Ryzen 2 efficiency improvements

M344587487 · 2018-04-25, 09:50

Efficency data from here: https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/3...requency-curve
RAM data from here: https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreview...chmarks-memory

tl;dr when set to 3.5Ghz all-core, a 2700X uses 80% of the energy that a 1700 does at the same clock. If using a Ryzen 2 for LL or similar you'll want to manually set the clock to override XFR2, which is good for normal use but not efficiency. Memory support and cache latencies are much better this gen. The sweet spot looks to be either 3466 or 3200 with tighter timings, some boards reportedly do a good job of tightening automatically. Some people state a 3% IPC gain clock for clock, but they may have inadvertently benefitted from automated timing tightening. Out of the gate MSRP is good value at not much above what gen 1 is currently selling for. Overall Ryzen 2 potentially rivals an equivalent intel for our purposes, although maybe not for LL due to intel's better AVX2 implementation.

mackerel · 2018-04-25, 11:43

I've noticed the X models selling well, ones at regular pricing are gone, and only some at elevated pricing are still available. Non-X is still around. Could speculate either way if people do want the X, or if the supply for X might be more limited since it is essentially binned to the upper limit. The price difference isn't much between them, and for other uses I'd rather pay slightly more for the faster CPU than trying to manually overclock it.

I'm vaguely planning on getting a 2700X, once my desired mobo is available (Asus mini-ITX X470).

I suspect the execution cores haven't really changed, and any apparent improvement in IPC is due to the latency improvements, which I'm not sure will have much impact on FMA3 workloads.

Mark Rose · 2018-04-25, 12:46

Also, the latest bios improves performance at least on Linux: https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...00x-bios&num=1

M344587487 · 2018-04-25, 15:23

I think it comes down to the 2700X has a better cooler and is priced to compete, last gen the 1700 was competitive but the 1700X and 1800X were priced more as halo products at MSRP. The assumed better binning is another plus. I am also waiting on the M-ITX X470 from Asus, aside from connectivity it has what looks to be identical specs to the crosshair 7, which I hope means it's just a cut-down version with identical memory support (the crosshair 7 memory support is meant to be good).

2018-04-25, 09:50	#1
M344587487 "Composite as Heck" Oct 2017 7×113 Posts	Ryzen 2 efficiency improvements Efficency data from here: https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/3...requency-curve RAM data from here: https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreview...chmarks-memory tl;dr when set to 3.5Ghz all-core, a 2700X uses 80% of the energy that a 1700 does at the same clock. If using a Ryzen 2 for LL or similar you'll want to manually set the clock to override XFR2, which is good for normal use but not efficiency. Memory support and cache latencies are much better this gen. The sweet spot looks to be either 3466 or 3200 with tighter timings, some boards reportedly do a good job of tightening automatically. Some people state a 3% IPC gain clock for clock, but they may have inadvertently benefitted from automated timing tightening. Out of the gate MSRP is good value at not much above what gen 1 is currently selling for. Overall Ryzen 2 potentially rivals an equivalent intel for our purposes, although maybe not for LL due to intel's better AVX2 implementation.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Ryzen help	Prime95	Hardware	9	2018-05-14 04:06
Help to choose components for a Ryzen rig	robert44444uk	Hardware	50	2018-04-07 20:41
29.2 benchmark help #2 (Ryzen only)	Prime95	Software	10	2017-05-08 13:24
AMD Ryzen is risin' up.	jasong	Hardware	11	2017-03-02 19:56
Any code improvements?	db597	Software	7	2004-09-09 17:05

2018-04-25, 11:43	#2
mackerel Feb 2016 UK 3×139 Posts	I've noticed the X models selling well, ones at regular pricing are gone, and only some at elevated pricing are still available. Non-X is still around. Could speculate either way if people do want the X, or if the supply for X might be more limited since it is essentially binned to the upper limit. The price difference isn't much between them, and for other uses I'd rather pay slightly more for the faster CPU than trying to manually overclock it. I'm vaguely planning on getting a 2700X, once my desired mobo is available (Asus mini-ITX X470). I suspect the execution cores haven't really changed, and any apparent improvement in IPC is due to the latency improvements, which I'm not sure will have much impact on FMA3 workloads.

2018-04-25, 12:46	#3
Mark Rose "/X\(‘-‘)/X\" Jan 2013 3×977 Posts	Also, the latest bios improves performance at least on Linux: https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...00x-bios&num=1

2018-04-25, 15:23	#4
M344587487 "Composite as Heck" Oct 2017 7·113 Posts	I think it comes down to the 2700X has a better cooler and is priced to compete, last gen the 1700 was competitive but the 1700X and 1800X were priced more as halo products at MSRP. The assumed better binning is another plus. I am also waiting on the M-ITX X470 from Asus, aside from connectivity it has what looks to be identical specs to the crosshair 7, which I hope means it's just a cut-down version with identical memory support (the crosshair 7 memory support is meant to be good).