Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 33 to 39 of 39

Thread: AMD Ryzen 9 4950X claimed to be a 4.8GHz boost 16C/32T CPU

  1. #33
    root Member DanceswithUnix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    In the middle of a core dump
    Posts
    12,713
    Thanks
    758
    Thanked
    1,509 times in 1,273 posts
    • DanceswithUnix's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus X470-PRO
      • CPU:
      • 5900X
      • Memory:
      • 32GB 3200MHz ECC
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Linux, 2TB Games (Win 10)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Asus Strix RX Vega 56
      • PSU:
      • 650W Corsair TX
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Fedora 36 + Win 10 Pro 64 (yuk)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Benq XL2730Z 1440p + Iiyama 27" 1440p
      • Internet:
      • Zen 80Mb/20Mb VDSL

    Re: AMD Ryzen 9 4950X claimed to be a 4.8GHz boost 16C/32T CPU

    Quote Originally Posted by watercooled View Post
    I wonder how much games make use of CPU dispatchers, to pick the most optimal binary for different CPUs? Even if it is just compiler flags, it could make a substantial difference in some games. I'm assuming they must already to it to some degree to allow for different extension compatibility.
    That isn't hard to code, but I imagine the test matrix would explode. I think at best you get a "modern, optimal" version with AVX etc enabled and a compatible version that just uses basic SSE.

    At least with modern games using 64 bit you don't have to go back to early SSE or (shudder) 8087 code, you know all 64 bit CPUs have a half decent feature set.

    My daughter's favourite paint package went about a magnitude faster going from Phenom II to the X8350. I shudder to think what that was falling back to when it didn't find the AVX support it wanted.

  2. #34
    Moosing about! CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Not here
    Posts
    31,917
    Thanks
    3,859
    Thanked
    5,165 times in 3,977 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 Ryzen 9 4950X claimed to be a 4.8GHz boost 16C/32T CPU

    Quote Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix View Post
    That isn't hard to code, but I imagine the test matrix would explode. I think at best you get a "modern, optimal" version with AVX etc enabled and a compatible version that just uses basic SSE.

    At least with modern games using 64 bit you don't have to go back to early SSE or (shudder) 8087 code, you know all 64 bit CPUs have a half decent feature set.

    My daughter's favourite paint package went about a magnitude faster going from Phenom II to the X8350. I shudder to think what that was falling back to when it didn't find the AVX support it wanted.
    Skyrim used X87 instructions when it first came out!

  3. #35
    root Member DanceswithUnix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    In the middle of a core dump
    Posts
    12,713
    Thanks
    758
    Thanked
    1,509 times in 1,273 posts
    • DanceswithUnix's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus X470-PRO
      • CPU:
      • 5900X
      • Memory:
      • 32GB 3200MHz ECC
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Linux, 2TB Games (Win 10)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Asus Strix RX Vega 56
      • PSU:
      • 650W Corsair TX
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Fedora 36 + Win 10 Pro 64 (yuk)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Benq XL2730Z 1440p + Iiyama 27" 1440p
      • Internet:
      • Zen 80Mb/20Mb VDSL

    Re: AMD Ryzen 9 4950X claimed to be a 4.8GHz boost 16C/32T CPU

    Quote Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH View Post
    Skyrim used X87 instructions when it first came out!
    I guess SSE had only been out for 12 years at that point, perhaps they really wanted to be compatible with those Pentium 166 owners.

  4. #36
    Moosing about! CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Not here
    Posts
    31,917
    Thanks
    3,859
    Thanked
    5,165 times in 3,977 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 Ryzen 9 4950X claimed to be a 4.8GHz boost 16C/32T CPU

    Quote Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix View Post
    I guess SSE had only been out for 12 years at that point, perhaps they really wanted to be compatible with those Pentium 166 owners.
    It makes you wonder whether some companies actually bother to test their games before launch?

  5. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    West Sussex
    Posts
    1,705
    Thanks
    190
    Thanked
    237 times in 218 posts
    • kompukare's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus P8Z77-V LX
      • CPU:
      • Intel i5-3570K
      • Memory:
      • 4 x 8GB DDR3
      • Storage:
      • Samsung 850 EVo 500GB | Corsair MP510 960GB | 2 x WD 4TB spinners
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Sappihre R7 260X 1GB (sic)
      • PSU:
      • Antec 650 Gold TruePower (Seasonic)
      • Case:
      • Aerocool DS 200 (silenced, 53.6 litres)l)
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10-64
      • Monitor(s):
      • 2 x ViewSonic 27" 1440p

    Re: AMD Ryzen 9 4950X claimed to be a 4.8GHz boost 16C/32T CPU

    Quote Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH View Post
    It makes you wonder whether some companies actually bother to test their games before launch?
    Certainly not Bethesda!
    As someone who played Dagggerfall with the infamous fall through the floor bug, I still remember when they tried to make a FSP with engine (think it was some Terminator thing) and the blurb called it a ground breaking engine... It certainly was but not in the way they meant!

    Everything since then has been released in half-finished state but because of the editor, the fan base polished it afterwards. Lesson: don't buy Bethesda software until the unofficial bug fix patch has been done, the Script Enhancer has been done, etc. So about 1 year after release?

  6. #38
    root Member DanceswithUnix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    In the middle of a core dump
    Posts
    12,713
    Thanks
    758
    Thanked
    1,509 times in 1,273 posts
    • DanceswithUnix's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus X470-PRO
      • CPU:
      • 5900X
      • Memory:
      • 32GB 3200MHz ECC
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Linux, 2TB Games (Win 10)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Asus Strix RX Vega 56
      • PSU:
      • 650W Corsair TX
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Fedora 36 + Win 10 Pro 64 (yuk)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Benq XL2730Z 1440p + Iiyama 27" 1440p
      • Internet:
      • Zen 80Mb/20Mb VDSL

    Re: AMD Ryzen 9 4950X claimed to be a 4.8GHz boost 16C/32T CPU

    Quote Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH View Post
    It makes you wonder whether some companies actually bother to test their games before launch?
    I bothered to look up the minimum requirements of the game, and it says dual core minimum and quad core recommended. That in theory allows for a Pentium-D, though I believe they were really meaning a Core-2 duo.

    Those all had SSE available, so I can't square that with the horrors of using x87 code.

  7. #39
    Banhammer in peace PeterB kalniel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    30,957
    Thanks
    1,849
    Thanked
    3,359 times in 2,700 posts
    • kalniel's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Ultra
      • CPU:
      • Intel i9 9900k
      • Memory:
      • 32GB DDR4 3200 CL16
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Samsung 970Evo+ NVMe
      • Graphics card(s):
      • nVidia GTX 1060 6GB
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic 600W
      • Case:
      • Cooler Master HAF 912
      • Operating System:
      • Win 10 Pro x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell S2721DGF
      • Internet:
      • rubbish

    Re: AMD Ryzen 9 4950X claimed to be a 4.8GHz boost 16C/32T CPU

    Skynet was great! Fantastic multiplayer arenas, well ahead of its time!

    As for the engine in TES games.. well it was/is the old NetImmerse which they kept upgrading and upgrading.

    Bugs though - they MASSIVELY got better at it. Games that size/scope are going to have loads, but there was a noticeable jump in stability from Oblivion onwards where you could tell they had much better automated testing - even Morrowind was a good step in stability from previous games.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 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
  •