AMD Zen Chip -

[Gnomatic]

I am om 50meg now. Ping unusually slow, normally 7ms.

http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/6136817713

That's about what I was getting until I received a little bump recently. So your cable ISP is probably running on DOCSIS 3.0.

Comcast is starting to roll out DOCSIS 3.1 in some markets here in the US, offering 1Gb/s download but only 35Mb/s. Not as good as a symmetrical fiber line, but I'd take it in a heartbeat.

https://arstechnica.com/business/2016/0 ... -contract/

[Gnomatic]

thats what i want - they offer it here but its another company and its not wired where i live - down the block is - RCN gives not idea when of if that will ever take place - we need more Fiber companies here - enough of this slow speeds - its time we at least catch up to third world countries with this internet -
i think in Japan - 100Mb is free - not sure i remember reading something like that a while back -

Yeah, South Korea, Japan, they've been WAYYY ahead of the US for years in internet speeds.

Here's one Brit's take on the state of the internet in the United States.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpbOEoRrHyU

[steves1977uk]

I wouldn't mind this speed... http://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/20 ... -roll.html

Steve

[steves1977uk]

Here's my speedtest on VDSL2...



Steve

[Gnomatic]

I wouldn't mind this speed... http://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/20 ... -roll.html

Steve

Wow, that would be pretty freaking' sweet! 10Gb/s or 1250MB/s, that's faster than a PC's SATA III interface! So in order for a single PC to saturate that line it'd need an NVMe SSD or a RAID array and a 10G NIC.

[Gnomatic]

Here's my speedtest on VDSL2...



Steve

3X better upload than me, nice.

[Burgerman]

Right now, trying to warm up my PC.

Ripping a blueray movie from my desktop to a compressed avi and sterio (no surround) at 1080 and 2kg to fit on a disk with another movie for my carer. Disks... What are they? Extinct now. (Called Lucy. You should watch it its worth the effort!)

And it was using about 15% cpu, one thread... Almost. Temp? No change. Room.
So I opened 5 winzips, and zipped up a bunch of 70gb backup files for nothing at once just to work it hard. 52 percent usage... And 44 degrees. Fan still turning at a speed you can count but not hear.

So also Winrar. I am now compressing some movies with winrar on max everything into fat 32 sized chunks. CPU not fully utilised, and not hot either.

Tell me again why I need more than 4 cores/8 threads/5ghz?

I am also editing some huge nikon d810 raw files at the same time and watching a copy of that movie on monitor 2. CPU? Doesn't care or notice. Its wildly more than anyone needs unless you go out of your way to torture it. Even then I am running out of ideas...

[Gnomatic]

Tell me again why I need more than 4 cores/8 threads/5ghz?

*You* probably don't.

What programs were you using to rip the disk? And what program did you use to shrink the rip to a smaller file size? I can tell one of them was not Hangbreak, cause that would have pegged your CPU.

[expresso]

your fine - - you dont need anything more - doing what you do - more than enough - use Handbrake to convert your video files etc, - that uses your cores %100 or very close to it - even DVDFAB - convert files - uses your Cores %100

if you had more more - it would use more cores - - does it really matter to you - would it make a big difference - maybe - maybe not - running on 5ghz - is nice - cant deny that - the higher clocks is keeping it ahead of the game -

and AMD is using more cores to stay in the game because of lower clock speeds - i wonder what it would have been if AMD used 4 cores only also and running at 5ghz like intel - that would be a good test to compare - Apples to Apples or close enough at least -

they should do a test - using handbrake - for both AMD chip and intel - but theres also the speed difference - how do we know whats making the most difference - speed maybe having the edge - vs more cores for most things - i dont follow this tech stuff much - i read something about Direct 12x or something like that - that will make use of the extra cores - when that happens - things can change

giving the reviews and your results - for me home use etc, i should be more than fine with intel at 5ghz - for my use - i am fine now with my 3770K - anything would be an improvement to me on my next setup -

[Burgerman]

I downloaded the newest version of that the other day. But while it says uses the CPU to 100% it doesn't really... It depends how you monitor it. The CPU isn't fed data fast enough to fully use it. So many of its cycles are not doing anything and some cores clock down to lower than 5ghz. I was experimenting the other day. it doesn't get the fans going. But 4 instances of prime does for eg should you wish to do that for any reason...

It actually can get the CPU to 100%, although not really working that hard, but only if trans coding from one M.2 NVMe to another m.2 NMMe disk. Fortunately I have 2... But you do rather need to go out of your way to make use of the full 8 threads to 100%. So I doubt that more cores will make much difference. Certainly not day to day. And probably not doing even this with a fast clocked CPU. The limit is now mem bandwidth and or disk performance. To really use the CPU to 100 percent at this time means small calculations that fit inside the CPU cache. And enough data throughput to make all cores run at 5gb. Because they don't much of the time even though thats what windows reports.

[Gnomatic]

This test was run using a single standard SATA SSD.



While Handbreak is not infinitely threaded and really can't make use of 10 core/20 threads, it still will take advantage of a CPU with more cores than 7700K has to offer, even a 7000K overclocked in the 5GHz range

[Burgerman]

According to that a 5.1ghz 7700k as I am running, is around 15% slower than a 1k pound chip, doing this one thing, and in nearly every other real world benchmark the 7700k murders it. And for desktop use, and games too. So overall, its not even a close match. And the AMD one is slower by a fair bit. Even the 1800x is not a match for intels multi core workstation/server chip.

So for 99 percent of the time a fast 4 core 8 thread chip is way faster. Disk speed, and memory is a factor too. So unless you run a big complex server setup, its worse generally. Other than you save 1 minute out of 15 with handbrake alone? How much of a working week do you spend doing that?

[expresso]

i am actually ripping all my DVDs i have which are over a thousand easy - got tired of keeping them in the closet - i rip them - then use handbrake to convert them to MKV and DVDFAB to merge it and make one file that works - giving away all my Disks - need room in my closet same with Blu ray disks - some i may keep depends on the movie -

this will take me a year

DVDFAB can do both - convert and merge - but many times i find it has issues with certain files - which handbrake dosnt - so am i forced to do it this way alot of the times

[Burgerman]

Well don't watch it rip/transcode, line them up, leave it to batch process while you eat/sleep/go out for the day. As the extra few percent shaved off with more cores wont make any real difference. You still get to watch.

[Gnomatic]

According to that a 5.1ghz 7700k as I am running, is around 15% slower than a 1k pound chip, doing this one thing, and in nearly every other real world benchmark the 7700k murders it. And for desktop use, and games too. So overall, its not even a close match. And the AMD one is slower by a fair bit. Even the 1800x is not a match for intels multi core workstation/server chip.

So for 99 percent of the time a fast 4 core 8 thread chip is way faster. Disk speed, and memory is a factor too. So unless you run a big complex server setup, its worse generally. Other than you save 1 minute out of 15 with handbrake alone? How much of a working week do you spend doing that?

As I said, a single instance of Handbreak cannot make use of 10C/20T, yet a 6950x still beats a much higher clocked and newer architecture 7700K.

And, in terms of performance per watt AND performance per dollar, Ryzen 1800X crushes Intel's Broadwell-E 6 and 8 core processors in workstation apps that take advantage of more cores than 4, while being more that sufficient for gaming..

[Burgerman]

Oh there I agree. But for home use that rizen (any) still doesn't match the 7700k for desktop/game/most uses at an extra 280 dollars for the 1800x.

The real issue here isn't that the AMD Rizen is particularly good, its not. But that Intel are charging 1k plus for any chip with 4 cores plus. Its way overpriced for its performance level. For most users, more than 4 cores brings ever diminishing returns. And bumping up speed helps as much. Their own 300 dollar 7700k cheapie chip out performs their 1k plus chip for almost all purposes/uses by a quite large margin. And the 1k plus one only beats it in heavily multithreaded aps and benchmarks.

For eg, for my home use, I would see no actual benefit from a 10 core chip! And its slower so in fact performance would be worse most of the time. Of course most of this is irrelevant as all these CPUs are way better than we need.

[Gnomatic]

You are right, all are very powerful chips, more than an average user needs. Nothing wrong with a 7700k.

Things are going to get interesting though. Intel is getting ready to update their 6, 8, and 10 core chips to a more current architecture. So that will eat into AMD's value proposition somewhat. However, around the time, it is widely expected AMD will release a 16C/32T Ryzen chip for $1,000.

And, on Aprill 11th, AMD will launch its Ryzen 5 line. One of the Ryzen 5's will be a 4C/8T chip for $169.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/11202/amd ... april-11th

[Burgerman]

AMD will release a 16C/32T Ryzen chip for $1,000.

But ever increasing cores give ever decreasing gains. Unless on a specifically written bit of software. So it wont be much benefit.

[Gnomatic]

[quote="Burgerman"]

But in those apps that do, it's almost certainly going to outperform Intel's upcoming chips at that price point. Anyone looking to buy Intel's 8 core chip is likely using those types of workstation apps. And it stands to reason, to that audience, a 16C/32T Ryzen for the same price might be very appealing.

[expresso]

Well don't watch it rip/transcode, line them up, leave it to batch process while you eat/sleep/go out for the day. As the extra few percent shaved off with more cores wont make any real difference. You still get to watch.

i ran into alot of issues - so i do one at a time to make sure - my panasonic player if flaky what will work off the USB drive - MKV works BUT - depends what program does the converting - i dont know why - ALL i know if i use DVDFAB MKV - that seems to work 99% of the times -

but alot of times - DVD FAB hangs up on certain files - so i used handbrake for some - then ran them on DVDFAB to merge them etc, - but now i am seeing the picture being changed during this conversion - Picture Size etc, -

now i am using AVC - which seems to work fine and merges them also - BUT again that end file MKV from using AVC - dosnt show up on my player - but if i run that same file thru DVDFAB - it works after -

too much to figure out why - so since its too cold to ride - i sit on my desk - have my tea and crackers - doing this - browsing - etc, - watching TV same time or some pandora - and wait for warmer days

No rush to get this done - and it if becomes a problem for real - i just wont do it - give away the disks as they are and move on - we can always stream them anyway - i done this in the past for my father with dvds - to watch etc, -
now i got him to use the USB stick also and do it for him also this way - his player panasonic also and finicky which formats it plays like mines etc,

[Burgerman]

Instead, what would be better is board that can take 4 of the 7700k CPU chips...
All that silly speed, on 16 cores/32 threads, and the same total cost.

Had a dual AMD board back in the day when we had single CPU processors. Worked very well. On some apps. Again on most others no gain.

[Gnomatic]

Instead, what would be better is board that can take 4 of the 7700k CPU chips...

Doesn't exist. The closest thing to a 7700k would be would be Skylake based Xeon E3-1270 v5. And the 1 in the 1270 means Intel only supports one socket per motherboard supporting chipset.

[Burgerman]

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Explore/Fastest/12

[Gnomatic]

That's all fine and good the site itself is ranking those CPU's with games and Average Joe PC users in mind.

There is a place for more cores/threads in the CPU market. If you run apps that are heavily threaded, this is what you want. If you're just an average Joe or a gamer, that's not as important as clock speed.

[Burgerman]

http://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/3181126
Mine, 300 pounds cheaper than Ryzen

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/AMD-Ryzen- ... ating/3916
The 1800x Ryzen. Marks here averaged for gaming, desktop and for heavy multi-threaded workstation as percentage over many builds.

Its not a small difference.

[Burgerman]

And compared by price...
http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/AM ... 3917vs3647

You have to compare to 1700.

[Gnomatic]

Just depends on the task or app you are using. If you are a gamer, or just an average user, the 7700K is a better performer and better value than the 1800X. But that's not really an apples to apples comparison.

Compared to the 6900K and 6950X, the 1800X is in some cases a better performer and in all cases a better value, while being more efficient. As I've said many times, just depends if the app you're using or task you're performing can take advantage of the extra cores/threads. As I mentioned before, if you were to import a 3D .stl file into Solidworks, ever core will be slammed. SW essentially has to "redraw" the object in its own format. Your 4, 6, or 8 core CPU will be busy for hours. Hell, even if you had one of AMD's upcoming 32 core 64 thread Zen-based server chips(Naples), you'd still slam all the cores doing that.

[Burgerman]

So if you do that, go to the pub, see what it did later? Everything else is faster with a 7700k?

[Gnomatic]

Biggest advantage of 7700K: More time at the pub!

[Burgerman]

Thats a good thing though right?



OK in the last benchmark I tested it, (CPU-Z) it also stuffs everything...

It stuffs everything by miles on single, 2, 3, 4, or 5 , and even 6 thread stuff.

The only time it loses is when we choose 8 threads, and compare it to a 10 core 20 thread intel $$$$ cpu! And AMDs Ryzen isnt even in it.

Here. (And even then on this rather unusual special task/benchmark not by much! I would still be leaving it to go while in the pub.) Everything else it just murders it.