Friday, May 19th 2017

AMD Talks Improved Ryzen Memory Support, Ryzen 3, and Game Optimization

AMD, in an interview with Forbes, confirmed that it is working to improve DDR4 memory support of its Ryzen series processors, to enable higher memory clocks. AMD Ryzen users find it difficult to get DDR4 memory clocks to run above 3000 MHz reliably. With memory clock being linked with the chip's Infinity Fabric clock (the interconnect between two CCX units on the "Summit Ridge" silicon), the performance incentives for higher memory clocks are just that much more.

AMD confirmed that its AGESA update for May improves DDR4 memory compatibility, although it also stressed on the need for motherboard manufacturers to improve their board designs in the future, with more PCB layers and better copper traces between the DIMM slots and the SoC socket. The company assures that more updates to AGESA are in the pipeline, and would improve performance of Ryzen processors at various levels. The AGESA updates are dispensed through motherboard vendors as BIOS updates.

The company also talked at length about game optimization, and how it has a dedicated team tasked to work with game studios on improving game performance on Ryzen processors, particularly at lower resolutions such as 1080p. At 1080p, today's games begin to get CPU-limited, and this is one area where Ryzen processors are losing ground to Intel Core processors. AMD has already worked with Oxide Games to improve Ryzen machines' performance with "Ashes of the Singularity," and is working to improve 1080p performance of other titles such as "Total War: Warhammer" and "DOTA 2." AMD also credits the recent Ryzen-balanced power plan, introduced through a chipset driver update, to improve performance in games by another 5-10 percent, which hands power-management from the OS over to CPU silicon-level Precision Boost features.

AMD also dispelled some misconceptions about the 20°C temperature offset noticed with Ryzen "X" series processors (eg: 1800X, 1600X). The Ryzen Master software places a 20°C temperature offset, which had some enthusiasts thinking that the "X" series processors have a lower throttling temperature. AMD clarified that the temperature offset never affected thermal throttling on these processors, and that it has updated Ryzen Master software to show the correct temperature.

AMD touched upon the lack of mini-ITX socket AM4 motherboards. While acknowledging the market successes of the recent mini-ITX motherboards by BIOSTAR, which are based on the X370 and B350 chipsets, AMD hinted that the broader availability of mini-ITX motherboards could be linked to its upcoming X300 chipset. Given that the mini-ITX form-factor mandates fewer expansion slots, onboard devices, and storage connectivity, the form-factor can make do with the SATA and USB ports put out directly by socket AM4 Ryzen processors, given that they are full-fledged SoCs. The X300 chipset lacks bandwidth-heavy downstream connectivity of its own, and only has the low-bandwidth machinery to keep the platform running. It also has extremely low thermal and power requirements that make it perfect for mini-ITX.

Lastly, AMD talked about the roll-out of its cost-effective Ryzen 3-series processors. The company is looking to launch quad-core and perhaps even dual-core Ryzen 3-series processors based on the "Summit Ridge" silicon, by Q3-2017 (after June). Ryzen 3 quad-core chips differ from Ryzen 5 series quad-core chips such as the Ryzen 5 1400, in that they lack SMT. Find the full interview in the link below.
Source: Forbes
Add your own comment

74 Comments on AMD Talks Improved Ryzen Memory Support, Ryzen 3, and Game Optimization

#26
r9
I think they would be great for budget gaming build.
For office computer to have to buy a dedicated graphic card is a big disadvantage.
Posted on Reply
#27
Flyrobot27
meirb11110% isn't much but you will have to pay more to reach it .using an a320m mobo without overclocking you will pay the same price as for intel+h110 mobo but end up 20% slower single core and no gpu that will cost you more.
I agree. In terms of regular office usage (not gaming), single core performance is the key, and I think even after 20 years multi core performance will not help it a lot if not talking about multi tasking. It is simply because office task cannot be executed by the CPU in parallel, and that is the reason for multi core setup. For office, i3 or Pentium is better simply for its better single core and iGPU. For gamers r3 will be a better go
Posted on Reply
#28
meirb111
Liviu CojocaruBut what about the multi threaded apps, is that ~20% less performance in single core worth it over the two 100% more cores and the fact that R3 can be OC'ed?
if i would make the comparison with a 64$ g4560 vs r3 120$ than amd's really lose big time. and as i said in my first post for light gaming or no gaming.
Posted on Reply
#29
RejZoR
meirb111if i would make the comparison with a 64$ g4560 vs r3 120$ than amd's really lose big time. and as i said in my first post for light gaming or no gaming.
Even with that, R3 would be so much better. C'mon, this isn't 2002 anymore...
Posted on Reply
#30
Imsochobo
meirb111if i would make the comparison with a 64$ g4560 vs r3 120$ than amd's really lose big time. and as i said in my first post for light gaming or no gaming.
have you tried a G4560, it feels like a unopened computer from 2012, cause it got 2012 performance.
If you want 65$ cpu, buy an used 2600K and get BETTER performance.
Ryzen 3ghz = 3.5 ghz G4560 in single core performance, more cache, better memory performance, faster cache +++ :)

Just be happy that AMD messed up the entire intel lineup\product stack so we will get better products cause Intel still has the better CPU designs, however now with a very small margin!
Posted on Reply
#31
meirb111
Imsochobohave you tried a G4560, it feels like a unopened computer from 2012, cause it got 2012 performance.
If you want 65$ cpu, buy an used 2600K and get BETTER performance.
Ryzen 3ghz = 3.5 ghz G4560 in single core performance, more cache, better memory performance, faster cache +++ :)

Just be happy that AMD messed up the entire intel lineup\product stack so we will get better products cause Intel still has the better CPU designs, however now with a very small margin!
i don't want a G4560 (no avx2 for x265 encoding) but for office usage that a winner for now. amd didn't messed the entire intel lineup ,they left the lower segment to be ruled by intel the G4560 is the smartest move intel made.adding Hyper-threading in the same price is step forward for lower segment.
Posted on Reply
#32
Liviu Cojocaru
meirb111i don't want a G4560 (no avx2 for x265 encoding) but for office usage that a winner for now. amd didn't messed the entire intel lineup ,they left the lower segment to be ruled by intel the G4560 is the smartest move intel made.
To be honest I am not sure how many people are building a custom PC only to use office applications and when it comes to business, trust me, they go with whatever the OEM gives them.
Posted on Reply
#33
RejZoR
People are so funny. Remember how everyone was bitching over Core i3's still being just dual cores. AMD offers true quad core instead. And same people go "Well, but you see..." C'mon people, who are you all kidding?
Posted on Reply
#34
meirb111
Liviu CojocaruTo be honest I am not sure how many people are building a custom PC only to use office applications and when it comes to business, trust me, they go with whatever the OEM gives them.
really? so a business owner will want to pay double for an amd cpu ? so that his lazy ass employees will have a 4 core cpu to play with.
Posted on Reply
#36
Liviu Cojocaru
meirb111really? so a business owner will want to pay double for an amd cpu ? so that his lazy ass employees will have a 4 core cpu to play with.
No I was saying that your argument about businesses is obvious and most of them don't really care about single core or multi core, they have contracts with different OEM's and they get what's cheap. I thought this discussion was about the consumer (end user).
Posted on Reply
#37
Captain_Tom
If they could place a 4/4 CPU at $99, and it clocks to at least 3.5GHz - it would be a game changer in budget PC cpu performance.
Posted on Reply
#38
Octopuss
meirb111really? so a business owner will want to pay double for an amd cpu ? so that his lazy ass employees will have a 4 core cpu to play with.
I don't like your generalization that employees are lazy asses, I don't like your tone, I don't like your smartass comments... and I don't like you.
Posted on Reply
#39
meirb111
OctopussI don't like your generalization that employees are lazy asses, I don't like your tone, I don't like your smartass comments... and I don't like you.
generalization? not really you are way too serious ,are you a lazy employee? is that why you were offended? you are taking it way too Personally and i never even responded to you before.
Posted on Reply
#40
eidairaman1
The Exiled Airman
r9I think they would be great for budget gaming build.
For office computer to have to buy a dedicated graphic card is a big disadvantage.
APUs for that.
Posted on Reply
#41
notb
Liviu CojocaruBut what about the multi threaded apps, is that ~20% less performance in single core worth it over the two 100% more cores and the fact that R3 can be OC'ed?
I honestly doubt the target audience of Ryzen 3 is interested in OC (even if they know what it is and are allowed to do it).

Comparing the performance based on numbers that we've seen here (I don't want to go into details and look for better estimations), let's assume that:
- Intel has 20% better single-thread performance,
- HT gives 30% of what a normal core does,
- 4 real cores are 100% faster than 2 real cores (not true)
we arrive at a result that R3 4C/4T is 28% faster than i3 2C/4T in full load.

That's not very impressive considering the lack of IGP.
Keep in mind this is the lowest price level AMD has in the Ryzen lineup. In this case a need to buy a GPU card - even the cheapest one - significantly impacts the platform price.
And while Ryzen 3 is the cheapest Ryzen planned (at this point), Kaby Lake lineup goes way down to cheap Pentiums and Celerons (the cheapest one is ~$50). And they all have an IGP...
Posted on Reply
#42
Captain_Tom
notbI honestly doubt the target audience of Ryzen 3 is interested in OC (even if they know what it is and are allowed to do it).

Comparing the performance based on numbers that we've seen here (I don't want to go into details and look for better estimations), let's assume that:
- Intel has 20% better single-thread performance,
- HT gives 30% of what a normal core does,
- 4 real cores are 100% faster than 2 real cores (not true)
we arrive at a result that R3 4C/4T is 28% faster than i3 2C/4T in full load.

That's not very impressive considering the lack of IGP.
Keep in mind this is the lowest price level AMD has in the Ryzen lineup. In this case a need to buy a GPU card - even the cheapest one - significantly impacts the platform price.
And while Ryzen 3 is the cheapest Ryzen planned (at this point), Kaby Lake lineup goes way down to cheap Pentiums and Celerons (the cheapest one is ~$50). And they all have an IGP...
Yup. Unless the top R3 is clocked at 4GHz, they should sell them for $79 - $119. That's what's required to fully shake up the Pentium/i3 market. Any more for them and they are kinda pointless compared to AMD's $169 4/8 R5's.
Posted on Reply
#43
Technomancer
There's a very thin line between making argument and TROLLING.
Posted on Reply
#44
notb
Captain_TomYup. Unless the top R3 is clocked at 4GHz, they should sell them for $79 - $119. That's what's required to fully shake up the Pentium/i3 market. Any more for them and they are kinda pointless compared to AMD's $169 4/8 R5's.
I'm with you on the ~$80 expectation. It would steal some market share in this segment (now dominated by Pentiums) and also give an upgrade path for current low-budget AMD FX users.
That would also leave a gap for the APU (it has to be more expensive than an IGP-less Ryzen counterpart, but at the same time cheaper than competing i3.

However, it has to be said that early leaks mentioned $120 for R3 and they were quite accurate for Ryzen 5 models:
www.techpowerup.com/230916/pricing-of-entire-amd-ryzen-lineup-revealed

Moreover, the cheapest GPU card you can buy today is AFAIK a GT210 for $30 and it's performance is really not enough for entertainment (it can struggle with 1080p video...).
A more sensible GT730 is $50 already (GT1030/RX550 >$70)...
While adding $50 to a Ryzen 7 gives you a great value productivity PC, I really don't see a point of a Ryzen 3 + RX550 combo.
And I don't think many gamers will pair R3 with a more expensive GPU. What for? Upgrade to a Ryzen 5 hardly changes the cost of gaming-oriented rig anyway...

Honestly, I'm surprised AMD is still planning to release the R3. I though they'll scrap it and cover the sub-$150 segment with APUs.
Posted on Reply
#45
kruk
notbThat's not very impressive considering the lack of IGP.
Keep in mind this is the lowest price level AMD has in the Ryzen lineup. In this case a need to buy a GPU card - even the cheapest one - significantly impacts the platform price.
And while Ryzen 3 is the cheapest Ryzen planned (at this point), Kaby Lake lineup goes way down to cheap Pentiums and Celerons (the cheapest one is ~$50). And they all have an IGP...
You can buy a used AMD/nVidia PCI-E GPU for like $20. How does that significantly impact the platform price? If you look at every penny you spend, why do you have to buy the latest and the greatest hardware anyway?

also
eidairaman1APUs for that.
Posted on Reply
#46
mcraygsx
So this reassures that current early adopters are sort of Beta Testers?

"AMD confirmed that its AGESA update for May improves DDR4 memory compatibility, although it also stressed on the need for motherboard manufacturers to improve their board designs in the future, with more PCB layers and better copper traces between the DIMM slots and the SoC socket."
Posted on Reply
#47
notb
krukYou can buy a used AMD/nVidia PCI-E GPU for like $20. How does that significantly impact the platform price? If you look at every penny you spend, why do you have to buy the latest and the greatest hardware anyway?
I bet you can buy a used GPU for $1, so how exactly is this advancing our discussion? Let's just stay with the new stuff pricing. Corporate clients won't buy used stuff. Many private owners won't consider that as well.

I know this is a tough call here, where we talk about $200 keyboards, but remember that some people spend $300 on their desktops (for this price you can even get a keyboard and mouse in the bundle :)).
$50 can be surprisingly significant - especially when you really don't get anything special in return. Most people will be totally happy with the IGP in Pentiums.
Posted on Reply
#48
eidairaman1
The Exiled Airman
Higher quality phases, mosfets/chokes, direct cooling.
Posted on Reply
#49
Fluffmeister
mcraygsxSo this reassures that current early adopters are sort of Beta Testers?

"AMD confirmed that its AGESA update for May improves DDR4 memory compatibility, although it also stressed on the need for motherboard manufacturers to improve their board designs in the future, with more PCB layers and better copper traces between the DIMM slots and the SoC socket."
It does imply AMD aren't entirely happy with their mobo partners and there is only so much they can do with a software update.

Still early days and a promising start regardless.
Posted on Reply
#50
evernessince
meirb111if you are on a budget with light gaming or no gaming i3 7100 in the same price is much better bargain ,it has higher single core performance and has a gpu , office and other apps will run faster .
Um, Ryzen runs office and pretty much any other app better. Single core performance doesn't mean much when Ryzen has more cores, more cache, and a better platform. Not to mention you can overclock any Ryzen processor out of the box.
meirb111you really twist things up , in order for an amd's r3 to reach the same clock as intel's i3 you will need to overclock it using a b350 motherboard and ending up paying more and ending up with 10% lower performance for single core. b350 motherboards cost more than an intel's h110 mobo
Intel doesn't have a 10% single thread gain over Ryzen. The number you are using is *maybe if you take the launch numbers and don't excluding outlying games that had poor performance that have already been fixed like ashes of the singularity. In reality it's more like 5% in games. This doesn't take into account that Ryzen beats Intel in many single threaded office and productivity apps because it has vastly more cache. FYI getting a 20% overclock on nearly any Ryzen processor is easy and that's free performance. The included cooler is good enough to handle it. Sure, the B350 motherboards cost a bit more but you are getting much more features. Let's be honest, Intel's H110 chipset sucks and is VERY limited. It is intended for barebones systems and you'd be lucky to find a decent power delivery system on them. Don't expect to run any decent GPU on them either, I've tried to run GPUs that draw power from the PCIe slot on multiple and they all eventually had issues under stress that weren't present on higher end boards.

If you are on a tight budget and only want to light game I wouldn't recommend you buy an i3, I'd say go buy any used PC. It isn't worth it to overpay for Intel's latest that does zero for you only to be locked into a platform with no upgrade path and low performance. If you absolutely had to the G4560 is a FAR better choice than any current i3 as you get similar performance for half the price. Of course it's likely that AMD will have an answer either with it's R3 lineup or it's new APUs featuring Radeon graphics, which are far better than intel's.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Dec 22nd, 2024 03:50 EST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts