Oh yeah man forgot about that one ! was still in the same room too haha. I had two 3870x2 with a 8800u for physx, beat that do not attempt this at home. It required two PSUs too ! And two 295s sandwiched
I had a dual 480 setup. It didn't run hot because they were under water but oh god did it pump heat out through my radiator setup. Incredible.
Ahhh back in the day where Sli was damn near perfect. Didn't have water on mine but was surprised at how well behaved it was.
I wasn't referring specifically to apps and so on I was talking more about how Windows handles and distributes the loads. So for example yeah Photoshop uses four cores. Then you load up an app that uses more, it will be Windows that decides what does what yes? I know that in Windows 7 the FX 8 series (including the hex core, 8 core and 4 core) were not even supported properly. Microsoft bought out a patch but quickly pulled it. Then Windows 8 comes along and all of a sudden you can score 2000 more Physics in Firestrike using the same CPU. Which leads me to believe that Windows 7 never really knew what to do with more than four cores. Especially when I found out that when BF3 launched loads of people with Quad+ cored CPUs were desperately disabling cores and or HT and running a core parking "hack" just to get them to play nice. It's a subject no one ever talks about. Multi tasking. What exactly is it that deciphers what gets used and when? well Windows obviously. And I have noticed a marked difference using higher threaded CPUs in both 8 and 10. It was part of the reason why once I installed 8 I never went back (once I had put in my start button etc). I know AMD worked a lot with Microsoft on Windows 8 to make sure the FX were supported properly. All in vain? yeah I think so. The IPC was so poor that it didn't really matter unless you were loading up all 8 cores. Oh, and of course stuff like VMs etc. A lot of the instructions needed for virtual machines are disabled on Intel K series CPUs so the AMDs were always cracking for that. Starting to wonder if the non X have some instructions disabled? Any way, I digress.. Basically whilst I can't actually prove it I think 8 and 10 handle more cores far better. What I might do later is run Realbench and try and find a way of watching the CPU. Then do something like Photoshop and watch what happens..
Call me a cynic, but if this was a horse I'd be giving it a very good looking over before buying it. No point having four legs and just half a lung. Ahem.
1600 marks at half the price... Yeah that made me actuallol. Like a real one, out loud Thanks for sharing, must have missed that Edit. Just made a cuppa and watched it all. I'm totally a believer. That video to me was like a review tbh.
I still want to wait for the reviews but, seriously, full credit to AMD for targeting value/price. Not in a month of Sundays would I have considered that a real possibility - I was fully expecting them to cash in on Intel's gouge-tastic price/performance base, given their financial woes of late, so this is refreshing. Much will depend on availability at launch and how that affects price, of course - remember the hikes on the price of the RX 480 immediately after launch? Nevertheless, I am optimistic. Will I buy one? No. I don't need it, but they may have laid the foundations for better value on my next upgrade and that will earn them a great deal of respect.
If I was a buyer I would be waiting for full independent benches. I would like to know what GPU was in those systems for the games. Nvidia I would assume or is Vega closer than we have been told.
Probably a 1080. Some are saying that the 580 may be a smokescreen. Polaris and not Vega. Basically AMD using what was going to be the 490 to flush the 1080ti out of Nvidia, then release Vega. No idea though man. Like everything else some will prove to be true and some false but until you actually get the thing in your hand it's impossible to tell. I've also heard rumours that AMD deliberately hobbled Vega when they showed it off. Again, may be true may not be. They've not made a single claim about it themselves so far so it's all vapour.
I also remember my radiator... dual 290X cards on water. The cards still hit into their sixties and the air coming off of the rads wasn't exactly cool. Hot, power hungry cards; that's what they were. Right? My mother in law has bought 700 shares in the past week (on my recommendation) and she's already quite pleased as her stock has Ryzen so sharply. Heh... heh. I'll get my coat... I saw this in the UK OC chat I am in on Skype, and people said it didn't clock well. However, you need to remember that not all 5960X's (and their lower brothers) were J batches, and the early ones also struggled to even hit 4 GHz on air/water. It wasn't until they were refined that they were able to hit 4.5 with ease. Well, most anyway. My CPU is from a little earlier, and 4.4 is realistically its max without dumping volts in for no real gains.
LN2 clockspeed usually is the max the chip will go, is probably why people are saying it did not clock well. We have no air or water oc numbers though. If it caps out at 4.2 water and ln2 is 5.2 then maybe they have a point. We will probably have to wait for reviews to see air overclock results for all 3 chips.
OK, sorry but availability BEFORE anyone's got a chance to review one is the equivalent of "games reviewers getting code on launch day" level ********. And Linus - 3 hrs of PPTs. Weaksauce, man. AMD used to do two days of PowerPoint hell and IDFs are similar.. They've PR'd this perfectly. Most of the press/YouTube celebs regurge the slides for traffic without any real and deep independent analysis (Linus' introduction was perfectly toeing the PR line), and they let OCers start breaking records to show its 1% potential. Well played.
Not sure about overclocking. TBH the scores at stock are good enough for me. However, if they are managing 4ghz or was it 4.1? on that Wraith cooler then I guess there is the possibility to go higher with a large AIO/water.
So we know it's good at multi-threaded stuff but how does it fair with single thread workloads? I know AMD are releasing some software to control some aspects of OC'ing and by the looks of it you can disable some cores, I'm guessing so you can push a single core higher.
