Well .. it seems that since its launch the number of videos about AMD's Ryzen CPU, which was crazy before launch, ,has actually increased in frequency.
I guess I should have seen that coming with new technology, architecture and lithography?!
However it has actually had more subjects attached to it than even I could have dreamed up. I was also encouraged to make this video after, not one but, two new subject areas concerning Ryzen cropped up.
First off was an extremely interesting rumour that stated that part of the issue of Ryzen's performance, though it was not an issue in my mind, had something to do with nVidia cards and more precisely nVidia's driver. Despite my complete lack of concern about performance in existing games, being a new architecture and NOT optimised for in any way, this particular issue is a problem. Because it will affect the performance of future games if not addressed.
Now this makes things quite interesting and what should take place is that when AMD's Vega becomes available the performance should increase. Well unless nVidia resolves the driver issue in the meantime.
Of course this problem was compounded by the lack of a high end graphics card from AMD which is why everyone will have to wait until either AMD RX Vega is launched or nVidia fixes their drivers, whichever comes first. As nVidia would now realise that they will lose a shed tonne of sales for everyone buying Ryzen I would imagine they will fix the issue pretty quick.
From now on, those that do theiur research like me and many others, everyone that is about to or planning a Ryzen build, like me, will either buy an AMD RX 480 and then an RX Vega when launched. Or they could purchase two RX 480's or wait a few days for the RX 580 and buy one or two of those or wait until May and just get the RX Vega.
As for the sudden jump from RX 480 to RX 580 .. I am not sure I agree with that AMD. I am not sure because .. well the RX 580 has not been out or its performance fully tested and out there in the wild. Yet.
The RX 580 is reported to be a refined Polaris chip so an improved RX 480. What I find, as do many others, odd about this is .. how much of a refinement and improvement did they get to justify calling it an RX 580? For me it would have to be damn close to the nVidia Geforce 1070 to be called an RX 480. I mean after all, leaving aside models ending in 'X' which was obviously never going to happen, you still have the '590' as well as 'Vega'.
In other words now announcing the RX 580 suggests to me that the RX 590 and the RX VEGA would be better than the Geforce 1070 and 1080 respectively...and are there not two Vegas coming out? So if the RX 590 is a cut down Vega I am wondering if there will be a huge gap in performance between the RX 580 and the RX 590? Bit weird.
The other thing that has cropped up is the re-emergence of the Ryzen Pro name. In that recent post I did with the leaked list of a head spinning 17 models of Ryzen I first called the list a pile of crap. But then later I gave it some thought and realised that the chances are that the Ryzen Pro models with be mobile parts.
Well the name has cropped back up and I still believe they will be mobile parts. I mean the desktop line up looks pretty tied up to me and introducing more models will just make everything confusing to many.
Blimey. This comes literally mere days after something no one expected with the leak and now almost confirmed rumour that AMD plans on doing a high end desktop platform, HEDT, and planning a 16 core processor followed by a leak of a 12 core processor!
Bloody hell. Along with improvements to be made we did expect, plus one that evaporated with Windows scheduling, plus some we did not expect, nVidia driver, faster RAM improving performance and now with these two Ryzen rumours and launches Ryzen is going to be talked about for a fair old while yet.
AMD has managed to raise the talk about Ryzen pre-launch and still managing to do this post launch in a way that, in my memory, has been better than anything they did in the past. Maybe this was part of their planned marketing strategy? If so ... well they are now looking to have outdone themselves here?
A common complaint among tech enthusiasts is AMD's marketing and claiming that their difficulty is most people do know Intel but do not know AMD. Well Ryzen has been heavily talked about for the last year or two that has increased to a peak lately and likely to stay in that peak for at least one year?
In other words recently almost all everyone has talked about it Ryzen and we cannot predict precisely when it will end. Now considering that there is also the Ryzen based APU's yet to come, the launches of the Pro models and these 12 and 16 core models over the next 6 months or so I would imagine that before everyone has even stopped talking about that engineering samples of the next Zen core will be doing the rounds and it may well continue on?
Hence why I said 'at least one year'.
I was planning to build a new rig based on Ryzen and Vega at the end of May or sometime in June but now I am like 'Oooh wait a minute ... 12 cores? Maybe I should wait and see the benchmarks on that?!' Lol. Well you have the final clock frequencies to consider as well as improvements and optimisations between now and then?
To those that said that 2017 was going to be a great year for PC tech mostly said it just about the launch of the known Ryzen CPUs, Vega GPUs and nVidia's 1080Ti.
Now I am wondering how many are sitting at their monitors frozen in place with their eyes wide and their chins resting on the floor with a pool of dribble gradually increasing its radius? Lol.
You do know water and electronics don't mix, right? Lol.
We do not know, fully at any rate, exactly what nVidia and Intel is going to do, launch or indeed leak this year either!
Showing posts with label Ryzen performance. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ryzen performance. Show all posts
Tuesday, 4 April 2017
Monday, 27 March 2017
MY FOREHEAD HURTS - RYZEN
OK then ...
Many, many people still making idiot mistakes, still quoting stuff like they know what they are talking about and still quoting crap that is simply not the case at all. All the cues are there already but for some reason people are blind to them.
Let us take one simple comment I saw on Tom's Hardware in the Ryzen 1700X review I have seen over and over again elsewhere ...
Some people have correctly stated that more cores will be needed in gaming in the future while naysayers without the intellect have stated that this will be years away ... if ever?!
If ever ... I just love some of these statements.
Games are coded based on what the mainstream is .. not the top end so sorry to all those that base, ,and even buy, everything on the top end. It is just simple economics.
Everyone has been purchasing Intel 4 core CPU's, that may or may not be hyper-threaded, and have done for years and simply because 6 and 8 core CPUs were not worth it if you were just gaming.
Right now two things are happening and the first is that the 8 core Ryzen's have been selling ... a lot. You also cannot base things on what your bloody friends do or say ... gaming is a global thing. The second thing is that more and more gamers are streaming and so much so that even Google and YouTube are trying to cater for those that want to stream there games.
That is two very good reasons for the Ryzen 7's and games being coded for more than four cores already and before I get to the next and best reason of all...
Every single rumour out there, forgetting the fact that gaming consoles already use 8 cores, is stating that the up and coming XBox Scorpio is going to use Ryzen cores as well as a Vega GPU.
That was Ryzen cores.
Did no one notice how quick game developers came out and said that they were both excited and working with Ryzen in mind? Did no one realise why this was?
Yeah ... when consoles are on their way they already have games being coded for them, which is why there is always a few titles available at launch. The Nintendo Switch not withstanding. Which only had two ... or one and a quarter from the sounds of it?
The XBox Scorpio is supposed to be coming out this year, 2017, and before the end of the year and we are already a few months into this year. Games do not get coded in a few months, not even indie bloody titles, lol.
Which likely means that games are already well into development for Ryzen.
Though none of this matters to myself personally.
I do not build a PC to play games on with three year old titles in mind and nor have I ever and nor will I ever do this. I really do not see how anyone does ... unless they are these die hard fanboys for old titles that just keep on playing them, not matter what.
The only game in recent memory that had me play through it far more than any other is Alien Isolation. Played through that around 6 times and the next closest title to that was three times and Call Of Juarez Gunslinger. The first was over atmosphere and the latter because playing it on its hardest setting, no cross-hairs at all, was a fun challenge. So fun I did it twice, lol.
As much as I loved, ,and completed, games like Skyrim, Fallouts, Dragon Age Inquisition and The Witcher 3 ... I have never been tempted to play them again. With the exception of Deus Ex Human Revolution that was far shorter than those others so did not mind going through it two, might have been three, times.
But I will get excited about the future RPG's along with other titles ... if they look good though of late that looking good a year or so before launch has not amounted to much. Despite all the raving about nVidia's latest GPUs, pre 1080 and 1070.
If things go according to plan I am building a Ryzen PC with a Vega card in a couple of months time when Vega is released. This might now get pushed back a little because of the news that a 12 and 16 core Ryzen might be coming. Something I thought would happen if I am honest but as there was absolutely no talk about this, or foresight, ,from any of the tech professionals I thought it was not going to happen.
I should know better than to ignore my instincts based on what tech journalists are or are not talking about!
Whether I go this route for more than 8 physical cores I am not sure right now. It would all rather depend somewhat on clockspeeds as well as RAM speed scaling, as is being noted with Ryzen 7.
Despite the whiners as well as those speaking about things they do not have the intellect to speak of I for one am very happy with what AMD have released. Because for the next 3 to 5 years things are going to be extremely interesting. Not 'might be' but 'will be'.
I thought it would be good to get on the AM4 platform as the next iterations of Ryzen should be pretty good. New node and new architecture alone are two areas where things will improve.
In all honesty the only negative point right now is the dual core RAM and the PCI-E lanes, though I am not entirely sure this is an issue. AS unlike so many armchair experts I cannot see into the future and am not sure whether those PCI-E lanes of 16x will be swamped by the next generation of cards?
Dual channel RAM is not really an issue as long as its frequency keeps increasing but will it get to a point whereby it cannot be increased? Which means to feed data faster you have no choice but to go quad channel, at which point you need a new motherboard.
But if a new motherboard is not need until, say, Zen 4, for arguments sake, and this is 3 years or more away then ... it is a non issue.
Oh I also find it hilarious that every single person that states that Ryzen is NOT a gaming CPU, even the ones trying to make excuses for it. Really?! I mean, REALLY?!
I wonder if they then go and play games on an XBox or a Playstation at 30 frames per second after hitting that return button and stating that Ryzen is not a gaming CPU because 140 frames and not 180 frames per second.
Now if I was a dedicated console owner I would get pretty irate at all these snobs going on about differences of ten or even twenty frames per second when there close to or above 100 frames per second by a fair old margin.
In fact I am amazed that console owners have not ripped into these people just yet.
I also mentioned about optimisations of current and slightly older games in a recent post on AMD's Ryzen? Yeah ... do not really care about that either ... unless it happens to be a game that I will go back to AND it is getting less than 40fps minimum.
Why?! Unless you are MMO'ing and doing it for money ... just, WHY?!
I also find it hilarious that everyone is scrambling to get Ryzen 5's performance metrics from Ryzen 7's, lol. Really?!
Oh dear.
You might get it right, you have a 50/50 chance, or you might get it wrong but you have no way of knowing. That is NOT, however, what some of them are stating. The are stating that they have tested by switching off cores and stating this is what will happen. I do not know and I do not care as outside of going for a 6 core Ryzen I have no interest.
I am aware, however, that there is no way of knowing how the cores will overclock and no way of knowing how the shared cache memory will make a difference. Will there be more cache memory available to cores because the other cores that would otherwise share this memory are no there? Or would it be that it remains the same depending on how cores are switched off, or failed in the production process? Who knows? I presently do not and I am damn sure no one else does.
Buuut ... if they get it right and there is no difference watch how all of them that predicted no change will crow about it, which will likely lead to irate people telling them to feck off and go and design CPU's as they are obviously engineers? Lol.
I get so annoyed when I read some of the comments. Hands over my face with my uttering "Oooh for the love of God, man!" Lol.
I am doing something I find funny ... I am going to hold off buying a laptop until they come out with Ryzen APU's. I do not bloody know why? Lol.
Well I have always been aware that despite all the crap everyone talks about then CPUs come out they fail to see that ... if something is faster in just one single thing then anything else that is slower comes down to a software issue.
Sorry but that's it and that's all.
If it was a hardware issue then it would show in every single thing tested and I imagine that, without bothering to go back and check, this would be the case with AMD's previous bulldozers. Not quite as bad as everyone made out but clearly slower in everything ... CLOCK FOR CLOCK.
This is not the case with Ryzen and so things are very, very different.
Yet I have very literally and a long time ago lost count of the number of remarks like "AMD has failed again" and "It is bulldozer all over again". Oooh boy, oh boy.
There is an old saying ... you cannot see the wood for the trees.
If you want to remain blind then go and be blind. Do NOT go around on the Internet trying to blind others because .. the Internet is NOT forgiving and it may come back to bite you in the arse?
EDIT: Oh and some so called tech journalists and reviewers might want to seriously change their tone too ... because what I hear a lot is "Oooh Ryzen was supposed to be sooo good at gaming and it is SOOOO NOOOT!"
Your giving out the wrong impression, maybe intentionally without having to actually state it, when that is simply NOT the case at all.
I for one never expected ANY Ryzen CPU to beat out the fastest Intel CPU on any level ... but it has or come close on all of them.
I expected 35% improvement but hoped they, AMD, were being honest when they stated a 40% improvement and we got over 50% improvement. It has worked out better than I had hoped so I actually find all of the negativity somewhat surprising, if I am perfectly honest.
Many, many people still making idiot mistakes, still quoting stuff like they know what they are talking about and still quoting crap that is simply not the case at all. All the cues are there already but for some reason people are blind to them.
Let us take one simple comment I saw on Tom's Hardware in the Ryzen 1700X review I have seen over and over again elsewhere ...
Some people have correctly stated that more cores will be needed in gaming in the future while naysayers without the intellect have stated that this will be years away ... if ever?!
If ever ... I just love some of these statements.
Games are coded based on what the mainstream is .. not the top end so sorry to all those that base, ,and even buy, everything on the top end. It is just simple economics.
Everyone has been purchasing Intel 4 core CPU's, that may or may not be hyper-threaded, and have done for years and simply because 6 and 8 core CPUs were not worth it if you were just gaming.
Right now two things are happening and the first is that the 8 core Ryzen's have been selling ... a lot. You also cannot base things on what your bloody friends do or say ... gaming is a global thing. The second thing is that more and more gamers are streaming and so much so that even Google and YouTube are trying to cater for those that want to stream there games.
That is two very good reasons for the Ryzen 7's and games being coded for more than four cores already and before I get to the next and best reason of all...
Every single rumour out there, forgetting the fact that gaming consoles already use 8 cores, is stating that the up and coming XBox Scorpio is going to use Ryzen cores as well as a Vega GPU.
That was Ryzen cores.
Did no one notice how quick game developers came out and said that they were both excited and working with Ryzen in mind? Did no one realise why this was?
Yeah ... when consoles are on their way they already have games being coded for them, which is why there is always a few titles available at launch. The Nintendo Switch not withstanding. Which only had two ... or one and a quarter from the sounds of it?
The XBox Scorpio is supposed to be coming out this year, 2017, and before the end of the year and we are already a few months into this year. Games do not get coded in a few months, not even indie bloody titles, lol.
Which likely means that games are already well into development for Ryzen.
Though none of this matters to myself personally.
I do not build a PC to play games on with three year old titles in mind and nor have I ever and nor will I ever do this. I really do not see how anyone does ... unless they are these die hard fanboys for old titles that just keep on playing them, not matter what.
The only game in recent memory that had me play through it far more than any other is Alien Isolation. Played through that around 6 times and the next closest title to that was three times and Call Of Juarez Gunslinger. The first was over atmosphere and the latter because playing it on its hardest setting, no cross-hairs at all, was a fun challenge. So fun I did it twice, lol.
As much as I loved, ,and completed, games like Skyrim, Fallouts, Dragon Age Inquisition and The Witcher 3 ... I have never been tempted to play them again. With the exception of Deus Ex Human Revolution that was far shorter than those others so did not mind going through it two, might have been three, times.
But I will get excited about the future RPG's along with other titles ... if they look good though of late that looking good a year or so before launch has not amounted to much. Despite all the raving about nVidia's latest GPUs, pre 1080 and 1070.
If things go according to plan I am building a Ryzen PC with a Vega card in a couple of months time when Vega is released. This might now get pushed back a little because of the news that a 12 and 16 core Ryzen might be coming. Something I thought would happen if I am honest but as there was absolutely no talk about this, or foresight, ,from any of the tech professionals I thought it was not going to happen.
I should know better than to ignore my instincts based on what tech journalists are or are not talking about!
Whether I go this route for more than 8 physical cores I am not sure right now. It would all rather depend somewhat on clockspeeds as well as RAM speed scaling, as is being noted with Ryzen 7.
Despite the whiners as well as those speaking about things they do not have the intellect to speak of I for one am very happy with what AMD have released. Because for the next 3 to 5 years things are going to be extremely interesting. Not 'might be' but 'will be'.
I thought it would be good to get on the AM4 platform as the next iterations of Ryzen should be pretty good. New node and new architecture alone are two areas where things will improve.
In all honesty the only negative point right now is the dual core RAM and the PCI-E lanes, though I am not entirely sure this is an issue. AS unlike so many armchair experts I cannot see into the future and am not sure whether those PCI-E lanes of 16x will be swamped by the next generation of cards?
Dual channel RAM is not really an issue as long as its frequency keeps increasing but will it get to a point whereby it cannot be increased? Which means to feed data faster you have no choice but to go quad channel, at which point you need a new motherboard.
But if a new motherboard is not need until, say, Zen 4, for arguments sake, and this is 3 years or more away then ... it is a non issue.
Oh I also find it hilarious that every single person that states that Ryzen is NOT a gaming CPU, even the ones trying to make excuses for it. Really?! I mean, REALLY?!
I wonder if they then go and play games on an XBox or a Playstation at 30 frames per second after hitting that return button and stating that Ryzen is not a gaming CPU because 140 frames and not 180 frames per second.
Now if I was a dedicated console owner I would get pretty irate at all these snobs going on about differences of ten or even twenty frames per second when there close to or above 100 frames per second by a fair old margin.
In fact I am amazed that console owners have not ripped into these people just yet.
I also mentioned about optimisations of current and slightly older games in a recent post on AMD's Ryzen? Yeah ... do not really care about that either ... unless it happens to be a game that I will go back to AND it is getting less than 40fps minimum.
Why?! Unless you are MMO'ing and doing it for money ... just, WHY?!
I also find it hilarious that everyone is scrambling to get Ryzen 5's performance metrics from Ryzen 7's, lol. Really?!
Oh dear.
You might get it right, you have a 50/50 chance, or you might get it wrong but you have no way of knowing. That is NOT, however, what some of them are stating. The are stating that they have tested by switching off cores and stating this is what will happen. I do not know and I do not care as outside of going for a 6 core Ryzen I have no interest.
I am aware, however, that there is no way of knowing how the cores will overclock and no way of knowing how the shared cache memory will make a difference. Will there be more cache memory available to cores because the other cores that would otherwise share this memory are no there? Or would it be that it remains the same depending on how cores are switched off, or failed in the production process? Who knows? I presently do not and I am damn sure no one else does.
Buuut ... if they get it right and there is no difference watch how all of them that predicted no change will crow about it, which will likely lead to irate people telling them to feck off and go and design CPU's as they are obviously engineers? Lol.
I get so annoyed when I read some of the comments. Hands over my face with my uttering "Oooh for the love of God, man!" Lol.
I am doing something I find funny ... I am going to hold off buying a laptop until they come out with Ryzen APU's. I do not bloody know why? Lol.
Well I have always been aware that despite all the crap everyone talks about then CPUs come out they fail to see that ... if something is faster in just one single thing then anything else that is slower comes down to a software issue.
Sorry but that's it and that's all.
If it was a hardware issue then it would show in every single thing tested and I imagine that, without bothering to go back and check, this would be the case with AMD's previous bulldozers. Not quite as bad as everyone made out but clearly slower in everything ... CLOCK FOR CLOCK.
This is not the case with Ryzen and so things are very, very different.
Yet I have very literally and a long time ago lost count of the number of remarks like "AMD has failed again" and "It is bulldozer all over again". Oooh boy, oh boy.
There is an old saying ... you cannot see the wood for the trees.
If you want to remain blind then go and be blind. Do NOT go around on the Internet trying to blind others because .. the Internet is NOT forgiving and it may come back to bite you in the arse?
EDIT: Oh and some so called tech journalists and reviewers might want to seriously change their tone too ... because what I hear a lot is "Oooh Ryzen was supposed to be sooo good at gaming and it is SOOOO NOOOT!"
Your giving out the wrong impression, maybe intentionally without having to actually state it, when that is simply NOT the case at all.
I for one never expected ANY Ryzen CPU to beat out the fastest Intel CPU on any level ... but it has or come close on all of them.
I expected 35% improvement but hoped they, AMD, were being honest when they stated a 40% improvement and we got over 50% improvement. It has worked out better than I had hoped so I actually find all of the negativity somewhat surprising, if I am perfectly honest.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)