Slash Boxes

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 15 submissions in the queue.
posted by martyb on Monday July 08 2019, @05:39AM   Printer-friendly
from the competition++ dept.

AMD's "7nm" Zen 2 8-core Ryzen 7 3700X and 12-core Ryzen 9 3900X CPUs have been reviewed:

The AMD 3rd Gen Ryzen Deep Dive Review: 3700X and 3900X Raising The Bar

From the conclusion page:

In the majority of controlled tests, AMD has done something they haven't been able to achieve in almost 15 years, since the tail-end of the Athlon 64's reign in 2005: that is to have a CPU microarchitecture with higher performance per clock than Intel's leading architecture. Zen 2 finally achieves this symbolic mark by a hair's margin, with the new core improving IPC by 10-13% when compared to Zen+.

Having said that, Intel still very much holds the single-threaded performance crown by a few percent. Intel's higher achieved frequencies as well as continued larger lead in memory sensitive workloads are still goals that AMD has to work towards to, and future Zen iterations will have to further improve in order to have a shot at the ST performance crown.

[...] In the majority of our system benchmarks, AMD more often than not is able to best Intel's Core i7-9700K and i9-9900K in terms of performance. It was particularly interesting to see the new 3rd gen Ryzens post larger improvements in the web tests, all thanks to Zen 2's improved and larger op cache.

In anything that is more than lightly multi-threaded, AMD is also able to take the performance crown among mainstream desktop processors, thanks to their inclusion of 12 cores in their top SKU Ryzen 3900X. For total MT throughput, Intel can still beat this with their massive X-series HEDT chips, but these server-derrived parts are in a completely different class in both features and price, and AMD has their own Threadripper parts to rival that. All of this means that for heavily threaded scenarios, the 3900X rules the roost among true desktop processors.

[...] Perhaps the best arguments for the 3700X and 3900X is their value as well as their power efficiency. At $329 the 3700X particularly seems exciting, and gamers will want to take note that it posts the same gaming performance as the $499 3900X. Considering that AMD is also shipping the CPU with the perfectly reasonable Wrath Spire cooler, this also adds on to the value that you get if you're budget conscious.

The 3900X essentially has no real competition when it comes to the multi-threaded performance that it's able to deliver. Here the chip not only bests Intel's mainstream desktop designs, but it's able to go toe-to-toe with the lowest rung of Intel's more specialized HEDT platforms. Even AMD's own Threadripper line-up is made irrelevant below 16 cores.

Also at Tom's Hardware, Guru3D, and Wccftech.

See also: AMD Zen 2 Microarchitecture Analysis: Ryzen 3000 and EPYC Rome

Previously: AMD and Intel at Computex 2019: First Ryzen 3000-Series CPUs and Navi GPU Announced
AMD Details Three Navi GPUs and First Mainstream 16-Core CPU

Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by takyon on Monday July 08 2019, @05:30PM (1 child)

    by takyon (881) <> on Monday July 08 2019, @05:30PM (#864579) Journal

    Some fans [] are quieter than others. The cooling situation is probably better than what it was a decade ago.

    Apparently, up to 28W chips [] can be cooled passively. Drop from the 35-45 Watt TDPs that you see on some chips (mostly desktop APUs), and you could at least reach that.

    Ultimately, I think we would need a transistor revolution [] in order to cut all TDPs below 15W and make most cooling obsolete. We may also need on-chip/package DRAM and/or universal memory since moving data around can generate a lot of heat. There's also talk of workloads being spread out across many cores using AI prediction, in order to utilize more cores while cutting clock speeds, but it remains to be seen whether that's vaporware.

    I can't deny that I like using a fanless system (like the laptop I'm typing on). I also see standalone VR driving up the performance of very low TDP SoCs. AMD's main Ryzen 3000-series lineup doesn't need to target these TDPs because most users want high performance. These chips are designed to compete with the likes of the i7-9700K and i9-9900K.

    Where AMD does have a blind spot is the below-15W laptop APU segment. Intel has Core M and various other parts, while AMD put out two 6W Excavator chips [], on the ol' "28nm" node, not Zen. From what I see on WikiChip [], there has never been a Zen or Zen+ CPU with less than 15W TDP. Could there be a Zen power efficiency floor that prevents below-15W segments from being hit?

    Right at 15W (12W is mentioned but that's a "configurable TDP-down"), there is this embedded chip [] and some mobile chips []. AFAIK AMD has not emphasized this form factor while Intel has continued to pay attention to it.

    I suppose that's reserved for the smartphone market these days

    We could always move in the other direction []. ;)

    [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 []
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 3, Informative) by JoeMerchant on Monday July 08 2019, @05:40PM

    by JoeMerchant (3937) on Monday July 08 2019, @05:40PM (#864586)

    "Back in the day" (2005) I was betting on AMD to get a sizeable new chunk of the market based on their much lower power yet competitively performing new chips. Then the Eye of Intel opened on low power concerns and blasted my AMD stock options into oblivion.

    🌻🌻 []