AMD Says Ryzen 1700X, 1800X Have a Temperature Reporting "Offset"

[londiste]

I have to ask what are you comparing AMD Ryzen's power figure's to? I ask because it's not that far off from and pretty comparable to Intel's 69#0k, or are you expecting 4c power consumption from an 8c processor?

well, that comparable 6900k is rated 140w tdp...

say what you want about intel but their definition of tdp matches up pretty well with the actual power consumption of the chip. this makes it measurable. heat coming off the chip is much more difficult to measure and it should be in the same general vicinity anyway.

amd-s previous attempt at different tdp was much better - acp (average cpu power). at least that kind of made sense.

 

[Manu_PT]

People are only buying 4c because that is what Intel only puts out at a widely affordable pricetag, >4c is out of reach of the large majority. Exacerbating the problem is that software isn't going to be written for minority hardware. So until Intel moves in the cheap 8c or AMD gains enough presence to be taken serious serious again by consumers/developers(I doubt that will happen by the sheer number of people d**kriding Intel's offerings) we'll continually be stuck in this 4c hell.



People have been saying this year after year with slight alterations depending on the fad. Fad are long gone and PCs are still here. In fact contrary to what you said made a comeback last year.



Ultrabooks? This year? Keep dreaming, any notebook with that kind of always has had some heft to it or is straight up labeled as a desktop replacement. I haven't heard of any sudden breakthroughs that allows them to package that kind of grunt into an Ultrabook.

You are so wrong about Desktop vs Mobile. Right now there are way more notebooks being sold than desktops.

With the last Nvidia 10xx Gen is even better. Right now you can get so much power on a laptop and that is the future, not desktops. Do you really think people want to be limited to their chair and desk for using their powerful PC? Keep dreaming. Macbook Pros and Windows 10 notebooks outsell completly the desktop market. I am testing right now a Leopard Pro by MSI with an i7 7700hq clocked at 3,8ghz + 16gb DDR 4 2400mhz + GTX 1060 chip exactly the same as the desktop GPU wich boosts to 1800mhz. GPU never exceeded 71º on stress testing and CPU tops out at 82º on AIDA64.This thing is powerful and weighs 2 kg and is really slim. The asus equivalent model is even smaller and light.


You need to inform yourself better I guess. Mobile is the future, not desktop. And no one will optimize games and mainstream software for 8 cores, not gonna happen. IPC will always be the most important thing as long as you have at least 3 threads. Look what a high clocked i3 can do against a last gen quad core and you will understand. Is way easier to code to few cores aswell. Coding to 8 threads is more of a enterprise/workstation software.

Intel is worried with Qualcomm and with improving IPC by going 10nm. Intel is not worried about 16 x86 threads by AMD. I would get a quad core 10nm chip clocked at 5,5ghz with a 50w TDP anyday over a 16 thread CPU at 3,7ghz.

 

[Totally]

You are so wrong about Desktop vs Mobile. Right now there are way more notebooks being sold than desktops.

With the last Nvidia 10xx Gen is even better. Right now you can get so much power on a laptop and that is the future, not desktops. Do you really think people want to be limited to their chair and desk for using their powerful PC? Keep dreaming. Macbook Pros and Windows 10 notebooks outsell completly the desktop market. I am testing right now a Leopard Pro by MSI with an i7 7700hq clocked at 3,8ghz + 16gb DDR 4 2400mhz + GTX 1060 chip exactly the same as the desktop GPU wich boosts to 1800mhz. GPU never exceeded 71º on stress testing and CPU tops out at 82º on AIDA64.This thing is powerful and weighs 2 kg and is really slim. The asus equivalent model is even smaller and light.


You need to inform yourself better I guess. Mobile is the future, not desktop. And no one will optimize games and mainstream software for 8 cores, not gonna happen. IPC will always be the most important thing as long as you have at least 3 threads. Look what a high clocked i3 can do against a last gen quad core and you will understand. Is way easier to code to few cores aswell. Coding to 8 threads is more of a enterprise/workstation software.

Intel is worried with Qualcomm and with improving IPC by going 10nm. Intel is not worried about 16 x86 threads by AMD. I would get a quad core 10nm chip clocked at 5,5ghz with a 50w TDP anyday over a 16 thread CPU at 3,7ghz.

There always have been more mobile devices than desktops for past 10 years again that is nothing new. You can wax eloquent all you want about that laptop, doesn't the fact it's nowhere near an ultrabook in size, it's battery life is crap when you are actually under load i.e. gaming battery barely lasts and hour and 2hrs doing anything else. You call that portable? lol. When that kind power is available for 6 hours, I'll agree with you. Until then, keep dreaming.

 

[Manu_PT]

Being mobile and portable doesn´t only mean having 6 hour+ battery time on gaming. People tend to forget that the simple fact you can play in a 120hz screen with a gtx 1060 and a backlight keyboard in your bed or couch while watching television, is also good. All of this is called confort and that´s always the direction humanity goes. Being sit on a chair/desk for hours is also the most unhealthy thing possible for the body. No one wants to come home after work and spend 2 hours in a chair just to play games or use their personal computer.

It´s 2017. People arrive at home, grab their 2kg personal computer powerful enough to play their Diablo chapter or Civilization, on the couch, while they are playing their mp3 songs via bluetooth from their laptop to their wireless bluetooth soundsystem. Once again, confort. Desktops, desks and chairs are so 1990s. Yeah we do it, because we are hardware/PC lovers. But we are a niche.

 

[Totally]

Being mobile and portable doesn´t only mean having 6 hour+ battery time on gaming. People tend to forget that the simple fact you can play in a 120hz screen with a gtx 1060 and a backlight keyboard in your bed or couch while watching television, is also good. All of this is called confort and that´s always the direction humanity goes. Being sit on a chair/desk for hours is also the most unhealthy thing possible for the body. No one wants to come home after work and spend 2 hours in a chair just to play games or use their personal computer.

It´s 2017. People arrive at home, grab their 2kg personal computer powerful enough to play their Diablo chapter or Civilization, on the couch, while they are playing their mp3 songs via bluetooth from their laptop to their wireless bluetooth soundsystem. Once again, confort. Desktops, desks and chairs are so 1990s. Yeah we do it, because we are hardware/PC lovers. But we are a niche.

As opposed to sitting on a couch hours on end? You also described nothing that cannot be done with a small itx, or matx system, a setup that I had for awhile until I got an xbox. I'm a tech enthusiast too but I'm sensible about it.

 

[notb]

People are only buying 4c because that is what Intel only puts out at a widely affordable pricetag, >4c is out of reach of the large majority. Exacerbating the problem is that software isn't going to be written for minority hardware. So until Intel moves in the cheap 8c or AMD gains enough presence to be taken serious serious again by consumers/developers(I doubt that will happen by the sheer number of people d**kriding Intel's offerings) we'll continually be stuck in this 4c hell.

You could have bought an 8c AMD CPU for years. FX-9590 is priced like an i5 and has similar multi-threading performance.

Also "4c hell"?
Just a year ago 4c were great and made you build a PC excelling in pretty much any task. Suddenly their not good for anything. And you're saying that just a few months before AMD releases 4c stuff. So what then? You'll change your mind and 4c will be fine again?

Ultrabooks? This year? Keep dreaming, any notebook with that kind of always has had some heft to it or is straight up labeled as a desktop replacement. I haven't heard of any sudden breakthroughs that allows them to package that kind of grunt into an Ultrabook.

Well... ultrabooks with 960M are available (like Asus Zenbook Pro), but that's a fairly week mobile chip compared to latest desktop models (although it's not bad for gaming, honestly).
However, ASUS will release a new Zenbook with the GTX1060 and we've already seen a few notebooks with this GPU. It should perform like the 980M which means it should be more or less like a proper 1050ti - a fairly competent GPU.

I have to ask what are you comparing AMD Ryzen's power figure's to? I ask because it's not that far off from and pretty comparable to Intel's 69#0k, or are you expecting 4c power consumption from an 8c processor?

Exactly. Ryzen draws basically as much as Intel 8c models - that's what I was talking about. But that's not what AMD claims (they compare based on TDP), not what leaks told us.
There was a thread about TPU Ryzen review delay (now closed), where some people said that other websites already have it for days. Well... I've read maybe around 10 of them and just 2-3 had some sort of power consumption check. Most didn't even mention the different TDP methodology - they also tried to convinced me that R7 1800X is much more power-efficient than Intel chips, because it has 8c while staying near 7700K power consumption. We know it's rubbish.

Have you tried actually shopping for Ryzen? Hard to sell chips when motherboards are just about out of stock everywhere.

Why would I shop for Ryzen? Isn't it clear I'm not amazed by the platform?

How is mobo availability even remotely relevant, when AMD themselves simply didn't offer too many CPUs for launch?
It's 4 o'clock in Poland and I'm pretty sure I could get the ASUS Crosshair + 1800X before noon with some instant delivery option, so it's not impossible to find. From the whole Ryzen-related stuff, only the 7 1700 is out of stock at this point.

And BTW: who's fault is it that relatively small number of motherboards are available and they're so hard to get? How is AMD doing with chipset supply?
When Intel launched all their latest generations, shops were full of stuff in matter of days. I haven't seen a shortage of anything "Intel inside" lately (including mobos with their chipsets) and we know they're still selling more than AMD (even with the Ryzen preorder "surge").
Surely, availability of stuff is also a factor to consider when choosing a platform. What if your motherboard has a fault, but your shop tells you a replacement will be available in a month?

 

[notb]

There always have been more mobile devices than desktops for past 10 years again that is nothing new. You can wax eloquent all you want about that laptop, doesn't the fact it's nowhere near an ultrabook in size, it's battery life is crap when you are actually under load i.e. gaming battery barely lasts and hour and 2hrs doing anything else. You call that portable? lol. When that kind power is available for 6 hours, I'll agree with you. Until then, keep dreaming.

And during the last 10 years it became dominated by Intel and NVIDIA, because they actually did some R&D to push the power consumption down.
It seems AMD did not, because the power-efficiency of Ryzen (great compared to Bulldozer) is most likely just an effect of switching to a modern manufacturing process (Samsung 14nm FinFET).

AMD totally ignored the mobile device market (just like you do ). At this point they're represented by the Radeon Pro GPU (in 2016 MacBooks). This chip is more or less a generation behind NVIDIA counterpart.

You're right about the poor battery life, but at home (or in many other places) you can use a cord. Sure, that's not exactly "mobile", but the PC is still small and gives you great elasticity of how and where you use it.
Also, 6 hours gaming on a battery? How much time do you spend gaming daily?
There are gaming notebooks with GTX1060 that will work for 2-3 hours.

But all in all, you're still missing the point.
We're not trying to convince you that notebooks are better or that they'll ever match desktops in performance - that's impossible.
But notebooks are the mainstream devices and the hardware inside them drives the trends.
Lately Intel and NVIDIA are releasing desktop and mobile variants together. In fact, Kaby Lake mobile was shipped months before desktop launch.
Everything is designed with notebooks in mind and the very low power requirements of desktop parts is a side-effect (but so is - to be honest - a slightly slower performance improvement).
So where is Ryzen mobile? AMD said that it'll launch in 2H2017 - together with Ryzen 3, which is not a good sign.

Until 8 cores become a standard in notebooks, software developers will be reluctant to spend money on optimization. Desktop market is simply to small. Sorry.

 

[cdawall]

AMD totally ignored the mobile device market (just like you do ). At this point they're represented by the Radeon Pro GPU (in 2016 MacBooks). This chip is more or less a generation behind NVIDIA counterpart.

What 35w nvidia gpu performs better? Also which ones in that tdp envelope support the required 5 streams of dp 1.2 data to drive two 5k monitors and the onboard display...?

 

[notb]

What 35w nvidia gpu performs better? Also which ones in that tdp envelope support the required 5 streams of dp 1.2 data to drive two 5k monitors and the onboard display...?

No NVIDIA mobile GPU is rated at 35W (they're at least "up to 75W").
What does that mean? Nothing.
RX460 is rated at 75W, but sucks over 100W in heavy load.
GTX1050 is also rated at 75W and that's it. And it performs slightly better.

I haven't seen many reviews of notebooks with 460 Pro, but I assume it is significantly slower than the desktop variant (as the TDP is less than half).
GTX1050 mobile and desktop variants have the same TDP and the performance difference is actually fairly small.

You miss the point, though. PC hardware evaluation can't be based only on performance - a thing hard to understand by many here, I noticed.

 

[cdawall]

No NVIDIA mobile GPU is rated at 35W (they're at least "up to 75W").
What does that mean? Nothing.
RX460 is rated at 75W, but sucks over 100W in heavy load.
GTX1050 is also rated at 75W and that's it. And it performs slightly better.

I haven't seen many reviews of notebooks with 460 Pro, but I assume it is significantly slower than the desktop variant (as the TDP is less than half).
GTX1050 mobile and desktop variants have the same TDP and the performance difference is actually fairly small.

You miss the point, though. PC hardware evaluation can't be based only on performance - a thing hard to understand by many here, I noticed.

Pc hardware isn't just based on performance. Compatibility is a huge section. Nvidia does not currently offer a gpu that could be used in the MacBook pro to support the built in display and two 5k displays using dp 1.2 streams.

Performance wise Polaris is very heavily binned. Basing laptop performance on desktop parts is dumb and ignorant. Amd offers multiple embedded solutions using the rx480 that consume 95w for the entire board to include memory.

 

[notb]

Pc hardware isn't just based on performance. Compatibility is a huge section. Nvidia does not currently offer a gpu that could be used in the MacBook pro to support the built in display and two 5k displays using dp 1.2 streams.

And does AMD offer that in general? I mean: latest Radeon Pro lineup is designed specifically for MacBook Pro. I don't even know if AMD is allowed to sell it to other vendors.
I would not surprised NVIDIA chips don't offer 2x5K, as there simply wasn't demand for such specification. They clearly have the power to do that.
Latest Intel Iris (in MacBook Pro 13) supports external 2x4K - not bad for IGP, isn't it?

 

[cdawall]

And does AMD offer that in general? I mean: latest Radeon Pro lineup is designed specifically for MacBook Pro. I don't even know if AMD is allowed to sell it to other vendors.
I would not surprised NVIDIA chips don't offer 2x5K, as there simply wasn't demand for such specification. They clearly have the power to do that.
Latest Intel Iris (in MacBook Pro 13) supports external 2x4K - not bad for IGP, isn't it?

ALL current gen AMD GPU's support 6 video streams.

 

[Bongiss]

Rumor : temperature fix for 1700x and 1800x will come out after ryzen 3 and 5 release. This idea was to make people buy the 5 and the 3. Because if 7 was that good. Fewer people will buy the 3 and 5.

 

[notb]

Rumor : temperature fix for 1700x and 1800x will come out after ryzen 3 and 5 release. This idea was to make people buy the 5 and the 3. Because if 7 was that good. Fewer people will buy the 3 and 5.

Idiotic and inconsistent.

The whole point of releasing the Ryzen 7 before 3 & 5 is that the latter 2 are sufficient for most customers - especially the gaming crowd AMD is targeting.
So they wanted to sell a large batch of Ryzen 7 to early adopters before we'll see benchmarks stating that Ryzen 5 losses next to nothing in games.

 

[EarthDog]

Rumor : temperature fix for 1700x and 1800x will come out after ryzen 3 and 5 release. This idea was to make people buy the 5 and the 3. Because if 7 was that good. Fewer people will buy the 3 and 5.

Pass that bong ISS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!