[HN Gopher] Ryzen 4000 Review
___________________________________________________________________
Ryzen 4000 Review
Author : caseyf7
Score : 107 points
Date : 2020-03-30 19:20 UTC (3 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.pcworld.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.pcworld.com)
| loser777 wrote:
| The natural question now is how much the i9-10980HK differs from
| the 9980HK that the 4800HS seems to trounce handily. Judging by
| the fact that it's still on some iteration of 14nm(++++++), it
| looks to be more of the same strategy of aggressive turbo to
| hopefully compensate for lackluster IPC.
|
| Hope to see more high performance AMD laptop design wins as a
| result!
| MuffinFlavored wrote:
| > 14nm(++++++)
|
| What do you mean by this?
| jonplackett wrote:
| It's also a reference to Intel's failure to make 10nm work
| (their equivalent to AMD'a 7nm) and just endlessly flogging
| slightly updated 14nm
| jdsully wrote:
| Intel has been repeatedly tuning their 14nm process and
| adding a plus at the end each time. It's starting to get a
| bit ridiculous.
| wtallis wrote:
| For reference, Intel's first 14nm mobile processors were
| introduced from late 2014 through mid 2015. They've done
| one major microarchitecture update since then, and the rest
| of their microarchitecture and fab refinements in the
| intervening years have been minor updates as they're in a
| holding pattern waiting for their fabs to deliver a 10nm
| process that is viable for mass production.
|
| The first 10nm process was such an abject failure that
| Intel now prefers to pretend it didn't happen. The second
| 10nm process produced laptop processors that began shipping
| last fall, but are still mixed in with 14nm processors that
| are branded as part of the same generation.
| heelix wrote:
| I'm really excited with the prospect of a a fast, multi core chip
| that does not throttle on a laptop. That G14 that everyone seems
| to be doing the initial review with shows really nice single and
| multicore performance with a small thermal signature. The gaming
| 'workout' is not terribly dissimilar to what I'd hope to see
| unplugged doing development.
|
| The i9 I've got in my work laptop just cannot handle the watts it
| tries to consume. I've held off updating my personal laptop
| waiting for something that is not an 8lb+ brick to allow it to
| run with a load. Should be a promising Spring/Summer.
| throwaway_pdp09 wrote:
| Why use a laptop if your work appears to befit a desktop? A lot
| more power and RAM expansion for less cash.
|
| > small thermal signature
|
| When I were a lad, we used to call that 'warm' :)
| Roritharr wrote:
| I still have not heard an official statement what the Thunderbolt
| 3 story is for these CPUs. Could we get it? Will we get it?
|
| Without this I simply can't buy em as we've invested in TB3 Docks
| for the past two years and are pretty happy with them.
| Symmetry wrote:
| The new Thinkpad T14 is supposed to have a TB3 on both the
| Intel and AMD versions, at least.
| chx wrote:
| That has not been confirmed. There is nothing official on the
| T14 on the Lenovo site yet except from the press release.
|
| https://www.lenovo.com/us/en/commercial-
| notebook/thinkpad/th... (and yes that's the right url, try
| replacing "thinkpad-t14-series" with "x" you will be
| redirected there)
| dijit wrote:
| Intel are finally starting to license motherboards on Ryzen
| (Asrock had one certified in Febuary) so it's not impossible,
| piinbinary wrote:
| The LTT review [0] also had good things to say about the battery
| life. This CPU seems very power-efficient when compared to a
| 9980HK.
|
| [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYqG31V4qtA
| loeg wrote:
| FWIW, loaded battery life is intrinsically linked to the
| thermal / cooling aspect of CPU performance discussed in the
| article. Mechanically, CPUs are just simple resisters
| converting stored battery energy into heat.
|
| Idle battery power is also interesting, and even the older Zen
| 1 had pretty good reduction in power consumption at idle (C1).
| lmilcin wrote:
| I have been holding out for almost a year already to replace my
| T440s with a new Ryzen-powered Thinkpad. Hope I won't have to
| wait for long now.
| thelittleone wrote:
| Big fan of Thinkpad. My 2017 MBP died (again) a few weeks ago
| and I can't get it respired due to travel restrictions. So I
| took out my old T420 and loaded Linux. Forced to use it for a
| few days and have to say I like it a LOT. It's bulkier and the
| screen is no where near as good. But it has 16GB RAM, the
| keyboard is amazing, it feels solid and I have USBs. I still
| occasionally use OSX on a 2010 Mac mini but recognise I'm not
| missing the Apple ecosystem at all. Quite a liberating feeling
| as I thought I was fully tied to it.
| bcrosby95 wrote:
| I've been holding out on replacing my XPS 13 with a Thinkpad T
| series with a Zen 2 processor. I recently bought my wife one
| and I love the ergonomics of the 14" way better than the 13".
|
| Probably my favorite laptop I've ever tried, and that includes
| both old and new macbooks.
| bloody-crow wrote:
| It's very promising. Can't wait to see more laptop offers on this
| chip. The current Asus Zephyrus G14 seems to gamer-y in terms of
| the design.
|
| I'd buy the same hardware in a more mature and grown-up chassis
| like current Dell XPS 13 in a heartbeat.
| nchelluri wrote:
| I want this in an XPS 13 too. I just bought an XPS 13 last
| year, running Ubuntu, and it's very nice, aside from the whine
| when it's plugged in.
| chkass wrote:
| I'd settle for an XPS 13 with 32GB of RAM :( 16GB is the
| current limit.
| MatekCopatek wrote:
| Not with this year's model (XPS 13 9300) - 32 GB is now
| available.
| slaw wrote:
| $199 motile m141 laptop - up to 32GB no coil whine and
| has matte screen.
| Arelius wrote:
| Yup, I have it, it's great!
| 0x202020 wrote:
| These reviews look great for the 35/45w TDP chips. I can't wait
| to see what the 15w (Ryzen 7 4800u) chips that would go in an
| XPS13 look like when they are released
| tmpz22 wrote:
| An interesting proxy for CPU evolution is seeing the
| recommendations shift in communities like reddit.com/r/buildapc.
| Last year many medium to high end builds were choosing intel
| CPUs, but now most are recommending AMD. The last bastion will be
| professional gamers and streamers when they upgrade their 9900KS
| level CPUs - likely when the new 3080 gpus come out.
|
| Good on AMD for pushing the competition forward by significant
| amounts.
| traden209 wrote:
| You still can't beat intel at the high end. Both in terms of
| heat and performance. If you have a task that doesn't
| parallelize well, you can't beat intel.
|
| Games are traditionally single threaded and hard to
| parallelize.
|
| However: you don't need to be the best, you just need to be at
| the "agreed upon" high end for game requirements, which is the
| xbox and ps4 (soon to be next gen).
|
| And so, if you're trying to build a "generation proof" gaming
| PC in a standard sized case, the 3800X is currently your best
| bet for a new build (or waiting for zen3). If you're trying to
| do SFF, Intel may be a better choice.
|
| Regardless: AMD's competition has dropped the prices in the
| "enthusiast" segment. My next build will be AMD, simply because
| I don't need the best of the best, but rather, good enough.
| Polylactic_acid wrote:
| From what I have seen, the single threaded tasks are slightly
| better on intel but even in this linked article the AMD chips
| are winning slightly in single threaded. And in multi
| threaded the AMD CPUs absolutely blow away intel by a huge
| margin at a lower price.
| ksec wrote:
| >Games are traditionally single threaded and hard to
| parallelize.
|
| It is not that the Gamers and Prosumers dont know.
|
| But they are willing to trade ~10% of Single Thread
| Performance for Double the Core at a similar or less price
| point.
|
| Sounds like a very reasonable decision to me.
| Polylactic_acid wrote:
| Also games are hardly limited by CPU at all a 10% loss in
| single threaded won't be noticed at all but more cores will
| make a huge difference for other tasks.
| shmerl wrote:
| _> Games are traditionally single threaded and hard to
| parallelize._
|
| That's some dinosaur games from the past. Modern games are
| using all available CPU cores with something like Vulkan and
| saturate GPU fully. So Intel CPUs are left in the dust with
| all the cores you get from high end Ryzens.
| gameswithgo wrote:
| the new ryzens compile gcc things faster, even on one thread.
| and you get more cores per dollar all the way up
| onli wrote:
| That's a bit outdated. Yes, the fastest cpu for games is
| still an Intel cpu, the i9-9900K. But the distance is not
| big. The 3950X is very close, the more reasonable AMD cpus -
| Ryzen 7 3700X and Ryzen 5 3600 - are also close. I collect
| benchmarks, comparison here [0]. When the next Ryzen
| generation arrives on the desktop even that small top spot
| for Intel will likely end.
|
| It's not only that the turbo boost of those Ryzen cpus is
| high and at the same clock Intel does not have a lead
| anymore. It's also that recent games are already pretty
| parallelized. There is no need to wait for the next console
| generation to see that effect.
|
| Btw, the 3800X is not a good pick. It is just a minimally
| higher clocked 3700X. If you want 8 cores, get the 3700X, the
| higher price of the 3800X is just a waste of your money. But
| for gaming you want to stick to a Ryzen 5 3600.
|
| [0]: https://www.pc-
| kombo.com/us/benchmark/games/cpu/compare?ids[...
| blattimwind wrote:
| > Games are traditionally single threaded and hard to
| parallelize.
|
| On my 3900X I've seen even single player action titles
| utilize 16+ threads with overall CPU utilization reaching
| peaks of 80-90 %.
|
| Yes, it maybe be _hard_ to parallelize game engines, but all
| major ones heavily use multiple cores. A bunch of years ago
| (4-5) people would recommend an i3-K dual core for gaming,
| because you could overclock it to 5+ GHz on air. That was
| sufficient for many titles back then. (And these i3s would
| sometimes give you higher FPS compared to the more expensive
| quad-core options). But a CPU like that is far too weak for
| newer titles.
|
| > You still can't beat intel at the high end. Both in terms
| of heat and performance. If you have a task that doesn't
| parallelize well, you can't beat intel.
|
| In terms of heat, that is, performance per Watt, Intel's high
| end is quite a bit worse than AMD's. It is true however that
| you can get slightly higher single-threaded performance out
| of Intel's highest-end CPUs, but not because they are more
| efficient (- AMD is better both perf/W and IPC-wise), but
| just by raw, unadulterated clock speed, pushing them to 5+
| GHz. And that causes them to burn _a lot_ of power.
| jakogut wrote:
| > You still can't beat intel at the high end. Both in terms
| of heat and performance.
|
| This sentiment is almost a year out of date. Since Zen 2
| launched, Intel has a measurable disadvantage in IPC. Intel's
| single-thread performance is only partially won back with
| higher clock speeds at the expense of far greater power
| usage.
| ckastner wrote:
| I built a new workstation in December, and I like my computers
| to be as quiet as possible, so I looked for a huge cooler and a
| top-quality fan.
|
| Reading reviews of coolers and fans was just eye-opening with
| regards to AMD's recent success. Most reviews proudly mentioned
| some Ryzen product, and barely any mentioned Intel at all (and
| most coolers are compatible with both).
|
| I realize that the build-your-own-PC enthusiast represents only
| a minor fraction of the overall market, but seeing AMD's
| reputation going from "the budget CPU" to becoming the new
| Coca-Cola whereas Intel is now Pepsi, all in the span of what,
| 2 years? was amazing.
|
| The server and laptop markets have other dynamics (a few large
| buyers, instead of many individuals) and I'm not sure AMD can
| compete with Intel on these dynamics, but I really wish them
| success.
| Symmetry wrote:
| When I built my first computer the conventional wisdom was that
| you wanted to use an AMD Athalon-64 processor and an NVidia
| graphics card. And there we are again.
| michaelyoshika wrote:
| Not following closely to the CPU industry. What right steps have
| AMD taken to achieve the recent success (compared with Intel)?
| jayflux wrote:
| They started from a new clean-sheet design. You can read about
| it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zen_(microarchitecture)
| jakogut wrote:
| Intel made missteps with their 10nm process, and manufacturing
| chips in house. Yields for their new process are too low for
| retail demand. Additionally clock speeds are higher with the
| more mature 14nm process of Kaby Lake, which is itself a more
| refined version of Skylake. With low yields, manufacturing is
| too expensive, and performance isn't much improved, leaving
| Intel little reason to bring these new chips to market. As a
| result, they've been refining and refreshing chips since
| Skylake. Kaby Lake introduced a bump in core count, as a
| response to AMD's release of their Zen microarchitecture.
|
| AMD overcame these challenges in several ways. They're fabless,
| choosing to partner with semiconductor manufacturers like TSMC
| rather than manufacturing chips themselves. TSMC's current 7nm
| process node is one generation ahead of Intel's 14nm node,
| roughly on par with Intel's 10nm node. Smaller process means
| more efficient, and often more performant.
|
| AMD also created a new architecture using a "chiplet" design
| and an interconnect (Zen), rather than the older monolithic die
| used by Intel. This increases yields and simplifies
| manufacturing, while making chips modular. Chiplets containing
| a number of cores can be combined into a single package to
| create various SKUs, targeting different market segments.
| Symmetry wrote:
| Excellent engineering management that has figured out a good
| architecture to re-use a few designs across a number of market
| segments. Years of investment previously in automated layout
| that let them iterate more rapidly and migrate from fab to fab
| as needed. Serious problems with an over ambitious node on the
| Intel side which resulted in flailing by Intel management.
| Roritharr wrote:
| Hiring Jim Keller.
| baybal2 wrote:
| Zen architecture team lead was Mike Clark, engineering lead
| Suzanne Plummer
|
| I am very sure that they didn't hire a man like Jim Keller
| "just" to do engineering work. In Intel, he is more of a
| project manager with extraordinary authority, and I believe
| that was the case for him for the last 10 or so year.
|
| He shipped countless triple A hit products, probably more
| than any other man in the industry. That experience is his
| real value.
| bgorman wrote:
| Intel's fabs have stagnated so AMD now has access to fabs as
| good or better as Intels. In addition, AMD has been iterating
| on a new micro-architecture for the last few years that is
| actually competitive with Intel's. From 2011-2015 AMD's
| Bulldozer based micro-architectures were not competitive, and
| coupled with being way behind on process nodes was a completely
| uncompetitive high-end product line.
| jfb wrote:
| PC World is still a going concern?
| uyuioi wrote:
| Come on Apple. Time to move to AMD!
| lukevp wrote:
| Apple's most likely going to move to custom ARM processors for
| a lot of their laptops.
| wyldfire wrote:
| If you believe the rumors, it sounds like they're moving to
| their own CPU designs. Maybe the Mac Pro would stay x86_64
| though?
| chx wrote:
| This is a dishonest review. The numbers are fine but the article
| surrounding it is dishonest. He is often repeating claims on
| weight but he compares 2070 (115W) and 2080 (150W) GPU laptops to
| a 2060 Max Q (65W) laptop.
| Niccizero wrote:
| I'm excitedly awaiting for the Ryzen 4000 Thinkpad anouncements,
| hopefully I can get to upgrade my aging P51. First time I'm
| exited for a tech launch in a long time.
| solarkraft wrote:
| I'm still waiting for the 3000-models to become affordable :s
| lhoff wrote:
| The now released 4000 Series of mobile CPUs is not the
| successor to the 3000 Series for Desktop CPUs. The 4000
| series mobile is using the same architecture as the 3000
| series desktop.
| mikenew wrote:
| They've been announced, although the details aren't 100%:
| https://www.ultrabookreview.com/35805-lenovo-thinkpad-t14-t1...
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2020-03-30 23:00 UTC)