Why everyone say Zen 5 is bad ?

[oxrufiioxo]

I think you know that's wrong lol.

People were expecting it to be 10-15% faster across the board vs Zen4 and faster than the 14700k in gaming like you guessed it AMD showed and not even margin of error faster like 10%+.....

The thing is I knew we were in for a treat due to how AMDs slides contradicted themselves on top of them throwing in the 5000XT CPUs beating the 13th gen ones in gaming lmao.

I've come to the conclusion that AMD just rushed these out the door before they were actually ready the slight delay wasn't enough. Performance in windows 11 has regressed for both Zen 4/5 and with HT on they suck at gaming something that I have not noticed to be nearly as bad on Zen4 so it's either a scheduling issue or poor implementation of HT. Just a all around crappy job of launching a product by AMD.

Had they just come out and said we've made changes that improve AVX workloads and feel long term these cpu's will get better with age here is the performance 5-10% better than Zen4 on average in Windows and for those on Linux a bit better sure some would have been disappointed but it wouldn't be as bad imho.

Same really compared to RDNA 3 showing pie in the sky performance numbers and they didn't need to they perform just fine the only issue was pricing especially with the 7900XT/7700XT.

AMD blows my mind sometimes they did a fantastic job launching the 7800XT and even though it didn't offer much over the outgoing 6800XT they at least made it a good value with some other improvements that is the way when performance isn't all that impressive and they got major kudos you'd think they'd go man that is the way all our launches should go.

 

[Wolverine2349]

What do you need the extra cores for so badly? I'm not picking on you, just trying to find the reason behind your statements.

Some games are slowly starting to get marginal benefit and sometimes modest in certain game situations within those games from more than 8 cores it seems.

Like TLOU Part 1, Starfield, Dragons Dogma 2, Cyberpunk, Spiderman Remastered. Want best set and forget it solution with all cores homogenous on one die.

No Big.Little shceudling quirks in anything, no severe cross socket/CCD latency penalty which games hate.

Last CPU with it was COmet Lake 10900K and 10850K. But the IPC on Comet Lake is so far behind and outdated as it is Skylake derivative. A modern arch like Golden Cove or Raptor Cove or Zen 4 or Lion Cove would be nice. Or at very minimum Zen 3 level IPC more than 8 cores on one node.

No such option exists at all.

Even Sapphire Rapids is too enterprise heavy requiring ECC RAM and on a crappy mesh and severe latency hit compared to client Golden Cove. So its not a good alternmati8ve even if money was of no object unlike Broadwell E and prior HEDT which had good latency and consumer friendly stuff without the stupid ECC RAM requirement and thus good for gaming despite being expensive unlike SPR and even Skylake X and above.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

No Big.Little shceudling quirks in anything, no severe cross socket/CCD latency penalty which games hate.

Last CPU with it was COmet Lake 10900K and 10850K. But the IPC on Comet Lake is so far behind and outdated as it is Skylake derivative. A modern arch like Golden Cove or Raptor Cove or Zen 4 or Lion Cove would be nice. Or at very minimum Zen 3 level IPC more than 8 cores on one node.

No such option exists at all.

I want the same thing honestly but not just because they come with more cores but because they likely would have more cache per core which is important for gaming....

a 4 core with 2x the performance per core of today's processors would still kill them in gaming. The problem is gaming performance has really hit a wall in general and we are getting 50%+ more performance every 2 years from gpu's at least at the top end.

 

[Wolverine2349]

People were expecting it to be 10-15% faster across the board vs Zen4 and faster than the 14700k in gaming like you guessed it AMD showed and not even margin of error faster like 10%+.....

The thing is I knew we were in for a treat due to how AMDs slides contradicted themselves on top of them throwing in the 5000XT CPUs beating the 13th gen ones in gaming lmao.

I've come to the conclusion that AMD just rushed these out the door before they were actually ready the slight delay wasn't enough. Performance in windows 11 has regressed for both Zen 4/5 and with HT on they suck at gaming something that I have not noticed to be nearly as bad on Zen4 so it's either a scheduling issue or poor implementation of HT. Just a all around crappy job of launching a product by AMD.

Had they just come out and said we've made changes that improve AVX workloads and feel long term these cpu's will get better with age here is the performance 5-10% better than Zen4 on average in Windows and for those on Linux a bit better sure some would have been disappointed but it wouldn't be as bad imho.

Same really compared to RDNA 3 showing pie in the sky performance numbers and they didn't need to they perform just fine the only issue was pricing especially with the 7900XT/7700XT.

AMD blows my mind sometimes they did a fantastic job launching the 7800XT and even though it didn't offer much over the outgoing 6800XT they at least made it a good value with some other improvements that is the way when performance isn't all that impressive and they got major kudos you'd think they'd go man that is the way all our launches should go.

Yeah and its a shame its not,

Zen 4 despite all the rumors of underwhelming IPC uplift actually had a decent IPC uplift of like 12-13% across the board in almost all workloads at the same clock speed. And it had a nice clock speed bump so much better than Zen 3 overall.

Zen 5 has no clock speed bump over Zen 4 and almost the same clock speed. And it was suppose to be the one with the better IPC uplift. Except its not and it sucks and only like 5% at best better across almost all workloads except AVX512 and some other rare niche cases where it seems any real performance benefit.

All those who were going to skip Zen 4 and wait for 5. turned out not to be worth it. Zen 4 was actually better IPC uplift than thought and with clock speed improvements was very good. Just really want more than 8 cores per die.

I want the same thing honestly but not just because they come with more cores but because they likely would have more cache per core which is important for gaming....

a 4 core with 2x the performance per core of today's processors would still kill them in gaming. The problem is gaming performance has really hit a wall in general and we are getting 50%+ more performance every 2 years from gpu's at least at the top end.

They both asre important though cache right now much more so.

Your right fewer faster cores are better than more slower cores. I mean just look at the 8-10 year old Intel Xeons. They do terrible. Same with early Zen parts with tons of cores

But modern Zen 3 or newer IPC and more cores on a single die is gonna be more helpful up to certain point. Probably up to 10 maybe 12. 16 or more way overkill for now though with HT/SMT off you never know.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

Yeah and its a shame its not,

Zen 4 despite all the rumors of underwhelming IPC uplift actually had a decent IPC uplift of like 12-13% across the board in almost all workloads at the same clock speed. And it had a nice clock speed bump so much better than Zen 3 overall.

Zen 5 has no clock speed bump over Zen 4 and almost the same clock speed. And it was suppose to be the one with the better IPC uplift. Except its not and it sucks and only like 5% at best better across almost all workloads except AVX512 and some other rare niche cases where it seems any real performance benefit.

All those who were going to skip Zen 4 and wait for 5. turned out not to be worth it. Zen 4 was actually better IPC uplift than thought and with clock speed improvements was very good. Just really want more than 8 cores per die.

Zen 4 ended up looking better because people confuse ST with IPC. The ST performance uplift of Zen4 was quite good even better than Zen 3 that was already pretty good vs 3000.

I just didn't like how they were configured out of the box and the pricing of the platform for Zen4/am5..... I ended up getting a 7950X3D but it has it's quirks that while not hard to overcome are still annoying.

I have another AM5 board in a box I will likely just wait till the 9800X3D is cheap enough to want to use it Assuming Zen 6 skips AM5.

 

[SL2]

People were expecting it to be 10-15% faster across the board vs Zen4 and faster than the 14700k in gaming like you guessed it AMD showed and not even margin of error faster like 10%+.....

Exactly.

People want a new CPU that's a bit faster like you say, nothing extreme. Some are happy to pay a premium fot that.

When the new CPU is so close to the old one, there is no point anymore. The new doesn't look so shiny anymore, you just lose money.

Anyone who posts this "people expects 150%" argument is just wrong IMO, it's never been like that.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

Exactly.

People want a new CPU that's a bit faster like you say, nothing extreme. Some are happy to pay a premium fot that.

When the new CPU is so close to the old one, there is no point anymore. The new doesn't look so shiny anymore, you just lose money.

Anyone who posts this "people expects 150%" argument is just wrong IMO, it's never been like that.

I mean from a 1800X to a 5800X3D is like almost double the performance in gaming and while that would be nice I am not naive to think amd will replicate that but 20-30% before this socket is retired would be nice.

 

[Wolverine2349]

Zen 4 ended up looking better because people confuse ST with IPC. The ST performance uplift of Zen4 was quite good even better than Zen 3 that was already pretty good vs 3000.

I just didn't like how they were configured out of the box and the pricing of the platform for Zen4/am5..... I ended up getting a 7950X3D but it has it's quirks that while not hard to overcome are still annoying.

I have another AM5 board in a box I will likely just wait till the 9800X3D is cheap enough to want to use it Assuming Zen 6 skips AM5.

Is the 9800X3D gonna be any good given vanilla Zen 5 is hardly any better than vanilla Zen 4?? 9800X3D is probably barley if any better than 7800X3D given Zen 5 underwhelming performance uplift to go by.

 

[SL2]

Cinebench R24 isn't available for Linux, right? At least I couldn't find it.

 

[AusWolf]

Some games are slowly starting to get marginal benefit and sometimes modest in certain game situations within those games from more than 8 cores it seems.

Like TLOU Part 1, Starfield, Dragons Dogma 2, Cyberpunk, Spiderman Remastered. Want best set and forget it solution with all cores homogenous on one die.

No Big.Little shceudling quirks in anything, no severe cross socket/CCD latency penalty which games hate.

Last CPU with it was COmet Lake 10900K and 10850K. But the IPC on Comet Lake is so far behind and outdated as it is Skylake derivative. A modern arch like Golden Cove or Raptor Cove or Zen 4 or Lion Cove would be nice. Or at very minimum Zen 3 level IPC more than 8 cores on one node.

No such option exists at all.

Even Sapphire Rapids is too enterprise heavy requiring ECC RAM and on a crappy mesh and severe latency hit compared to client Golden Cove. So its not a good alternmati8ve even if money was of no object unlike Broadwell E and prior HEDT which had good latency and consumer friendly stuff without the stupid ECC RAM requirement and thus good for gaming despite being expensive unlike SPR and even Skylake X and above.

What benefits are those games getting from more cores? I haven't seen any.

I'm not saying that 10-12 cores on a monolithic die wouldn't be nice, but I'm finding it hard to see a use case for it today from a purely gaming perspective.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

What benefits are those games getting from more cores? I haven't seen any.

I'm not saying that 10-12 cores on a monolithic die wouldn't be nice, but I'm finding it hard to see a use case for it today from a purely gaming perspective.

It would mostly be interesting to see. Some games spread over 12-16 cores already pretty evenly so a low latency performant cpu with that many cores would be nice to see. Obviously we are talking 4090 territory only
even RDNA4 will be too slow for it to matter and likely anything below the 5080.

Still I would take 1.3x to 1.5x perfomance per core over more cores that's just getting less likely with every generation so only going wider with developers MT their engines seems like the way.

 

[AusWolf]

It would mostly be interesting to see. Some games spread over 12-16 cores already pretty evenly so a low latency performant cpu with that many cores would be nice to see. Obviously we are talking 4090 territory only
even RDNA4 will be too slow for it to matter and likely anything below the 5080.

Still I would take 1.3x to 1.5x perfomance per core over more cores that's just getting less likely with every generation so only going wider with developers MT their engines seems like the way.

Agreed. I'm very much interested in Bartlett Lake, but I'm not sure how much gaming benefit it'll bring over my 7800X3D with something like RDNA 4, or a 5070, if any at all.

 

[SL2]

What benefits are those games getting from more cores? I haven't seen any.

Indeed. If going from a measly 6 core to 8 core returns only 0.5% more even at 1080 with a 4090, how could even more cores be the solution? Raptor gets a bigger bump, but that's also with bigger difference in clock speed.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

Indeed. If going from a measly 6 core to 8 core returns only 0.5% more even at 1080 with a 4090, how could even more cores be the solution? Raptor gets a bigger bump, but that's also with bigger difference in clock speed.
View attachment 359855

That's due it being two 8 core ccd with a huge latency penalty when going through the IF.

To actually compare we'd need a 7800X3D and a another cpu with one CCD with 12 cores and X3D or a 9800X with 12 cores and 1 ccd vs the 9700X

I don't think amd or Intel will offer us am option that will work though with amd using slow ass IF and Intel now using tiles.

 

[Zach_01]

Check these averages below during gaming

1. Active core count
2. CPU usage
3. CPU thread usage

I think a 10-12core CCD on "steroids" (3DVcache) would run circles on every existing 3D variant.
But for now I dont see how this can fit AMD's plans for the universal design that benefits profit margins

 

[oxrufiioxo]

Check these averages below during gaming

1. Active core count
2. CPU usage
3. CPU thread usage

I think a 10-12core CCD on "steroids" (3DVcache) would run circles on every existing 3D variant.
But for now I dont see who this can fit AMD's plans for the universal design that benefits profit margins

View attachment 359857

It doesn't and will not happen.

It's fun to wish for though.

 

[Zach_01]

And we should start forgetting nonX3D parts for gaming. Smell the cache everywhere...
AMD is keep releasing 3Ds everywhere they can fit Zen3/4 and Im waiting Zen5 to have them from top to bottom too.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

And we should start forgetting nonX3D parts for gaming. Smell the cache everywhere...
AMD is keep releasing 3Ds everywhere they can fit Zen3/4 and Im waiting Zen5 to have them from top to bottom too.

While I agree, we still need the base chip to perform well in the first place unless amd starts doing more than just adding cache to them.

 

[Zach_01]

Of course non3Ds are not going anywhere. They are just not meant for gaming. In fact as it turns out they are not.
They are not bad, but not build for it like regulars used to be

unless amd starts doing more than just adding cache to them.

I think they will at some point if not now

Just a couple only...

AMD Readies Ryzen 5 5500X3D Socket AM4 Processor with 3D V-Cache

If you're on the Socket AM4 platform, AMD is never gonna give you up, never gonna let you down, never gonna run around and desert you; never gonna make you cry, never gonna say goodbye, never gonna tell a lie, and hurt you. The company is reportedly giving finishing touches to a firecracker of a...

www.techpowerup.com

Rumoured new AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D could be our first sub-$200 3D V-cache gaming CPU

Ye olde AM4 socket just keeps on rollin'.

www.pcgamer.com

Keep them coming... give cache to the masses!

 

[SL2]

That's due it being two 8 core ccd with a huge latency penalty when going through the IF.

Are you saying the 9600X and the 9700X that I'm talking about has TWO CCD's? Did you even read my post?

To actually compare we'd need a 7800X3D and a another cpu with one CCD with 12 cores and X3D or a 9800X with 12 cores and 1 ccd vs the 9700X

I'm not sure that's necessary. I think my post points out that adding more more cores than 8 just gives diminishing returns.

Like I suggested, it already does that when going from 6 to 8.

I didn't talk about V-cache tho, that's true.

 

[Zach_01]

I didn't talk about V-cache tho, that's true.

Thats the key
Core scaling is ok-ish on other than gaming tasks
Gaming needs cache because it needs to keep them loaded for this specific workload

We never saw what more than 8 well fed cores can do on gaming... I mean for Zen...

 

[AusWolf]

That's due it being two 8 core ccd with a huge latency penalty when going through the IF.

To actually compare we'd need a 7800X3D and a another cpu with one CCD with 12 cores and X3D or a 9800X with 12 cores and 1 ccd vs the 9700X

I don't think amd or Intel will offer us am option that will work though with amd using slow ass IF and Intel now using tiles.

Bartlett Lake might be our last hope.

 

[SL2]

Thats the key
Core scaling is ok-ish on other than gaming tasks
Gaming needs cache because it needs to keep them loaded for this specific workload

We never saw what more than 8 well fed cores can do on gaming... I mean for Zen...

Well there's always the next generation lol. I hope it will be radically different in a good way.

I dunno tho, with realistic settings you're quite GPU limited most of the time anyway.
As in running 4k with a 4090 for instance.

You get that sweeeeeet 3.4 % bump when going from a 7600 to a 7800X3D. /s

 

[Zach_01]

Sure as the CPU becomes less and less important... no doubt.
Yet still the heavy masses are on 1080p, some on 1440p and far less on 4K

 

[Wolverine2349]

While I agree, we still need the base chip to perform well in the first place unless amd starts doing more than just adding cache to them.

Yes exactly as vanilla Zen 5 is like hardly any uplift over vanilla Zen 4. So Zen 5 3D will probably not be much improvement over Zen 4 X3D though you never know. But based on available data it does not look good.