[Chozofication]

I have been hearing that intel arrow lake (2024) will have 40 cores for the i9, and the i7 will share the 13900k's 8+16 core configuration.

Just to put this in perspective, combined with an estimated 45% (+/-) ipc increase over raptor lake, the likely outcome is that the i7 15700k will outperform the ryzen 8950x 16c32t in multicore performance, and the 40 core i9 15900k will be on another planet basically.

I plan to get the 15700k because well I surely don't need 40 cores myself but also that'll give me a reason to get the 16900k i9 later, for all the additional cache and ipc gains.

And on the low end I can see the i3 getting some e cores, i.e. 4 Performance cores with hyperthreading, and 4 e cores. Sell that for $130-140 or even cheaper for the F sku (no integrated graphics) and intel could have the best chips from top to bottom.

 

[Hostile_18]

I'm still loving my 7600x. I put it in 65w eco mode, it boosts to 5.4ghz, it runs so cool and quiet.

Honestly I'll just get the 8700x next year and do the same.

 

[Bullet Club]

AMD 3D V-Cache CPUs are coming to laptops, and they'll contend for the gaming crown

It's about time!

AMD is reportedly preparing to bring its 3D V-Cache technology to its Zen 4 mobile CPUs, and it's about damn time! V-Cache equipped chips have been available for a long time in desktop and server form, but until now, we haven't seen the tech make it into an AMD mobile chip.

According to a tweet (or is that an X, or whatever) from @9550pro, the first chip is the Ryzen 9 7945HX3D. It will feature in an upcoming Asus ROG Scar notebook. The chip features 16 Zen 4 cores and a total of 128MB of L3 cache. This is made up of 32MB on each of the two chiplets, plus an additional 64MB of stacked cache.

This chip will sit at the top of AMD's mobile CPU range, so expect it to feature in flagship desktop replacement machines with the best GPUs. Battery life and mobility won't be the selling point of these systems. It'll be all about performance, and there's every chance notebooks with this chip will be the fastest on the market.

If mobile V-Cache chips prove to be successful for AMD, there's no reason to doubt we'll see the tech trickle down to the worldlier models. 8-core or 6-core V-Cache equipped chips should offer excellent gaming performance, and with any luck, they won't cost too much and deliver good battery life too, which is a trait of AMD's mobile CPUs.

I've been surprised not to see AMD release V-Cache models for the notebook market. It is a natural fit given the characteristics of mobile chips. They don't have the TDP or thermal budget of desktop chips, and they're clocked lower, meaning more L3 cache should be even more advantageous in games that would otherwise require power guzzling raw clock speeds to maximize performance.

The non V-Cache equipped Ryzen 9 7945HX has a default TDP of 55-75W, which means any concerns over the fragile nature of the TSV interconnects that link the chiplet and cache should be absent. Excessive voltage is an enemy of V-Cache, and this is of no concern with lower voltage mobile chips.

As to how successful these chips are will depend on the rest of the system. V-Cache models won't magically make GPU limited games at 4K run faster, but it will help at lower resolutions on systems with very high refresh rate screens. A system with a 7945HX3D, RTX 4090 and a 1080p screen is unlikely to be released, but at 1440p, a high end GPU delivering 240 FPS or higher is possible. Well optimized esport games are a case in point, and in that kind of use case, X3D mobile chips should be at their best.

Of course stacked cache isn't beneficial for all games and applications. Some benefit more from clock speeds, and once the L3 cache fills, the system still needs to fall back to system memory. It'll be interesting to see how AMD tunes its turbo modes, chiplet software and driver to deliver optimal performance for all types of mobile workloads.

Source: PC Gamer

 

[Bullet Club]

More like Wallet Raper.

 

[Chozofication]

96 cores is insane. Intel will probably have that many cores on regular desktop by 2027 and amd will have a similar amount of threads by then as well

Maybe by then games will be using more than 8 cores lol… maybe

 

[Aarbron]

This the general consensus? I've only watched tech-Jesus review half way through before I fell asleep.

 

[Bullet Club]

 

[Chozofication]

I know this is funny

But if you have very fast ddr5, run the 14900k with intel's power spec (so don't let it used the fully unlocked power draw for 2% better perf) it's still a great gaming chip. Just, obviously a really minuscule difference compared to 13900k.

7800x3d is a beast no doubt, the best gaming cpu for the money easily, I have to respect the competition there. But it doesn't win all the time, particularly if you have very fast ram on the 13/14900k.

Truthfully the 14900k is a disappointment. I was expecting 5-8% better than 13900k, and it's really like 2% better at best.

Shame we didn't get meteor lake desktop.

 

[Chozofication]

Intel can do it to themselves too!

 

[Bullet Club]

 

[Mickmrly]

That'll be great for low powered laptops and devices. This will be a bit bad for intel though, a lot of the surfaces, 2 in 1's and low powered devices use the core and atom CPU's with integrated graphics.

Intel just can't catch a break. I guess because they wanted to explore the GPU space, NVIDIA and AMD have decided to break into the CPU space.

 

[Chozofication]

That'll be great for low powered laptops and devices. This will be a bit bad for intel though, a lot of the surfaces, 2 in 1's and low powered devices use the core and atom CPU's with integrated graphics.

Intel just can't catch a break. I guess because they wanted to explore the GPU space, NVIDIA and AMD have decided to break into the CPU space.

I don't foresee this hurting high end laptop for intel, but we'll see.

Once again, intel was their own worst enemy by not having meteor lake on time.

Next year they are going to kick so much ass on desktop though, as I keep repeating ad nauseam. Gloom and doom is at all time highs on the internet because of 14th gen, but nah.

The point where this stuff starts to matter a lot less is when Intel's shift to foundry first, chip design second is complete. They know how things are going and decided if they can't sell their chips to everyone, why not make them for the competition?

I just hope I get some good news on that front sooner rather than later.

However, they are absolutely not giving up on their chips and claim to be able to return to server dominance in 2 or 3 years.

 

[Aarbron]

Given the flurry of ARM news:



DaVinci Resolve is to get a native Windows ARM version too

 

[Grisham]

 

[Bullet Club]

Alleged AMD Ryzen 9000 "Zen 5" Desktop CPU Prices Revealed: 9950X $499, 9900X $399, 9700X $299, 9600X $229

Alleged prices of AMD's Ryzen 9000 "Zen 5" Desktop CPUs have been revealed & it may look like the top 9950X chip would top out at $499 US if these are the real deal.

AMD Ryzen 9000 "Zen 5" Desktop CPU Prices Might Be Super Competitive If These Alleged Prices Are To Be Believed, Ryzen 9 9950X Flagship For $499 US

The pricing information comes from Anandtech Forum member, Hail The Brain Slug, who allegedly knows someone working at BestBuy. In the conversation, the alleged BestBuy employee revealed the Ryzen 9000 CPUs are in stock & ready for the retail launch on the 31st of July though availability might vary from shop to shop. It is mentioned that there's lots of stock for the Ryzen 9 9900X & the Ryzen 7 9700X CPUs but there aren't a lot of Ryzen 9 9950X and Ryzen 5 9600X chips at this specific retailer.

In a previous post, we saw a similar situation: the Ryzen 7 9700X and Ryzen 9 9900X had plenty of stock while the Ryzen 5 9600X had less than 100 units. But moving forward to important bits, we have alleged pricing of the Ryzen 9000 CPUs which is as listed below:

• Ryzen 9 9950X - $499 US (7950X $699 US MSRP)
• Ryzen 9 9900X - $399 US (7900X $549 US MSRP)
• Ryzen 7 9700X - $299 US (7700X $399 US MSRP)
• Ryzen 5 9600X - $229 US (7600X $299 US MSRP)

It is also mentioned that the prices could change when AMD updates the retailer with the official retail sales date. We've seen major tech companies make last-minute MSRP/Price changes, even on the same day as the launch so that's entirely possible. But before we go any further, we would like to state once again that these prices aren't officially confirmed yet so take them with a grain of salt.

In the case that these are true, the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X 16-Core CPU would end up being a killer value against the Core i9-14900K and Core i9-14900KS, both of which retail above $500 US, are power-hungry and riddled with instability issues. Meanwhile the $399 US price of the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X is also solid which will put some pressure on the Core i7-14700K CPUs. The Ryzen 7 9700X at $299 US seems to be a good deal since it was recently revealed that the chip would end up slightly faster than the Ryzen 7 7800X3D, the best gaming chip at the moment while running at just 65W.

Lastly, the AMD Ryzen 5 9600X at $229 US makes it look much better than the previously expected $299 US pricing. The 6-core chip will be a decent mainstream solution for the AM5 segment at the alleged pricing. Overall, if these prices do end up being true, then AMD will attract lots of new PC builders to its AM5 platform, and with all the troubles that Intel is currently facing with its Desktop lineup, AMD might just take away a big chunk of that desktop market share.

AMD Ryzen 9000 "Granite Ridge" Desktop CPUs Specs:

CPU Name	Architecture	Cores / Threads	Base / Boost Clock	Cache	Graphics (Integrated)	Memory Support	TDP	Price (MSRP)
Ryzen 9 9950X3D?	Zen 5	16/32	TBD	128 MB L3 + 16 MB L2	2 x RDNA 2 CUs	DDR5-5600	TBD	TBD
Ryzen 9 9950X	Zen 5	16/32	4.3 / 5.7 GHz	64 MB L3 + 16 MB L2	2 x RDNA 2 CUs	DDR5-5600	170W	$499?
Ryzen 9 9900X3D?	Zen 5	12/24	TBD	128 MB L3 + 12 MB L2	2 x RDNA 2 CUs	DDR5-5600	TBD	TBD
Ryzen 9 9900X	Zen 5	12/24	4.4 / 5.6 GHz	64 MB L3 + 12 MB L2	2 x RDNA 2 CUs	DDR5-5600	120W	$399?
Ryzen 7 9800X3D?	Zen 5	8/16	TBD	96 MB L3 + 8 MB L2	2 x RDNA 2 CUs	DDR5-5600	TBD	TBD
Ryzen 7 9700X	Zen 5	8/16	3.8 / 5.5 GHz	32 MB L3 + 8 MB L2	2 x RDNA 2 CUs	DDR5-5600	65W/120W?	$299?
Ryzen 5 9600X	Zen 5	6/12	3.9 / 5.4 GHz	32 MB L3 + 6 MB L2	2 x RDNA 2 CUs	DDR5-5600	65W	$229?

Source: WCCFTech

 

[Hostile_18]

It seems like I'll be forever on this 6 core 7600x lol. To be fair it's a good problem to have, it's been so good for the money.

9800x 3D will be when I bite.

 

[Pagusas]

if those prices are legit, AMD has an all star gen on its hands. Bravo (if legit)

 

[Hostile_18]

if those prices are legit, AMD has an all star gen on its hands. Bravo (if legit)

I think they will be on the lower side, as interest just seems really low this time round. I guess in gaming circles alot will be waiting on the x3d chips.

 

[Bullet Club]

Intel says it has found the issue causing 13th and 14th Gen CPUs to crash

Now, Intel plans to address the processors' troublesome 'elevated operating voltage' with a microcode patch.

Intel says it has found the source of the widespread instability issues affecting its Core 13th and 14th Gen processors. In an update on Monday, Intel confirmed that CPUs are experiencing "elevated operating voltage" and that a patch is on the way.

"We have determined that elevated operating voltage is causing instability issues in some 13th/14th Gen desktop processors," Intel employee Thomas Hannaford writes on the company's forum. "Our analysis of returned processors confirms that the elevated operating voltage is stemming from a microcode algorithm resulting in incorrect voltage requests to the processor."

Intel says it's working to release a microcode patch for motherboard manufacturers in mid-August and that anyone affected by the issue should contact Intel support in the meantime. The chipmaker first confirmed it was investigating the issue in April after receiving reports from Intel Core i9-13900K and i9-14900K owners experiencing frequent game crashes.

So far, guidance from Intel and motherboard BIOS updates haven't fully fixed the instability issue. But the pressure on Intel to address the problem has only intensified in recent weeks. Path of Titans developer Alderon Games posted a YouTube video revealing "thousands" of game crashes impacting players with Intel's 13th and 14th Gen CPUs, while a video from Gamers Nexus says they "can't recommend Intel" processors right now due to the ongoing issues.

Source: The Verge

 

[Pagusas]

I don't foresee this hurting high end laptop for intel, but we'll see.

Once again, intel was their own worst enemy by not having meteor lake on time.

Next year they are going to kick so much ass on desktop though, as I keep repeating ad nauseam. Gloom and doom is at all time highs on the internet because of 14th gen, but nah.

The point where this stuff starts to matter a lot less is when Intel's shift to foundry first, chip design second is complete. They know how things are going and decided if they can't sell their chips to everyone, why not make them for the competition?

I just hope I get some good news on that front sooner rather than later.

However, they are absolutely not giving up on their chips and claim to be able to return to server dominance in 2 or 3 years.

Given apple's success with the M series, do we really think ARM isn't going to eventually attack the high end market? If nvidia is entering the cpu market, they arent going to aim at just low powered devices. If the software comes along and works as well as what Apple did on their side, we could see ARM take over fast in all areas, including the high end market.

 

[Chozofication]

Given apple's success with the M series, do we really think ARM isn't going to eventually attack the high end market? If nvidia is entering the cpu market, they arent going to aim at just low powered devices. If the software comes along and works as well as what Apple did on their side, we could see ARM take over fast in all areas, including the high end market.

I don't think so ; there's limits with scaling to high wattage on ARM thus far.

10 years is a long time though, we'll see. But that's one reason why intel wants to be a leading foundry, so they can make competing chips as well.

 

[XOR]

Alleged AMD Ryzen 9000 "Zen 5" Desktop CPU Prices Revealed: 9950X $499, 9900X $399, 9700X $299, 9600X $229

Alleged prices of AMD's Ryzen 9000 "Zen 5" Desktop CPUs have been revealed & it may look like the top 9950X chip would top out at $499 US if these are the real deal.

AMD Ryzen 9000 "Zen 5" Desktop CPU Prices Might Be Super Competitive If These Alleged Prices Are To Be Believed, Ryzen 9 9950X Flagship For $499 US

The pricing information comes from Anandtech Forum member, Hail The Brain Slug, who allegedly knows someone working at BestBuy. In the conversation, the alleged BestBuy employee revealed the Ryzen 9000 CPUs are in stock & ready for the retail launch on the 31st of July though availability might vary from shop to shop. It is mentioned that there's lots of stock for the Ryzen 9 9900X & the Ryzen 7 9700X CPUs but there aren't a lot of Ryzen 9 9950X and Ryzen 5 9600X chips at this specific retailer.

In a previous post, we saw a similar situation: the Ryzen 7 9700X and Ryzen 9 9900X had plenty of stock while the Ryzen 5 9600X had less than 100 units. But moving forward to important bits, we have alleged pricing of the Ryzen 9000 CPUs which is as listed below:

• Ryzen 9 9950X - $499 US (7950X $699 US MSRP)
• Ryzen 9 9900X - $399 US (7900X $549 US MSRP)
• Ryzen 7 9700X - $299 US (7700X $399 US MSRP)
• Ryzen 5 9600X - $229 US (7600X $299 US MSRP)

It is also mentioned that the prices could change when AMD updates the retailer with the official retail sales date. We've seen major tech companies make last-minute MSRP/Price changes, even on the same day as the launch so that's entirely possible. But before we go any further, we would like to state once again that these prices aren't officially confirmed yet so take them with a grain of salt.

In the case that these are true, the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X 16-Core CPU would end up being a killer value against the Core i9-14900K and Core i9-14900KS, both of which retail above $500 US, are power-hungry and riddled with instability issues. Meanwhile the $399 US price of the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X is also solid which will put some pressure on the Core i7-14700K CPUs. The Ryzen 7 9700X at $299 US seems to be a good deal since it was recently revealed that the chip would end up slightly faster than the Ryzen 7 7800X3D, the best gaming chip at the moment while running at just 65W.

Lastly, the AMD Ryzen 5 9600X at $229 US makes it look much better than the previously expected $299 US pricing. The 6-core chip will be a decent mainstream solution for the AM5 segment at the alleged pricing. Overall, if these prices do end up being true, then AMD will attract lots of new PC builders to its AM5 platform, and with all the troubles that Intel is currently facing with its Desktop lineup, AMD might just take away a big chunk of that desktop market share.

AMD Ryzen 9000 "Granite Ridge" Desktop CPUs Specs:

CPU Name	Architecture	Cores / Threads	Base / Boost Clock	Cache	Graphics (Integrated)	Memory Support	TDP	Price (MSRP)
Ryzen 9 9950X3D?	Zen 5	16/32	TBD	128 MB L3 + 16 MB L2	2 x RDNA 2 CUs	DDR5-5600	TBD	TBD
Ryzen 9 9950X	Zen 5	16/32	4.3 / 5.7 GHz	64 MB L3 + 16 MB L2	2 x RDNA 2 CUs	DDR5-5600	170W	$499?
Ryzen 9 9900X3D?	Zen 5	12/24	TBD	128 MB L3 + 12 MB L2	2 x RDNA 2 CUs	DDR5-5600	TBD	TBD
Ryzen 9 9900X	Zen 5	12/24	4.4 / 5.6 GHz	64 MB L3 + 12 MB L2	2 x RDNA 2 CUs	DDR5-5600	120W	$399?
Ryzen 7 9800X3D?	Zen 5	8/16	TBD	96 MB L3 + 8 MB L2	2 x RDNA 2 CUs	DDR5-5600	TBD	TBD
Ryzen 7 9700X	Zen 5	8/16	3.8 / 5.5 GHz	32 MB L3 + 8 MB L2	2 x RDNA 2 CUs	DDR5-5600	65W/120W?	$299?
Ryzen 5 9600X	Zen 5	6/12	3.9 / 5.4 GHz	32 MB L3 + 6 MB L2	2 x RDNA 2 CUs	DDR5-5600	65W	$229?

Source: WCCFTech

That price is very sweet for the 9700X which they say slightly beats 7800x3d.

Will wait and see, for black friday deals or later. Crypto currently sleeping, which is why I'm going to be buying crypto, and after boom period selling. 300$ can turn into 3000$ if crypto mania manifests again. So at least for me not buying cpus until after crypto mania phase.

 

[Pagusas]

That price is very sweet for the 9700X which they say slightly beats 7800x3d.

Will wait and see, for black friday deals or later. Crypto currently sleeping, which is why I'm going to be buying crypto, and after boom period selling. 300$ can turn into 3000$ if crypto mania manifests again. So at least for me not buying cpus until after crypto mania phase.

Yeah, this will be a glorious black friday year.

 

[Bullet Club]

 

[Pagusas]

Cool. Release an all 24 - P core version at a great price that doesn't fail and you'll regain some good will intel.

 

[Bullet Club]

 

[crumbs]

Rough year for CPU releases. A yawn from AMD and now a wet fart from Intel.

 

[Pagusas]

Rough year for CPU releases. A yawn from AMD and now a wet fart from Intel.

Still have high hopes for the 9950x3d if it really is going to have 3d cache on both ccd's. That'll make it the ultimate game/production chip.

 

[crumbs]

Still have high hopes for the 9950x3d if it really is going to have 3d cache on both ccd's. That'll make it the ultimate game/production chip.

Agreed (I switched to a 7800x3d last year when they were getting cheap bundles), although AMD could really crank up the pricing on the 9000x3d parts considering the competition.

 

[Bullet Club]

 

[Bullet Club]

 

[regawdless]

The sad part about all of this performance talk ... Is software.

Software is actually the biggest issue. Games and engines could be way more efficient and smart in how they're utilizing the CPUs. These core clocks are already extremely high, the CPUs are extremely capable. But the ways they're used are very inefficient. That's why the 3d cache works, it's a pretty blunt hardware solution to a software issue. Software improvements could multiply the gaming performance but those resources aren't being invested.

 

[WesternBlood]

The sad part about all of this performance talk ... Is software.

Software is actually the biggest issue. Games and engines could be way more efficient and smart in how they're utilizing the CPUs. These core clocks are already extremely high, the CPUs are extremely capable. But the ways they're used are very inefficient. That's why the 3d cache works, it's a pretty blunt hardware solution to a software issue. Software improvements could multiply the gaming performance but those resources aren't being invested.

Considering how big games are now going to Unreal 5 instead of taking chances and making bespoke, tailored engines for the hardware it runs on means we will have the 80% good enough software to run for everyone looking to make a game.

It is the same as central planning of communist countries. Locks out innovation and keeps a lumbering beast across generations that will eventually code itself into a corner if the base aspects of the code are unable to be updated appropriately.

 

[Bullet Club]

 

[regawdless]

This whole CPU discussion is so weird to me. All that talk about omg this amazing CPU look how crazy fast it is.

Then nearly all sites only do 1080p testing. Omg look at those increases! No enthusiast who purchases such a CPU plays at 1080p though. Then I finally find a site that does benchmarks with higher resolutions. At 1440p, the increase from my 13600k to the 9800X3D is 9% with a 4090. Which, it's all at really high fps either way so ok, but nothing amazing.

Then you go to 4k and you're talking about a 3.5% difference compared to a 13600k. I'm playing at 3440x1440 so it'll be like what 5-6% more on average on a crazy 4090 that will push very high fps either way? Yeah I'm not that enthusiastic about upgrading.

 

[XOR]

This whole CPU discussion is so weird to me. All that talk about omg this amazing CPU look how crazy fast it is.

Then nearly all sites only do 1080p testing. Omg look at those increases! No enthusiast who purchases such a CPU plays at 1080p though. Then I finally find a site that does benchmarks with higher resolutions. At 1440p, the increase from my 13600k to the 9800X3D is 9% with a 4090. Which, it's all at really high fps either way so ok, but nothing amazing.

Then you go to 4k and you're talking about a 3.5% difference compared to a 13600k. I'm playing at 3440x1440 so it'll be like what 5-6% more on average on a crazy 4090 that will push very high fps either way? Yeah I'm not that enthusiastic about upgrading.

If you want 100+fps with path tracing 1080p is part of the equation. That is 4k DLSS performance which uses internal 1080p resolution

 

[regawdless]

If you want 100+fps with path tracing 1080p is part of the equation. That is 4k DLSS performance which uses internal 1080p resolution

Not exactly. There's a cost to DLSS, it's not free. I'd like to see benchmarks for that though.

 

[XOR]

Not exactly. There's a cost to DLSS, it's not free. I'd like to see benchmarks for that though.

Theres a cost to dlss but high framerates are definitely possible



Keep in mind rumor is the 5080 will be 10% faster than the 4090 and will release in a few months

 

[Hostile_18]

I've been really impressed with the 9800x3D results. I am in the first UK batch, so should have mine early next week.

Ps How crazy would it be to spend £1200 on a motherboard

 

[XOR]

I've been really impressed with the 9800x3D results. I am in the first UK batch, so should have mine early next week.

Ps How crazy would it be to spend £1200 on a motherboard

It's scary to spend that much on am5 motherboards, the cpu pins are now in the motherboard.