I think even that is fairly uncommon to these day, the vast majority even previous enthusiasts just let them run for the most part. If they do anything it is more than likely memory tuning. I am just thinking about coverage even on youtube, every one I watch once did OCing, even less serious like L1 and now it is pretty much just install, give decent cooling and maybe push memory even from the previously serious record chasers.
For sure it is still a thing, but it seem like the tail end of what it used to be recognisable as.
When on windows I now use software to push allcore to 3.9 for battlefield. I envy those who can use PBO. I also want the x3d but donāt need it, but maybe I can pick it up in a year or so and sit with current PC for at least another five years. I think thatāll also allow me to push my samsung b die even higher, and the less time I have to spend on the cpu, the more time I can spend punching myself in the dick while popping out the cmos battery.
I have the same mindset, if the reviews on this is as good as AMD makes them out to be, Iāll probably pick up one the be the last one for my x570 motherboard.
Well the thing is when there is a voltage cap, then it might have an impact on PBO as well.
it wouldnāt really matter much if the 3D-Vcache is really going to be,
a significant performance uplift in most gaming and productivity workloads.
But iĀ“m more currious about the actual problem they where,
facing with the 3D-Vcache that they have to lock it down.
Iām assuming stability issues but what does this say about the future of zen4?
AMDās priority is still to make unlocked cpuĀ“s.
But yeahā¦
Yup i agree that missing manual oc doesnāt have to be that big of a deal at all.
Iām really curious too see what this thing can do.
And what kind of conclusions we could from that.
When they announced 3D vcacheā¦ was it a year ago? It seems ages ago now, but I inferred that they were talking about the 6000 series being a refresh of the 5000 series, but with 3D cache across the board. Instead I guess what this is is closer to a one-off proof of concept, at least for now. I wonder what the volume of this thing is going to be.
I found the recent announcement weird too. There were three generations of CPU announcement including this, the 6000 and 7000 series, across a variety of platforms. When they announce the 5800X3D and the 7800X for the same year Iām not sure of the reasoning in buying the 5800X3D, it would be like buying Kaby Lake when Coffee Lake was months away (or Rocket Lake and Alder Lake, for a more recent example).
Probably more aimed at people like me who are on less than 5000 series. It makes for the best final upgrade for the platform for general all round performance from they way they talk about it.
Its first gen locked for overclocking bevause voltage reasons only. I love how people makle everything else up like vampires and werewolfs.
Next gen 3D memory may or maybe locked. You know nothing john snow.
Letās be real AMD killed overclocking with the way their CPUs dynamically boost anyway. Most Ryzen āoverclockingā involves undervolting and reducing heat these days. Any performance boost you might get is a bonus.
People on AMD keep saying stuff like this, but it just doesnāt compute to me. Itās like when people complained about Intel only keeping motherboards for two generations. I was on my previous CPU for 10 years ā I donāt expect to keep my motherboard or RAM from one CPU to the next.
Iāve been on the same motherboard+RAM for five years, I donāt expect to have to upgrade every component when I decide I need 20% more CPU horsepower. Shouldnāt that just drop right in if it can be made to do so? Seems awfully wasteful to replace four components just to upgrade one. (1600X>3600X>5600X)
No, I donāt expect any component to just ādrop right inā to my old motherboard. That didnāt even support PCIe3.0. It didnāt support m.2 boot drives (although I could use them as additional storage). Modern CPUs are two DDR generations ahead. I donāt think that ancient standards should be maintained in perpetuity. I also donāt agree that CPU performance has only increased 20% in the last decade. My current CPU has ten more cores than my previous.
They meant, to me, that when they want 20% more as in 3600X to 5600X or more, they just get the next gen CPU as AMD mad a decision to support AM4 through its life time. I personally have 3700X and if I wanted a jump in performance I get the semi generational jump to revised 5800X over my 3700X and also the bonus of the 3DVCache.
No one exprect a two ran generatio ngap to support a CPU jump like that, thats just silly. and the performance gap in that time have been much greater than only 20%, you are talking DDR2ā¦ that what a Core 2 Quad? The mind reels at the thoughts of the percentage jump between say a Q9500 and a 5800X if that is even comparable across companies and times.
I didnāt misread anything. They responded to my post specifically talking about upgrading CPUs every decade. And really there hasnāt really been a big enough jump between Ryzen 1000 and Ryzen 5000 to really justify changing out. For the vast, vast majority of people changing out their GPU is much more beneficial than swapping out even a midrange CPU. I would go so far as to say most people still on 6th gen Intel are still fine. I find this expectation that youāre going to want to buy a new CPU every 18 months or so not only incredibly wasteful, but displays an awful lack of confidence in AMD products.
idk if you have just lost track of dates, but youāre listing CPUs and RAM standards from 15 years ago. 10 years ago was Sandy Bridge and DDR3. Thatās what I upgraded from. Personally if I were still on Haswell I wouldnāt be considering upgrading for a little while yet. When I moved to AMD I was under no illusion of keeping the motherboard for my next upgrade, probably in another 10 years so I find the argument completely moot.
The thing is, as well, that I really should add is that this long term support does come with issues. For example there was a problem of Bulldozer and its derivatives being stuck on PCIe 2.0 for so long. Obviously that platform had other issues, but I donāt think itās beneficial to keep ancient features for years after the industry has moved on just in the name of compatibility. Additionally Ryzen has already encountered issues of its support tables essentially having to overwrite old CPU models for new ones in BIOS due to space limitations. There are motherboards that if you update their BIOS they will brick old CPUs. You canāt just keep supporting an endless list of brand new CPUs without issue.
I donāt really get the issue. Buy the best CPU you can afford, upgrade it when it no longer does what you need it to, and the platform will be obsolete by then anyway so itās moot.
You said 10, they said 5. You also said two ram generations, both of what I listed are in that time frame.
Yes clearly if you change your motherboard, ram, and CPU that is how you like to change you systems. I am many others can have motherboards that are 5 years old and replace on that cycle because we prefer it and do it with everything potentially from 1X00 Ryzen to 5X00 Ryzen cpus, all with out changing motherboard or ram. it is possible.
I know they said 5, but as Iāve already said buying a new CPU that often just doesnāt make sense to me. I think thatās wasteful. There just hasnāt been a big enough change in that time frame.
For some reason you started making assumptions rather than just askingā¦
Thatsā fair, some of us donāt mind 20% per generation, thatās actually pretty good all things considered, not many of us hold out for 80 to 100+% performance increases. just how we do things differently. For those that do it the smaller increments by buying the best and upgrading when necessary it is convenient right now to exist in a time where that can be a hell of a ride on the currently existing boards. I mean the gap to take it to extremes from the crappiest AM4 CPU which isnt even Ryzen, all the way to a 5950X or 5800X3d, whichever is faster in then end, must be just massive.
thats where I took that from, not assuming, literally reading your posts.
The thing is Iām not convinced it is 20% between Ryzen generations. In fact to me the only case that makes Ryzen a bit of an exception is that the brought the 12 and 16 core options down to the mainstream. I still wouldnāt trust a motherboard whose power stage was designed for 8 cores tops with a 16 core 4.7*GHz part, but I understand that the ālike for likeā product just didnāt exist in the 1000 or 2000 series era.
Iām talking specifically about an i7 3960X paired with DDR3 that I bought in 2012. The quad core quad and DDR2 you inferred from my post were from around 2007-ish. You could have just asked for clarity if specifics mattered to you rather than guessing wrong.
