AMD ZEN5 - A Deeper Dive Into Architecture

Processors 206 Page 1 of 1 Published by

Click here to post a comment for AMD ZEN5 - A Deeper Dive Into Architecture on our message forum
#6250206
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/246/246171.jpg
Honestly, that's a lot more changes than I was expecting. Glad to hear they're just not doing incremental bumps and increasing the power envelope.
#6250239
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/50/50906.jpg
Agreed. And not only that, seeing 7700X -> 9700X going 105W -> 65W is an awesome thing to see!
#6250242
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/271/271560.jpg
mind blowing that procs with these stats are only using 10w/core for the desktop. i know i don't need to upgrade my desktop(s), but the difference in processing power (particularly AVX 512) would pay for itself in time saved on my main (home office) pc. the 9950x ftw baby. which means i can move my 7900X3D to my gaming rig and my 5800X3D to my htpc (and gift the 5700X from the htpc to my mom)
#6250243
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/56/56686.jpg
The 65tdp 9700x look real nice to, look forward to that review
#6250253
data/avatar/default/avatar28.webp
probably still going to wait for the X3D variant but i do find it slighly dissapointing that the basic layout is unchanged for the 12 and 16 core's though it's probably has it's reasons. from a gaming perspective the 8 core's tend to beat a 12 core because a 12 core more often then not gets treated like 2x a 6 core since they can cram up to 32 core's per CCD you'd think by now the 12 and possibly 16 core would have gone back to a single CCD setup. now i'm kinda expecting the 9700/9800X3D to be the gaming king by default, unless the 16 core is smarter about how it handels it's X3D cores and non X3D cores (or maybe it will be a dual X3D this time around who knows)
#6250258
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/242/242443.jpg
anub1s18:

probably still going to wait for the X3D variant but i do find it slighly dissapointing that the basic layout is unchanged for the 12 and 16 core's though it's probably has it's reasons. from a gaming perspective the 8 core's tend to beat a 12 core because a 12 core more often then not gets treated like 2x a 6 core since they can cram up to 32 core's per CCD you'd think by now the 12 and possibly 16 core would have gone back to a single CCD setup. now i'm kinda expecting the 9700/9800X3D to be the gaming king by default, unless the 16 core is smarter about how it handels it's X3D cores and non X3D cores (or maybe it will be a dual X3D this time around who knows)[/QUOTE
It's already been said that the 9000 3D part wouldn't beat the 7800x 3D part. The 7000 series would still be king. At least thats what was said.
#6250262
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/50/50906.jpg
SplashDown:

It's already been said that the 9000 3D part wouldn't beat the 7800x 3D part. The 7000 series would still be king. At least thats what was said.
By whom. And how so.
#6250264
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/242/242443.jpg
heffeque:

By whom. And how so.
It was posted in here somewhere ... sorry forgot where I read it.
#6250270
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/50/50906.jpg
SplashDown:

It was posted in here somewhere ... sorry forgot where I read it.
I don't know... Seems like a weird thing to do. Why produce it if it's going to be slower? Unless it's going to be cheaper, or use less energy, I don't see a reason as to produce it/sell it (shrug)
#6250284
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/84/84948.jpg
SplashDown:

It's already been said that the 9000 3D part wouldn't beat the 7800x 3D part. The 7000 series would still be king. At least thats what was said.
SplashDown:

It was posted in here somewhere ... sorry forgot where I read it.
Please stop spamming BS 🙄 Pics or it didn't happen.
#6250294
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/164/164033.jpg
heffeque:

I don't know... Seems like a weird thing to do. Why produce it if it's going to be slower? Unless it's going to be cheaper, or use less energy, I don't see a reason as to produce it/sell it (shrug)
3D really has one advantage and that is gaming. So beating that 3D cache with simply architectural upgrade might not be so straight forward and replacement for those will come from AMD in the form of 3D ones again. But the 3D parts do not really get the benefit in other tasks so the upgrade makes sense all in all. Also yes I read wrong whom and what you were answering to so. :D anyway the 3D parts for sure should beat old 3D parts
#6250295
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/50/50906.jpg
There's no mention of 9800X3D being slower than 7800X3D there whatsoever...
#6250298
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/164/164033.jpg
tsunami231:

https://www.guru3d.com/review/amd-confirms-ryzen-9000-series-specs-and-launch-date-for-july-31st-keeps-pricing-undisclosed/ probably refering to this article however, it is also acknowledged that the Ryzen 7 9700X may not match the gaming performance of the Ryzen 7 7800X3D, based on statements from AMD’s Don Waligroski
In that they are comparing it to 5800X3D which means that the 9700X probably is around 0-10% slower then 7800X3D. Maybe faster in some rare cases.
#6250299
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/164/164033.jpg
SplashDown:

It's already been said that the 9000 3D part wouldn't beat the 7800x 3D part. The 7000 series would still be king. At least thats what was said.
Well that hasn't been said. Just that "basic" part somewhat can match the 3D counterpart of old?
#6250304
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/56/56686.jpg
Ryu5uzaku:

In that they are comparing it to 5800X3D which means that the 9700X probably is around 0-10% slower then 7800X3D. Maybe faster in some rare cases.
just stating what AMD guy said in the article, I couldn't give damn it beats it, it matching with lower power usage is bigger and better then in my eyes, cpu and gpu tdp need to be reigned in
#6250308
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/164/164033.jpg
tsunami231:

just stating what AMD guy said in the article, I couldn't give damn it beats it, it matching with lower power usage is bigger and better then in my eyes, cpu and gpu tdp need to be reigned in
I know just correcting the 7800X3D part, anyways it's clear it's going to be quite a bit better this 9000 series then 7000. And improvement all around also.
#6250335
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/277/277212.jpg
In my opinion their naming or numbering convention is stupid. In my opinion it should be this : 9900 = 16 cores 9800 = 12 cores 9700 = 8 cores 9600 = 6 cores. They can then add X and 3D suffixes as needed. Also - I wish they would separate the L2 and L3 numbers because the L2 is on the CPU chip and L3 is on the CCX so the 9950 and 9900 have the same 64MB of L3 cache since they both have two CCXs but their L2 size cache differs because it is 1MB per core.
#6250452
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/216/216349.jpg
Gomez Addams:

In my opinion their naming or numbering convention is stupid. In my opinion it should be this : 9900 = 16 cores 9800 = 12 cores 9700 = 8 cores 9600 = 6 cores. They can then add X and 3D suffixes as needed. Also - I wish they would separate the L2 and L3 numbers because the L2 is on the CPU chip and L3 is on the CCX so the 9950 and 9900 have the same 64MB of L3 cache since they both have two CCXs but their L2 size cache differs because it is 1MB per core.
I agree but marketing departments hate logical naming conventions...

Next Page