5

#147

Post by vegabook »

mmaniac wrote: post #104
vegabook wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Geekbench Ryzen 9 7950x is 2930 max, so if we're generous and give the 9950x 15% uplift we'll be at 3380, which is still 400 points or so behind apple silicon for a much higher clock speed and a multiplier larger power draw. Also the max memory bandwidth at 70GB/s or so is basically pathetic, trounced by ASi.

You're comparing apples and oranges. Ryzen has never had the lead with 1T performance, but emphasises nT and core counts instead. Memory bandwidth is largely meaningless for desktop CPUs but matters a lot for a SoC with a big GPU. Strix Halo appears to be AMD's competitor to Apple SoCs which will feature a much bigger iGP and much greater memory bandwidth. When we hear more about that, comparisons will be apt.

AMD has been making SoCs forever. Why does it take a kick in the teeth from Apple for both Intel and AMD suddenly to wake up and give us performance SoCs, 5 years later? They've been coasting on the stone-age motherboard+cards arch because essentially Nvidia gave you a big, fat, modern coprocessor in the form of an [g/r]tx card that hid the underlying problems.

They could have done what AAPL did ages ago but they have no ability to innovate properly. They've been leaning on their x86 duopoly and if it's now on its last legs, it's their fault.

Re: AMD Unveils Ryzen 9000 CPUs for Desktop, Zen 5

#148

Post by MenhirMike »

IamFr0ssT wrote: post #92
lldb wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can run 4x32 DDR5 on current gen AMD consumer platforms but don't expect speeds above 4400MHz in quad-channel regardless of what the module is rated for. I'd instead suggest dual channel 48GB DIMMs for 96GB at full speed.

4 DIMMs does not equal Quad-channel. I see in AMD's presentation Quad-channel is supported by chipsets, but I am not aware of a current AMD consumer/hedt chip with 4 memory channels.

Non-Pro Threadripper 7960X/7970X/7980X are Quad Channel. (The Threadripper Pro's are Octa-Channel)

But yeah, Desktop Ryzen's are all Dual Channel.

Re: AMD Unveils Ryzen 9000 CPUs for Desktop, Zen 5

#149

Post by Tepix »

It's weird that CPUs tend to use more power every two years now instead of less. Looks like this time, the TDP didn't increase. Yay! i guess. Don't most people think their PCs are fast enough already?

It's as if our planet wasn't being destroyed at a frightening speed. We're headed towards a cliff, but instead if braking, we're accelerating.

Re: AMD Unveils Ryzen 9000 CPUs for Desktop, Zen 5

#150

Post by aurareturn »

mmaniac wrote: post #104
vegabook wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Geekbench Ryzen 9 7950x is 2930 max, so if we're generous and give the 9950x 15% uplift we'll be at 3380, which is still 400 points or so behind apple silicon for a much higher clock speed and a multiplier larger power draw. Also the max memory bandwidth at 70GB/s or so is basically pathetic, trounced by ASi.

You're comparing apples and oranges. Ryzen has never had the lead with 1T performance, but emphasises nT and core counts instead. Memory bandwidth is largely meaningless for desktop CPUs but matters a lot for a SoC with a big GPU. Strix Halo appears to be AMD's competitor to Apple SoCs which will feature a much bigger iGP and much greater memory bandwidth. When we hear more about that, comparisons will be apt.

Ryzen doesn't even lead in MT on laptops.

With M4, they're likely to fall even farther behind. M4 Pro/Max is likely to arrive in Fall. AMD's Strix Point doesn't seem to have a release date.

Post reply on HN