No, I just separated Cores and SMT threads to better understand how each application scales. For example, it doesn't look like Destiny 2 uses SMT at all, only cores:
No, I just separated Cores and SMT threads to better understand how each application scales. For example, it doesn't look like Destiny 2 uses SMT at all, only cores:
So in other words, add enough cores, and your level is finished rendering before you even design it?Nice, supralinear.
Some Geekbench numbers, http://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/3770816
Ignore the Multi-Core Score, something is there broken.
Ignore the Multi-Core Score, something is there broken.
Last edited:
Just got done building a new Ryzen system, 1700. Have the CPU running at 3.9, and memory at 3600.
I can get the CPU to 4.0, but then for some reason the memory downclocks.
EDIT: set the memory to 3466 MHz, CPU at 4.0, temps do not exceed 63 C in prime95, or Handbrake.
I can get the CPU to 4.0, but then for some reason the memory downclocks.
EDIT: set the memory to 3466 MHz, CPU at 4.0, temps do not exceed 63 C in prime95, or Handbrake.
Last edited:
Ryzen Threadripper was secretly developed by engineers in their spare time without the company's knowledge and they were so impressed. Now I know why there is a difference between the AMD CPU side and AMD GPU, it's like there are 2 AMDs.
https://www.computing.co.uk/ctg/new...ped-threadripper-cpu-as-a-skunk-works-project
https://www.computing.co.uk/ctg/new...ped-threadripper-cpu-as-a-skunk-works-project
That sounds like Assassin's Creed which was supposed to be a Prince of Persia but was secretly turned into the game we know now. ^^
Management should trust some of their people more.
Actually no, it doesn't. We don't know how many possible "skunkworks" ideas there has been on the GPU front, not before one becomes huge success, they won't tell about them without that part
Eyefinity comes to mind on GPU side.
Maybe there had been no plan for dummy cores.
Doesn't 16core EPYC still have 4 Zeppelin dies?
The latter. There was a free version of the (same, entire) article I read it somewhere, but now cant find it anymore.
Here is the story w/o pay-register wall : https://www.forbes.com/sites/antony...d-the-processor-that-beat-intel/#16465206230c
Edit : please anyone delete my post above? Thanks
Edit : please anyone delete my post above? Thanks
Yes. All Epycs have 8 memory channels and 128 PCIe lines (some reserved for chipset tho.)
I was pretty sure that was the case. That's why I didn't understand the connection between Epyc and 2-die Threadripper.
The biggest different is the marketing department, recently AMD radeon twitter account said there were 570 on stock and on "great price" of 280 dollars....Even I had to comment asking what was wrong with them.
The architectural features that allow Ryzen to connect four dies allowed them to link two dies with comparatively little effort. While they were at it, they reused elements like the general socket format from EPYC, which likely explains why Threadripper inherited the mechanical requirements of having two placeholder dies.
It would have been harder to get preliminary work as far as it did if the overall architecture needed changes and real investment, made the business case harder once presented, and it would have taken longer to roll out. In corporate terms, it was more spontaneously put together than EPYC and Ryzen because Threadripper naturally falls out of the system's capabilities.
Yes also the timeframe given to show the project that were originally planned for 2018 and was moved a year to make the 2017 launch with in my opinion was the real game changer. Now that TR exists and its selling as good as it can be we can be sure of more refine design in the next generation, probably moving to a unique platform to make it easier and even cheaper to work and manufacture.
Its really rare to me that AMD didn't plan TR from the beginning since they were working on Epyc, TR just look like a natural path to me. Im exited to see how the next gen will look.
Similar threads
