Thursday, October 1st 2020
AMD Ryzen 9 5900X CPU-Z Bench Score Leaks, 27% Higher 1T Performance Over 3700X
With AMD expected to announce its 5th Generation Ryzen "Vermeer" desktop processors next week, the rumor-mill is grinding the finest spices. This time, an alleged CPU-Z Bench score of a 12-core/24-thread Ryzen 9 5900X processor surfaced. CPU-Z by CPUID has a lightweight internal benchmark that evaluates the single-threaded and multi-threaded performance of the processor, and provides reference scores from a selection of processors for comparison. The alleged 5900X sample is shown belting out a multi-threaded (nT) score of 9481.8 points, and single-threaded (1T) score of 652.8 points.
When compared to the internal reference score by CPUID for the Ryzen 7 3700X 8-core/16-thread processor, which is shown with 511 points 1T and 5433 points nT, the alleged 5900X ends up with a staggering 27% higher 1T score, and a 74% higher nT score. While the nT score is largely attributable to the 50% higher core-count, the 1T score is interesting. We predict that besides possibly higher clock-speeds for the 5900X, the "Zen 3" microarchitecture does offer a certain amount of IPC gain over "Zen 2" to account for the 27%. AMD's IPC parity with Intel is likely to tilt in its favor with "Zen 3," until Intel can whip something up with its "Cypress Cove" CPU cores on the 14 nm "Rocket Lake-S" processor.
Sources:
9550pro (Twitter), VideoCardz
When compared to the internal reference score by CPUID for the Ryzen 7 3700X 8-core/16-thread processor, which is shown with 511 points 1T and 5433 points nT, the alleged 5900X ends up with a staggering 27% higher 1T score, and a 74% higher nT score. While the nT score is largely attributable to the 50% higher core-count, the 1T score is interesting. We predict that besides possibly higher clock-speeds for the 5900X, the "Zen 3" microarchitecture does offer a certain amount of IPC gain over "Zen 2" to account for the 27%. AMD's IPC parity with Intel is likely to tilt in its favor with "Zen 3," until Intel can whip something up with its "Cypress Cove" CPU cores on the 14 nm "Rocket Lake-S" processor.
120 Comments on AMD Ryzen 9 5900X CPU-Z Bench Score Leaks, 27% Higher 1T Performance Over 3700X
I'll wait for the TPU review before making any decision.
Also another leak where 5800X beating I9 10900K in Ashes of the Singularity benchmark. Gives good vibes for zen 3.
videocardz.com/newz/amd-ryzen-7-5800x-8-core-zen3-cpu-spotted-on-aots-benchmark-site
Unless Intel really brings something good to the table with 11 gen CPU's. It seems amd zen 3 is the go to choise for the coming time.
Now let's just hope scalpers dosesn't do a nvidia ampere again to Zen 3. Cleaning inventory in seconds.
5900X is my goal, but I am anticipating disappointment through the end of the year minimum.
At the moment, that memory training gives up on XMP timings far too easily because it doesn't loosen them enough. Even very loose 3600 timings and 1800 FCLK are waaaay better than JEDEC 2133 defaults.
Say you have a 3600 kit with 18-18-18-40 XMP timings that won't run on a typical Zen2 CPU; regardless of the board, the AGESA firmware will use the XMP primary timings and take a rough stab at the secondary timings before giving up. The thing is, XMP primary timings are almost always compatible with Zen2, it's the auto-generated secondary/tertiary timings that fail to boot on AMD and those aren't even part of the XMP spec. You can likely get that 3600-18-18-18-40 kit to run at 3600-16-16-16-36 on Zen2, so the problem is not the XMP data stored on the SPD.
IMO, AMD need to stick to the XMP frequency and voltage, and then use the primary timings as a reference point to calculate some safe values to attempt on the memory training runs. The best thing they could do at this point is hire 1usmus since his DRAM calculator works really well and is only a megabyte even as a compiled windows application with a GUI. If he can make a bootable timings calculator based off a handful of input variables, AMD can integrate the same kind of thing into AGESA. It doesn't even matter if AMD assumes low-quality RAM modules and runs a super-loose set of timings. Take that 3600 kit I mentioned above; Even if it was run at 20-20-20-55 timings with tRC of ~70 and tRFC of ~600 it would still be so much better than giving up and running the FCLK at 1066 instead of 1800 just because the memory training failed to find bootable values.
Also about job. I lost my old back in April do to lock down and found a new job in July and have been there for 3 months. This week we have gone from pretty busy to almost nothing to do. If this continues, I can kiss this job goodbye as well. So I can only say I know to well how uncertainty can make people more desperate for money. It's not funny to go with out a job. Specially in the long run, as you feel the economic worries coming with low or no income at all situation.
Let's hope the vaccine will come fast, so we can get this dam virus out of the way and we can get back to more normal times. Althrow the virus is here to stay, but with a vaccine it will hopefully not be a bigger problem than the common cold/flu.
AMD need their own Xmp ,intel timings are made for intel memory controller's which have different characteristics than AMD's.
15% from Ryzen 9 3900X to Ryzen 9 5900X is nothing interesting, it's even disappointing given that they even jumped over one whole generation - Ryzen 4000 series.
Waiting for DDR5 and PCIe 5, as well, maybe 2022, but at least it will be a strong and future-proof platform.
Hot and noisy X570 with last AM4 CPU , just no.
They can call it Susan 43 I couldn't care less and they don't owe you two times the performance because they skipped a number.
Buy what you want obviously but spouting shite about 15% when it's looking like 27% and fifteen is above The norm anyway , go intel bro they'll give you more cores , performance and better bedroom heating, no wait only one of those is true.
Whatever.
It's called 1st generation, 2 generation, not 1st generation and then jump over to 5th generation.
It's misleading the customers who will think a second generation in advance.
Intel at least doesn't skip generations.
1st generation.
2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, and now 10th.
And i also hope this CPU is compatible with PCIe 6. Yep thats me. Dumb as a rock.
Sound, very.
You're really just trolling at this point with this whole skipping thing
We got every AMD generation technically, just not an SKU for every segment.
And we're up to(intel gen) 11 next, 10900 etc are out ,the very easy to recall 11090 is next ,like who the f knows what Intel CPU is what ,they have a million different sku's a generation with some right turds hid about the place, Imho.
But back to your point they skipped a number, so what, dya really not recall Anyone else doing that.
I reckon about 25% of the combinations, RAM doesn't work with the XMP profile, and I can always get it to work with the DRAM calc, though not necessarily with the default settings - sometimes I have to pick bad bin, or drop from B-die to OEM but it doesn't matter, I'm only concerned with getting them booting and stable at the higher FCLK and it's extremely rare (twice ever, I think) that I can't run at least the XMP's rated frequency and CL timing.
If you dig into what info the XMP 2.0 profile stores, very little of it is secondary and none of it is tertiary timings, yet these are the ones that need tweaking with bins or manual entry when the 1usmus safe defaults don't work using the presets, so it's not the XMP timings that are at fault, it's the poor attempts at memory training and ease with which motherboards/AGESA gives up and reverts back to JEDEC 2133.
Patriot And certified Ram has been faultless for me though, even beyond Xmp ,last few builds I went with them, they're not expensive comparatively either.
But I still disagree that Xmp should just work, I understand it would be nice but it's unrealistic, didn't AMD make Amp an Xmp competition, not seen anything about it in years, shits vague now.
@ARF do the maths FFS, 8 cores add 2= 20% more cores = Intel having many a brew break chilling.
clap f#£@&g clap.