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

81–90 of 297 posts

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

#81

Post by user_7832 »

matharmin wrote: post #54
doikor wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The CPUs are also using the previous-gen graphics architecture, RDNA2. The GPU on these parts is there mostly for being able to boot into BIOS or OS for debugging. Basically when things go wrong and you want to debug what is broken (remove GPU from machine and see if things work)

These are decent GPUs for anything other than heavy gaming. I'm driving two 4k screens with it, and even for some light gaming (such as factorio) it's completely fine.

I agree, my 780m is quite capable in most games. Depending on the resolution & settings even cyberpunk 2077 is playable at 60fps. MS Flight sim though hits (presumably the memory bandwidth bottleneck) hard.

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

#82

Post by zigzag312 »

aurareturn wrote: post #59
arp242 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I would stick to SPEC and Geekbench. I will repeat: "On Geekbench I gave up after scrolling a few pages." SPEC doesn't seem to have easily browsable results, but we can find the Cinebench 2024 ones easy and guess what? Apple isn't at the top. Not even close: https://www.cgdirector.com/cinebench-2024-scores/

Here's GB6: https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/compare/6339005?baselin... Note: M3 Max is a 40w CPU maximum, while 7950x is a 230w CPU maximum. The stated 170w max is usually deceptive from AMD. Source for 7950x power consumption: https://www.anandtech.com/show/17641/lighter-touch-cpu-power... . Note that the M3 Max leads in ST in Cinebench 2024 and 2-3x better in perf/watt. It does lose in MT in Cinebench 2024 but…

It the end, what matters is real-world performance and different workloads have different bottlenecks. For people who use Cinema 4D, Cinebench is the most accurate measurement of hardware capabilities they can get. It's very hard to generalize what will matter for the vast majority of people. I find it's best to look at benchmarks for the same applications or similar workloads to what you'll be doing. Single score benchmark like Geekbench are fun and quick way to get some general idea about CPU capabilities, but most of the time they don't match specifics of real-world workloads.

Here's a content creation benchmark (note that for some tasks a GPU is also used):

https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/mac-vs-pc-for-con...

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

#83

Post by nolist_policy »

123yawaworht456 wrote: post #77
matharmin wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These are decent GPUs for anything other than heavy gaming. I'm driving two 4k screens with it, and even for some light gaming (such as factorio) it's completely fine.

I'm under the impression that Factorio can run on any GPU capable of producing video output at all. years ago when I played it, it ran perfectly fine on whatever iGPU my 4790K had. 60 FPS/UPS with pretty big bases (although iirc I did disable all video effects like smoke to avoid cluttering the screen)

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

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

#84

Post by Aardwolf »

adrian_b wrote: post #56
buildbot wrote: post #26

AVX512 in a single cycle vs 2 cycles is big if the clock speed can be maintained at all near 5GHz. Also doubling of L1 cache bandwidth is interesting! Possibly, needed to actually feed an AVX512 rich instruction stream I guess.

For most instructions, both Intel and AMD CPUs with AVX-512 support are able to do two 512-bit instructions per clock cycle. There is no difference between Intel and AMD Zen 4 for most 512-bit AVX-512 instructions. I expect that this will remain true for Zen 5 and the next Intel CPUs. The only important differences in throughput between Intel and AMD were for the 512-bit load and store instructions from the L1 cache…

> There is no difference between Intel and AMD Zen 4 for most 512-bit AVX-512 instructions.

Except for the fact that Intel hasn't had any AVX-512 for years already in consumer CPUs, so there's nothing to compare against really in this target market

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

#85

Post by MaKey »

user_7832 wrote: post #81
matharmin wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These are decent GPUs for anything other than heavy gaming. I'm driving two 4k screens with it, and even for some light gaming (such as factorio) it's completely fine.

I agree, my 780m is quite capable in most games. Depending on the resolution & settings even cyberpunk 2077 is playable at 60fps. MS Flight sim though hits (presumably the memory bandwidth bottleneck) hard.

The 780m is RDNA3 though.

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

#86

Post by mmaniac »

AMD seem to be playing it safe this with this desktop generation. Same node, similar frequencies, same core counts, same IOD, X3D chips only arriving later... IPC seems like the only noteworthy improvement here. 15% overall is good but nothing earth shattering.

The mobile APUs are way more interesting.

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

#87

Post by DEADMINCE »

adrian_b wrote: post #56
buildbot wrote: post #26

AVX512 in a single cycle vs 2 cycles is big if the clock speed can be maintained at all near 5GHz. Also doubling of L1 cache bandwidth is interesting! Possibly, needed to actually feed an AVX512 rich instruction stream I guess.

For most instructions, both Intel and AMD CPUs with AVX-512 support are able to do two 512-bit instructions per clock cycle. There is no difference between Intel and AMD Zen 4 for most 512-bit AVX-512 instructions. I expect that this will remain true for Zen 5 and the next Intel CPUs. The only important differences in throughput between Intel and AMD were for the 512-bit load and store instructions from the L1 cache…

> The only important differences in throughput between Intel and AMD

Not exactly related, but AMD also has a much better track record when it comes to speculative execution attacks.

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

#88

Post by Arrath »

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.

Well perhaps I will stop holding out and just get the 7800x3d, if the 9000 generation won't be too terribly groundbreaking.

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

#89

Post by glimshe »

nolist_policy wrote: post #83
123yawaworht456 wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm under the impression that Factorio can run on any GPU capable of producing video output at all. years ago when I played it, it ran perfectly fine on whatever iGPU my 4790K had. 60 FPS/UPS with pretty big bases (although iirc I did disable all video effects like smoke to avoid cluttering the screen)

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...
Post reply on HN