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

161–170 of 297 posts

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

#161

Post by kmfrk »

irusensei wrote: post #160

I'll probably wait one or two years before getting into anything with DDR5. I've blew some money on an AMD laptop in 2021. At the time it was a monster with decent expansion options: RX 6800m, Ryzen 9 5900HX. I've stuck it with maximum 64GB DDR4 and 2x 4TB psi 3.0 nvme. Runs Linux very well. But now I'm seeing lots of things I'm locked out. Faster ethernet standards, the fun that brings with tons of GPU memory (no US…

Waiting for CAMM2 to get wider adoption could be interesting:

https://x.com/msigaming/status/1793628162334621754

Hopefully won't be too long now.

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

#162

Post by worthless-trash »

irusensei wrote: post #160

I'll probably wait one or two years before getting into anything with DDR5. I've blew some money on an AMD laptop in 2021. At the time it was a monster with decent expansion options: RX 6800m, Ryzen 9 5900HX. I've stuck it with maximum 64GB DDR4 and 2x 4TB psi 3.0 nvme. Runs Linux very well. But now I'm seeing lots of things I'm locked out. Faster ethernet standards, the fun that brings with tons of GPU memory (no US…

You will find that this is the cost of any laptop, any time you buy it there is always new tech around the corner and there isn't much you can do about it.

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

#163

Post by vegabook »

mmaniac wrote: post #156
vegabook wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 hav…

This question is almost rhetorical. Yes, competition drives innovation. When Ryzen APUs only had Intel to worry about, they rested on their laurels with stagnating but still superior performance. Intel did the same thing with 4c/8t desktop CPUs during the Bulldozer dark age. SoCs are good for the segments they target but they're by no means the be-all-end-all of personal computing. The performance of discrete graphic…

as soon as someone puts 16GB of VRAM next to an SoC (Nvidia, soon), the gaming pc is dead. These hot 'n slow discrete components are fun to decorate with RGB but they're yesterday for _all_ segments.

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

#164

Post by mrweasel »

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.

> AMD isn't using TSMC's latest node

Staying on an older node might ensure AMD the production capacity they need/want/expect. If they had aimed for the latest 3nm then they'd have get in line behind Apple and Nvidia. That would be my guess, why aim for 3nm, if you can't get fab time and you're still gaining a 15% speed increase.

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

#165

Post by Semaphor »

pquki4 wrote: post #114
jiggawatts wrote: post #91

I wonder when the PC world will transition to unified memory and more monolithic architectures as seen in the Apple M-series chips, but also in the NVIDIA GB200 "superchip", the AMD MI300 accelerator, the X-Box and Playstation consoles, and even in some mobile phone system-on-a-chip designs. It feels like the PC is the "last holdout" of discrete upgradeable components with relatively low bandwidth between them. Soone…

I doubt that's ever going to happen -- people build their own PCs exactly because they want the opposite of everything in a MacBook: they want modularity, upgradeability and repairability to the point that they are willing to sacrifice power efficiency. "AI will need to run..." Let's wait and see what actually happens to AI before being too eager to change the design of computers. I'm also pretty sure there will be a…

> people build their own PCs exactly because they want the opposite of everything in a MacBook: they want modularity, upgradeability and repairability to the point that they are willing to sacrifice power efficiency.

While I’m totally one of those people, aren’t we some rather small minority, nowadays? I mean, obviously still big enough for companies to produce parts we want, but I always keep reading how more and more people are using laptops instead of desktops.

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

#166

Post by simcop2387 »

worthless-trash wrote: post #162
irusensei wrote: post #160

I'll probably wait one or two years before getting into anything with DDR5. I've blew some money on an AMD laptop in 2021. At the time it was a monster with decent expansion options: RX 6800m, Ryzen 9 5900HX. I've stuck it with maximum 64GB DDR4 and 2x 4TB psi 3.0 nvme. Runs Linux very well. But now I'm seeing lots of things I'm locked out. Faster ethernet standards, the fun that brings with tons of GPU memory (no US…

You will find that this is the cost of any laptop, any time you buy it there is always new tech around the corner and there isn't much you can do about it.

(disclosure I own a 13in one)

Yea closest I see to being better about it is Frame.work laptops, and even then it's not as good a story as desktops, just the best story for upgrading a laptop right now. Other than that buying one and making sure you have at least two thunderbolt (or compatible) ports on separate busses is probably the best you can do since that'd mean two 40Gb/s links for expansion even if it's not portable, but would let you get things like 10GbE adapters or fast external storage and such without compromising too much on capability.

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

#167

Post by Loudergood »

glimshe wrote: post #89
nolist_policy wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 'Ryzen 7000 iGPU" (Why is there no official codename?!) can even run GTA 5 at low/medium settings.

I know it's hard to believe, but GTA V is now over 10 years old...

But does it run Crysis?

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

#168

Post by KingOfCoders »

JonChesterfield wrote: post #131
KingOfCoders wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would love to quote a compiler comparison, but I don't know a good and accepted compiler benchmark. What would you use as a compiler benchmark? (Preferably Go, but I assume Rust would be better, as it is much slower, so the differences are bigger) (corrected my c&p mistake with the mini, thanks)

Building clang using itself is a reasonable approximation to a compiler benchmark, speaking as someone who spends a depressing fraction of his life doing that over and over for permutations of the source code. That's somewhere in the five to ten minutes range on a decent single socket system.

Do you know of a benchmark site that compares clang compilations for different systems (CPU/RAM/SSD)?

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

#169

Post by KingOfCoders »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #136
aurareturn wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Passmark is a pretty bad CPU benchmark. It generally has poor correlation. I would stick to SPEC and Geekbench. Even Cinebench 2024 isn't too bad nowadays though R23 was quite poor in correlation. In general, not only are Apple Silicon CPUs faster than AMD consumer CPUs, but they're 2-4x more power efficient as well.

The problem with Geekbench is it's trying to average the scores from many different benchmarks, but then if some of them are outliers (e.g. one CPU has hardware acceleration or some other unusual aptitude for that specific workload), it gets an outsized score which is then averaged in and skews the result even if it doesn't generalize. What you want to do is look at the benchmarks for the thing you're actually using…

The max power on Intel/AMD CPUs is only there to get the CPU "performance crown". As you've said, you spend a large amount of additional power for very minor gains (to be at the top of fancy Youtube review charts).

It looks though as if AMD/Intel feel threatened by Snapdragon though - we'll see what AMD Strix / Halo brings for the first meaningful x86 mobile processor in years (or Luna Lake).

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

#170

Post by KingOfCoders »

arp242 wrote: post #64
KingOfCoders wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Geekbench has a seperate page for each "instruction set". For Apple you need to go to https://browser.geekbench.com/mac-benchmarks Then compare numbers by hand I assume. Though what I would love is compile-time vs. $ (as mentioned, I'm a software developer). The 7950x is $500 and a very fast SSD is $400, fast 64gb is $200, very good board is $400 so I get a very fast dev machine for ~$1700.

Ah right; that's confusing! Seems that the AMD and Intel chips are much faster though, consistent with other benchmarks. Speed vs. $ is of course a different story than pure speed; kinda hard to capture in a number I guess. Most Go projects compile more than fast enough even on my 7 year old i5, although there are exceptions (mostly crummy hyper-overengineered projects).

I think it depends on what you do. If you write a database in Go, there is no problem with 5min compile time. If you write a web app, 10 sec compile times are already annoying.
Post reply on HN