Rule	Description
Follow the Reddit Content Policy	You can find it here. TL;DR: If you can't say something respectfully, don't say it at all. Insults and personal attacks aren't welcome here.
Post should be about hardware	Posts should be about hardware news, reviews, technical discussion or how-tos and buyers guides.
No editorializing titles	Please use the "suggest title" button for link submissions, or copy the title of the original link. Do NOT editorialize the title of the submission; (minor) changes for clarity may be acceptable if the original title is clickbait, or failed to summarize its actual content.
Original Source Policy	Content submitted should be of original source, or at least contain partially original reporting on top of existing information. Exceptions can be made for content in foreign language or any other exceptional cases. Fully paywalled articles are not allowed. Please contact the moderators through modmail if you have questions.
No memes, jokes, or direct links to images	Memes, direct image links, and low effort content will be removed. This includes both posts and comments. Images submitted as self posts must include an informative description for context. Top level comments must be substantive and contain more than 20 characters.
No tech support or PC building questions	These belong in /r/techsupport, /r/buildapc or any relevant tech subreddits. If your post asks a question about a specific product or need, it probably belongs elsewhere. This includes 'What should I buy?', 'Does a ____ do what I need?', 'How much is _____ worth?' and 'How long until (something obvious) happens?' type questions.
Serious and intelligent discussion	We allow discussion posts on relevant topics to hardware; there should however be at least background information and relevancy to demonstrate such a discussion is worthwhile. Low effort posts such as "What is ______ and what does it do?" is not acceptable.
Rumor Policy	No unsubstantiated rumors - Rumors or other claims/information not directly from official sources must have evidence to support them. Any rumor or claim that is just a statement from an unknown source containing no supporting evidence will be removed.
Misc. Rules	No content behind paywalls. No submissions to streaming sites outside of event megathreads. No submissions to crowdfunding sites or ongoing campaigns. No bots.

4,161,672 Subscribers

[Asianometry] The End of Dennard Scaling

2 Comments

2024/12/03
05:53 UTC

Is Intel and AMD repeat of 20+ years ago??

Intel Ultra Desktop PC has been shitting the bed recently, while AMD's desktop PC is just destroying every other Windows CPU... on the other hand...

Intel's Core Ultra Series 2 laptop CPU is near Apple M series power efficiency destroying every other windows CPU even the Qualcomm ARM CPU...

this feels so deja vu as 20 years ago, the Intel Pentium was just going downhill every iteration, but their "Core" series laptop CPU came to save the day. At the same time, AMD 64 released and was insanely good...

This just feels uncanny at this point rofl.

36 Comments

2024/12/03
04:07 UTC

AMD MI325X vs. MI355X accelerator comparison

MI325X vs. MI355X Chip-Level Comparison

Specification	MI325X	MI355X
Architecture	CDNA 3	CDNA 4
Compute Performance (FP16)	10.4 PF	18.5 PF
Compute Performance (FP8)	20.8 PF	37 PF
Compute Performance (FP4/FP6)	Not Supported	74 PF (FP6/FP4)
Memory Type	HBM3e	HBM3e
Memory Capacity (per GPU)	256 GB	288 GB
Memory Bandwidth	6 TB/s	8 TB/s
Parameter Capacity	1.8 Trillion	4.2 Trillion

11 Comments

2024/12/02
16:24 UTC

[TechTechPotato] Shock Retirement

85 Comments

2024/12/02
14:47 UTC

Ray Tracing: Has it Been A Success for PC Gaming?

111 Comments

2024/12/02
07:19 UTC

100

Why Hybrid Bonding is the Future of Packaging

18 Comments

2024/12/01
15:15 UTC

183

Ryzen 9000 performance re-examinated (what AMD left behind at the launch)

As is known, AMD left some of potential performance for Ryzen 9000 at its launch, which were improved by subsequent microcode updates and software patches. With the launches of Arrow Lake and the Ryzen 7 9800X3D, Ryzen 9000 (non-X3D) was able to show a clearly improved performance, especially at gaming benchmarks.

This short article (long form at 3DCenter) will take a closer look at this performance improvement in comparison to Ryzen 7000 and Core i-14000 in order to correct the performance differences established at launch. At its launch, Ryzen 9000 was measured with an average of +9% application performance and +4% gaming performance compared to Ryzen 7000.

For this purpose, the benchmark evaluation for the launch of the Ryzen 7 9800X3D was extended to Ryzen 7000 and the missing figures were filled by interpolation. The following performance tables show how the performance of Ryzen 7000 & 9000 has changed compared to Intel's Core i-14000 between the benchmarks from August (launch of Ryzen 9000) and November (launch of Ryzen 7 9800X3D):

	7600X	7700X	7900X	7950X	9600X	9700X	9900X	9950X	14900K
	6C Zen4	8C Zen4	12C Zen4	16C Zen4	6C Zen5	8C Zen5	12C Zen5	16C Zen5	8P+16E RPL
Application Perf. OLD	55.5%	67.4%	85.6%	101.0%	61.4%	71.8%	94.4%	110.1%	100%
Application Perf. NEW	56.8%	68.7%	86.8%	101.7%	62.1%	73.4%	96.5%	111.6%	100%
Difference	+1.3 PP	+1.3 PP	+1.2 PP	+0.7 PP	+0.7 PP	+1.6 PP	+2.1 PP	+1.5 PP	–
Gain Zen 4 to Zen 5	–	–	–	–	76X→96X +9.3%	77X→97X +6.8%	790X→990X +11.2%	795X→995X +9.7%	–
Gaming Perf. OLD	82.0%	86.5%	86.5%	88.4%	86.7%	91.5%	87.5%	91.1%	100%
Gaming Perf. NEW	87.7%	91.9%	90.8%	92.5%	93.5%	97.5%	96.1%	99.4%	100%
Difference	+5.7 PP	+5.4 PP	+4.3 PP	+4.1 PP	+6.8 PP	+6.0 PP	+8.6 PP	+8.3 PP	–
Gain Zen 4 to Zen 5	–	–	–	–	76X→96X +6.6%	77X→97X +6.1%	790X→990X +5.8%	795X→995X +7.4%	–

In terms of application performance, the differences are small - and only exist compared to Intel, but not between Ryzen 7000 and 9000. In terms of gaming performance, Ryzen 9000 also only gains slightly vs Ryzen 7000 with the new benchmarks. Compared to Intel, however, Ryzen 9000 achieves a convincing result. But, Ryzen 7000 also benefits very noticeably from the firmware and software improvements.

The picture becomes even clearer in a direct generation comparison of all tested models against each other: With the new benchmarks, Ryzen 9000 gains almost nothing over Ryzen 7000 at application performance, and the (relative) gain is also small at gaming performance. However, the advantages of the new benchmarks of Ryzen 9000 compared to Core1-14000 are very clear: Under applications it is only +2.4% more, but under games it is +8.9% more.

	OLD (Aug '24)		NEW (Nov '24)	Difference
Applic. Perf.: Ryzen 7000(X) to Ryzen 9000(X)	100% vs 109.1%	→	109.2%	+9.1% → +9.2%
Applic. Perf.: Core i-14000(K) to Ryzen 9000(X)	100% vs 103.5%	→	105.6%	+3.5% → +5.6%
Gaming Perf.: Ryzen 7000(X) to Ryzen 9000(X)	100% vs 103.9%	→	106.5%	+3.9% → +6.5%
Gaming Perf.: Core i-14000(K) to Ryzen 9000(X)	100% vs 93.4%	→	101.6%	–6.6% → +1.6%

AMD has therefore left a lot of potential performance behind at the launch of Ryzen 9000. Not so much compared to Ryzen 7000, but very clearly compared to Intel. Nevertheless, the progress in the gaming performance of Ryzen 9000 between the benchmarks from August to November is sufficient for Ryzen 9000 to no longer lag behind Core i-14000 at gaming performance, but rather to catch up (or partially lead).

Such a result would certainly have made Ryzen 9000 look better at its launch, and the net-wide rating would probably have been much friendlier. This underlines the importance of not launching prematurely without finished firmware & software. Now a few months later, it is certainly much more difficult for AMD to change the narrative on Ryzen 9000 once it has been set.

TLDR — What AMD has left behind in terms of performance at the Ryzen 9000 launch:

Note: all comparison values are based on the average of the four X models at AMD; at Intel, based on their three K models compared to the three larger X models from AMD
+2.0% more application performance for Ryzen 9000(X) compared to Core i-14000(K)
+0.1% more application performance for Ryzen 9000(X) compared to Ryzen 7000(X) (= within measurement tolerance)
+8.9% more gaming performance for Ryzen 9000(X) compared to Core i-14000(K)
101.6% gaming performance level of Ryzen 9000(X) compared to Core i-14000(K) instead of the 93.4% shown at launch
+2.4% more gaming performance for Ryzen 9000(X) compared to Ryzen 7000(X)
for the following reason: +5.7% more gaming performance for Ryzen 7000(X) compared to Core i-14000(K) (= Ryzen 7000 also benefits well from all the patches & updates)
Sources: averaged results of the launch reviews for Ryzen 9000 (from August 2024) and Ryzen 7 9800X3D (from November 2024)

Original & some longer article in german: 3DCenter.org

63 Comments

2024/12/01
13:34 UTC

1,882

[Gamers Nexus - Special Report] Do Not Buy NZXT | Predatory, Evil Rental Computer Scam Investigated

575 Comments

2024/12/01
00:08 UTC

Lunar Lake at 17W - Windows Laptops NEEDED This(video)

32 Comments

2024/11/30
10:40 UTC

Rules:

Spam and Self Promotion:

Related Reddits:

filters