Rumor: AMD Seeds Board partners Ryzen 3000 Samples - Runs 4.5 GHz and show 15% Extra IPC
Click here to post a comment for Rumor: AMD Seeds Board partners Ryzen 3000 Samples - Runs 4.5 GHz and show 15% Extra IPC on our message forum
vbetts
Moderator
Bulldozer to Piledriver had a pretty decent IPC upgrade, I can believe it. AMD is really good on tuning their core technology.
Dazz
When the Intel core architecture first came out newer gens provided decent gains but once they pushed it to the max IPC gains were only 2-3% and they have technically been flat for the last 3 gens besides pushing clock speeds. Zen was a conservative release and Zen+ had slight tweaks. Zen 2 i can see doing 13% with some heavy tweaking on the IO controller and reduced latency core communication more tweaking on memory sub timings by default. Zen is quite scalable/tweakable they also have way slower L1/2/3 cache and higher latency than Intel so tweaks can be applied there also along with improve data prediction. There is alot of things they can do to get that 13-15% AMD is taking Intels approach of tick tock.
I am still sceptical of clock speeds however seeing how Zen has slowly been coming along in that department.
fredgml7
It would be so great if all the rumors/leaks end up being true. I have no doubt that it will be good though.
Borys
It´s BRILHANT what AMD has been doing last years! This prove that ALL is transient!
Zen2 will be my next setup after a very long time, and I am very proud to give my money to the best option today in the marketing talking about cost x performance (perhaps now the both terms in the top).
Skeptical people and Intel fanboys are doubt one more time, but AMD will bring the TOP CPU performance at ALL (games and data) because the Zen tecnology is very MATURE... and the jump of 12nm to 7 will be very powerful. IF... the ZEN2 runs with ALL CORES at 5.0GHZ with DDR4 4000MHZ (with good latency) the Darkness time is already planted there!
Congratulations AMD and good fortune to the blue side... they will really need!
nz3777
BS unless it can do 6Ghz iam not buying it! Joking aside I was expecting something Huge from Amd zen2 but even with these ipc improvements I would still rather have a 9900k. Zen is way cheeper I give em that much less then half price.
nevcairiel
What I'm afraid of is that they are measuring IPC gain in some AVX/AVX2 workload, since Zen/Zen+ is limited there to 128-bit, instead of the full 256-bit that AVX(2) can offer. Zen2 is fixing that, however its rarely used by games, for example, so it wouldn't result in any gains there.
Getting full AVX1/2 is still a noteworthy gain, but folding that into some generic IPC increase would be .. misleading, since its not a generic gain, but only in applications that use it specifically.
What I'm really interested in is what all-core clocks it can get for a 24/7 OC under water/AIO. If thats in any way decent, I'm definitely interested in a 12-core variant. But I definitely want 4.7+ all core for that, since I can run my "aging" 14nm Intel 10-core on that today already.
S V S
AMD "leaks" have a serious history of vastly overstating actual performance.
It is hard to believe this is accurate.
Aura89
Engineering sample, and don't know if that is base, or all-core boost. Lets say it is base, what exactly is not "huge" about that? I'm only pointing this out because it sounds like you are reading this as though its not an engineering sample as well as knowing what the all-core boost is to make your opinion
Kool64
I’m going to be the coolest kid on the block with a starter 6 core processor. It’ll be since upgrade for my 1600x.
Kaleid
Yes, everything before Ryzen has quite a bit of marketing jargon to create more of a buzz...true, but the IPC improvements of Ryzen actually were better than they promised.
__
I do hope more switch to AMD, we need better competition in PC stuff, as we can see the competition in the phone business is making sure just about all actors are trying to make the best phone possible or at least the performance keeps on going up
4.5Ghz and the extra IPC sounds nice. If it is 8 cores then no need to switch up for quite some time, because PS5 will unlikely run at 4.5Ghz anyhow.
anticupidon
The waiting game intensifies.
Lavcat
My primary computer is Broadwell 5930 at 4.6 GHz. I am not hurting at the moment but my next CPU purchase will probably be AMD. In the 486 days I called up AMD and asked if AMD's 486 was pin compatible. They let me speak to an engineer who explained the AMD 486 was not actually pin compatible with Intel's.
Sadly I went with Intel that time, but the whole 486 platform was a disaster. I had a Young motherboard that never worked. I'll take a good 286 any day. I never used an 8080 but I did use an 8085. I was into mini computers and mainframes before that.
RooiKreef
Well if the 15% IPC is true then AMD will be basically on par with Intel clock for clock. Now the big question is how far will the final products boost compared to Intel CPUS?
Fox2232
https://www.techspot.com/article/1616-4ghz-ryzen-2nd-gen-vs-core-8th-gen/
See difference of productivity with 6C/12T chips... around 3% mostly and sometimes AMD wins. Difference in gaming is bigger. From their numbers 2600X is around 7~12% slower in those few games tested than 8700K. But then look bit more and see that gap between 1600X and 8700K has been reduced by half by that 2600X.
...
1600X is 16,4% slower in FC5 than 8700K. But 2600X is only 7,8% slower than same 8700K. (That's tweak between Zen and Zen+ where many claimed that there are no changes...)
- - - -
If those 15% are true and would be across the board (which they are not as that is some kind of average), AMD would claim productivity win regardless of clock, because there both sides end up using all cores and that reduces intel's clock advantage... or results in quite some energy waste.
And in gaming, it would reduce difference enough to become unimportant.
msotirov
Maybe time to long AMD's stock for a quick profit later this year 🙂
TalentX
Clock-Speed isn't everything that makes a CPU better.
Zen2 is a new architecture based on 7nm, plus it is patched against Spectre and it isn't affected by Meltdown nor Spoiler, while Intel CPUs still are.
Even with Zen and Zen+ AMD already has the upper hand against intel, as in benchmarks I see them mostly at top in multi-core performance, not intel.
Might be true that single core performance on intel is better than AMD up to some extent (as of right now). However, there again AMD has a fair price policy instead, thus you can keep your kidney!
For those who are gaming-oriented who must have the better single-core performance advantage regardless of the price policy:
Let's not forget that a few months ago a Zen2 prototype model was running head in head with an 9900K, while Zen2 was consuming half the power that the 9900K does, which you can safely assume that Zen 2 was very most likely not running on full potential at all.
Anyway, having no high hopes or expectations isn't necessarily meant to be something bad. It may as well boost the "surprise" effect when the final product launches.
Netherwind
He did write 2700K 🙂 And I assume that's what he meant by IPC increase?
BReal85
Wow, so you will have maybe 5+ % more fps in FHD games with a 2080Ti. So basically 0,0001% of the gamers. BRILLIANT!
DeskStar
Now is this with a heavy OC, or are we talking about typical "theoretical" boost performance.....?!?
This will be the true deciding factor as to whether or not I want to build a new system. That and memory support. I want silly speeds and a minimum of quad channel support.
Looking good so far AMD......Let us all keep hoping....
Yogi
Google translate of the source HH linked to seems to indicate that it's a 15% improvement "overall" compared to Zen+.
I think people are overreacting with theories of 15% IPC improvement on top of clock improvements. Just because the Eng Sample clocks at 4.5 GHz doesn't mean a whole pile. The silicon lottery swings both ways even with production improvements over time and improvements to drivers, etc.
Retail chips could perform the exact same as this hypothetical ES.
Edit: Zen+ not Zen2
