Now AMD is just being silly.
Keep some gains back for later on, perhaps?
I always backed AMD, so I'm very happy that they are kicking Intel's but for now.
AMD's Ryzen 7000 desktop processors will reportedly top 5.7 GHz in the case of the Zen giant's top-of-the-line 7950X, when they launch later this quarter. The industry watchers at Wccftech claim to have obtained detailed specs for AMD's next-gen Zen 4 desktop CPUs, codenamed Raphael. If true, they offer some interesting …
What I'm really missing (as I've probably mentioned before) are the "good enough" desktop chips which AMD used to sell for £50 - £70 or so complete with graphics. Pushing the performance envelope is great, but when the cheapest 4000 series Ryzen 3 has a current RRP of only just under £100 as far as I can tell, and that's before you look at pricing up a separate graphics card and the fact that the 4000 series will likely be phased out as soon as these new chips are available, it's difficult these days to build a "cheap and cheerful" machine. Couldn't they have carried on producing some of the A-series? They were just fine for this kind of use.
Of *course* it's going to be the new normal.
Anyone who believes that this current chip 'shortage' will ever end, that somehow from this point forward supply with ever catch up enough with demand to bring prices back to their previous levels, I have several bridges over the Thames that I'll be happy to sell you.
I have a vague feeling that hiking up prices, in certain economic 'climate', is more profitable than mass production of cheap and cheerful. See something similar in travel industry (flight prices), though I don't know if the same business priciple applies here.
are you referring to. Keep in mind this is a leak, and there is nothing about timeline
Are you talking about oveclocking ? Maybe there's a practical reason that has nothing to do with sku-binning. That's the case dor the 5800x3d.
On a side issue, what performance increase is typically available through overclocking ?
Yes, mumble, mumble 16 bit, woteva but...
..."back in the day" I was able to shoehorn Windows for Workgroups onto machines with as little as 2MB RAM and 20MB of HDD while 4MB and 40MB seemed fairly comfortable. Since the L3 cache seems to be shared and amounts to 4MB per core with, of course, 1MB per core of dedicated L2, I wonder what WfW would run like, if tied to one core and running entirely from the caches? Or 16 of them at the same time, or 32 running in effectively 2.5MB...
Or (yes, I know I'm getting silly now) how about Windows 95, which I seem to remember worked pretty well in 16MB? Room for four of those in the L3 of the 16-core processor...
The 5900X can suck down as much as 200W when the chipmaker's Precision Boost Overdrive — an automated overlocking profile found in the bios — is enabled.AMD reports both the TDP and PPT of their platform. The maximum PPT of AM5 is 230W, therefore any particular CPU can in theory draw up to 230W and still be within spec for the platform. Typically, TDP*1.35 is the allowed (at stock) PPT of any particular consumer Ryzen.
Unless AMD has changed the way it reports TDP since the launch of its 5000-series parts, there's a good chance the chip designer's Ryzen 7900 and 7950 parts could near 300W in real-world power consumption, putting them in the same territory as Intel's 12th-gen chips.
"AMD would like to issue a correction to the socket power and TDP limits of the upcoming AMD Socket AM5. AMD Socket AM5 supports up to a 170W TDP with a PPT up to 230W. TDP*1.35 is the standard calculation for TDP v. PPT for AMD sockets in the “Zen” era, and the new 170W TDP group is no exception (170*1.35=229.5).