Hagrid
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2006
- Messages
- 9,162
I am not gullible to believe any releases from either side. Only real world numbers.I thought that was the whole point of their release presentation?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I am not gullible to believe any releases from either side. Only real world numbers.I thought that was the whole point of their release presentation?
I am not gullible to believe any releases from either side. Only real world numbers.
Lol its all marketing games should be optimised for all sorts of hardware not only cpu but gpu wise as well.
AMD has always been a game changer to the world.
And i like it that way if AMD wasnt squeezing Intel, Intel would have still be applying us with 45nm in 2020 lol.
Intel is not even looking at the gaming side.
All they care is how to capture AI graphics business from Nvidia and otherwise grow in Data centers.
Games being optimised for Intel comes in handy here for Intel
But i like your idea if games where AMD optimised where it would lead us ?
I think AMD could easily win this. They said real world. Real world = chrome with 2 dozen tabs open, teamspeak/discord, outlook open, either a movie on a second screen or a streaming service going + the actual game. That is real world, or just realistic use world...
The AMD can execute six micro-ops per clock while Intel can do only four. But there is a problem with doing so many operations per clock cycle. It is not possible to do two instructions simultaneously if the second instruction depends on the result of the first instruction, of course. The high throughput of the processor puts an increased burden on the programmer and the compiler to avoid long dependency chains. The maximum throughput can only be obtained if there are many independent instructions that can be executed simultaneously.
This is where simultaneous multithreading comes in. You can run two threads in the same CPU core (this is what Intel calls hyperthreading). Each thread will then get half of the resources. If the CPU core has a higher capacity than a single thread can utilize then it makes sense to run two threads in the same core. The gain in total performance that you get from running two threads per core is much higher in the Ryzen than in Intel processors because of the higher throughput of the AMD core (except for 256-bit vector code).
Regarding IPC, since Ryzen, if you look at the architecture, AMD can do more IPC.
and why they have incremental increases in performance with the same underlying architecture.
This isn't necessarily accurate. On the OS side, the patches for vulnerability mitigation are likely in place, but not necessarily on the firmware side.
"Real world gaming."
Best oxymoron today.
Oh. That's low.Is Intel bringing their chiller to the fight?
I'd pay real money for that.I would pay so much money for Dr. Su to do a rap battle with Intel marketing.
It would be like the opposite of the Aliens Versus Predator trailer line - No matter who wins. WE WIN.
They had 3200 ram with they had it. deliddling.I think AMD could easily win this. They said real world. Real world = chrome with 2 dozen tabs open, teamspeak/discord, outlook open, either a movie on a second screen or a streaming service going + the actual game. That is real world, or just realistic use world...
Delidding? Are we going here now?ryzen,
They had 3200 ram with they had it. deliddling.
I remember the days when changing the crystal was the way to overclock.... does that make me older?I remember the days when the pencil trick was cutting edge. Now we are delidding.
Was that the amd's I don't remember jumpers were fun. Oh man I woke up again.I remember the days when changing the crystal was the way to overclock.... does that make me older?
I remember the days when the pencil trick was cutting edge. Now we are delidding.
I remember the days when changing the crystal was the way to overclock.... does that make me older?
Was that the amd's I don't remember jumpers were fun. Oh man I woke up again.
I had Celerons that would push past 933mhz. I'm old.we are so old
I had Celerons that would push past 933mhz. I'm old.
Its certainly better than the normal reviews. Here at hardocp we or at least I was used to know this already, with Kyles graphics you can tell how the system was doing by looking into how tight and clean the graph was, and I think these issues were addressed typically.. ... Meh long way of saying miss hardocp I guess... ( Can't pull a hardocp link )
In fairness, all our CPU's had bare dies at one point. Case in point, the Pentium III 1.0GHz and the two Athlon's on the far right. The top is a Thunderbird 1.33GHz and the bottom one is an Athlon XP 2600+.
View attachment 167327
I started in the mid-1990's. These were already dated, but I've actually done a few memory upgrades with SIPP modules. Back in those days, you could sometimes upgrade the cache on the motherboard. However, that required a chip puller.
Back when I started, we did everything with either jumpers or dip switches. Overclocking was done simply by setting the motherboard for a CPU frequency that was higher than what you had. If you had the fastest CPU, you often couldn't go any higher. Of course, we had tricks for that too. We had control over the multipliers so we could sometimes get increases on those chips as well. You could also go slightly above what ever your bus spec was, but that threw everything off. I've overclocked everything from the 286 onward. Of course, those were dated when I got started, but they were still widely used.
You do realise it's not about games being optimised for AMD/intel.
No programmer is going to spend time hand optimising game code unless there is a bottleneck that desperately needs to be fixed.
It's about compilers being aware. That takes time and engineering effort. Typically code queries the cpu to work out what extensions (such as sse/avx) it has, and runs a path that is suitable.
In most cases, it'll just go "oh you've got AVX2, great, I'll use that" rather than "oh you have an AMD Ryzen 9000 chip, let's use code for that".
The difference is if you use the intel compiler, which by and large unless you have a good reason and the money to do it, you don't these days. The reason for this is that intel's compiler looks at the manufacturer string then if it doesn't find GenuineIntel it uses a basic code path. The upshot of the compiler is it is the best compiler for intel chips.
The vast majority of games use Microsoft's/Visual studio's compiler or GCC (Through Clang/LLVM) so this is a bit of a moot point.
Regarding IPC, since Ryzen, if you look at the architecture, AMD can do more IPC.
he optimising that Agner is talking about there will benefit intel as well as AMD.. quite frankly. it's platform agnostic, as it just means proper threading conventions
The hardware can do more with one cycle than Intel's existing architecture, the exception is AVX2 (and it looks like they may have fixed that with Zen 2.. but we'll see). The issue is care and feeding of the beast. You need to make sure all of those pipelines are fed, as much as possible, all of the time. This means multithreading and is why SMT results in so much better results for AMD than it does intel.
As an aside, it's also why AMD worked so hard on cache in Zen+, and Zen 2, and why they have incremental increases in performance with the same underlying architecture.
Says the kid...I had Celerons that would push past 933mhz. I'm old.
GamersNexus (@GamersNexus)
AMD's game streaming "benchmarks" with the 9900K were bogus and misleading. We did those tests ages ago and the 9900K is nowhere near as bad as it was painted. You can force it to be bad, but it's very forced. https://t.co/F3AJKWIM6J
I also have the opinion, just by various pieces GamersNexus has produced, that they are very bias towards Intel. So, it might as well be Intel making that claim, it means about as much to me.
My opinion has nothing to do with bias.. but what ever, you can think what every you want about me, as you don't have a clue.
Talk about bias...
My opinion has nothing to do with bias.. but what ever, you can think what every you want about me, as you don't have a clue.
ssshhhhhhttt, we can always hope.He is not coming back, the former review staff have a site tho just might have to wait a bit to get a review until they get established enough to get sampled.