Page 79 of 119 FirstFirst ... 2939495969767778798081828999109 ... LastLast
Results 1,249 to 1,264 of 1892

Thread: AMD - Zen chitchat

  1. #1249
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    3,087
    Thanks
    430
    Thanked
    389 times in 267 posts

    Re: AMD - Zen chitchat

    Quote Originally Posted by watercooled View Post
    As I understand it, AMD's results are valid (they don't appear to be affected by this HPET implementation 'bug'). Also, other sites should be unaffected as this is down to the way Anandtech test.
    Yes AMD results are valid AFAICT.

    I'm not even sure it's a bug TBH as despite them saying some overclocking/benchmark programs force HPET on it seems to be more a snafu of Anandtech's own making.

    Maybe I'm being to harsh on Anandtech and forcing Windows to rely on a single timer is a common thing for overclocking/benchmark programs to do but IMO I'd consider that to be a bad practice, it's not the usage of HPET that i take issue with it's the forcing of Windows to only use a single timer.

  2. #1250
    Senior Member watercooled's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    11,165
    Thanks
    1,518
    Thanked
    975 times in 835 posts

    Re: AMD - Zen chitchat

    I say 'bug' in inverted commas, but it does seem like Intel's implementation causes problems that don't happen on the AMD platform; the difference in Intel goes up to 76%.

  3. #1251
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    3,087
    Thanks
    430
    Thanked
    389 times in 267 posts

    Re: AMD - Zen chitchat

    Apologies i missed the inverted commas.

    TBH i wouldn't consider it a hardware related 'bug' as IIRC even in the days of using the RTC clock there were additional checks done on timings, besides if it is a 'bug' with Intel's implementation it's unlikely to be a purposeful bug as the difference results in a 76% lower result in some cases, i.e when using more than one source for timings their results increase, at least i think that was the conclusion I'm in a bit of a rush so haven't dbl checked.

  4. #1252
    Not a good person scaryjim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    15,168
    Thanks
    1,225
    Thanked
    2,280 times in 1,866 posts
    • scaryjim's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Dell Inspiron
      • CPU:
      • Core i5 8250U
      • Memory:
      • 1x 8GB DDR4 2400
      • Storage:
      • 128GB M.2 SSD + 1TB HDD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Radeon R5 230
      • PSU:
      • Battery/Dell brick
      • Case:
      • Dell Inspiron 5570
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • 15" 1080p laptop panel

    Re: AMD - Zen chitchat

    Quote Originally Posted by Corky34 View Post
    ... Maybe I'm being to harsh on Anandtech and forcing Windows to rely on a single timer is a common thing for overclocking/benchmark programs to do ...
    3DMark not only requires use of HPET for "valid" results, but refuses to run in default configuration if HPET isn't available: you specifically have to tell it not to use HPET if you can't enable it (my new laptop has no option to enable HPET, for example).
    Last edited by scaryjim; 25-04-2018 at 07:36 PM.

  5. #1253
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    3,087
    Thanks
    430
    Thanked
    389 times in 267 posts

    Re: AMD - Zen chitchat

    I think there maybe some confusion, enabling HPET in the BIOS only enables/exposes an additional timing mechanism for software to use, setting HPET in the BCD file for Windows tells it, and by extension any software running on it, to only use the HPET timer, 3Dmark requiring it to be enabled in the BIOS for valid results is understandable, setting Windows to use only HPET for its timing is what would be wrong.

  6. #1254
    Not a good person scaryjim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    15,168
    Thanks
    1,225
    Thanked
    2,280 times in 1,866 posts
    • scaryjim's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Dell Inspiron
      • CPU:
      • Core i5 8250U
      • Memory:
      • 1x 8GB DDR4 2400
      • Storage:
      • 128GB M.2 SSD + 1TB HDD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Radeon R5 230
      • PSU:
      • Battery/Dell brick
      • Case:
      • Dell Inspiron 5570
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • 15" 1080p laptop panel

    Re: AMD - Zen chitchat

    Quote Originally Posted by Corky34 View Post
    ... 3Dmark requiring it to be enabled in the BIOS for valid results is understandable, setting Windows to use only HPET for its timing is what would be wrong.
    Yeah, I was just pointing out a very common piece of benchmarking software that pushes you onto HPET whenever possible. It's indicative of a general expectation of/reliance on HPET in benchmarking, and I can totally understand why a reviewer whose entire job is benchmarking CPUs would prefer to choose their own timers and would use the most accurate one available. It's a perfectly understandable mindset, and it's not something you'd expect to have an incidental side-effect of tanking game performance by over 40% in some cases.

    The additional performance hit Intel are seeing here is basically exactly what you'd expect from an IO intensive task following the application of meltdown patches. It's a bit edge case, and I think it's right that AT are changing the benchmarking suite this year to use the default enabled, not forced HPET settings now they've discovered that forcing it causes anomalous results on Intel CPUs. OTOH, I also think the decision to force HPET in the first place was valid, reasonable, and sound. And it has highlighted an issue that Intel have either not known about or have chosen not to disclose. I'm disinclined to lay any blame on AT for this one.

  7. #1255
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    3,087
    Thanks
    430
    Thanked
    389 times in 267 posts

    Re: AMD - Zen chitchat

    I'm not a reviewer and i don't run (m)any benchmarks so can't pretend to know the mindset of someone whose job it is to do that, it would drive me nuts TBH.

    What i was trying to say is that Windows and AFAIK all software has typically never relied on just a single timer, normally to get an accurate measurement of time you use two or preferably more timing sources and constantly run checks against the two with highest resolutions, back in the day IIRC that was the RTC and the PCI clock generator.

    I understand what you're saying about testers wanting to control all the variables and be as accurate as possible, and I'd personally put this down to one of those things, blaming anyone for it is perhaps a bit strong but it was interesting to read what caused it and reassuring that there are testers who go to such lengths, i think that speaks volumes about Andantech's CPU guy.

    *What i find most interesting is the unanswered questions, if the HPET timer does throw a wobbly on Intel systems why hasn't it been picked up in other OS' like Linux, is it caused by Windows like what we saw (iirc) when Ryzen system came out of sleep and people thought they could OC them more but it ended up being a timing issue, if Windows has been automatically discounting the HPET timing as unreliable in some situations how come its gone undiscovered since the days of Windows 8.

    *I'm not expecting answers BTW it's just i love a good detective story that involves what went wrong or how something works in computers.

  8. #1256
    Moosekateer CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Not here
    Posts
    29,666
    Thanks
    3,341
    Thanked
    4,669 times in 3,603 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: AMD - Zen chitchat

    6C/12T Ryzen 1 and 2 compared with 6C/12T CFL at the same clockspeed:

    https://www.techspot.com/article/161...-core-8th-gen/

    Looking at the application benchmarks there is not much in it,so gaming must be being affected by lack of optimisations plus things like latency.


    Those despicable Elk,stealing the pond weed!

  9. #1257
    root Member DanceswithUnix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    In the middle of a core dump
    Posts
    10,933
    Thanks
    582
    Thanked
    1,174 times in 1,000 posts
    • DanceswithUnix's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus X470-PRO
      • CPU:
      • 3700X
      • Memory:
      • 16GB 3200MHz
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Linux, 1TB Games (Win 10)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Asus Strix RX Vega 56
      • PSU:
      • 650W Corsair TX
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Fedora 30 + Win 10 Pro 64 (yuk)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Benq XL2730Z 1440p + Samsung 2343BW 2048x1152
      • Internet:
      • Zen 80Mb/20Mb VDSL

    Re: AMD - Zen chitchat

    Quote Originally Posted by Corky34 View Post
    What i was trying to say is that Windows and AFAIK all software has typically never relied on just a single timer, normally to get an accurate measurement of time you use two or preferably more timing sources and constantly run checks against the two with highest resolutions, back in the day IIRC that was the RTC and the PCI clock generator.
    On the PC you traditionally only had the RTC chip to work with, and that is really low precision. For short timings, these days you have the CPU timing registers.

    TBH I would have thought the best way to get timings would be to run a second PC and spit a packet across the network to declare the start and end of test. There would be a network delay but that would be just a few milliseconds and the same for start and end so should cancel out. That would allow something like a Raspberry Pi running a network time client (so high accuracy) to record timings without having to worry about core migrations, load level, missed interrupts and core parking that make this hard on modern PCs.

    I did have a quick play at benchmarking when I was unemployed so had some spare time a year ago, it didn't drive me nuts but was more work than I fancied for a hobby. The start of the site is still up if you want a laugh, www.linuxbench.com But hey, I was playing with Linux so I could script my benchmarks

  10. #1258
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    3,087
    Thanks
    430
    Thanked
    389 times in 267 posts

    Re: AMD - Zen chitchat

    Quote Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix View Post
    On the PC you traditionally only had the RTC chip to work with, and that is really low precision. For short timings, these days you have the CPU timing registers.
    I could have sworn i remember something about not being allowed to use IRQ 0 for configuring the old sound blaster 16 in DOS because it was used for timing system events, maybe i need to take one of those tests for senility.

    EDIT: A look at Ryzen 2's voltage curves.

    Last edited by Corky34; 26-04-2018 at 12:51 PM.

  11. #1259
    Senior Member watercooled's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    11,165
    Thanks
    1,518
    Thanked
    975 times in 835 posts

    Re: AMD - Zen chitchat

    CD at Semiaccurate spoke about Intel's 10nm still having problems a while back. Just seen this announced: https://www.anandtech.com/show/12693...m-cpus-to-2019

  12. #1260
    Moosekateer CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Not here
    Posts
    29,666
    Thanks
    3,341
    Thanked
    4,669 times in 3,603 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: AMD - Zen chitchat

    Quote Originally Posted by watercooled View Post
    CD at Semiaccurate spoke about Intel's 10nm still having problems a while back. Just seen this announced: https://www.anandtech.com/show/12693...m-cpus-to-2019
    I wonder if AMD can get their performance CPUs to 7NM before Intel can get to 10NN?? Let's hope GF actually manages to deliver on their promises!


    Those despicable Elk,stealing the pond weed!

  13. #1261
    Moosekateer CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Not here
    Posts
    29,666
    Thanks
    3,341
    Thanked
    4,669 times in 3,603 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: AMD - Zen chitchat

    That is some good increases over Ryzen MK1 with games like PUBG,Fortnite and WoW:

    https://www.computerbase.de/2018-04/...raft-1920-1080


    Those despicable Elk,stealing the pond weed!

  14. #1262
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    3,087
    Thanks
    430
    Thanked
    389 times in 267 posts

    Re: AMD - Zen chitchat

    Interesting deep dive into PB2 on [H]ardOCP...
    Wraith Prism aside, Precision Boost 2 is the real deal. I have spent the last week trying to shoot holes in it, and those holes are just not there. AMD has simply over-delivered when it comes to Precision Boost 2. I also do not recall ever giving a CPU "feature" an award in the last 20 years, but that is exactly what we are going to do today. Precision Boost 2? Color me impressed. AMD just won the Great Turbo War of 2018.

  15. Received thanks from:

    kalniel (01-05-2018)

  16. #1263
    Moosekateer CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Not here
    Posts
    29,666
    Thanks
    3,341
    Thanked
    4,669 times in 3,603 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: AMD - Zen chitchat

    The B450 chipset will be out in July and the new Z490 in June:

    https://www.tomshardware.com/news/bl...pus,37001.html
    https://www.anandtech.com/show/12711..._medium=social

    Edit!!

    AT test the Acer Swift 3 with a Ryzen 7 2700U:

    https://www.anandtech.com/show/12709...n-meets-laptop

    They think part of the reason the Intel laptops have better battery life is down to the use of DDR4 in the AMD laptops and LPDDR3 in the Intel ones.
    Last edited by CAT-THE-FIFTH; 03-05-2018 at 10:26 PM.


    Those despicable Elk,stealing the pond weed!

  17. #1264
    Oh Crumbs.... Biscuit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    N. Yorkshire
    Posts
    11,192
    Thanks
    1,392
    Thanked
    1,091 times in 833 posts
    • Biscuit's system
      • Motherboard:
      • MSI B450M Mortar
      • CPU:
      • AMD 2700X (Be Quiet! Dark Rock 3)
      • Memory:
      • 16GB Patriot Viper 2 @ 3466MHz
      • Storage:
      • 500GB WD Black
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Sapphire R9 290X Vapor-X
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic Focus Gold 750W
      • Case:
      • Lian Li PC-V359
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 x64
      • Internet:
      • BT Infinity 80/20

    Re: AMD - Zen chitchat

    Be interesting to find out what Z490 actually is in comparison to X470

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •