• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

AMD Announces 3rd Generation Ryzen Desktop Processors

Joined
Feb 15, 2019
Messages
434 (0.80/day)
There are a few caveats here:
-Cinebench is a very specific workstation load. While it's an okay general predictor of overall performance, it's a poor predictor of some things (like gaming performance).
-Ryzen traditionally does well in Cinebench compared to Intel.
-Clock scaling is not necessarily linear.
-We don't know all-core turbo speeds of these new Ryzen chips. Though I'm hoping they're as high as it looks even with "normal" cooling. Nor do we know the power limits/cooling/BIOS settings of the demoed Intel chips, which can affect performance quite a lot.

Still, even if we give Ryzen a 10% advantage over Intel in Cinebench performance when compared to other tests, matching the 9900K at lower clocks is very impressive. It's hard to see how this would fail to come very, very close to it across the board.
Sure.
Some software are specifically optimized / poorly optimized for certain CPU type.
We all know Ryzen processors do well in Cinebench in multi threaded workload.
However matching Intel CPU in Cinebench in Single threaded test is something past generation Ryzen processors never achieved.

Of course, assuming these numbers on today's ppt are real.
 
Joined
Sep 17, 2014
Messages
12,811 (5.94/day)
Location
Mars
Processor i7 8700k 4.7Ghz @ 1.26v
Motherboard AsRock Fatal1ty K6 Z370
Cooling beQuiet! Dark Rock Pro 3
Memory 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX 3200/C16
Video Card(s) MSI GTX 1080 Gaming X @ 2100/5500
Storage Samsung 850 EVO 1TB + Samsung 830 256GB + Crucial BX100 250GB + Toshiba 1TB HDD
Display(s) Eizo Foris FG2421
Case Fractal Design Define C TG
Power Supply EVGA G2 750w
Mouse Logitech G502 Protheus Spectrum
Keyboard Sharkoon MK80 (Brown)
Software W10 x64
4.5 ~ 4.7 Ghz is really what they needed all along for this CPU to be a solid allrounder.

Can't wait to see performance in real world / reviews. But I think Intel's going to be smoked in that last remaining bastion of gaming on MSDT. With that, all things considered there is literally no reason for a consumer to get any Intel CPU. There's no price advantage, there's less certainty wrt security / flaws that are yet to come and already in place, there's no performance advantage and no perf/watt to win.

Now its time for the knockout punch with some solid Navi-based APUs, because that's what RDNA (GCN *cough*) is going to be competitive at: integrated graphics. I don't see much purpose for it otherwise at this point. AMD really needs to get serious about laptops.
 
Joined
Feb 19, 2009
Messages
1,069 (0.25/day)
Location
I live in Norway
System Name 3 sys spec seperated by "|"
Processor R9 3900x| R7 1700 @3.75 | 4800H
Motherboard Asrock X570M | AB350M Pro 4 | Asus Tuf A15
Cooling Air | Air | duh laptop
Memory 64gb G.skill SniperX @3600 CL16 | 64gb | 16gb
Video Card(s) EK-FC - RX Vega 64 | server | RTX2060M
Storage MP510 2TB, 660P 2TB, 2x860 evo 1tb | 960 500gb Intel 660P 1tb PM871 4x256gb ++| 1TB 660+ 1tb A1000
Display(s) AOC 28" 4K something + 1440p AOC 144hz something.
Case Phanteks EvolvX M-Atx
Power Supply Corsair RM850
Mouse g502 Lightspeed
Keyboard TT Meka G1
4.5 ~ 4.7 Ghz is really what they needed all along for this CPU to be a solid allrounder.

Can't wait to see performance in real world / reviews.
4.5 with 15% ipc is all I need.
I have one use case for that, starcraft 2! :p
I have not noticed any bottlenecks apart from that.
 
Joined
May 2, 2017
Messages
2,641 (2.20/day)
Processor AMD Ryzen 5 1600X
Motherboard Biostar X370GTN
Cooling Custom CPU+GPU water loop
Memory 16GB G.Skill TridentZ DDR4-3200 C16
Video Card(s) AMD R9 Fury X
Storage 500GB 960 Evo (OS ++), 500GB 850 Evo (Games)
Display(s) Dell U2711
Case NZXT H200i
Power Supply EVGA Supernova G2 750W
Mouse Logitech G602
Keyboard Lenovo Compact Keyboard with Trackpoint
Software Windows 10 Pro
Sure.
Some software are specifically optimized / poorly optimized for certain CPU type.
We all know Ryzen processors do well in Cinebench in multi threaded workload.
However matching Intel CPU in Cinebench in Single threaded test is something past generation Ryzen processors never achieved.

Of course, assuming these numbers on today's ppt are real.
There's no reason to assume the CB numbers are anything but real, as that's an extremely reproducible benchmark, and AMD would be panned by pretty much everyone if it required exotic cooling or something similar. But yeah, as I said, even with AMD's minor general architectural advantage in CB, matching the 9900K (including ST) is a very impressive feat, and bodes very well for other workloads - given, as you say, that this was previously impossible.

Yep, that's been widely reported.
 
Joined
Jul 18, 2016
Messages
339 (0.23/day)
System Name Gaming PC / I7 XEON
Processor I7 4790K @stock / XEON W3680 @ stock
Motherboard Asus Z97 MAXIMUS VII FORMULA / GIGABYTE X58 UD7
Cooling X61 Kraken / X61 Kraken
Memory 32gb Vengeance 2133 Mhz / 24b Corsair XMS3 1600 Mhz
Video Card(s) Gainward GLH 1080 / MSI Gaming X Radeon RX480 8 GB
Storage Samsung EVO 850 500gb ,3 tb seagate, 2 samsung 1tb in raid 0 / Kingdian 240 gb, megaraid SAS 9341-8
Display(s) 2 BENQ 27" GL2706PQ / Dell UP2716D LCD Monitor 27 "
Case Corsair Graphite Series 780T / Corsair Obsidian 750 D
Audio Device(s) ON BOARD / ON BOARD
Power Supply Sapphire Pure 950w / Corsair RMI 750w
Mouse Steelseries Sesnsei / Steelseries Sensei raw
Keyboard Razer BlackWidow Chroma / Razer BlackWidow Chroma
Software Windows 1064bit PRO / Windows 1064bit PRO
Finally no more cpu with 4 cores!
 
Joined
Apr 18, 2013
Messages
718 (0.27/day)
Intel is truly fuqed.

Sitting on their laurels for how many years? Rehashing SkyLake for how many times? Six already? They should scrap their 10nm plans and go straight to 7nm.

I'm so happy for AMD. Zen 2 will not just be faster in terms of IPC, it will be faster in pretty much all workloads despite its 10% frequency deficit (5GHz vs 4.5GHz). And in terms of TDP Intel is just ... not competitive at all any more.

What a day to be alive.

The underdog finally defeats Goliath.
 
Joined
Oct 4, 2017
Messages
451 (0.43/day)
Location
France
System Name White Rose ( https://imgur.com/gallery/l7Lg4Wj )
Processor RYZEN 7 2700
Motherboard ROG STRIX B450-i
Cooling NOCTUA NH-L12S
Memory Patriot Viper Steel DDR4 4000Mhz 16Go PVS416G400C9K
Video Card(s) ASUS STRIX 1080Ti OC
Storage XPG SX8200 Pro 512 go NVMe + SAMSUNG 850 EVO 500GB
Display(s) SAMSUNG U28D590D 4K 28''
Case Nouvolo Steck
Power Supply CORSAIR SF600
Mouse Logitech G203 Prodigy
Keyboard Ajazz ak33
Software Windows 10 1909
Honestly im a bit disapointed by Zen 2 , not because of the leaks but because of product itself !

1) 15% IPC increase is good but peoples tend to forget that this is compared to Zen not Zen+ . On top of that we have still to wait for actual reviews to confirm those numbers .

2) 4,6Ghz is good and i know clockspeed is not everything but im not going to lie i was expecting more from a cutting edge process like 7nm ( considering 4,3Ghz is already possible on 12nm ) . Maybe there is some OC headroom but i doubt .

3) No improvement on core count for R3 R5 R7 , sure now you have a 12cores part but that's a new segment ( R9 ) .

4) The most important factor imo which contributes to the disapointement is that there is no real improvement on pricing either . Small chiplets should allow for much better yields thus better pricing compared to previous generations but that's not the case for R7 and R5 . On top of that 2000 series retail for dirty cheap nowadays making 3000 series pricing look even worst .



Don't get me wrong Ryzen 3000 series should be solid products considering Zen and Zen+ where already great but to my eyes AMD missed a gold opportunity to put the nails on Intels coffin by increasing core count and offering lower prices on all segments. Looks like AMD is going for the more conservative/safe approach along with bigger margins wich is far from ideal considering Intel will wake up sooner or later so AMD needs to create a gap before that happens instead of simply matching Intel !
 
Last edited:

bug

Joined
May 22, 2015
Messages
7,893 (4.13/day)
Processor Intel i5-6600k (AMD Ryzen5 3600 in a box, waiting for a mobo)
Motherboard ASRock Z170 Extreme7+
Cooling Arctic Cooling Freezer i11
Memory 2x16GB DDR4 3600 G.Skill Ripjaws V (@3200)
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX 1060 SC
Storage 500GB Samsung 970 EVO, 500GB Samsung 850 EVO, 1TB Crucial MX300 and 3TB Seagate
Display(s) HP ZR24w
Case Raijintek Thetis
Audio Device(s) Audioquest Dragonfly Red :D
Power Supply Seasonic 620W M12
Mouse Logitech G502 Proteus Core
Keyboard G.Skill KM780R
Software Arch Linux + Win10
4.5 ~ 4.7 Ghz is really what they needed all along for this CPU to be a solid allrounder.

Can't wait to see performance in real world / reviews. But I think Intel's going to be smoked in that last remaining bastion of gaming on MSDT. With that, all things considered there is literally no reason for a consumer to get any Intel CPU. There's no price advantage, there's less certainty wrt security / flaws that are yet to come and already in place, there's no performance advantage and no perf/watt to win.

Now its time for the knockout punch with some solid Navi-based APUs, because that's what RDNA (GCN *cough*) is going to be competitive at: integrated graphics. I don't see much purpose for it otherwise at this point. AMD really needs to get serious about laptops.
Somewhat ironic, but when past Intel CPUs didn't shine, there was the chipset that could still be a reason to go Inel. They were generally more stable and more featured than other solutions. These days, with half the chipset onto the CPU, even that (feeble) reason is gone.
7/7 is so far away now...
 
Joined
Dec 31, 2009
Messages
18,108 (4.67/day)
Benchmark Scores Faster than yours... I'd bet on it. :)
wich is far from ideal
Perhaps for the consumer.... but they are a business. Theve offered more cores at a lower price and still do. NOW they can support higher pricing like this and still be better than the competition.
 
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
2,676 (0.67/day)
Location
Czech republic
Processor Core i7 3770K
Motherboard Gigabyte Z77X-UD3H
Memory 16GB
Video Card(s) Sapphire Radeon Rx 580 Nitro+ 8GB
Storage Samsung 850 PRO 256GB + Samsung 970 PRO 1TB
Display(s) Dell U2415
Case Fractal Design Define R6 Black
Audio Device(s) Creative Sound Blaster ZxR
Power Supply Seasonic PRIME Ultra 650W Gold
Mouse Roccat Kone EMP
Software Windows 10 x64
Telling us there is 15% IPC improvement, but meaning compared to Zen1, that's misleading as hell. What's the real IPC improvement over Zen+ then? 3%? Less?
I expected AMD to be better than Intel when it comes to "lying".
 
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
630 (0.47/day)
It is clear that it still won´t beat Intel in gaming. They didn´t even bother to compare it to Intel on those scenarios, and considering Intel reaches 5ghz easily, I still think it will be the best option for gamers.

Also 95% of the motherboards have fans. From all the MSI models, only the 300€ one didn´t have a fan and that´s a huge price for a motherboard.

Tbh with it being 7nm, is rather unimpressive.
 
Joined
May 31, 2016
Messages
1,896 (1.23/day)
Location
Currently Norway
System Name Bro2
Processor Ryzen 2700X
Motherboard MSI X470 Gaming Carbon
Cooling Corsair h115i pro rgb
Memory G.Skill Flare X 3200 CL14
Video Card(s) RX Vega 64 Red Devil / Sapphire 5600XT pulse
Storage M.2 Samsung Evo 970 250MB/ Samsung 860 Evo 1TB
Display(s) LG 27UD69 UHD
Case Fractal Design G
Audio Device(s) realtec 5.1
Power Supply Corsair AXi 760W / Seasonic 750W GOLD
Mouse Logitech G402
Keyboard Logitech slim
Software Windows 10 64 bit
It is clear that it still won´t beat Intel in gaming. They didn´t even bother to compare it to Intel on those scenarios, and considering Intel reaches 5ghz easily, I still think it will be the best option for gamers.

Also 95% of the motherboards have fans. From all the MSI models, only the 300€ one didn´t have a fan and that´s a huge price for a motherboard.

Tbh with it being 7nm, is rather unimpressive.
Well I wouldn't say they lied. IPC it's not just more MHz. I'd wait still for the reviews and benchmarks anyway.
 
Joined
Feb 23, 2019
Messages
1,481 (2.76/day)
Location
Poland
Processor Ryzen 7 3700X
Motherboard Gigabyte X570 Aorus Elite
Cooling BeQuiet Dark Rock 4
Memory 2x8 GB Crucial Ballistix Sport LT 3200 CL16 @ 3466 CL 14
Video Card(s) EVGA 1060 6GB SSC
Storage SX8200 Pro 1 TB, Plextor M6Pro 256 GB, WD Blue 2TB
Display(s) BenQ BL2411PT
Case SilverStone Primera PM01 RGB
Power Supply SeaSonic Focus Plus Gold 750W
Mouse SteelSeries Rival 300
Keyboard MK Typist (Kailh Box White)
Waiting for first benchmarks, but they pretty much have me on board, considering current Intel's offerings.
 
Joined
May 24, 2007
Messages
4,907 (1.02/day)
Location
Tennessee
System Name R9 / FX
Processor AMD Ryzen R9 3950X / AMD FX-8350
Motherboard MSI MEG X570 ACE AM4 / ASUS Crosshair V Formula-Z AM3+ AMD 990FX
Cooling Noctua NH-D15 chromax.black / Stock 8350 cooler
Memory Crucial Ballistix 32GB 3200 MHz DDR4 / Corsair XMS3 16 GB 1333 MHz DDR3
Video Card(s) SAPPHIRE NITRO+ 5700XT SE 8GB / SAPPHIRE NITRO+ Radeon RX Vega 64 8 GB
Case Fractal Define R7 / COOLER MASTER Elite 335 Upgraded
Software Windows 10 Pro 64 Bit
I will be anxious for a 3900x.
 
Joined
Sep 17, 2014
Messages
12,811 (5.94/day)
Location
Mars
Processor i7 8700k 4.7Ghz @ 1.26v
Motherboard AsRock Fatal1ty K6 Z370
Cooling beQuiet! Dark Rock Pro 3
Memory 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX 3200/C16
Video Card(s) MSI GTX 1080 Gaming X @ 2100/5500
Storage Samsung 850 EVO 1TB + Samsung 830 256GB + Crucial BX100 250GB + Toshiba 1TB HDD
Display(s) Eizo Foris FG2421
Case Fractal Design Define C TG
Power Supply EVGA G2 750w
Mouse Logitech G502 Protheus Spectrum
Keyboard Sharkoon MK80 (Brown)
Software W10 x64
It is clear that it still won´t beat Intel in gaming. They didn´t even bother to compare it to Intel on those scenarios, and considering Intel reaches 5ghz easily, I still think it will be the best option for gamers.

Also 95% of the motherboards have fans. From all the MSI models, only the 300€ one didn´t have a fan and that´s a huge price for a motherboard.

Tbh with it being 7nm, is rather unimpressive.
Best case scenario is Intel will have an advantage only in edge cases. That's really already the case, because high refresh is a niche and for anything targeting 60 FPS, Ryzen 2xxx does the job fine.

But really, all things considered... including a price gap that is now even more significant (you don't need top end Ryzen to fight top end Intel on gaming or other tasks, 8c16t is readily available at multiple price points), Intel's relevance is reduced to nearly zero.

Oh, and be careful not to install too many mitigations because you might actually lose the comparison altogether ;) And no guarantees that there won't be any more of those...

Somewhat ironic, but when past Intel CPUs didn't shine, there was the chipset that could still be a reason to go Inel. They were generally more stable and more featured than other solutions. These days, with half the chipset onto the CPU, even that (feeble) reason is gone.
7/7 is so far away now...
You say that but look at the above quote :rolleyes:
 
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
630 (0.47/day)
Best case scenario is Intel will have an advantage only in edge cases. That's really already the case, because high refresh is a niche and for anything targeting 60 FPS, Ryzen 2xxx does the job fine.

But really, all things considered... including a price gap that is now even more significant (you don't need top end Ryzen to fight top end Intel on gaming or other tasks, 8c16t is readily available at multiple price points), Intel's relevance is reduced to nearly zero.

Oh, and be careful not to install too many mitigations because you might actually lose the comparison altogether ;) And no guarantees that there won't be any more of those...



You say that but look at the above quote :rolleyes:
The security flaws do not bother me. I´m on Windows 7 anyway and my CPU doesn´t have HyperThreading (9700k). From the benchmarks I seen with all the security patches applied, intel didn´t lose a single fps in gaming, only on some advanced tasks that I guess no home user will use, for the most part.

We can argue the 12c/24t CPU is the big new on this launch, because it will obliterate anything Intel has to offer while being cheaper than the HEDT solutions (and better). But I can´t see the fuss on the 8/16 and 6/12 chips. Their MRSP seems similar to Intel prices and no indications at all that they will be superior. Also I´m not liking the X570 platform at all, with such high power consumption/fans. Steven from GamerNexus said so far that´s the biggest let down. X570 doesn´t seem as refined as it should be. The 6 core and 8 core do not bring anything new to the table performance wise, only if you compare them with previous AMD models.
 
Joined
Sep 17, 2014
Messages
12,811 (5.94/day)
Location
Mars
Processor i7 8700k 4.7Ghz @ 1.26v
Motherboard AsRock Fatal1ty K6 Z370
Cooling beQuiet! Dark Rock Pro 3
Memory 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX 3200/C16
Video Card(s) MSI GTX 1080 Gaming X @ 2100/5500
Storage Samsung 850 EVO 1TB + Samsung 830 256GB + Crucial BX100 250GB + Toshiba 1TB HDD
Display(s) Eizo Foris FG2421
Case Fractal Design Define C TG
Power Supply EVGA G2 750w
Mouse Logitech G502 Protheus Spectrum
Keyboard Sharkoon MK80 (Brown)
Software W10 x64
The security flaws do not bother me. I´m on Windows 7 anyway and my CPU doesn´t have HyperThreading (9700k). From the benchmarks I seen with all the security patches applied, intel didn´t lose a single fps in gaming, only on some advanced tasks that I guess no home user will use, for the most part.

We can argue the 12c/24t CPU is the big new on this launch, because it will obliterate anything Intel has to offer while being cheaper than the HEDT solutions (and better). But I can´t see the fuss on the 8/16 and 6/12 chips. Their MRSP seems similar to Intel prices and no indications at all that they will be superior. Also I´m not liking the X570 platform at all, with such high power consumption/fans. Steven from GamerNexus said so far that´s the biggest let down. X570 doesn´t seem as refined as it should be. The 6 core and 8 core do not bring anything new to the table performance wise, only if you compare them with previous AMD models.
Fair enough and I can see where you're coming from then. But still, I think the real interesting chips this round are not the absolute high end models but the ones below; $329 for 8C16T with high peak clocks is fantastic and major progress and its the go-to gaming chip as of today. And below that, it gets much more interesting, because you get a nearly similar gaming CPU for as little as half that number.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bug
Joined
Apr 18, 2019
Messages
261 (0.54/day)
Location
USA - Western Massachusetts
System Name Daily Driver(gaming, browsing, light web dev.)
Processor Ryzen 7 3800X
Motherboard Gigabyte X570 Aurus Pro Wifi
Cooling Corsair H60 w/Nidec GentleTyphoon
Memory 16GB(2x8) G.Skill FlareX DDR4-3200C14
Video Card(s) Sapphire Vega 64
Storage Samsung 970 EVO+ 1TB (Boot/OS) | Samsung 860 EVO 1TB (Games) | 2 x WD Spinners 1TB/500GB(BU)
Display(s) 2 X AOC Q3279VWFD8 - 10bit IPS 1440p @ 75hz FreeSync over DP
Case Corsair Graphite 600T w/mesh side
Audio Device(s) Logitech Z625 2.1 | cheapo gaming headset when mic is needed
Power Supply Corsair HX850i
Mouse Logitech G602
Keyboard Corsair K70 Lux - Blue on Black
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
Benchmark Scores Not really a benchmark guy...
Telling us there is 15% IPC improvement, but meaning compared to Zen1, that's misleading as hell. What's the real IPC improvement over Zen+ then? 3%? Less?
I expected AMD to be better than Intel when it comes to "lying".
You do understand that IPC is fluid from application to application, that presenting a 15% IPC increase across all scenarios is not an easy task to prove. What I got from the presentation was that in most scenarios they have been seeing at least a 15% single core IPC increase versus Zen+. Calling it lying insinuates that they presented concrete scientific information incorrectly in a dubious fashion. Presenting facts in terms is of the best case scenarios is called marketing. In my experience, the only tech company better at marketing than Intel is Apple.
 
Joined
Feb 15, 2019
Messages
434 (0.80/day)
Telling us there is 15% IPC improvement, but meaning compared to Zen1, that's misleading as hell. What's the real IPC improvement over Zen+ then? 3%? Less?
I expected AMD to be better than Intel when it comes to "lying".
Zen+ vs Zen = 3% IPC increase
Zen2 vs Zen = 15% IPC increase

Zen2 vs Zen+ = 1.15 / 1.03 = 11.7% IPC increase.
 
Joined
Oct 4, 2017
Messages
451 (0.43/day)
Location
France
System Name White Rose ( https://imgur.com/gallery/l7Lg4Wj )
Processor RYZEN 7 2700
Motherboard ROG STRIX B450-i
Cooling NOCTUA NH-L12S
Memory Patriot Viper Steel DDR4 4000Mhz 16Go PVS416G400C9K
Video Card(s) ASUS STRIX 1080Ti OC
Storage XPG SX8200 Pro 512 go NVMe + SAMSUNG 850 EVO 500GB
Display(s) SAMSUNG U28D590D 4K 28''
Case Nouvolo Steck
Power Supply CORSAIR SF600
Mouse Logitech G203 Prodigy
Keyboard Ajazz ak33
Software Windows 10 1909
Perhaps for the consumer.... but they are a business. Theve offered more cores at a lower price and still do. NOW they can support higher pricing like this and still be better than the competition.
Yes i don't disagree with you but imo AMD needs more marketshare before starting to think about higher margins , it's a bit to early for that and to achieve this you need to be more agressive on pricing or/and core count . Ofcourse im taking consumer perspective into account aswell and so should AMD ( im not saying they don't ) otherwise you endup like Intel .
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2013
Messages
3,416 (1.27/day)
Telling us there is 15% IPC improvement, but meaning compared to Zen1, that's misleading as hell. What's the real IPC improvement over Zen+ then? 3%? Less?
I expected AMD to be better than Intel when it comes to "lying".
It is 15% based on SPECint 2006, also what do you mean by lying?
 

bug

Joined
May 22, 2015
Messages
7,893 (4.13/day)
Processor Intel i5-6600k (AMD Ryzen5 3600 in a box, waiting for a mobo)
Motherboard ASRock Z170 Extreme7+
Cooling Arctic Cooling Freezer i11
Memory 2x16GB DDR4 3600 G.Skill Ripjaws V (@3200)
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX 1060 SC
Storage 500GB Samsung 970 EVO, 500GB Samsung 850 EVO, 1TB Crucial MX300 and 3TB Seagate
Display(s) HP ZR24w
Case Raijintek Thetis
Audio Device(s) Audioquest Dragonfly Red :D
Power Supply Seasonic 620W M12
Mouse Logitech G502 Proteus Core
Keyboard G.Skill KM780R
Software Arch Linux + Win10
Yes i don't disagree with you but imo AMD needs more marketshare before starting to think about higher margins , it's a bit to early for that and to achieve this you need to be more agressive on pricing or/and core count . Ofcourse im taking consumer perspective into account aswell and so should AMD ( im not saying they don't ) otherwise you endup like Intel .
Let's face it, after fixing the initial RAM compatibility issues, there were few use cases where AMD lost to Intel.
They didn't gain as much market share as they could, but it's hard to imagine they'll gain less than before with an improved product lineup.
 
Joined
Jun 28, 2018
Messages
280 (0.36/day)
I missed something or why is everyone talking about 15% more IPC?

In the slides AMD showed is 13%.

 
Joined
Apr 12, 2013
Messages
3,416 (1.27/day)
It's based on SPECint2006 over zen+ while this 13% could be based on a sample of other applications. Lemme see if I can get the link for 15% back, also Lisu Su said it herself.
 
Top