- Joined
- Sep 6, 2013
- Messages
- 3,559 (0.85/day)
- Location
- Athens, Greece
System Name | 3 desktop systems: Gaming / Internet / HTPC |
---|---|
Processor | Ryzen 5 7600 / Ryzen 5 4600G / Ryzen 5 5500 |
Motherboard | X670E Gaming Plus WiFi / MSI X470 Gaming Plus Max (1) / MSI X470 Gaming Plus Max (2) |
Cooling | Aigo ICE 400SE / Segotep T4 / Νoctua U12S |
Memory | Kingston FURY Beast 32GB DDR5 6000 / 16GB JUHOR / 32GB G.Skill RIPJAWS 3600 + Aegis 3200 |
Video Card(s) | ASRock RX 6600 / Vega 7 integrated / Radeon RX 580 |
Storage | NVMes, ONLY NVMes / NVMes, SATA Storage / NVMe, SATA, external storage |
Display(s) | Philips 43PUS8857/12 UHD TV (120Hz, HDR, FreeSync Premium) / 19'' HP monitor + BlitzWolf BW-V5 |
Case | Sharkoon Rebel 12 / CoolerMaster Elite 361 / Xigmatek Midguard |
Audio Device(s) | onboard |
Power Supply | Chieftec 850W / Silver Power 400W / Sharkoon 650W |
Mouse | CoolerMaster Devastator III Plus / CoolerMaster Devastator / Logitech |
Keyboard | CoolerMaster Devastator III Plus / CoolerMaster Devastator / Logitech |
Software | Windows 10 / Windows 10&Windows 11 / Windows 10 |
Games are a certain type of application where IPC plays an important role. I think when you are talking about "CPU limited" you have for example, Blender in your mind, not games. IPC plays an important role and don't forget that these type of GPUs are tested in low settings usually. They are not tested in 4K and ultra setting. So, yes, Zen 2 can give a boost in those kind of benchmarks.Are you seriously trying to claim that the Picasso iGPU is CPU limited? Because that is the only way that Renoir's equal performance compared to higher CU Picasso could be attributed to its Zen 2 cores.
No one said that Zen 2 cores are the only reason for the extra performance from those 8 CUs. I don't have time to keep repeating what I wrote, because you try to force your own conclusions while twisting the meaning of my posts. I am going to ignore these kind of conclusions and tricky questions from now and on.
I am not going to keep repeating myself.Why are you comparing 3200g and 3400g in this discussion?
No one will point the finger at you if you permit someone else to have a different opinion than yours. I believe that it has been already proven that the bandwidth is enough to feed 11 CUs for low/mid settings 720p/1080p gaming, you believe it's not enough. OK.Your point has been that AMD shrinking down the CU count in Renoir reflects them making a conscious decision to keep the status quo, my point has been that 1) 8CU Renoir likely beats 11CU Picasso (given power constrained 7CU Renoir equals 11 CU Picasso), and 2) AMD's decision to not press for 11CU Renoir is likely because they are hitting up against bandwidth limits from DDR4.
11CUs are NOT a 2080 Ti. I understand what you mean, but when you feel the need to use the fastest card in the world to make a point, I don't buy it.It is the same as strapping a 2080 with 64b GDDR3, it wouldn't perform any better than a 1650 because it would be so bandwidth limited.
Let's agree that we disagree here.You can already see that even with Picasso by seeing how much performance goes up with higher memory speeds, it's clearly starved of bandwidth, and Renoir would be even more starved when it has a 8 core high performance CPU to also feed.
"Sound technical decision" to lose the iGPU advantage. OK.Tiger Lake may perform better, I wait to see that actually benched rather than iffy leaks with little detail. If Intel does release a 12 CU equivalent iGPU that fits within a similar power limit and out performs Renoir, then I'll congratulate Intel, and still think AMD made a sound technical decision to set the CU count as they did with Renoir.