AMD's Future Chips & SoC's: News, Info & Rumours.

Page 90 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
InvalidError said:
If you are still happy with the value you are getting from your i7-2600k, then it means that what is on the market today still isn't good enough for you to bother with an upgrade,. That's the essence of what I find disappointing about the 3k series. Yes, it is better, but still not so much so for the price that I can be bothered to upgrade my i5-3470 yet.

Until about ten years ago, keeping the same PC for 5+ years was nearly unthinkable for most people including myself with most people upgrading every 2-3 years, today it is a matter of course for a growing number of people as good 5+ years old PCs (something like i5-2400 and up) are still adequate for the vast majority of everyday tasks and most casual to somewhat competitive gaming.
Click to expand...

Curious to see what the threshold of many people are for upgrading now is versus back then. I've only been interested in computer related stuff since about 2013 so I've only ever known 5-10% increases each generation MAX (at least for Intel). I think that many of the people that have grown up with that kind of progress have a lower threshold to consider upgrading while many that remember or experienced more rapid performance progression from earlier times might want to wait for more significant gains before upgrading.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jdwii
TCA_ChinChin said:
Curious to see what the threshold of many people are for upgrading now is versus back then. I've only been interested in computer related stuff since about 2013 so I've only ever known 5-10% increases each generation MAX (at least for Intel). I think that many of the people that have grown up with that kind of progress have a lower threshold to consider upgrading while many that remember or experienced more rapid performance progression from earlier times might want to wait for more significant gains before upgrading.
Click to expand...
Well, I upgraded from an i7 2700K @4.6Ghz (since 2012 no less!) to a Ry2700X running at 4.3Ghz turbo and I've seen 4.1Ghz all core speed. I had zero expectations of better performance to be really honest, but I was surprised as the 2700X was noticeably faster in everything. Some were, as you can imagine, more noticeable than others. Games were more or less similar, but minimum FPS went up by a lot (less slowdowns and stutter) and productivity, specially streaming, was mind blowing.

Begrudgingly, it's one of those "see it to believe it", as going from anything between Sandy to Covfefe Lake i7s to AMD's Ryzen 2Ks is going to be an upgrade at best, but a side-grade at worst (games, mainly; except min FPS).

Anyone with an i7 8700K and up is fine until 2 more gens at the very least, I'd say.

Cheers!
 
InvalidError said:
Most of my upgrades from 486 to my current i5-3470 are 3-4X bumps. My biggest bump is from 8088 to 486DX33, a ~70X improvement :)
Click to expand...

Lol thats tremendous. I think most people don't expect that kind of upgrade anymore unfortunately. Whether or not people still should is another question. I've seen people argue that its not worth upgrading from different variations of 22/14/12/10/7nm when its mostly 5-10% gains, but nowadays, anything more than 20% improvement garners significant recognition. I think that until there can be another kind of extreme improvement year on year like there was over a decade ago (rapid and easier node shrinks, architectural advancements, architectural changes, I/O improvements, etc.), then one can realistically only expect these kinds of marginal improvements.
 
remixislandmusic said:
I don't know what to think about the fact that you can buy a Xeon from 2009 and still game as well as someone on a modern I5. Heck, the 4c/8t Xeon even has more threads than the I5 6c/6t.
Click to expand...
Except HT gives you only ~30% more performance while cores give you up to 100% and 8th/9th-gen also has a 30-40% IPC advantage vs first-gen i-series, which should make the old Xeon closer to a modern quad-core i3.
 
It wasn't that long ago we were still recommending people to buy dual cores. And that is still true of a large portion of recent laptops. A lot of those people still have them. And that is talking the western world.

When all dual cores are supplanted with low end quad cores with SMT or HT, then there will be a real reason to prioritize on multi-threading. So that is mid-range ultrabooks and desktops available today.

+1 for heterogeneous computing. Makes sense to have chips properly designed for the task do the work. You never know, FPGAs might start making it into mainstream computers at some point. Would be pretty need to have your chip reconfigure itself to make it as efficient as possible at the tasks you regularly perform. Toss in a few Q-bits while they are at it.
 
remixislandmusic said:
Seriously. At least you have hyperthreading.
Although I have a newer, more efficient Zen CPU, my 4c4t ryzen 3 1200 @3.7 is even slower than your 2600k both in per-thread and multithreaded performance and yet I can still game fine on it for most titles.
Click to expand...

InvalidError said:
If you are still happy with the value you are getting from your i7-2600k, then it means that what is on the market today still isn't good enough for you to bother with an upgrade,. That's the essence of what I find disappointing about the 3k series. Yes, it is better, but still not so much so for the price that I can be bothered to upgrade my i5-3470 yet.

Until about ten years ago, keeping the same PC for 5+ years was nearly unthinkable for most people including myself with most people upgrading every 2-3 years, today it is a matter of course for a growing number of people as good 5+ years old PCs (something like i5-2400 and up) are still adequate for the vast majority of everyday tasks and most casual to somewhat competitive gaming.
Click to expand...

Gsync monitor helps a lot though but despite 2600k hanging in there i still wouldn't mind upgrading to an 9900k or Zen 2 and faster ram even to push up fps minimums and to deal with ever increasingly big games. I know free performance is free performance just the squabbling over a few hundred MHz with the 9900k is quite comical 😀
 
Welp, looks like AMD is taking a "clear cut" approach to PCIe 4.0 and the motherboards.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1135424044117839872
View: https://twitter.com/IanCutress/status/1135424044117839872


I can't deny I feel like they're grabbing the bull by the tail instead of the horns on this one, as it IS the partner's responsibility to get certification and not AMD's, unless I'm mis-understanding something about how certification works. We all know 4xx and prior chipsets are not PCIe 4.0 certified, but partners should have a say in whether or not they want to try to give support or not.

Personally, I am not upgrading my motherboard just to get PCIe 4.0 and I do not think it's a deal breaker to not have it, but it's like missing out on a freebie.

Cheers!
 
That is a shame for those buying high-end 4xx series boards in hopes for pcie4 in addition to Zen2. If true oh well, they'll still make use out of the motherboard like you say Yuka and it's not like pcie4 cards are in a hurry either.

Still, those jumping the gun on mobos in the last couple of months for Zen2, and there have been many, should have waited.
 
Yuka said:
I can't deny I feel like they're grabbing the bull by the tail instead of the horns on this one, as it IS the partner's responsibility to get certification and not AMD's, unless I'm mis-understanding something about how certification works. We all know 4xx and prior chipsets are not PCIe 4.0 certified, but partners should have a say in whether or not they want to try to give support or not.
Click to expand...
The 400-series and older chipsets are physically lacking the bits required to support PCIe 4.0, so 4.0 on chipsets is simply impossible and there is absolutely nothing that can be certified about them for 4.0.

If anything gets upgraded to 4.0 on those boards, it will be the lanes connected directly to the CPU if the socket and board have the necessary signal integrity to make that work when a Zen 2 or newer CPU which does have PCIe 4.0 capability on its PCIe lanes is installed. It is up to individual board manufacturers to decide which of their boards have a good enough shot at working PCIe 4.0 to enable it in BIOS. You can expect even some lowly A320 board to get PCIe 4.0 on the x16 slot. The x4 NVMe slot will depend heavily on where it is located.
 
  • Like
Reactions: digitalgriffin
Didn't the Tom's article mention that technically, you could still use the "beta" BIOSes available before retail launch for the pre-x570 boards that already support PCIe 4.0? I thought it was just AMD not officially supporting/endorsing PCIe gen 4 support on older boards but board partners could still technically have them enabled through BIOS?
 
Yes, they did say that.

We'll have to wait and see what ends up happening, but if (in my case) Asus says my MoBo can work with PCIe 4, I may just enable it and see what happens. Thing is, I'm not sure I'll swap the 2700X 😛

Cheers!
 
That's kind of the writing on the wall here: you need a Ry3K to have the CPU PCIe lanes. The question mark is if the previous chipsets would allow the passthrough (not the right term, but kind of applies) of the new CPU.

AMD just said no; closed the door and fired the clowns.

Cheers!
 
I haven't heard of any confirmed pricing yet but I'm pretty sure these new SSDs are going to cost more than your typical x570 board. I'd guess if you can afford the new SSD(s) that can use the extra bandwidth of pcie 4 you can afford to upgrade to a new motherboard.
 
Yuka said:
The question mark is if the previous chipsets would allow the passthrough (not the right term, but kind of applies) of the new CPU.
Click to expand...
There is no chipset to "pass through" anything. Older-generation motherboards that get PCIe4 support are those that have nothing but dumb wires between the CPU and PCIe/NVMe slot with sufficiently good signal integrity to handle it, no chips of any sort involved on the motherboard itself. By the same token, this probably rules out many SLI/CF motherboards due to the x16/x8x8 PCIe signal switches.
 
TCA_ChinChin said:
Curious to see what the threshold of many people are for upgrading now is versus back then. I've only been interested in computer related stuff since about 2013 so I've only ever known 5-10% increases each generation MAX (at least for Intel). I think that many of the people that have grown up with that kind of progress have a lower threshold to consider upgrading while many that remember or experienced more rapid performance progression from earlier times might want to wait for more significant gains before upgrading.
Click to expand...


To give my non nerdy response if your PC does everything that you want it to do then don't even consider upgrading enjoy what you have. But if you want faster decodes/encodes, faster transfers, or higher frame rates then consider buying newer parts......Also less people are concerned then me but i feel like in 2019 a PC should be 99.5% silent when doing anything a tablet or smart phone can do including 4K video playback and web browsing. That's one reason i feel people should upgrade to improve their cooling and fans
 
One of my goals would be to grab one of Amd's 2200G use a 212+ and a Noctua fan to replace it, get a case meant for quietness and replace one of their fans with a Noctua fan and of course use a RMX PSU and keep fans at 300 RPM the CPU something tells me the whole PC would be completely silent. Quiet PC's man that is where it is at it bothers me when PC's are loud doing something a 100$ smartphone can do.
 
I have been thinking about the Ry3K-G series to replace my aging A8-3850. Although it's still going strong and suits my needs, I think it will need a bump when I change my TV (Panasonic Plasma... Damn I love this TV) as it's about to die, I think, sigh...

I'm only concerned about decent mATX offerings, if at all, exist for the APUs and if AMD will release them soon enough. I don't want to deal with a Vega/Polaris if I can, but then I don't know when they'll replace the GPU side in them for the new not-GCN stuff. Also, the Ry3K-G stuff is Zen+ (a.k.a. Zen 1.5), correct?

Cheers!
 
boju said:
@Yuka there are tv repair guys around still fixing plasmas, might be worth looking into, could be a model with similar parts in their possession they could swap over.
Click to expand...
I've been reading a bit about it as well, yes. Thanks for the recommendation, @boju :)

It has a nasty green vertical line that glares back at you when there's black backgrounds, haha.

Anyway, I can't remember if AMD said anything about the Ry3K-G siblings. I'll try to find some info.

Cheers!
 
  • Like
Reactions: boju
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom