AMD's Ryzen CPUs (Ryzen/TR/Epyc) & Vega/Polaris/Navi GPUs

I would have been more than happy with a 3960x. Waiting for Zen3 I probably would go for AM4 or the equivalent. The 3950x would be more than enough today but over a 1950x I can't justify $1,000.00 and change of TR to AM4. This assumes for the 4950x about another overall 10% increase over the 3950x or better.

 

Yeah, I've started looking more at the server chips if they will either boost to current send cooling on a more conservative, less opportunistic, boost algorithm or if I can still overclock. Throw a 16- core into a 1P board that is an E-ATX, and enjoy.

Sent from my SM-G975U1 using Tapatalk

 

I do not use VM's or other aspects requiring a 16 core server. I only went with a 1950x as I was a fanboy. I could have easily went with just an 1800x and been done with it. I would have went with a new TR but AMD kicked the fanboy right out of me. I would still like an IPC increase but the 3xxx does not offer enough to justify the costs, maybe the next gen will.

 

Yeah, I'm thinking 8-16 core server chips. Depends if mainstream gets the interposer and hbm next time.

Sent from my SM-G975U1 using Tapatalk

 

So, for those that currently are looking at a 16-core server chip rather than the mainstream platform, here is some pricing:

64GB (8x8GB) 2933 ECC DDR4 = $393 ( https://www.newegg.com/nemix-ram-64gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/1X5-003Z-00T57?&quicklink=true )
7302P Epyc Rome - $914 ( https://www.newegg.com/amd-epyc-7302p-socket-sp3/p/N82E16819113599 )
Asrock Rack EPYCD8-2T ATX Server MB - $491 ( https://www.newegg.com/asrock-rack-...ssor-family/p/N82E16813140011?&quicklink=true )

So, for $1798, you have 8-channel memory with 64GB of ram, 128 PCIe lane system with 4xPCIe 4.0 x16 lanes and 3x8 lanes, two mini-SAS HD controllers for 8 sata drives, and just need to add the GPU and PSU (and a case and cooler, but details).

Now I'm just waiting to see if the 16-core or 8-core server chips get the HBM memory and interposer with Zen 4, along with whether or not they are willing to allow boost above a ceiling (basically a less aggressive boost than seen on mainstream, but allows to continue to boost until out of thermal headway, current headway, etc.). If the server boost algo is better, a system like this is NOT unreasonable for those that do not need the core count of TR, but need more mem bandwidth and need or want more I/O.

I ripped them for messing with TR owners, and they deserve it. But, if not for them locking these chips to top out at 3.4GHz and having to make OCing convoluted for them, I would readily recommend the 8 and 16 core chips to those individuals (which this cost is not that different from my original 1950X build).

@custom90gt @TANWare - thoughts?

 

It counts on your needs of the system.so either as you mentioned or a 2950x @ 4.2 GHz. For the price you may manage 2970X but that may not be an optimal choice. Whatever you chose expect it to be limited in any upgradability.

Edit; Or go to micro cnter when they get 3960x's in;

279.99 1 279.99 Gigabyte TRX40 AORUS Pro WiFi AMD sTRX4 ATX Motherboard
1399.99 1 1399.99 3960x
70.99 4 283.96 G.Skill Ripjaws V 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4-3200
Total = 1963.94

 

I'd love to go this route, especially for 8-channel memory, but single core performance is still very important to me. There doesn't seem to be a happy medium for me and my specific needs/desires at this time. It is a heck of a build though and would be pretty fun.

 

Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 with AMD Ryzen 7 4800U APU launched
https://hexus.net/tech/news/laptop/140723-lenovo-yoga-slim-7-amd-ryzen-7-4800u-apu-launched/

Well, this is quite interesting.
Mainly because the 4800U in it will be configured to 25W TDP (and the cooling assembly designed to support that TDP rating).

This is actually a first I've seen from OEM's to use AMD APU and allow it to 'stretch' all the way up to its maximum TDP.
Will be fascinating to measure its CPU/GPU performance.
$849 for all that (and I think Lenovo could have went lower on the price, maybe $750 or less because of no dGPU).

LPDDR4x memory (but no word on how much memory is being shipped with the unit, nor if it will be user-upgradeable), so bandwidth at least shouldn't be an issue, but I'm hoping it ships with 16GB running in dual-channel as standard.

One other thing that wasn't mentioned was whether Freesync is supported.

 

Are there any OEM's preparing Renoir (Zen 2 mobile APU's) with AMD dGPU's such as 5600M and 5700M?

I think I heard something about Dell doing that.

Got it:
DELL G5 15 Special Edition with AMD Ryzen 7 4800H and Radeon RX 5600M


Dell still hadn't included this option for purchase (what is taking OEM's so long to bring all AMD systems out?).

 

As the video mentions April for release.

 

Ah... though that could be affected by COVID-19 epidemic.

 

Amazon has world's cheapest AMD Ryzen 7 4800H and RTX 2060-powered Asus laptop for pre-order at an incredible US$1199
https://www.notebookcheck.net/Amazo...-order-at-an-incredible-US-1199.459322.0.html

Not bad.
Three problems:
1. Its Asus (which is notorious for poor cooling designs).
2. No AMD dGPU such as 5600m or 5700m.
3. Someone mentioned that the GPU is Maxq version - meaning, relatively underpowered.

Plus, not sure what kind of potential issues we could expect from mixing AMD apu which requires AMD iGP drivers and Nvidia GPU drivers... nor do we know anything about sustained performance under full load (guess we need to wait for third party reviews), let alone the fan noise and temperatures.

 

AMD APU and Nvidia dGPU have been mixed for 3 generations at this point. If there were problems, they would have been long evident.


EDIT:

Also, does anyone know of the PCIe layout and allocation on these new APUs? Is it still 12 lanes, or do we get more this time around?

 

4800H laptop review:


Seems it beats the i9 9980h, specially on price/performance ration, since this laptop is 1200$

 

4900HS review:

Stays on par with 9980hk or beats it outright badly in some tests at 40w less consumption and killer battery life. Monster of a BGA chip.

 

Did you see this guys? @Mr. Fox @Papusan

This CPU destroyed Intel's comparable 9980HK and even my 9700K! That's insane! Finally they are back in the game!

 

Don't compare 8 vs 16 threads (9700K lack HT). And they compared the Ryzen chips with an most likely crippled Acer model http://forum.notebookreview.com/threads/the-throttlestop-guide.531329/page-1122#post-11000131 And the 9980HK is from last year (Q2'19)

 

@electrosoft and @Spartan, great performance and battery life. Negative 100 for no number pad, squealy fans, and no webcam.

More importantly (objective):

From (a real review with no whiney video to accompany it:

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/asus-rog-zephyrus-g14

 

I know the laptop is not what I'm interested in, it's the CPU. According to the review the laptop is very plasticy and has a horrible fingerprint scanner with a 15% success rate. Also the battery life is great. (10 hours)

 

As well 8GB of the RAM soldered to the board won't make it any more tempting. + (I found that the keys around ASDF got quite hot and were sometimes uncomfortable).

 

Based on my girlfriends experience with the MSI Alpha 15 (3750H+5500M), and my own previous experience with a 3750H+2060 notebook, AMD+Nvidia works FAR better than AMD+AMD.

As good as this CPU is, AMD dGPUs are not competitive (even less so in notebooks) and their drivers are still trash. ASUS did the right thing using Nvidia.

 

AMD+Nvidia combo good on gaming.
AMD+AMD good on image rendering? with lite gaming?

 

To elaborate, with AMD+AMD, she cannot use reference drivers from AMD, and must stick to MSI drivers (extremely outdated now), else the 5500M is stuck at low clocks, and switchable graphics doesn’t work at all. When using the outdated MSI drivers, it works fine except for about 1/3 of the time the dGPU downclocks randomly within games and refuses to come back up until you restart.

With AMD+Nvidia? Reference drivers work fine, and the system behaves normally and performance from the 2060 was excellent.

Embarrassing for AMD, their software is just plain terrible.

 

So your problem is with mfr choice, not the AMD product?

Sent from my SM-G975U1 using Tapatalk

 

I’m definitely more focused on seeing the 4900 series in other thin and light chassis like the Razer, MacBook or Lenovo for starters.

The 4900 series are definite 9th gen killers and 10th gen is looking like 9th gen rehash so far:

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Core-i9-10980HK-Processor-Benchmarks-and-Specs.452737.0.html

 

It does outperform a 5.1Ghz 8700K, which for a mobile chip is kinda cool. Except, it runs a constant 95c while doing it.

 

Expected, its a 14" chassis, when the i9's run 99c while throttling in 17" chassis its fine?..

 

https://www.sweclockers.com/test/29...9-4900hs-och-geforce-rtx-2060-max-q/5#content

https://hwbot.org/submission/4099815_papusan_cinebench___r20_core_i7_8700k_4064_marks

 

I was looking at der8auers video, after LM he pulled 4342. link

 

Add in huge sales of AMD's desktop chips it will be hard being Intel for the time being


AMD's Ryzen 5 3600 sold almost three times as many units than all of Intel's chips put together in latest Mindfactory CPU sales data notebookcheck.net

 

Glad to see AMD do so well in the mobile market. Intel's 10th gen stuff isn't going to change those margins. I'm curious what will happen when overclockers get their hands on notebooks with these CPUs (and not just a 14" thin and light with the lower power HS) because stock is already pretty impressive.

 

With these improvement, it makes me now looking forward for an "entry lvl" Ryzen 4k CPU with Radeon GPU biggie for adult course on 3D CAD use!

 

The temperatures in question are due to Asus poor cooling (the chip can actually run faster if proper cooling was implemented).
Otherwise, the 4900HS produces the performance it does at half the power while having much faster IGP.

I knew that Asus cooling will be questionable.
Its a handy little machine that's quite powerful, but I personally need something with adequate cooling which will be able to sustain full speeds at maxed out loads indefinitely (due to content creation) and not sound like a jet engine while doing so (I experienced that with GL702ZC which also kept frying itself, and I'm not eager to get back to that experience).

 

I'm quite excited for AMD DTRs, especially if we see 17" models w/ AM4 3950X that can be modded above 65W TDP.

 

If an OEM releases a laptop with 4900H and 5700M for example which has proper cooling that can reach/sustain maximum loads indefinitely on both CPU and GPU while being relatively quiet (similar to Acer Helios 500), then just slap AMD Radeon Pro drivers onto the machine and those should function fine for games (comparable performance to commercial drivers) and be far better for productivity.

EDIT:
Also, I think one of the reviewers of that Asus machine with 4900HS used Liquid Metal on the CPU and GPU, and it dropped temperatures by 10 degrees C at maximum load (the CPU was also able to run faster as a result).

Bear in mind that Asus apparently also used thermal paste on the VRM's and memory chips (which is an odd choice). I'd sooner use quality thermal pads instead (perhaps if someone modded the VRM's and memory chips with those it could further reduce temperatures).

Acer did a great job with Helios 500 using Ryzen 2700 and Vega 56.
Monster cooling which was better than most desktops.
Except, Acer dropped the ball with outdated BIOS interface (which was locked on top of that and hadn't supplied updates for Zen 2), along with putting 2 RAM slots below the kb and populated them with painfully slow RAM (which would require complete disassembly to reach those RAM slots).

If OEM's recreate that cooling design with Zen 2 DTR laptops and 5700 for example in 17" chassis, then it should be amazing.
In all honesty, we could have Ryzen 3900 (65W TDP) inside such a system, or possibly 3900x or 3950x (since Acer helios 500 cooling can handle 105W CPU).

If Acer got its act together, they would upgrade the BIOS in the Helios 500, unlock it and allow users to upgrade to Zen 2 (and much faster RAM) and we could just slap 3950x inside with 3200MhZ RAM (the cooling assembly can easily handle 105W TDP CPU and V56 still has really powerful compute which would be excellent for content creation with Radeon PRO drivers while providing same/better gaming performance as RTX 2060 non-MaxQ... at 120W).

 

If talking desktop, it will be better than mobile performance. The zen 3 chips coming around Q4 (October-ish by some reports) will not have CCXs, meaning less inter-core latency, better thread scheduling and great balancing by having 8 instead of 4 cores in each group, having the full 32MB cache open to all 8 cores without having to go to the I/O die.

Sent from my SM-G975U1 using Tapatalk

 

That would certainly contribute to improved performance of the overall Zen 3 chip along with uArch (IPC) improvements that we were told could expect.
They hadn't said how much, only that the improvements would be in line with what to expect of a completely new uArch.
So, if Zen 2 is a 'baseline' to work with (which wasn't a total uArch change, more like 'fully realised Zen'), then at the very least we're looking at 10-15% IPC improvement... possibly more.

The Zen 3 chips could have at least a similar progression in performance as Zen 2 was from Zen+ (or even from Zen 1 perhaps?).

This also begs the question if Zen 4 would in turn be sort of a minor revision of Zen 3 (except on 5nm and probably increased number of cores,clocks and efficiency), or would it also be a new uArch?

 

Its not regular thermal paste, its more viscous, not so runny, almost like a liquid thermal pad, if you use thermal pads you will need to use pads with less than 0.5mm thickness, because that viscous thermal paste that Asus uses lets the heatsink sit much closer to the VRM's/VRAM's, you wont gain anything by using thermal pads, at most, use K5 Pro..

 

Hm... I don't know.
When I used my GL702ZC, it was a 17" chassis and Asus did the same thing... they used thermal paste on CPU/GPU and VRM's and GPU vRAM).
My motherboard kept frying itself and the machine was undergoing repairs on 2 or 3 separate occasions, and it was pretty loud.

My guess is Asus completely botched the cooling and either missed something which resulted in these constant failures, or it was just plain bad quality control.

Either way, Asus did mention they were starting to use Liquid Metal on CPU/GPU in their newer laptops, so not sure why they hadn't done that from the onset on this Zephyrus machine.

 

i9's also aren't 35W TDP...

 

Even Intel's 10nm mobile parts were found at times to not pull solely spec. But different discussion altogether.

Everything I said contributes to reducing latency and increasing IPC, although they have quite a few tweaks in addition.

As for Zen 4, I do wonder what they will do for mainstream and HEDT. For server, it's already come out they are talking using an interposer (lower latency than infinity fabric), at least for on package. They also will have capability for HBM on package. Supports PCIe 5.0 and DDR5, most likely. But, once again, that is servers. Should be approaching 50% IPC over Zen, so 3.6GHz should be 20-30% faster than my 1950X running at 4.2GHz. Means I might just replace my rig with server parts, OCed or not, next round. Hope they have a speed optimized variant for their 8 and 16 core models, since those have no competition from Threadripper and it is an option for more I/O and memory bandwidth than mainstream AM5.

Sent from my SM-G975U1 using Tapatalk

 

For me this 4900HS is impressive but everyone compare it with the 8-core intel laptop, but 8-core intel for laptop sucks, it is very inefficient comparing to the 9750H.. we need a comparison between the 9750H and the 4600H, performance would be much closer, but still, intel will consume more power :/

 

Saw this in another forum, thought I'd share:

https://bestware.com/de/xmg-apex-15.html

15" laptop with desktop 3950X / GTX 2070. @Papusan and the rest of the LGA crew.

 

Well, PGA, right?
Even Intel stuck with PGA on laptops.

 

Regarding slap in faster ram. How can you be sure that the MB is good enough to handle faster ram? Just a reminder... Dell's gaming flagship with Z390 can't even handle Intel's default specs for ram. And this isn't due the IMC or the chips itself. All come down to the MB quality.

Worthless without being able to be customized with the best graphics card. If you was able to put in a +150w 2080 and the hardware will be cooked by itself.

Less consumed power doesn't automatically means it will run cooler.

Don't expect wonders with the coling system if the ODM/OEM prefer software tuning of cooling instead for making the cooling best possible.

System Temperature Tracking
SmartShift is also part of a new System Temperature Tracking paradigm that AMD is implementing in its new APUs. Even if there is power headroom, a system can’t turbo if there isn’t thermal headroom. Smart Temperature Tracing v2 (or STTv2) is designed to help a system boost for longer by knowing more about the thermal profile of the device.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/1562...-ryzen-mobile-4000-series-7nm-apu-uncovered/4

Currently, many gaming notebooks come with powerful GPUs and CPUs that share the same unified cooling solution, such as a 45W GPU and 80W GPU (total 125W) housed under the same cooler. However, the cooler may only be able to dissipate 90W of heat in aggregate, which leads to constraints on either the CPU or GPU during heavy use.

https://www.tomshardware.com/uk/news/amd-ryzen-mobile-Renoir-4000-series-9-4900h-hs-series

 

Thankfully AMD seems to be much better at performing closer to their TDP than Intel. Neither of them stick to it, but Intel really underestimates it...

 

I just saw the 10700 (65w tdp) chip, pull 176w.

 

Peak power draw or turbo boost power draw, doesn't matter in the TDP equation. TDP represents the heat energy equivalent of the max sustainable power draw at base clock speeds (per Intel's def). In general, the TDP is equal to PL1 limit, so, the 65w TDP chip can draw much more power than 65w, but it is required to sustain only 64w indefinitely (without dropping below base clock speed). The chip's TDP should be considered the minimum required heat dissipation potential for the installed heatsink (Intel recommends that the heatsink TDP should exceed the chip's TDP).

I'm not defending Intel, just reiterating what's stated in the Intel N'th gen spec sheets.

 

Yes, I know how Intel tries to dance around the TDP numbers. Even at base clocks I've seen their TDP numbers off of their guestimates... Either way AMD is still ahead of Intel when it comes to maintaining max clocks at reasonable power levels.