![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Pretty wild to go from, "It isn't Intel" to "It's better in blender".
If AMD & Intel keep this up we'll be telling "remember x86?" jokes.
To be fair, the hardware is the hardware. It's not going to get magically better. After two years we've gotten marginally better performance, despite AMD's claims.
Oh boy, I hate to break it to you, but this CPUs are not any more efficient that anything that was already out.
This is the most ill informed post I’ve read since Zen 5s release. Not only are they not more efficient, but even if they were, it certainly wouldn’t equate to a significant enough delta to make any appreciable difference in your AC run time.
Post is nothing but a statement of facts. No need to take it personal.
Not sure how factual a ranking of how much post are ill-informed can be ?
Pointing out something as misinformation when it is indeed misinformation is not an insult. Zen 5 is not more efficient. The post clearly states that the content of the post are not factual. Nothing in the post is directed at the poster, at all. Saying that it is the most ill informed is strictly an opinion, we can agree there; but to sit there and take that post as an insult is just going overboard. Facts do not care about feelings.
Zen 5 consumes less power for the same or more performance than Zen 4 while running lower clockspeeds on multi-core loads. It's not only more power efficient but more efficient in having higher IPC.
The claim was “significant” efficiency gains that’ll lead to using your AC less. I’ve been watching and reading reviews for the past week and haven’t seen it. Have you? Beyond that, it often times performs worse. Did you see those numbers or is this a case of blind leading the blind?
I said they’re not more efficient because they’re not. They trade blows.
Yeah, we've heard this marketing bullet point ad nauseam. But hey, don't take it from me, take it from GN. Someone who people on this forum laud when he is singing praises about Ryzen chips.
Seems it bears repeating since people keep touting the efficiency misinformation.
One dude makes the most ill informed post ever, you top it with the funniest. So cinebench is the hill youve chosen to die on? When was the last time someone recommended new build recommendations for 24/7 cinebench runs? No wonder no one is seeing what you’re seeing, they’re looking at actual applications and games they use. Never witnessed such a desperate and sad cope.
Oh, oh. I know this one. Zen 1. People here were throwing cinebench numbers around left and right to promote Zen 1 as the best thing since sliced bread. In reality, it wasn't until Zen 3 when AMD reached parity and bested Intel.
You’re absolutely right. Allow me to clarify my point for use cases like yours instead of my gross over-generalization.
I'm not trying to die on any hill. All I did was post proof that Zen 5 is more efficient in terms of power and IPC compared to Zen 4 in some workloads. Something you said didn't exist.
If it "is" more efficient how is it there's several scenarios where it isn't? Sounds like you have a literacy and/or comprehension problem. Perhaps Bill Clinton can help you define "is"
CPU efficicacy change from task to task when they change enough between generation, for example the zen5 was worst at it when gaming on some setup:
One possible would be when efficiency was a major issue, AM4 was already extremely good in the marketplace that regard, the 7700 was better than the 5950x which was incredible, that why it is hard to get excited.
5950x has twice the core count of a 7700 though. It's not hard to be more efficient with that kind of handicap. Especially when gaming since games don't typically scale past 8 core anyway.
I agree. But if it's a 5% gain across the board, and doesn't have the deg issues, that's still more impressive than Zen 5 which is 3-5% faster... sometimes. If they can avoid these nagging scheduling issues in Windows, that's another plus.