Discussion AMD Ryzen MegaThread! FAQ and Resources

[jdwii]

They may be a little gunshy about that kind of thing now. Half the threads about fx 9590's here come down to mobo issues. Either boards that don't officially support it but sorta work anyway, or boards that are supposed to support it and burn out their power delivery systems. It shouldn't be the same situation given the power usage disparity will be much less, or even negative, but there isn't a lot of information about the 12nm LP node as of yet.

Juanrga and Jdwii said they seen on other forums that the talk is lower operating voltage, which they assume ~3-400MHz boost to frequency. But they are still seeing limitation with a frequency wall 4.1GHz.

Those aren't my words.

I take it back than. What were you saying?

Those are my words and long time overclocker for Amd CHEW who goes back to the hammer days of Amd.

 

[8350rocks]

If they require new MoBos I'll flip a table D:!

Cheers!

New MB will not necessarily be required...just feature update.

EDIT: There is some speculation that the 400 series boards may enable NVMe RAID on Ryzen2, but I would suspect that may be capable with some sort of adapter on 300 series boards. (***THIS IS CURRENTLY RUMOR MILL SPECULATION, DO NOT TAKE THIS AS A CERTAINTY***)

 

[8350rocks]

They may be a little gunshy about that kind of thing now. Half the threads about fx 9590's here come down to mobo issues. Either boards that don't officially support it but sorta work anyway, or boards that are supposed to support it and burn out their power delivery systems. It shouldn't be the same situation given the power usage disparity will be much less, or even negative, but there isn't a lot of information about the 12nm LP node as of yet.

The problem there is people buy a 970 board with cheap VRMs and do not get the a beefy enough board.

I have been running a 9590 on a 990FX UD3 for 4 years now, and I have never had power delivery issues, or voltage problems.

 

[-Fran-]

Like I said... Somewhere (seems like not here, lol)... I think that as long as the new chipset brings new bells and whistles you can live without and still use Zen (on whatever flavor) on previous boards, it's all fine.

Now, power delivery is indeed a concern and most probably they would block lower end models from supporting newer CPUs (I hope not, it would still suck) if it changes too much. I would still hate it. And, just to be perfectly clear, it would suck donkey marbles.

Cheers!

 

[TMTOWTSAC]

They may be a little gunshy about that kind of thing now. Half the threads about fx 9590's here come down to mobo issues. Either boards that don't officially support it but sorta work anyway, or boards that are supposed to support it and burn out their power delivery systems. It shouldn't be the same situation given the power usage disparity will be much less, or even negative, but there isn't a lot of information about the 12nm LP node as of yet.

The problem there is people buy a 970 board with cheap VRMs and do not get the a beefy enough board.

I have been running a 9590 on a 990FX UD3 for 4 years now, and I have never had power delivery issues, or voltage problems.

Well, the point I was raising was just because the socket was the same, it didn't mean everything was interchangeable. In particular some of the 990fx boards that required a bios update for the 9590 never really worked well. One from Gigabyte in particular springs to mind, as it lacked sufficient VRM cooling in the absence of an air cooled CPU. It only takes a few people experiencing problems before the product reputation suffers. The 9590 was as much a symbol of AMD's shortcomings as the P4 was for Intel. It wouldn't surprise me if AMD wanted to make absolutely certain of compatibility with a new board design rather than risk that kind of headache again.

 

[jdwii]

Like I said... Somewhere (seems like not here, lol)... I think that as long as the new chipset brings new bells and whistles you can live without and still use Zen (on whatever flavor) on previous boards, it's all fine.

Now, power delivery is indeed a concern and most probably they would block lower end models from supporting newer CPUs (I hope not, it would still suck) if it changes too much. I would still hate it. And, just to be perfectly clear, it would suck donkey marbles.

Cheers!

I really hope Amd never makes a CPU on AM4 with over 125 watt TDP i don't think they will even make a CPU over 95 watts. Seems like Amd is trying to stay at 95 watts or lower with Zen actually they are supposed to make more efficient models of Zen next year.

 

[jdwii]

They may be a little gunshy about that kind of thing now. Half the threads about fx 9590's here come down to mobo issues. Either boards that don't officially support it but sorta work anyway, or boards that are supposed to support it and burn out their power delivery systems. It shouldn't be the same situation given the power usage disparity will be much less, or even negative, but there isn't a lot of information about the 12nm LP node as of yet.

The problem there is people buy a 970 board with cheap VRMs and do not get the a beefy enough board.

I have been running a 9590 on a 990FX UD3 for 4 years now, and I have never had power delivery issues, or voltage problems.

Well, the point I was raising was just because the socket was the same, it didn't mean everything was interchangeable. In particular some of the 990fx boards that required a bios update for the 9590 never really worked well. One from Gigabyte in particular springs to mind, as it lacked sufficient VRM cooling in the absence of an air cooled CPU. It only takes a few people experiencing problems before the product reputation suffers. The 9590 was as much a symbol of AMD's shortcomings as the P4 was for Intel. It wouldn't surprise me if AMD wanted to make absolutely certain of compatibility with a new board design rather than risk that kind of headache again.

If Amd keeps the CPU at the same TDP this will never be a concern even if they make a AM4 CPU in 2065 lol. FX 9000 series was stupid just like the 500 series GPU's Amd made. What add 10% but throw efficiency out the window that's all those products were.

 

[-Fran-]

I really hope Amd never makes a CPU on AM4 with over 125 watt TDP i don't think they will even make a CPU over 95 watts. Seems like Amd is trying to stay at 95 watts or lower with Zen actually they are supposed to make more efficient models of Zen next year.

Well, don't forget you can go past 125W with a CPU relatively easy these days. Not because the "TDP" is ~95W the MoBo vendors will just make their boards to have such a low ceiling, specially "enthusiast" types/marketed ones.

I think AMD is just playing to OEMs wishes, but it's fine; I do like having 125W CPUs, but I don't mind trying to lower the power requirements a bit. Plus, if you want to have a good vertical integration of products, you need to let OEMs produce as many products as possible that can support your CPUs, right? Notice Intel likes to have a good vertical *segregation* of products.

Cheers!

 

[juanrga]

I really hope Amd never makes a CPU on AM4 with over 125 watt TDP i don't think they will even make a CPU over 95 watts. Seems like Amd is trying to stay at 95 watts or lower with Zen actually they are supposed to make more efficient models of Zen next year.

The AM4 socket has a TDP of 128W. And the real TDPs of 1800X and 1700 CPUs are 128W and 90W, respectively. '95W' and '60W' are marketing labels, just as 12LP and 14LPP are marketing labels those days, with little relation to actual sizes.

I guess Pinnacle Ridge models will stay on the same TDP than the Summit Ridge models that will replace. The same happened with Trinity --> Richland. For instance the 100W A10-5800K was replaced by the 100W A10-6800K.

EDIT:

The roadmap details Pinnacle Ridge has same TDPs than Summit Ridge.

 

[jdwii]

Then from a VRM standpoint we have nothing to worry about. Besides of course users buying a 8 core ryzen and setting 1.4V 4.0ghz on a cheap B350 board and wondering why a year later their setup doesn't turn on anymore haha.

Main reason why i switched my Tomahawk to the Asrock Taichi which can handle up to 300 watts. Never know if Amd goes crazy trying to compete with Zen 3 they might make some desperate parts.

 

[8350rocks]

I really hope Amd never makes a CPU on AM4 with over 125 watt TDP i don't think they will even make a CPU over 95 watts. Seems like Amd is trying to stay at 95 watts or lower with Zen actually they are supposed to make more efficient models of Zen next year.

The AM4 socket has a TDP of 128W. And the real TDPs of 1800X and 1700 CPUs are 128W and 90W, respectively. '95W' and '60W' are marketing labels, just as 12LP and 14LPP are marketing labels those days, with little relation to actual sizes.

I guess Pinnacle Ridge models will stay on the same TDP than the Summit Ridge models that will replace. The same happened with Trinity --> Richland. For instance the 100W A10-5800K was replaced by the 100W A10-6800K.

EDIT:

The roadmap details Pinnacle Ridge has same TDPs than Summit Ridge.

TDP = Thermal Design Power = HEAT DISSIPATION

Not to be at all confused with power draw.

 

[juanrga]

I really hope Amd never makes a CPU on AM4 with over 125 watt TDP i don't think they will even make a CPU over 95 watts. Seems like Amd is trying to stay at 95 watts or lower with Zen actually they are supposed to make more efficient models of Zen next year.

The AM4 socket has a TDP of 128W. And the real TDPs of 1800X and 1700 CPUs are 128W and 90W, respectively. '95W' and '60W' are marketing labels, just as 12LP and 14LPP are marketing labels those days, with little relation to actual sizes.

I guess Pinnacle Ridge models will stay on the same TDP than the Summit Ridge models that will replace. The same happened with Trinity --> Richland. For instance the 100W A10-5800K was replaced by the 100W A10-6800K.

EDIT:

The roadmap details Pinnacle Ridge has same TDPs than Summit Ridge.

TDP = Thermal Design Power = HEAT DISSIPATION

Not to be at all confused with power draw.

First law of thermodynamics. All the energy dissipated as heat by the CPU comes from the socket.

 

[goldstone77]

Call of Duty WWII Beta @ 1440p 144Hz, What Does It Take to Play?
Hardware Unboxed
Published on Sep 30, 2017
[video="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JU2qV58zRZU&feature=youtu.be&ab_channel=HardwareUnboxed"][/video]

7700K and 1500X with a 1080Ti a comparison in Call of Duty WWII Beta @ 1440p 144Hz, The 1500X doesn't look that bad. It has a few low dips here and there that drop average performance, but it upward 130ish FPS most of the time. You watch and see what you think.

Edit: I didn't notice the transition to the 8 core Ryzen processor. The 1500X was ~100 FPS, and the 8 core 130ish.

 

[jpe1701]

Do you guys think someone will release an x470 with a good power delivery system in a micro atx form factor? I went with an Asrock ab350m pro 4 just as a place holder waiting for a micro atx x370 that was good.

 

[jdwii]

Do you guys think someone will release an x470 with a good power delivery system in a micro atx form factor? I went with an Asrock ab350m pro 4 just as a place holder waiting for a micro atx x370 that was good.

It's hard to really say you just want micro ATX best you will get is a true 6 phase+ 3 phase board but man they don't even have a X370 chipset for micro-atx but they do for mini-itx


Pro4 board is ok but it has terrible v-droop over being a fake 6 phase board 3X2 phase and its been reported to have some massive v-droop issues like setting 1.3V and it drops to 1.2V under load.

If running at stock its a fine board. Really want to get a 4+ phase board however for greater voltage control.

For some reason i think we might see better micro-atx boards once Raven Ridge drops

 

[jdwii]

Call of Duty WWII Beta @ 1440p 144Hz, What Does It Take to Play?
Hardware Unboxed
Published on Sep 30, 2017
[video="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JU2qV58zRZU&feature=youtu.be&ab_channel=HardwareUnboxed"][/video]

7700K and 1500X with a 1080Ti a comparison in Call of Duty WWII Beta @ 1440p 144Hz, The 1500X doesn't look that bad. It has a few low dips here and there that drop average performance, but it upward 130ish FPS most of the time. You watch and see what you think.

Edit: I didn't notice the transition to the 8 core Ryzen processor. The 1500X was ~100 FPS, and the 8 core 130ish.

More important he said you need more then 4 cores on your CPU if you don't have SMT or you will drop below 60fps like the I5 did.

 

[jpe1701]

Do you guys think someone will release an x470 with a good power delivery system in a micro atx form factor? I went with an Asrock ab350m pro 4 just as a place holder waiting for a micro atx x370 that was good.

It's hard to really say you just want micro ATX best you will get is a true 6 phase+ 3 phase board but man they don't even have a X370 chipset for micro-atx but they do for mini-itx


Pro4 board is ok but it has terrible v-droop over being a fake 6 phase board 3X2 phase and its been reported to have some massive v-droop issues like setting 1.3V and it drops to 1.2V under load.

If running at stock its a fine board. Really want to get a 4+ phase board however for greater voltage control.

For some reason i think we might see better micro-atx boards once Raven Ridge drops

Yeah I was fooled by the "6+3" phase marketing when I bought it. It holds 3.8Ghz at 1.35v stable but only on occasions when I want a video rendered quickly, I usually just use it at stock. And it's with a 1600 not an 8 core. The crappy part is I'm fine with the feature set of b350 but I need it to be able to handle an overclock 24/7 without burning out in just a little while.

 

[jdwii]

I know i had to go through the same issue ended up selling my Tomahawk in favor of the asrock taichi so i wouldn't have to worry about 100+C on the VRM under load when overclocking.

 

[8350rocks]

I really hope Amd never makes a CPU on AM4 with over 125 watt TDP i don't think they will even make a CPU over 95 watts. Seems like Amd is trying to stay at 95 watts or lower with Zen actually they are supposed to make more efficient models of Zen next year.

The AM4 socket has a TDP of 128W. And the real TDPs of 1800X and 1700 CPUs are 128W and 90W, respectively. '95W' and '60W' are marketing labels, just as 12LP and 14LPP are marketing labels those days, with little relation to actual sizes.

I guess Pinnacle Ridge models will stay on the same TDP than the Summit Ridge models that will replace. The same happened with Trinity --> Richland. For instance the 100W A10-5800K was replaced by the 100W A10-6800K.

EDIT:

The roadmap details Pinnacle Ridge has same TDPs than Summit Ridge.

TDP = Thermal Design Power = HEAT DISSIPATION

Not to be at all confused with power draw.

First law of thermodynamics. All the energy dissipated as heat by the CPU comes from the socket.

That is tangential.

TDP = the heat loss, and the more efficient the transistors in the processor are, the less leakage you have coming out as heat loss. So, a processor could have a 95W TDP and have a maximum power draw of 125W and both be completely accurate without subterfuge.

Only consumers make the mistake of attempting to confound the two, anyone with industry knowledge is aware that TDP is never associated with maximum power draw, only the heat dissipation required to competently cool the processor under rated load.

 

[juanrga]

That is tangential.

TDP = the heat loss, and the more efficient the transistors in the processor are, the less leakage you have coming out as heat loss. So, a processor could have a 95W TDP and have a maximum power draw of 125W and both be completely accurate without subterfuge.

Only consumers make the mistake of attempting to confound the two, anyone with industry knowledge is aware that TDP is never associated with maximum power draw, only the heat dissipation required to competently cool the processor under rated load.

Efficiency of the circuits at socket level is about 90%. So an input of 125W measured at the socket level produces heat of about 112W. No one is discussing "consumers" here; we are discussing measurements by reviewers that found that AMD lied with the TPDs. In fact some of those reviews now give RyZen TDP official figures using "" because they know those official figures are only marketing numbers not related to real TDP of he chips. Example?

Ryzen Threadripper 1950X : 16C/32T, 180W, 999$
Intel Core i9-7900X : 10C/20T, 140W, 999$
Ryzen Threadripper 1920X : 12C/24T, 180W, 799$
Intel Core i7-7820X : 8C/16T, 140W, 599$
Ryzen 1800X : 8C/16T, "95W", 499$

They know "95W" is not the real TDP.

 

[goldstone77]

That is tangential.

TDP = the heat loss, and the more efficient the transistors in the processor are, the less leakage you have coming out as heat loss. So, a processor could have a 95W TDP and have a maximum power draw of 125W and both be completely accurate without subterfuge.

Only consumers make the mistake of attempting to confound the two, anyone with industry knowledge is aware that TDP is never associated with maximum power draw, only the heat dissipation required to competently cool the processor under rated load.

Efficiency of the circuits at socket level is about 90%. So an input of 125W measured at the socket level produces heat of about 112W. No one is discussing "consumers" here; we are discussing measurements by reviewers that found that AMD lied with the TPDs. In fact some of those reviews now give RyZen TDP official figures using "" because they know those official figures are only marketing numbers not related to real TDP of he chips. Example?

Ryzen Threadripper 1950X : 16C/32T, 180W, 999$
Intel Core i9-7900X : 10C/20T, 140W, 999$
Ryzen Threadripper 1920X : 12C/24T, 180W, 799$
Intel Core i7-7820X : 8C/16T, 140W, 599$
Ryzen 1800X : 8C/16T, "95W", 499$

They know "95W" is not the real TDP.

The reference from hardware.fr that you use is invalid to the point of measuring TDP.

The TDP is typically not the largest amount of heat the CPU could ever generate (peak power), such as by running a power virus, but rather the maximum amount of heat that it would generate when running "real applications." This ensures the computer will be able to handle essentially all applications without exceeding its thermal envelope, or requiring a cooling system for the maximum theoretical power (which would cost more but in favor of extra headroom for processing power).[1]

Thermal design power
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is about the thermal design envelope of microprocessors. For the general concept, see power rating.
The thermal design power (TDP), sometimes called thermal design point, is the maximum amount of heat generated by a computer chip or component (often the CPU or GPU) that the cooling system in a computer is designed to dissipate under any workload.

The TDP is typically not the largest amount of heat the CPU could ever generate (peak power), such as by running a power virus, but rather the maximum amount of heat that it would generate when running "real applications." This ensures the computer will be able to handle essentially all applications without exceeding its thermal envelope, or requiring a cooling system for the maximum theoretical power (which would cost more but in favor of extra headroom for processing power).[1]

Some sources state that the peak power for a microprocessor is usually 1.5 times the TDP rating.[2] However, the TDP is a conventional figure while its measurement methodology has been the subject of controversy. In particular, until around 2006 AMD used to report the maximum power draw of its processors as TDP, but Intel changed this practice with the introduction of its Conroe family of processors.[3]

A similar but more recent controversy has involved the power TDP measurements of some Ivy Bridge Y-series processors, with which Intel has introduced a new metric called scenario design power (SDP).[4][5]

Overview[edit]
See also: CPU power dissipation
The TDP of a CPU has been underestimated in some cases, leading to certain real applications (typically strenuous, such as video encoding or games) causing the CPU to exceed its specified TDP and resulting in overloading the computer's cooling system. In this case, CPUs either cause a system failure (a "therm-trip") or throttle their speed down.[6] Most modern processors will cause a therm-trip only upon a catastrophic cooling failure, such as a no longer operational fan or an incorrectly mounted heatsink.

For example, a laptop's CPU cooling system may be designed for a 20 W TDP, which means that it can dissipate up to 20 watts of heat without exceeding the maximum junction temperature for the laptop's CPU. A cooling system can do this using an active cooling method (e.g. forced convection) such as a fan, or any of the three passive cooling methods: convection, thermal radiation or conduction. Typically, a combination of these methods is used.

Since safety margins and the definition of what constitutes a real application vary among manufacturers, TDP values between different manufacturers cannot be accurately compared. For example, while a processor with a TDP of 100 W will almost certainly use more power at full load than a processor with a 10 W TDP from the same manufacturer, it may or may not use more power than a processor from a different manufacturer that has a 90 W TDP. Additionally, TDPs are often specified for families of processors, with the low-end models usually using significantly less power than those at the high end of the family.

The dynamic power consumed by a switching circuit is approximately proportional to the square of the voltage:[7]

{\displaystyle P=CV^{2}f} P=CV^{2}f
where C is capacitance, f is frequency, and V is voltage.

Variable TDP[edit]
TDP specifications for some processors may allow them to work under multiple different power levels, depending on the usage scenario, available cooling capacities and desired power consumption. Technologies that provide such variable TDPs include Intel's configurable TDP (cTDP) and scenario design power (SDP), and AMD's TDP power cap.

Configurable TDP[edit]
Configurable TDP (cTDP), also known as programmable TDP or TDP power cap, is an operating mode of later generations of Intel mobile processors (as of January 2014) and AMD processors (as of June 2012) that allows adjustments in their TDP values. By modifying the processor behavior and its performance levels, power consumption of a processor can be changed altering its TDP at the same time. That way, a processor can operate at higher or lower performance levels, depending on the available cooling capacities and desired power consumption.[8]:69–72[9][10]

Intel processors that support cTDP provide three operating modes:[8]:71–72

Nominal TDP – this is the processor's rated frequency and TDP.
cTDP down – when a cooler or quieter mode of operation is desired, this mode specifies a lower TDP and lower guaranteed frequency versus the nominal mode.
cTDP up – when extra cooling is available, this mode specifies a higher TDP and higher guaranteed frequency versus the nominal mode.
For example, some of the mobile Haswell processors support cTDP up, cTDP down, or both modes.[11] As another example, some of the AMD Opteron processors and Kaveri APUs can be configured for lower TDP values.[9][10][12] IBM's POWER8 processor implements a similar power capping functionality through its embedded on-chip controller (OCC).[13]

Scenario design power[edit]
Intels description of Scenario Design Power (SDP): "SDP is an additional thermal reference point meant to represent thermally relevant device usage in real-world environmental scenarios. It balances performance and power requirements across system workloads to represent real-world power usage. "[14]

Scenario design power (SDP) is not an additional power state of a processor. The SDP only states the average power consumption of a processor using a certain mix of benchmark programs to simulate "real-world" scenarios".[4][15][16] For example, Y-series (extreme-low power) mobile Haswell processor show the difference between TDP and SDP.[14]

Since safety margins and the definition of what constitutes a real application vary among manufacturers, TDP values between different manufacturers cannot be accurately compared.

Edit: added statement below and quotes under opening statements.
I said this before, and for a long time really. TDP is not a "standard" across the board all companies decide what it means too them, and how they implement it.

 

[aldaia]

Just to put TDP vs real power consumption on perspective
i7 7700K 114.3/91 = 126%
r7 1800X 117.9/95 = 124%
i7 8700K 159.5/95 = 168%

 

[aldaia]

Interesting, lots of ryzens in there:

 

[aldaia]

At mindfactory.de AMD outsells intel for second consecutive month.

 

[TechyInAZ]

Hey guys, just a quick update regarding Ryzen:

It seems like with the Fall Creators Update, we no longer need the Ryzen Balanced Plan. I just upgraded to FCU with a Ryzen 7 1700X, and I am getting better benchmark scores with the balanced plan vs the ryzen balanced plan.

Also, on the normal balanced plan, I'm not getting any core parking whatsoever.