Any power efficiency test for RyZen

[hojnikb]

Ryzen is very power efficient up to around 3Ghz (at 30W, the stilt quoted 800 CB points), then efficiency falls off a cliff.

 

[Vya Domus]

Ryzen is very power efficient up to around 3Ghz (at 30W, the stilt quoted 800 CB points), then efficiency falls off a cliff.

Every electric circuit behaves this way , including CPU's. Power consumption vs clocks and voltage (and temperature as a result) grows in an almost linear fashion up to a point and then it becomes exponential. It's not Ryzen that dose this , it's literally every chip ever.

 

[hojnikb]

Every electric circuit behaves this way , including CPU's. Power consumption vs clocks and voltage (and temperature as a result) grows in an almost linear fashion up to a point and then it becomes exponential. It's not Ryzen that dose this , it's literally every chip ever.

Yes, this is very true, but 800CB point at 30W is extremely good result.

 

[Frag_Maniac]

No, I'm saying AMD has an edge because they aren't selling quads/dual cores with an IGP. In that sense Intel shot themselves in the foot through artificial market segmentation, it's also hard to justify a new socket/motherboard every two years. Basically with Ryzen, looking at most of the benches & having some clue about Vega (IGP) performance in APU mode, being priced at the lower end of expectations, I fully expect AMD to smash Intel product offerings across the board in terms of VFM. I'd be surprised if AMD doesn't take away a big chunk of Intel's market share, on desktops & possibly even more with notebooks.

Well, honestly I'd rather see the 1500X compete more on clock speed, and less on price. I agree that Intel ought to be using IGP less, especially on high end chips used for gaming. That said, I just found out some are curing the 7700k heat problem by going into the BIOS and simply setting the voltage for the IGP to 0. Word is it can drop the load temp down from 80c to 60c when benching with tools like Prime95. It's been said that the fuss about the TIM used and need of delidding is blown out of proportion, and that it's really the stock voltage setting on the IGP. I also think Intel's CPUs can easily last 3 or more years, so I'm not so sure the new socket thing is that big an issue. As long as you don't buy one of their older models, it should last you until your next major upgrade.

 

[Dethroy]

IMO lack of sufficient power (wattage) is why all Ryzen chips suck at OCing and boosting. I mean look at even their 1500X quad. Instead of being clocked higher than their 8 cores, it's only 3.5-3.7.

I was very skeptical when they mentioned laptop level wattages. It was a bad move IMO. Intel is going to exploit that with their next line of chips, like they have all bad decisions by AMD.

Don't get me wrong, I really wanted AMD to succeed for healthy competition sake if nothing else, but this is really a false victory for them. Soon people will see it for what it is, smoke and mirrors.

The Zen architecture is fine tuned for the enterprise market. Ryzen just so happens to be a good gaming CPU as well - not exceptionally good and not meant for OC enthusiasts (the R7 1700 having the most headroom of the 3 SKUs released so far), but it'll probably age better than Intel's 4 core i7s and still offers a good perf/$ ratio (apart from the 1800X) when solely looking at gaming performance.

 

[HTC]

The Zen architecture is fine tuned for the enterprise market. Ryzen just so happens to be a good gaming CPU as well - not exceptionally good and not meant for OC enthusiasts (the R7 1700 having the most headroom of the 3 SKUs released so far), but it'll probably age better than Intel's 4 core i7s and still offers a good perf/$ ratio (apart from the 1800X) when solely looking at gaming performance.

Interesting video!

 

[cadaveca]

The Zen architecture is fine tuned for the enterprise market. Ryzen just so happens to be a good gaming CPU as well - not exceptionally good and not meant for OC enthusiasts (the R7 1700 having the most headroom of the 3 SKUs released so far), but it'll probably age better than Intel's 4 core i7s and still offers a good perf/$ ratio (apart from the 1800X) when solely looking at gaming performance.

Well,

From the AMD Ryzen Reddit AMA:

AMD_james 323 points324 points325 points 6 days ago* (0 children)

1st) Is the core communication between complexes handled via a interconnect between the L3 caches or does it use some other method that is more core-to-core direct?

A1: The infinity fabric handles core to core communication across complexes. When a core requests data that is not inside the CCX L3 a strobe to both the adjoining L3 and main memory is made, and the data returned either via the infinty fabric internal connection or memory controller, based on the location.

2nd) what is considered the smallest unit of Zen; a whole complex with L3, a whole complex without L3, a single core with L1 & L2 and access to L3, or a single core without L3?

A2: As described at Hot Chips, our Zen core complex including L3 is the 'building block'.

So, this has kind of been know since last August. Not sure why anyone is surprised.

 

[Frag_Maniac]

...it'll probably age better than Intel's 4 core i7s...

Seriously don't see how you could think that. AMD's MB sockets age well yes, but I really don't think people are going to be keeping a less performing chip as long as they would a better performing Intel.

If by age you mean slowly die, CPUs, unless you're pretty reckless at cooling and OCing them, last pretty long generally.

 

[Dethroy]

Seriously don't see how you could think that. AMD's MB sockets age well yes, but I really don't think people are going to be keeping a less performing chip as long as they would a better performing Intel.

If by age you mean slowly die, CPUs, unless you're pretty reckless at cooling and OCing them, last pretty long generally.

Putting aside your snarky irony, die shrinking will hit its physical limits (see: Intel abandoning its Tick-Tock and even Tick-Tick-Tock model), which means that the hunt for ever-increasing frequencies will see less and less pursuers, and in order to boost performance, we'll witness a trend in both hardware and software seeking to optimize parallelization (Ryzen's strong suit).

 

[EntropyZ]

Die shrinking will hit its physical limits (see: Intel abandoning its Tick-Tock and even Tick-Tick-Tock model), which means that the hunt for ever-increasing frequencies will see less and less pursuers, and in order to boost performance, we'll witness a trend in both hardware and software seeking to optimize parallelization (Ryzen's strong suit).

This is what I am hoping that's going to happen, better sooner rather than later. Though hope isn't going to make Ryzen perform more efficiently. AMD partnering with some developers is a good start, but they really have to keep working together in order to make better use of Zen cores.

I'm pretty optimistic so far. I mean AMD has been making decent GCN GPU's that age well. They should be able to do the same for the CPU so long as the software in use isn't holding itself back.

I want to see the day where some of us will be able to say, "I told you so". The opposite is you getting the same reply, but I won't mind.

 

[Vayra86]

Putting aside your snarky irony, die shrinking will hit its physical limits (see: Intel abandoning its Tick-Tock and even Tick-Tick-Tock model), which means that the hunt for ever-increasing frequencies will see less and less pursuers, and in order to boost performance, we'll witness a trend in both hardware and software seeking to optimize parallelization (Ryzen's strong suit).

Sure, but time is not on AMD's side with this launch, and gaming still wants the highest clock possible - 7700K proves this even beyond 'optimization'.

Zen2 and Zen3 will have to have a better OC capability, especially in the lower segment/core count SKUs. Ryzen has very solid base performance but it doesn't look to be as 'lean' as the Intel Core arch in terms of frequency scaling.

I do intend to stay on 1080p for a good while still, so Ryzen thus far's a no go for me. Sadly.

 

[RejZoR]

Well, if any time, now is the time to grab Ryzen on AM4 and upgrade to new processor when they come out. Usually we buy a platform and stick with it without upgrading. And then there is already new socket and it's no point in buying an upgrade anyway (*cough* Intel sockets that change like socks *cough*). But with AM4 being so fresh, that's very much possible.

 

[Dethroy]

Sure, but time is not on AMD's side with this launch, and gaming still wants the highest clock possible - 7700K proves this even beyond 'optimization'.

Zen2 and Zen3 will have to have a better OC capability, especially in the lower segment/core count SKUs. Ryzen has very solid base performance but it doesn't look to be as 'lean' as the Intel Core arch in terms of frequency scaling.

I completely agree that Ryzen is not as good for gaming as SKUs like the 7700K, 6700K and the likes, but that was never AMDs intention, and it would of been nothing but short of a miracle if Ryzen would actually rival these SKUs in gaming while still offering its exceptional multithreaded performance. I merely hinted at the chance of Ryzen aging better...

it'll probably age better than Intel's 4 core i7s

due to reasons I explained in post #34.

 

[yeeeeman]

Seriously don't see how you could think that. AMD's MB sockets age well yes, but I really don't think people are going to be keeping a less performing chip as long as they would a better performing Intel.

If by age you mean slowly die, CPUs, unless you're pretty reckless at cooling and OCing them, last pretty long generally.

1700X is maybe a less performing chip in gaming compared to 7700K for now, but I bet in 2-3 years, when gaming will move to 8 core support you will be, with the 4 cores of the i7, in the same situation as todays cpus which have only 2 cores. From a pure computation point of view, there is no comparison to be made between 1700, be it X or not and 7700K. If you want bragging rights now (10 fps more in a game which runs at 100fps), yes, go ahead and buy the 7700K. We'll decide in a few years who was right and who was wrong.

 

[RejZoR]

Ryzen is not much worse now, opposed to how much you will gain over time... Where 7700k will just decline one way or another.

 

[EarthDog]

Ryzen is not much worse now, opposed to how much you will gain over time... Where 7700k will just decline one way or another.

Do tell how the 7700K is going to lose performance over time.........

 

[RejZoR]

Do tell how the 7700K is going to lose performance over time.........

Demand a 6 core workload from it... that's how. Yeah, it has 8 threads, but half of them are HT. So, good luck with that.

 

[pantherx12]

IMO lack of sufficient power (wattage) is why all Ryzen chips suck at OCing and boosting. I mean look at even their 1500X quad. Instead of being clocked higher than their 8 cores, it's only 3.5-3.7.

I was very skeptical when they mentioned laptop level wattages. It was a bad move IMO. Intel is going to exploit that with their next line of chips, like they have all bad decisions by AMD.

Don't get me wrong, I really wanted AMD to succeed for healthy competition sake if nothing else, but this is really a false victory for them. Soon people will see it for what it is, smoke and mirrors.

The low wattage hasn't got anything to do with it. Tdp is thermal design power its something they choose essentially. So if you tool a 1800x and ran it at 4ghz on all cores ( 300mhz boost over stock 3.7) it will already be beyond its 95w tdp, especially if you had to increase voltages as well.

What is likely going on here is we are seeing the differences between Intel and tmsc 14nm nodes. Intels is technically superior and they've been on 14nm for a while as well so they can pull extra frequency out of their chips.

We will see higher frequencies as time goes by and Amd and tmsc work with each other on the 14nm process for Ryzen.

 

[EarthDog]

Demand a 6 core workload from it... that's how. Yeah, it has 8 threads, but half of them are HT. So, good luck with that.

It works just fine with 8 threads... though the HT cores are, of course, not as fast as the logical. That said, it won't lose performance over time. The performance remains the same.

 

[RejZoR]

I sure hope you understand what we mean by this. It's not like it'll magically calculate less operations, it's just that it'll be much less effective at it than Ryzen. Because it just has so many more cores...

 

[Dethroy]

It works just fine with 8 threads... though the HT cores are, of course, not as fast as the logical. That said, it won't lose performance over time. The performance remains the same.

While the i7 7700K isn't going to lose any performance, the Ryzen 7 SKUs will see bigger gains than the i7 7700K from increased parallelization. Hence the i7 7700K will lose ground to the Ryzen 7 SKUs over time...

 

[EarthDog]

On anything which can use more than 4 logical cores, absolutely.

 

[Frag_Maniac]

Sure, but time is not on AMD's side with this launch, and gaming still wants the highest clock possible - 7700K proves this even beyond 'optimization'.

Exactly, that's how Intel beats currently, and it's not like they aren't gearing up for the long haul either. Have you Ryzen wins fanatics not seen that Intel came out with reasonably priced hex cores, while AMD was flopping with their virtual 8 core floating module sleeping bull models? And do you not know that next round will see Coffee Lake hex and 8 cores? You guys act like AMD invented the idea of CPUs with greater than 4 cores.

And as far as wattage goes, no, it's not just about that, but that low wattage is a result of AMD not knowing how to make as robust chips, and it's not just the architecture Intel uses to handle it, it's materials. If you look at the latest articles too, Intel is indicating the 10nm chips will be more used for mobile devices. There's nothing wrong with a little healthy wattage on a desktop chip though. Hell, it's been Intel for some time that has proven their higher end CPUs don't even NEED an OC to keep up with today's GPUs.

AMD on the other hand like to serve the mainstream rather than enthusiast industry, so low wattages for them means they can fit into both OEM and custom builds. I doubt they'll ever really compete with Intel at the high end enthusiast market though. The days where they could afford to compete there are long gone. They have resigned to being mainstream, based first and foremost on console development and sales.

 

[mcraygsx]

Do tell how the 7700K is going to lose performance over time.........

Have you seen benchmarks on new AAA titles. 7700K is already maxing out on all 8 threads, while a 6 or 8 core CPU ( Ryzen or Broadwell-E ) still have plenty of room to expand with SLI/Crossfire or Better GPU. Thus a Quad Core CPU will lose its performance over time unless you plan to keep utilized it for low resolution gaming. More and more consumers can affoard 2k and 4k monitors now a day then ever before and that is where 6/8 core CPU shine.

 

[HD64G]

Absolutely fantastic power consumption numbers from Ryzen 7s! And they KILL i7s in effiviency, having double the cores and threads when it's the 1st iteration on a new process while Intel is updating the same arch and its 14nm for 2 years now! Engineering achievenent by all means!