Why?That's not a valid sample.
The valid sample looks more like 70% above TGL.
More like 100% above TGL if true.
What's convenient is to have a copium balloon as well furnished as yours.Why is one valid while the other isn't? How convenient that the "invalid" result is the one where it is massively underperforming expectations.
Neither of those samples should be valid to you, kids.Why?
I was always under the impression Golden Cove is +19% over Willow Cove (TigerLake). This puts Zen 5 at +16% over Golden Cove. That doesn’t seem impossible to me.
It does to me.Why?
I was always under the impression Golden Cove is +19% over Willow Cove (TigerLake). This puts Zen 5 at +16% over Golden Cove. That doesn’t seem impossible to me.
That's pretty much where I estimate Zen 5 IPC to end up. It seems pretty good to me. And if they can push clock rates a bit higher still then Zen 5 3D will be in very good shape.Why?
I was always under the impression Golden Cove is +19% over Willow Cove (TigerLake). This puts Zen 5 at +16% over Golden Cove. That doesn’t seem impossible to me.
Still waiting for an explanation why one score in the morning completely invalidates the other score in the afternoon, on the same day.how much timespy pts is that
you don't have to cope.
You can always go back to the Intel thread and pray for nova lake!
"SF-23 will be unprecedented in terms of speed" - Ferrari CEO before the 2023 F1 season started.Just believe.
There are 40 days left before Computex.
What's convenient is to have a copium balloon as well furnished as yours.
I've already said it several times: there is no way AMD would've bothered redoing the entire frontend and making a large Tock just to come out with 5% IPC improvement at the exit. It is an insane degree of cope to believe that they would release a product like that after this much effort.
Which means that that convenient number you've found that barely puts it above Zen 4 is either completely false, and the other 2x TGL number is also completely false, either that your convenient number is completely false and the other one is not.
I don't have proof that the other one is true. I do have every reason to be confident that that score you're attaching yourself to is entirely false.
So I'll do as the optimists and BELIEVE. And you're free to believe whatever you want, I don't wanna argue with someone who seriously believes that AMD would come out with a 5% IPC growth as the first big leap since Zen 2. That is a ridiculous number to latch on to.
I'm sure you were making a point there, but all I know about cars is that mine still starts when I turn the key and hasn't killed me yet. And I don't care to know much more."SF-23 will be unprecedented in terms of speed" - Ferrari CEO before the 2023 F1 season started.
Why?
I was always under the impression Golden Cove is +19% over Willow Cove (TigerLake). This puts Zen 5 at +16% over Golden Cove. That doesn’t seem impossible to me.
So you can cope without knowing the platform variables involved.Still waiting for an explanation why one score in the morning completely invalidates the other score in the afternoon, on the same day.
they're the exact same since it's all the exact same platforms.My source only told me Zen5's TDP is higher than Zen4; also claimed by HXL.
Yes - you would know if you follow Formula 1.I'm sure you were making a point there, but all I know about cars is that mine still starts when I turn the key and hasn't killed me yet. And I don't care to know much more.
I don't think there was any way to have "Power Consumption: +" compared to RPL-R.View attachment 97747
@adroc_thurston Do you know about TDP of Zen5? My source only told me Zen5's TDP is higher than Zen4; also claimed by HXL.
And if you knew about letting go when you've become a broken record, that would be highly appreciated. Bye.Yes - you would know if you follow Formula 1.
The real concerning part is that he only went "Power Consumption: -".I don't think there was any way to have "Power Consumption: +" compared to RPL-R.
Yawn.platform variables involved.
Someone else will have to do it, I can't get it to work at 2000MHz.
cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/cpufreq/scaling_cur_freq
400000
400000
400000
1999222
400000
400000
400000
2000130
400000
2000078
1998810
400000
400000
400000
400000
400000
400000
400000
400000
400000
400000
2000082
400000
1999932
400000
400000
400000
400000
400000
400000
1999921
1999553Again, you don't have to cope here.Yawn.
Offensive picture removed.
Which factors are sensitive to Geekbench performance: Processor firmware, or/and time of result upload?No, timestamps of when the results were uploaded online.The timestamps of the firmware/ microcode?The *timestamps* are there on the entries
...and except for SP5, but that one goes along with a core count increase.My source only told me Zen5's TDP is higher than Zen4; also claimed by HXL.
they're the exact same since it's all the exact same platforms.
well except -halo.
Obviously but they've been bumping server skt power every gen since Naples, no changes here either....and except for SP5, but that one goes along with a core count increase.
It is comparable to previous generation. Do you realise that?I don't think there was any way to have "Power Consumption: +" compared to RPL-R.
So 19.3% higher IPC than Zen 4 if that leak is real. Not bad. Especially if other rumors of still higher clock rates is also true it puts it right in line with previous Zens in generational uplift.
I did it, lscpu shows 2.6 Base for my 7950X, but cpufreq reports 2G, I don't have GB account, so maybe someone can check the frequencies
My RAM is 6000MT/s
Bash:cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/cpufreq/scaling_cur_freq 400000 400000 400000 1999222 400000 400000 400000 2000130 400000 2000078 1998810 400000 400000 400000 400000 400000 400000 400000 400000 400000 400000 2000082 400000 1999932 400000 400000 400000 400000 400000 400000 1999921 1999553
STX is not recognized properly, L1 and other data seems completely off.
This is a more conservative report unlike this one @1.4G here https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/compare/22423185?baseline=22425328
If these are spoofs then well... waste of time
No, it doesn’t.Zen 4 already had a decent IPC advantage over Golden Cove, so that would mean Zen 5 has almost no IPC uplift. Given what we know about the design, this isn't possible (edit: unless AMD completely botched the design in some way, but that also seems extremely unlikely).
15.7% higher Integer Score than Zen 4.
I did it, lscpu shows 2.6 Base for my 7950X, but cpufreq reports 2G, I don't have GB account, so maybe someone can check the frequencies
My RAM is 6000MT/s
Bash:cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/cpufreq/scaling_cur_freq 400000 400000 400000 1999222 400000 400000 400000 2000130 400000 2000078 1998810 400000 400000 400000 400000 400000 400000 400000 400000 400000 400000 2000082 400000 1999932 400000 400000 400000 400000 400000 400000 1999921 1999553
STX is not recognized properly, L1 and other data seems completely off.
This is a more conservative report unlike this one @1.4G here https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/compare/22423185?baseline=22425328
If these are spoofs then well... waste of time
Z4 is higher int, lower FP.Golden Cove & Zen 4 have near identical IPC.
Not at 6000 MT/s memory:Z4 is higher int, lower FP.