*Official Benchmark Thread* - Post it here or it didn't happen :D

[Mr. Fox]

35 minutes ago, Talon said:

 

Oooofff. Ya I knew when Lisa Su came on stage, barely talked about Zen 5 and had to force a smile that Zen 5 was going to suck, and well..

Must be why the price is lower. 

• Lower base clock
• Only 100 Mhz higher boost clock
• Poor DDR5 overclocking
• Dramatically lower TDP
• Minimal or no performance improvements depending on workload

It is a new CPU downgrade. That's pretty disappointing for my friends and family that like AMD.

 

It is sad that so many things suck in the computer space right now. Lots of people are all emo about motherboard BIOS settings damaging Intel CPUs but when you zoom out it is pretty sucky by all measurements.

[Papusan]

42 minutes ago, Talon said:

 

Oooofff. Ya I knew when Lisa Su came on stage, barely talked about Zen 5 and had to force a smile that Zen 5 was going to suck, and well..

 

Nice. Now you can clearly see why AMD changed the pricing policy for 9000 series Ryzen Zen5. 

 

13 minutes ago, Mr. Fox said:

Must be why the price is lower. 

• Lower base clock
• Only 100 Mhz higher boost clock
• Poor DDR5 overclocking
• Dramatically lower TDP
• Minimal or no performance improvements depending on workload

It is a new CPU downgrade.

 

It is sad that so many things suck in the computer space right now. Lots of people are all emo about motherboard BIOS settings damaging Intel CPUs but when you zoom out it is pretty sucky by all measurements.

 

If the Ryzen chips downclock to base clock in heavy load/or thermal throttle it will run slower than their 2 years old Zen4 chips. This even with the 16% IPC improvement. That's an improvement? Newer has to be better bro @ryan 3.8x1.16 = 4.4GHz. Their 2 year old chips run base clock at 4.5GHz. 

[Mr. Fox]

7 minutes ago, Papusan said:

 

Nice. Now you can clearly see why AMD changed the pricing policy for 9000 series Ryzen Zen5. 

 

 

If the Ryzen chips downclock to base clock in heavy load/or thermal throttle it will run slower than their 2 years old Zen4 chips. This even with the IPC improvement. That's an improvement? Newer has to be better bro @ryan

And, it looks like AMD has mirepresented the performance. They essentially accomplished nothing in two years. 

 

So, long story short, if you prefer AMD and want to move from AM4 to AM5 your best option is to upgrade to a last generation CPU.

 

Our truth remains unchanged @Papusan. Newer is always better newer.

[Papusan]

4 minutes ago, Mr. Fox said:

And, it looks like AMD has mirepresented the performance. They essentially accomplished nothing in two years.

 

Exactly the same as they did with the newly launched re-hashed 5000 series chips. Dubbed XT.

 

 

 

[Mr. Fox]

14 minutes ago, Papusan said:

 

Exactly the same as they did with the newly launched re-hashed 5000 series chips. Dubbed XT.

 

 

 

The punchline...

 

[cylix]

At least they are good in Linux and avx 512🫠. Ill will wait for x3ds.

 

 

[cylix]

Also PBO is the way

 

 

 

[Papusan]

3 hours ago, Mr. Fox said:

The punchline...

Mheee.... AMD offer now the same as Intel did with Skylake. +++++++

 

And stability.... You like start your testing/review with BSOD on your new toy's? This is an rushed launch. And this even after AMD's delayed launch of Zen5 to fix it. Yup, newer has to be better.... Mheee. No thanks. 

 

[electrosoft]

What is it with Jay, AMD and getting ram to run at 6000? I've used 4 different AM5 boards, probably at least 7 different DDR5 kits and have never failed to stabilize 6000 on a 7950x, 7950x3d, 7600x, 7800x3d.

 

 

2 hours ago, cylix said:

Also PBO is the way

 

 

 

 

Absolutely. Just finished watching De8auers and overclockers are going to love dropping all the limits and opening up this chip with good cooling and a potential delid. AMD was truthful when they said OC'ers will like it. Waiting to see how much cooling scales with it as unlocked it was bouncing off the 90c limit.

 

Main benefits are a fab shrink so far and some IPC uplift but overall more evolutionary than revolutionary and then some.

 

The downsize is even unlocked, the 7800X3D still trashes it overall with all systems running 6000 memory. 1-4fps increase with OC/limits removed on the 9700x vs 7700x.

 

My final verdict? Same as before, I'll be waiting for the X3D variants even mores so now. This, again, lets me wait to see what Intel brings to the table while I continue to play with this 14900KS and my ~16 months in action AM5 (not counting a down 1.5 month when my MB went bye bye) system still holding it down.

 

Overclocked/unlimited 9700x vs stock 9700x on an Asus board with just a 360mm AIO. De8uaer notes future video to really overclock it with a delid and better cooling to see how it stacks up.

 

I'm also looking forward to see if there are improvements in the IMC/realization at higher frequencies outside of memory benchmarks.

 

 

13 minutes ago, Papusan said:

Mheee.... AMD offer now the same as Intel did with Skylake. +++++++

 

And stability.... You like start your testing/review with BSOD on your new toy's?

 

 

Unlike Intel, AMD actually did a small node shrink. 6th->10th, Intel was basically 14nm++++++++ but yeah, overall much ado about nothing at this point for me but I await the X3D variants. 🙂

 

 

[jaybee83]

1 hour ago, electrosoft said:

this. +25% performance jump going from stock to OC. that still "meh" for you @papusan? 😄 here i thought we dont really give a damn about stock performance 😛 and thats not even delidded yet...

 

but yes i still agree that the stock performance is VERY disappointing indeed. AMD put too much focus on efficiency this time around instead of letting their new cpus off the leash. i mean cmon, at this point in time NON-DEFECTIVE cpus are already a win against intel and their still developing 13/14th gen desaster... but of course, even more reason to hold back and play the intel playbook of yesteryear starting with 2nd gen....

 

ill be holding tight to my setup and see what the 9950X and the X3D variants bring to the table before making a purchasing decision. no rush this time 🙂 

[cylix]

59 minutes ago, electrosoft said:

What is it with Jay, AMD and getting ram to run at 6000? I've used 4 different AM5 boards, probably at least 7 different DDR5 kits and have never failed to stabilize 6000 on a 7950x, 7950x3d, 7600x, 7800x3d.

 

 

 

Absolutely. Just finished watching De8auers and overclockers are going to love dropping all the limits and opening up this chip with good cooling and a potential delid. AMD was truthful when they said OC'ers will like it. Waiting to see how much cooling scales with it as unlocked it was bouncing off the 90c limit.

 

Main benefits are a fab shrink so far and some IPC uplift but overall more evolutionary than revolutionary and then some.

 

The downsize is even unlocked, the 7800X3D still trashes it overall with all systems running 6000 memory. 1-4fps increase with OC/limits removed on the 9700x vs 7700x.

 

My final verdict? Same as before, I'll be waiting for the X3D variants even mores so now. This, again, lets me wait to see what Intel brings to the table while I continue to play with this 14900KS and my ~16 months in action AM5 (not counting a down 1.5 month when my MB went bye bye) system still holding it down.

 

Overclocked/unlimited 9700x vs stock 9700x on an Asus board with just a 360mm AIO. De8uaer notes future video to really overclock it with a delid and better cooling to see how it stacks up.

 

I'm also looking forward to see if there are improvements in the IMC/realization at higher frequencies outside of memory benchmarks.

 

 

 

Unlike Intel, AMD actually did a small node shrink. 6th->10th, Intel was basically 14nm++++++++ but yeah, overall much ado about nothing at this point for me but I await the X3D variants. 🙂

 

 

 

 

JAY sometimes is a NOOB I mean everyone is running 6000 mhz on am5 atm.. also hes always choosing stupid RAM...but at least he's figured out now🤣🤣

 

 

[cylix]

Also don't forget about that new  Curve Shaper option,  will be interesting to see what can we do with it on the oc part.

 

@jaybee83 we care for stock  perf only on AMD😁😁😁🤪

[Papusan]

35 minutes ago, jaybee83 said:

but yes i still agree that the stock performance is VERY disappointing indeed. AMD put too much focus on efficiency this time around instead of letting their new cpus off the leash. i mean cmon, at this point in time NON-DEFECTIVE cpus are already a win against intel and their still developing 13/14th gen desaster... but of course, even more reason to hold back and play the intel playbook of yesteryear starting with 2nd gen....

 

My take on this.... AMD used inferior silicon for 9700X. And probably also for 9900X. Hence they reduced TDP to keep up the stability throughout it's lifespan for those chips. There is not a single reason they needed castrate it out of the box like this. But they did it for a reason. I don't trust them if they said it was for power efficiency. Run PBO and they run at double the power consumption. I trust AMD equal much as with Intel. They know more than what they want to tell their customers about their own products. You just can't trust them. Only stupids do that.

 

 

[jaybee83]

16 minutes ago, Papusan said:

 

My take on this.... AMD used inferior silicon for 9700X. And probably also for 9900X. Hence they reduced TDP to keep up the stability throughout it's lifespan for those chips. There is not a single reason they needed castrate it out of the box like this. But they did it for a reason. I don't trust them if they said it was for power efficiency. Run PBO and they run at double the power consumption. I trust AMD equal much as with Intel. They know more than what they want to tell their customers about their own products. You just can't trust them. Only stupids do that.

 

 

 

good point, they might be saving their better silicon dies for the higher end skus or even the X3D chips. maybe thats the strategy to let the X3D parts clock higher?

[Talon]

37 minutes ago, jaybee83 said:

this. +25% performance jump going from stock to OC. that still "meh" for you @papusan? 😄 here i thought we dont really give a damn about stock performance 😛 and thats not even delidded yet...

 

but yes i still agree that the stock performance is VERY disappointing indeed. AMD put too much focus on efficiency this time around instead of letting their new cpus off the leash. i mean cmon, at this point in time NON-DEFECTIVE cpus are already a win against intel and their still developing 13/14th gen desaster... but of course, even more reason to hold back and play the intel playbook of yesteryear starting with 2nd gen....

 

ill be holding tight to my setup and see what the 9950X and the X3D variants bring to the table before making a purchasing decision. no rush this time 🙂 

 

The problem is that an overclocked 13600K for $230 on Amazon and drawing similar wattage can score the same or higher. For $230 vs the $359 AMD is asking for this. And the 13600K will have nearly identical gaming performance. Actually HWU had the 14600K 1 fps higher. 

 

And the real problem? Intel is releasing it's next gen 3nm Arrow Lake in October. AMD won't be facing a 2 year old platform, they're going to be facing a new processor with a leading edge node. 

[Papusan]

3 minutes ago, jaybee83 said:

 

good point, they might be saving their better silicon dies for the higher end skus or even the X3D chips. maybe thats the strategy to let the X3D parts clock higher?

 

And X3D parts will cost more. AMD need something when Arrow lake is out.

[Rage Set]

Here you guys talking about AMD vs Intel but you guys haven't heard that everything we love is pointless....if you take the writer at xda-developers.com word's for it. 

 

https://www.xda-developers.com/overkill-pc-building-trends-not-worth-the-trouble/

 

5 overkill PC building trends that aren't worth the trouble -

 

Quote

Key Takeaways

• Custom watercooling loops aren't worth the effort over AIOs due to minimal performance gains.
• Modifying cases for specific builds is a dying trend; it's better to buy a unique case to stand out.
• Delidding CPUs poses significant risks and is unnecessary just to get slightly better thermals in modern CPUs.
• Dual PSUs and dual graphics cards are unnecessary for all but the most extreme workstations.

 

You only have to take a look at the comments to figure out this guy shouldn't be writing for a tech website. What in the heck happened to that website? I remember getting ROMs for my phones from this website and now they are hot take artists.

 

 

[Mr. Fox]

1 hour ago, Talon said:

 

The problem is that an overclocked 13600K for $230 on Amazon and drawing similar wattage can score the same or higher. For $230 vs the $359 AMD is asking for this. And the 13600K will have nearly identical gaming performance. Actually HWU had the 14600K 1 fps higher. 

 

And the real problem? Intel is releasing it's next gen 3nm Arrow Lake in October. AMD won't be facing a 2 year old platform, they're going to be facing a new processor with a leading edge node. 

People that prefer Intel won't care about what AMD brings. People that prefer AMD won't care what Intel brings. People that don't know what they don't know will believe those that they choose to believe or be extremely confused. $100 or $200 in price probably isn't going to change anyone's mind one way or the other unless they don't know anything and don't have a preference.

 

Some people (the smart ones) decide everything based on what their experience was before and they don't forgive and forget bad experiences, or not very swiftly. Nor should they. They learn from their mistakes and are not keen on repeating them. Others have no experience and form a preference based on what someone else tells them they should think.  Then there are those that have only had one experience, it was good, and they don't know what else is out there. And they don't care. They do not want to rock the boat and maintaining status quo is safe and easy.

Most people treat products the same as politics. Everything is generally black versus white, light versus darkness, good versus bad, right versus left, God versus Satan, Conservative versus Liberal, Republican versus Demoncrat, etc. And, that's perfectly OK. At least you know where you stand with them. And, that is certainly better than not knowing. Those that hide in the shades of gray are the dangerous ones that will kill you when you're not paying attention. They don't choose sides and can't make up their mind about anything. They are confused, clueless and careless and easily influenced. 

1 hour ago, Rage Set said:

Here you guys talking about AMD vs Intel but you guys haven't heard that everything we love is pointless....if you take the writer at xda-developers.com word's for it. 

 

https://www.xda-developers.com/overkill-pc-building-trends-not-worth-the-trouble/

 

5 overkill PC building trends that aren't worth the trouble -

 

 

You only have to take a look at the comments to figure out this guy shouldn't be writing for a tech website. What in the heck happened to that website? I remember getting ROMs for my phones from this website and now they are hot take artists.

 

 

Yeah, he shouldn't be writing for a tech website. I agree. He definitely is not a PC enthusiast, that's for sure. If he thinks he is, then he is a poser.

[electrosoft]

1 hour ago, Papusan said:

 

My take on this.... AMD used inferior silicon for 9700X. And probably also for 9900X. Hence they reduced TDP to keep up the stability throughout it's lifespan for those chips. There is not a single reason they needed castrate it out of the box like this. But they did it for a reason. I don't trust them if they said it was for power efficiency. Run PBO and they run at double the power consumption. I trust AMD equal much as with Intel. They know more than what they want to tell their customers about their own products. You just can't trust them. Only stupids do that.

 

 

 

Or looking at it another way, the lesser silicon is always trickled down to lesser chips/designs and this is no different (see: 7950X3D X3D CCD vs 7800X3D). They revamp the 9700x to give equal or slightly better performance than its predecessor at a much lower power envelope and runs cooler overall. That's a win:win. The trade off is performance is not greatly increased. These new designs are going to ROCK for SFF and laptops. Enthusiasts also have the option to open up the power limits, manually OC if they want even or go with the new curve optimizer software and take it to the limit (one more time.....).

 

But 11th, 13th and 14th has shown us when power draw can get silly. We saw what happen to Intel with 13th and 14th gen when left unchecked power consumption wise. Sanity HAS to kick in at some point and there are limits to too much power draw outside of overclocking.

 

I saw this having no problems pulling 350-390w when merited, but still.... 🙂

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Talon said:

 

The problem is that an overclocked 13600K for $230 on Amazon and drawing similar wattage can score the same or higher. For $230 vs the $359 AMD is asking for this. And the 13600K will have nearly identical gaming performance. Actually HWU had the 14600K 1 fps higher. 

 

And the real problem? Intel is releasing it's next gen 3nm Arrow Lake in October. AMD won't be facing a 2 year old platform, they're going to be facing a new processor with a leading edge node. 

 

Don't you love the competition? 🙂 

 

But yeah, I am REAL curious to see what Intel is bringing to the table with Arrow Lake. Intel could basically wipe the slate clean real quick with the 13th/14th debacle by introducing absolutely killer new chips that retake the lead in sweeping fashion like they did with 12th gen that left AM4 along with the 5800X3D in the rear view mirror (when properly tuned of course).

 

 

[Papusan]

1 hour ago, Rage Set said:

Here you guys talking about AMD vs Intel but you guys haven't heard that everything we love is pointless....if you take the writer at xda-developers.com word's for it. 

 

https://www.xda-developers.com/overkill-pc-building-trends-not-worth-the-trouble/

 

5 overkill PC building trends that aren't worth the trouble -

 

 

You only have to take a look at the comments to figure out this guy shouldn't be writing for a tech website. What in the heck happened to that website? I remember getting ROMs for my phones from this website and now they are hot take artists.

 

 

 

From the article.... You might not know this, but it's possible to run more than one power supply on a single computer. The reasons for doing it can range from redundancy, where you can't afford a power failure under any circumstances, to increased power, where a single power supply just isn't enough. Consequently, you'll find such setups only in professional workstations, servers, or mining rigs.

 

Me run dual PSU due easier cable routing and that I don't need swap out and in the new modern fragile junk-connectors (4090 Hof use two trash connectors) for benching my other graphics cards cards. And I can connect whatever extra hardware I want in my black box. Loads of fans and several pumps.... No problems.  And remember the 5v line for peripherals is capped with low max Amp on most PSU's. Even the high end one's. My main PSU  (Be Quiet! Dark Power Pro 12 - 1500 Watt) ain't weak at all and have a lot of power connectors on the psu panel but not enough for my needs. There is still a market for more than what the average gamer boy/computer Joe want or need. But some can't see the light.......

 

 

2 hours ago, jaybee83 said:

this. +25% performance jump going from stock to OC. that still "meh" for you @papusan? 😄 

 

If you heavly castrate the chips as default... You'll get higher OC headroom😎 Pure physics bro @jaybee83

[jaybee83]

42 minutes ago, Papusan said:

If you heavly castrate the chips as default... You'll get higher OC headroom😎 Pure physics bro @jaybee83

 

yes of course. but i seem to remember that any chips (be it cpu or gpu) boosting out of the gate right up to the capability limit and leaving only measly few % points to manual OC didnt earn much happiness around here. soooo....what do we want, then? pushed to the limit out of the box or lots of OC headroom left on the table? 😄 

[Mr. Fox]

12 minutes ago, jaybee83 said:

 

yes of course. but i seem to remember that any chips (be it cpu or gpu) boosting out of the gate right up to the capability limit and leaving only measly few % points to manual OC didnt earn much happiness around here. soooo....what do we want, then? pushed to the limit out of the box or lots of OC headroom left on the table? 😄 

I guess that depends on how much headroom, where the road ends and if one is happy with the destination. The path being long and wide is kind of nice, but only if it leads to the place you want to go to. A one-hundred fold increase sounds impressive, but the end result is different starting from 1 than it is starting from 2.

[Papusan]

1 hour ago, jaybee83 said:

 

yes of course. but i seem to remember that any chips (be it cpu or gpu) boosting out of the gate right up to the capability limit and leaving only measly few % points to manual OC didnt earn much happiness around here. soooo....what do we want? pushed to the limit out of the box or and still lots of OC headroom left on the table😄 

 

😀😀😀

 

 

Pcworld didnt dare post the review because the numbers looked damn wrong. And Amd try defend their benchmark numbers...... Again meheee also from Pcworld. The AMD employee is sweating more and more the more results being shown, LOOL

 

Please see the whole video. Amd is pretty rousted by the Pcworld editor. Not everyday I see such a good work done from Gordon🙂 

 

 

See the face on AMD's employeee....😂

 

[Mr. Fox]

31 minutes ago, jaybee83 said:

 

yes of course. but i seem to remember that any chips (be it cpu or gpu) boosting out of the gate right up to the capability limit and leaving only measly few % points to manual OC didnt earn much happiness around here. soooo....what do we want, then? pushed to the limit out of the box or lots of OC headroom left on the table? 😄 

21 minutes ago, Mr. Fox said:

I guess that depends on how much headroom, where the road ends and if one is happy with the destination. The path being long and wide is kind of nice, but only if it leads to the place you want to go to. A one-hundred fold increase sounds impressive, but the end result is different starting from 1 than it is starting from 2.

 

[electrosoft]

36 minutes ago, jaybee83 said:

 

yes of course. but i seem to remember that any chips (be it cpu or gpu) boosting out of the gate right up to the capability limit and leaving only measly few % points to manual OC didnt earn much happiness around here. soooo....what do we want, then? pushed to the limit out of the box or lots of OC headroom left on the table? 😄