|
Yea they were nigh impossible to find. I do think that that style of removing bottlenecks (similar to the big jump from moving the memory controller on die way back in the day) is going to be the norm for CPU advances as far as what we see in the next few years.
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2016 02:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 20:35 |
|
|
When you push both chips to their OC wall, is skylake significantly faster than sandy bridge? I'm continually amazed at how much life is in that chip. Hell, I only bothered going from 4.2 to 4.5 this month - I never felt the need to bump voltage off stock. Dumb question - I'm pretty sure my 2500k is running my 1833 RAM at 1600, but I'm not sure. (CPU-Z says it's running the XMP, MSI Control center for overclocks says 1600. "Windows Performance Index" knocks RAM down to 7.6 when a similarly equipped machine scores a 7.9 on that. Anything that separates out a RAM benchmark so I can tell if I have a problem?
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2016 07:40
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:I went back and dug up reviews on the 5775C. I think you guys are remembering it with rose-colored glasses here. It had a big clock deficit over the 4790K, but competed well in games. Average frame rates are no use if you want to see the difference I'm referring to, also. Edit: ah, you've seen the results, I guess I should have fished around for that earlier. No rose tinted glasses here. I'm not suggesting everyone go and buy a 5775C, because they are hard to find and thus expensive, don't overclock well (and you need to unlock a power limit in software, I saw, too), and will therefore be slower in other tasks, but the fact is that that cache helps a relatively low clocked chip achieve smoothness greater than even the next generation chip with higher clocks, so it'd be great if we had both a giant cache on the newest architecture as well as decent clocks. HalloKitty fucked around with this message at 11:55 on Dec 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2016 11:16
|
|
|
Harik posted:Anything that separates out a RAM benchmark so I can tell if I have a problem? I believe CPU-Z will give you accurate readings on your RAM timings/speeds
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2016 13:53
|
|
|
Harik posted:When you push both chips to their OC wall, is skylake significantly faster than sandy bridge? I'm continually amazed at how much life is in that chip. Hell, I only bothered going from 4.2 to 4.5 this month - I never felt the need to bump voltage off stock. Absolutely no question it is. (But the gains are mostly not seen in games) Gwaihir fucked around with this message at 15:23 on Dec 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2016 15:12
|
|
|
If Skylake is so much faster how's come Excel still opens in under 1s on my 2500k?
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2016 16:14
|
|
|
JnnyThndrs posted:I believe CPU-Z will give you accurate readings on your RAM timings/speeds CPU-Z is even more confused:   So it's maybe running 1833 with fail-safe timings? Except the MB manufacturer and multiple random benchmarks disagree. That's why I'm looking for something definitive to test with to see WTF is really going on here. Gwaihir posted:Absolutely no question it is. I went looking and found this showing the improvement mostly comes from the DDR-4 controller. It's games, but they went specifically looking for games that they could hit CPU limits on. The whole core architecture has scaled really well with improved bandwidth, so a 4.6GHZ 2500k with 2133 ram is within spitting distance of a 4.6ghz 6500k with 2400 - but if you feed the 6500 DDR4-3200 it's not even close. Which makes sense - I can't imagine there's a lot of room for improvement in an ALU at this point, so make it faster by preventing stalls. It'd be interesting to see a 6500K with DDR-4 underclocked to 2133 for comparison. So the performance improvement is due to better external busses. Faster/more PCI, more RAM bandwidth, support for NVMe/sata express/USB 3.1, etc. I'm not blowing off the gains by saying that - to the contrary, those are the places where real work gets bottlenecked more than tightly looped CPU benchmarks do.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2016 17:30
|
|
|
ItBurns posted:If Skylake is so much faster how's come Excel still opens in under 1s on my 2500k? Is.. Is that a joke?!?!? Harik posted:
Yea, the platform improvements in 5 years have been quite extensive for storage, ram, and general I/O.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2016 17:40
|
|
|
Gwaihir posted:
Maybe Intel just put a halt on increased performance chips so the rest of computing could catch up. Software/multi-thread improvements, ssds, higher bandwidth ram all offer better performance gains to the 5 year old 2500k than a processor with twice the IPC.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2016 17:57
|
|
|
Lube banjo posted:Maybe Intel just put a halt on increased performance chips so the rest of computing could catch up. Software/multi-thread improvements, ssds, higher bandwidth ram all offer better performance gains to the 5 year old 2500k than a processor with twice the IPC. Or it has more to do with the fact that by and large, people continue to see computers as 'appliances,' and allow them to become 'gunked up' over a period of 3-5 years, at the end of which they remedy that by buying a new one and are 'wowed' by its speed, when in truth, if they learned how to bring everything back to stock and make minor quality-of-life additions, they could have that 'like new or even better' experience all over again. Why offer a better product for the consumer when it's corporate and industrial clients that demand 'mo' betta' and will pay 'mo' money' for it?
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2016 18:01
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:Or it has more to do with the fact that by and large, people continue to see computers as 'appliances,' and allow them to become 'gunked up' over a period of 3-5 years, at the end of which they remedy that by buying a new one and are 'wowed' by its speed, when in truth, if they learned how to bring everything back to stock and make minor quality-of-life additions, they could have that 'like new or even better' experience all over again. Oh, the wonders of simply adding an SSD to an old system and doing a clean install. It amazes people.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2016 19:07
|
|
|
Lube banjo posted:Maybe Intel just put a halt on increased performance chips so the rest of computing could catch up. Software/multi-thread improvements, ssds, higher bandwidth ram all offer better performance gains to the 5 year old 2500k than a processor with twice the IPC. If they had some magical architecture design just sitting in their back pocket that offered large CPU performance increases they would be selling it at huge margins to datacenter customers. If (when) manufacturing meets a physical wall and stalls out for a long time like it did for GPUs, then maaaaaaybe? we see some radical change, like what Nvidia did in migrating from Kepler to Maxwell (Same process, big improvements in power use and performance, although at a tradeoff of dumping performance on non-gaming workloads). Otherwise there's just no reason.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2016 19:27
|
|
|
Harik posted:CPU-Z is even more confused: Shuffle your memory sticks around, you're running in single channel. I wouldn't worry about the timings at all (you could always manually set them if you want, but eh) but dual channel is very important.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2016 20:10
|
|
|
craig588 posted:Shuffle your memory sticks around, you're running in single channel. I wouldn't worry about the timings at all (you could always manually set them if you want, but eh) but dual channel is very important. What he means here is have your sticks either in Slot 1 & 3 or 2 & 4. 1 & 2 and 3 & 4 are single-channel.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2016 20:33
|
|
|
Harik posted:CPU-Z is even more confused: As the above say, get the sticks organized in the correct slots (if you have 4, they should be color coded, or like said above, 1/3 2/4) to get dual channel working, also you have 2 XMP for your command rate. While if you are overclocked, getting 1T to work is tricky sometimes, if you can do it in the bios (Set the other XMP if it gives your the option, or if not, manually setting the Command Rate to 1T and see if you boot) those 2 changes combined should give you a pretty nice boost.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2016 23:18
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:What he means here is have your sticks either in Slot 1 & 3 or 2 & 4. 1 & 2 and 3 & 4 are single-channel. I can't ever keep this straight. Is that always true? Assuming a DDR3/4 board with 4 slots.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 01:49
|
|
|
Jago posted:I can't ever keep this straight. Is that always true? Assuming a DDR3/4 board with 4 slots. It depends on the motherboard. Usually that's how it works. Sometimes they color the lock tabs different colors to indicate which set goes with which.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 01:51
|
|
|
havenwaters posted:It depends on the motherboard. Usually that's how it works. Sometimes they color the lock tabs different colors to indicate which set goes with which. Sometimes. Really though you just have to look at the manual to be sure. See also: PCIe slot channel mappings. Although sometimes you get lucky and they silkscreen a little diagram right onto the board.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 01:59
|
|
|
You will also sometimes see the slots labeled in a more helpful way than 1-2-3-4 if you look on the board, like A1-A2-B1-B2.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 02:02
|
|
|
Eletriarnation posted:You will also sometimes see the slots labeled in a more helpful way than 1-2-3-4 if you look on the board, like A1-A2-B1-B2. Most just name them DIMM_0 through DIMM_3, though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 02:34
|
|
|
Huh? All my boards the last few years had the slots themselves color-coded to indicate what channel. There's still some that don't?
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 12:29
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:Huh? All my boards the last few years had the slots themselves color-coded to indicate what channel. There's still some that don't? I have an X99 board whose 8 RAM slots are all solid black. For a bonus, they also decided that paired slots should go outside-in, and alternating. So the recommended fill order ends up being: 1324 4231 Glad I kept the manual!
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 14:35
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:Huh? All my boards the last few years had the slots themselves color-coded to indicate what channel. There's still some that don't? Most will do this. But what isn't consistent is whether you need to put the DIMMs in slots of the same or different color to get dual channel.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 22:44
|
|
|
So Zen appears faster than a 6900K in Handbrake: http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/editorial-amd-zen-is-now-ryzen-processor,1.html
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 23:12
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:So Zen appears faster than a 6900K in Handbrake: http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/editorial-amd-zen-is-now-ryzen-processor,1.html never seen an article shoot its credibility in the head so fast: quote:Yes the Zen and thus Summit Ridge product series officially will be named AMD RYZEN, kind of extrapolated from risen I guess, and not the Rizen gospel group (yes I Googled!). We think this is a terrific name for hopefully an even more terrific processor series.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 23:22
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:never seen an article shoot its credibility in the head so fast: That's an article holding one hand up in the universal 'give me a minute' gesture, as it pounds an entire gallon jug of bleach, finishes it, belches, then continues right where it left off.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 00:40
|
|
|
What's it with companies having decent codenames and then gently caress it up with branding? Microsoft's also really ace at it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 02:31
|
|
|
A lot of great codenames have serious rights issues lurking if you tried to use them in production. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 02:44
|
|
|
Good thing nobody has copyrighted THREADRIPPER!
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 02:58
|
|
|
quote:A new processor will need a new chipset. AMD sold its chipset division I think two years ago already, a new processor series will need a new chipset as the motherboard needs an infrastructure as well. While most of the chipset functionality is harbored inside the processor, a new generation and architecture processor will always a new motherboard chipset. This is a sentence any high school kid struggling to meet the minimum word limit on a paper would love because they are struggling to meet the minimum word limit on their paper and they would love this sentence.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 04:31
|
|
|
Guru3d is all over the place because they have some real knowledgeable writers and also have some people who seem to not know english very well and no editor to fix anything up.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 04:51
|
|
|
craig588 posted:Shuffle your memory sticks around, you're running in single channel. I wouldn't worry about the timings at all (you could always manually set them if you want, but eh) but dual channel is very important. BIG HEADLINE posted:What he means here is have your sticks either in Slot 1 & 3 or 2 & 4. 1 & 2 and 3 & 4 are single-channel. EdEddnEddy posted:As the above say, get the sticks organized in the correct slots (if you have 4, they should be color coded, or like said above, 1/3 2/4) to get dual channel working, also you have 2 XMP for your command rate. While if you are overclocked, getting 1T to work is tricky sometimes, if you can do it in the bios (Set the other XMP if it gives your the option, or if not, manually setting the Command Rate to 1T and see if you boot) those 2 changes combined should give you a pretty nice boost. Jesus I'm a dumbfuck. Here's what actually happened: Because both DIMMS were on the same channel, the MB said "You're obviously too stupid to overclock, I'm going to run the memory at something I know is safe." I've had this wrong for FIVE loving YEARS: 12/9/2011 from newegg. Built it immediately and haven't taken it apart since. I put them in different colored slots because same color = same channel, right? Nope! So now it's 1 & 3 and suddenly the BIOS options unlocked and I could select 1833 and XMP-1. I'd say "Geez, what a difference" but I'd have to feed it an x264 encode to be sure and I didn't really bench it before I switched them. I don't think I would have figured out there was a problem if it wasn't for dicking around with this "UserBenchmark" thing. Shows you where each component lands vs other people with the same component - so I was getting 17th percentile compared to everyone else who owns DDR3-1866 RAM. Fixing it put me up at 94th - obviously a lot of people buy 1866 because the number is higher, then put it in systems that run it at 1600 by default. Thanks guys, I feel really stupid now. Apparently I'm just bad at computers despite having built my own since '94.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 05:12
|
|
|
At least you put your video card all the way into the slot, right? Right?
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 05:25
|
|
|
I'm surprised that card ran as well as it did.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 06:11
|
|
|
DrDork posted:At least you put your video card all the way into the slot, right? Sure, after trimming the pcie lanes down with a pair of cutters
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 07:23
|
|
|
Congrats on the new PC.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 07:29
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 12:12
|
|
|
RYZEN is definitely about as bad a name as AMD usually gives things. They're still stuck in the 90s/2000s, Crimson! Bulldozer! RYZEN! FirePro! CrossFire! I can see the tacky CGI box art already.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 12:30
|
|
|
It's not like ATI had much better names prior to "Radeon." I mean, RAGE FURY MAXX? I'm just hoping they bring back the mind-blowing 90's/00's box art. Because I would totally trust a product with a giant metallic googly-eyed military frog on the box.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 14:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 20:35 |
|
|
AMD should bring back the "All-In-Wonder" brand.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 14:23
|
|
