z22
1647
Can i assume the review embargo is lifted on or around the official release date for Zen4, which I think is Sept 27th? GamerNexus is my goto reviewer, but a few others also seem impartial.
Don’t think so - seems targeted at 5xxxs.
I think I’ve just applied an offset of -30 somethings per core here. Not completely sure :) I had ‘negative’ set in AGESA under PBO, so I’m hoping that was picked up in the app.
stusser
1649
Ryzen master works on earlier chips but they don’t support the curve optimizer. I think you can still undervolt all cores identically, but just dropping tdp may be just as effective.
-30 all cores is excellent, if it’s stable.
Editer
1650
I mean, this talk of 105w vs 160w is pretty hilarious to us Intel users. (Insert Doc Brown “gigawatt” meme here.) My electric bill is tiny compared to water and gas, with a 10900K/3080 system idling 24/7 until I got my NAS set up. This time 10 years ago two light bulbs would be 200w.
I wonder what the odds are that these new Ryzens will be performance competitive in MSFS compared to the 13900K? I’d love to go back to AMD, but with modern flight sims, both max single-core performance and multicore can make a huge difference. We’re the only gamers still seeing frame rates between 30 and 60 with high-end rigs, and with the optimizations they’ve made to the graphics engines, I’m almost always CPU-limited in MSFS.
Those bulbs did get pretty toasty.
My computer crashed, something it hasn’t really done in ~2 years. 3900X.
A fatal hardware error has occurred.
Reported by component: Processor Core
Error Source: Machine Check Exception
Error Type: Cache Hierarchy Error
Processor APIC ID: 0
But the really weird thing is my temps have gone up 9C. Before the crash I never went above 75C. And now it’s hitting 84C. I have a big-ass dual fan Noctua cooler.
I don’t understand.
Aleck
1655
A little googling on the error code indicates it could be anything from a bad CPU, old BIOS, a bad CPU overclock, bad memory, to a bad GPU. I would start by (if you’re overclocking) dialing everything back to the defaults. See what that does.
My guess is the temps could be involved/making things on the CPU unhappy. Regarding the temps, first things first – ensure the cooler is working (fans running, etc.)
Second: have you cleaned the cooler at all in those two years? If not, I would clean the cooler (remove dust from the fans and big ass heatsink, using compressed air and a soft cloth), then remove the old paste and re-paste the CPU cooler. I find I need to do that every few years in order to keep temps where they ought to be.
One other common suggestion I saw online was to run Prime95 for a couple hours and see what errors, if any, it throws out.
My wife’s Ryzen 5 3600 did something similar a while back, after about three years of use.
Chappers
1657
check the cooler, that nothing physical got in there. Take it off, clean it and then reseat it with some new thermal paste. I once had a moth get in between the heatsink and the CPU around 15-20 years ago, no idea how it got in there.
That’s quite the throwback to the OG bug!
Rock8man
1659
Ryzen 9 7900X and Ryzen 5 7600X reviews.
AMD’s Ryzen 7000 processors are here, with a new 5nm process node and AM5 socket unlocking higher clock frequencies, greater power usage and in turn better performance. The four new CPUs releasing on September 27th also include a new 6nm I/O die, integrated graphics and support for DDR5 and PCIe 5.0 - it’s a substantial feature upgrade that reclaims parity with Intel’s 12th-gen CPUs.
From the conclusion:
Looking at the Ryzen 5 chip, we saw upwards of a 25 percent frame-rate improvement from the 5600X to 7600X in many games at 1080p - perfectly in line with the uptick in single-core performance in synthetic benchmarks. With faster DDR5-6000 RAM, we saw an even more impressive gen-on-gen improvement, reaching 46 percent in Flight Sim 2020 and 48 percent in Cyberpunk 2077. Our real world video transcode test also produced impressive results, with the 7600X delivering a 40 percent frame-rate lead over the 5600X.
The Ryzen 7900X is similarly strong in content creation tests, with its higher clocks and IPC allowing it to outperform the last-generation Ryzen 9 5950X despite having fewer cores and threads. Gaming performance was also outstanding, with a 10 to 25 percent improvement over the last-gen 5950X (and by analogue, the 5900X) at 1080p. However, the 12900K and 5800X3D do remain faster in a handful of tests; the 7900X doesn’t quite represent the knock-out blow that AMD was no doubt hoping for at the top end. Perhaps we’ll see a ‘7900X3D’ somewhere down the road that combines the best of the 7900X and 5800X3D to really seal off that top spot.
stusser
1660
Yep, they look to be excellent, exactly as AMD promised.
I still would strongly advise everybody to wait at least 1 month, and preferably 3, after release to buy one. This is a brand new CPU, I/O die, socket, chipset, and memory. AMD quality control is poor, particularly on software and firmware.
abrandt
1661
I read through Ars’ review earlier which seemed to have similar conclusions. Notably at the end he recommended waiting a few months to jump as well, not because of the need to improve the firmware but because of expected price drops on the required new mobo and ram
Alistair
1662
Expensive too, given you need a new MB and ram. These reviews do make dropping in a 5800X3D look pretty appealing. Much the same way an old timey 3080 is still more appealing than a 4080.
So, basically, you need DDR5 5600 or higher.
TurinTur
1665
Hardware Unboxed has a nice price comparison (per frame) too for the 7600x, taking in account mobos and ram
stusser
1666
That chart is bogus, as Zen4 does not support DDR4.
And while they do find a 12.5% difference between DDR5-5200 and 5600, that’s at 1080p to stress the CPU. Will that ever actually matter in games at 1440p or 4k? Nah. If it’s a small price difference of course go for the faster RAM. Otherwise, Nah.
I did caveat that with “in games”, but this is a 7600X-- if you’re doing CPU-intensive non-gaming work, you won’t be looking to buy a 6-core CPU.
