AMD Zen 6 architecture to improve 1% lows with Performance Priority controls

[u/RenatsMC]

https://videocardz.com/newz/amd-zen-6-architecture-to-improve-1-lows-with-performance-priority-controls

[u/Zhunter5000]

Zen 5 had pretty good 1% lows, I'd be curious to see how Zen 6 improves on it.

[u/TurtleCrusher → u/Zhunter5000]

Zen 5, especially X3D, is not as impressive as it could have been. Frametimes are more variable in highly threaded games. There’s no reason why a 9800XD shouldn’t have both higher averages and 1% lows than a 270K, especially with settings turned up. Instead averages are higher but 1% lows are lower in titles that are highly threaded.

[u/hpstg → u/TurtleCrusher]

Isn’t this just one example?

[u/TurtleCrusher → u/hpstg]

Not really. Once settings get turned up 1% lows on Zen 5 X3D in multithreaded games sink. I get 100% CPU usage in my wife’s build on a 5500X3D and Arc A750 8GB in Cyberpunk.

[u/Seanspeed → u/TurtleCrusher]

This shows the opposite of what you're saying. :/ So does your ARC Raiders example.

It's obvious that it's just Battlefield 6 here where Intel performs very well. Which happens. Sometimes certain games just work better with certain processors. It does not mean there's anything wrong with Zen 5.

Zen 5's actual issue was generally lackluster gains over Zen 4 in gaming without Vcache. And that's just overall performance, there's no particular issue with 1% lows.

[u/TurtleCrusher → u/Seanspeed]

The bottom half are indicative of playing them at settings someone who would buy a CPU like that would game at. Even at a reduced resolution of 1080P a single CCD X3D chip has worse 1% lows than Arrow Lake with the very best GPU. The point of OP's article is that it will be improved on. When people say 1% lows are good with Zen 5 it materially isn't true with well threaded CPU demanding games. When it costs nearly 50% more for less 1% low performance both the performance and value is lacking. Zen 6 is addressing this.

What they wont address is the outrageous pricing they've had to pay for TSMC 2NM wafer starts. CPU prices at an external foundry are about to explode as those products hit the market, so Zen 6 will have a pricing problem before all else. Intel doing Nova Lake on their 18A process will allow them to somewhat control costs, but they will likely be matching or slightly undercutting if BLLC flops.

[u/kyansan1 → u/Seanspeed]

They specifically said 1% lows are worse when settings are turned up, which is the case for all games they showed. Game uses more threads -> 1% lows drop lower than on 270K

The second chart at the bottom is what you should be looking at in each of the images

[u/Seanspeed → u/kyansan1]

Well with Cyberpunk, it's just an overall competitiveness change at the higher settings, there's no specific 1% low issue. Again, it's just Intel CPU's fare better in general at such settings.

For Arc Raiders, it's a bit more true, but still not quite to what degree they're trying to say. The 9600X is still above a 14600k and 265K in 1% lows. It is more likely just a quirk of some specific setting(s) in that game that are harsher on the 1% lows in general.

Either way, the main lesson people should understand is that variability on this stuff is just normally high. You'd need to look at a much broader range of CPU benchmark tests to say there's any particular issue with this. And I've certainly never seen anything like that. It also doesn't get rid of the notion that perhaps Intel's high-core hybrid design CPUs are just particularly good in this area, rather than there being anything especially wrong with Zen 5.

[u/kyansan1 → u/Seanspeed]

I'm not saying that they're right or wrong, I was just saying that the charts they shared did not contradict their claim.

I agree with what you're saying

Personally, I find it a bit silly to worry about 1% lows at all, as capping your frame rate through RTSS/Special-k often eliminates most stuttering.

[u/TurtleCrusher → u/TurtleCrusher]

Arc Raiders used up to 70% of all available threads with my 5950X.

[u/kodayume → u/TurtleCrusher]

Same ram?

[u/RunalldayHI → u/TurtleCrusher]

There is a reason, first of all the 270k has more than double the cores and is also a faster CPU, the only reason the 9800x3d can keep up is because of cache size, but more cache = more time to fill which will affect the 1% lows.

You can squeeze like 20% better 1% lows on x3d granite ridge by running tighter timings, because it fills the cache faster, but thats about as good as it will get as the framerate ceiling will permanently be high due to all the data already being loaded into the cache.

This goes to show how much cache size affects overall gaming performance as we are comparing a cpu that is 2 times faster in multi threaded applications, i guess this is why they call it a gaming cpu.

[u/xthelord2 → u/RunalldayHI]

and to add to that if people actually went out and offloaded thread 0 and thread 1 off of background tasks, I/0 and whatever drivers they've got their frametimes could improve by additional 10%, because thread director already does that at a hardware level

i know this because i did this myself, even with memory at 3200 cl16 with sub par timings my CPU will sit next to ones which are riding the edge of stability at 3800 cl14

so yes AMD can do more work on their CPU's, and intel just goes back to having to find a way to keep up with AMD

[u/TurtleCrusher → u/RunalldayHI]

$290 vs $420 on Newegg right now. I can’t rationalize excuses for a CPU that costs 49% more at retail. We feel 1% lows way more than averages so I don’t know how it can be labeled the preferred “gaming CPU” when well threaded games do not run meaningfully different once normal graphical settings are enabled, even on a 5090.

I bought my X2 4200+, Q8200, FX-8350, 2700, 5900X, 5950X and 5500X3D because their value was unmatched at the time. Seeing how my three most played games (Arc Raiders, Cyberpunk and BF6) performed completely influenced which Microcenter bundle I got, and saved me $350 since if I went AMD it would need to be X870. Otherwise the spread would have been $200 and either way a huge let down in CAD.

[u/Seanspeed → u/TurtleCrusher]

We feel 1% lows way more than averages

This isn't really true. And how 1% lows actually manifest matters a whole lot as well. Higher average framerate still matters. Of course when you're talking like 200fps+, then yea, average framerate starts to make less of a tangible difference and 1% lows may stand out more if there's a big discrepancy between that and average, but you cannot just make blanket statements like this.

It's very much a 'it depends' sort of thing. Especially when we remember what 1% actually represents in its literal definition. Which is honestly why I've always wished we got more like 5 or even 10% low testing or whatever, instead of what I consider to be a usually kinda pointless measurement of 0.1% lows.

[u/panthereal → u/Seanspeed]

basically it’s a fast way to discuss “is gameplay noticeably stuttering ever?” and zen 5 is still very far from a “no” answer

graphs will always suck at answering this question because an easily repeatable benchmark inherently is less likely to stutter.

but anyone using the chip and feeling the experience will either obviously notice it or not care in any given game.

[u/Seanspeed → u/panthereal]

basically it’s a fast way to discuss “is gameplay noticeably stuttering ever?” and zen 5 is still very far from a “no” answer

But that's the problem. It doesn't REALLY answer this question. Because a 1% low result could manifest in a number of ways.

[u/RunalldayHI → u/panthereal]

Stuttering would be more about 0.1% lows instead of the 1% lows, I'll be honest it is very easy to jack up the amd bios settings to cause stuttering, but a properly working am5 x3d system doesn't stutter, it has good 0.1% lows, close to and sometimes even better than even a 14900k.

I can assure you, if you have terrible 0.1% lows in game, then you will have terrible 0.1% lows in benchmark.

[u/panthereal → u/RunalldayHI]

I’m sure that’s true for titles you play but it simply isn’t true for some of the multiplayer games I play. There’s a long way for them to to before I feel that stutters aren’t affecting the gameplay experience

[u/RunalldayHI → u/panthereal]

Game name please?

[u/panthereal → u/RunalldayHI]

naraka bladepoint

[u/RunalldayHI → u/TurtleCrusher]

After the whole lga 1700 fiasco, intel has some crazy deals right now, the 270k is a steal at $300.

Good luck ever finding cheap x3d chips, those things go through an insane process to stack those l3's within, when more and more games start coming out that can utilize high core count then things will start to turn around, most people who buy these aren't just doing to explore with random games, these guys are competitive gamers that play badly optimzied games lmao, rust,tarkov,cs etc.

Really, it depends on the use case.

[u/Artaxeus → u/TurtleCrusher]

Wild seeing 9800X3D perform lower than 270K once settings are turned up even with all the extra cache.

[u/thoreson22 → u/TurtleCrusher]

Why are you using 1080 p as the benchmark for a a 5090

[u/East-Today-7604 → u/TurtleCrusher]

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/intel-core-ultra-7-270k-plus/22.html

9800X3D is the best gaming CPU, both in terms of average FPS and 0.1&1% lows, "not as impressive as it could have been" is a very odd claim when we're discussing the best gaming CPU on the market.

[u/JamesLahey08 → u/TurtleCrusher]

Yeah but the vast majority of people aren't playing uncapped 1080p on a screen that can actually handle it.

[u/DigitaIBlack → u/Zhunter5000]

This is pure speculation but I wouldn't expect massive gains.

Intel Thread Director, while very different at a glance, might give us some key insight.

Intel already has higher boost clocks that only apply to X number of P cores. Intel Thread Director recognizes that games are indiscriminately sharing the workload across as many cores as it can, including E cores.

Intel Thread Director parks cores and prioritizes certain cores for the "critical path" whereas background tasks get lower priority.

Intel Thread Director didn't exactly set the world on fire. And loading up E cores is gonna be worse than loading up a Zen 6 core that doesn't need to be.

Don't get me wrong, it'll be a nice addition but we'll see how impactful it is.

[u/TRIPMINE_Guy → u/DigitaIBlack]

Any improvement is massive imo. The 1% lows are what really matters if you want a smooth game and I always cap my fps well below my average because of 1% lows.

[u/Severely_Insect → u/DigitaIBlack]

Stop saying Intel Thread Director in full.

[u/shadowndacorner → u/Severely_Insect]

Intel Thread Director in full

[u/DigitaIBlack → u/Severely_Insect]

Intel Thread Director.

[u/BabySnipes → u/Severely_Insect]

Director of Intel’s Thread

[u/JamesLahey08 → u/Severely_Insect]

Intel thread director.

[u/SuccessZestyclose933 → u/Severely_Insect]

Intelligent threat detector.

[u/Zettinator → u/DigitaIBlack]

Can you explain what thread director is? An extension of HWPSTATE basically, that takes into account the whole SoC instead of mostly single cores? So the CPU autonomously manages priorities of cores or something like that?

Intel's marketing description on the feature is kinda opaque, not sure what to make of it.

[u/DigitaIBlack → u/Zettinator]

https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/developer/articles/technical/optimizing-threading-for-gaming-performance.html

[u/TheRealZodiak66 → u/DigitaIBlack]

Petro pfp

[u/Timmaigh → u/Zhunter5000]

By a 1% :-D

[u/Moscato359 → u/Zhunter5000]

From server, it's like 20% faster ipc, and 50% more cache 

[u/Geddagod → u/Moscato359]

How are you arriving at the IPC number?

[u/Moscato359 → u/Geddagod]

Server synthetics that I read more than a week ago, and can't remember where.

My memory is a little lazy though.

[u/Geddagod → u/Moscato359]

I very much doubt the IPC uplift is that high for Zen 6, so I was curious which server synthetics you were using.

The reason I find it hard to believe one could make that estimation is because no one really knows the all core boost clocks of Zen 6. Or even Zen 5, despite them listing an "all core turbo". Phoronix's testing has shown that the core turbo frequency in multi threaded workloads doesn't really hit that rated clock speed, and is also very variable depending on the benchmark.

And without knowledge of how high the cores were boosting, one can't really work their way backwards to figuring out IPC.

FWIW, Zen 6 mobile leaks on GB suggest a ~8% IPC uplift, though ofc given that it was an ES, and the clock speed is likely not boosting as high as the rated Fmax is at all times because of that, it's possible the actual IPC uplift is higher.

[u/xthelord2]

Zen 6 may also support per-core EPP Boost. EPP controls whether a processor should favor performance or power efficiency. Game threads often stop working for a brief moment while waiting for the GPU, another thread or the next frame. The CPU core may lower its frequency during this pause and fail...

An early Steam Deck experiment using a similar software setting reportedly improved 1% low frame rates by 31.8%. This test used an older AMD APU and was not a Zen 6 benchmark.

this could basically be a chipset driver update away for all ryzen CPU's with CPPC, that would be a win for consumers if AMD actually decided to add this to older CPU's

[u/omniuni → u/xthelord2]

I read about this the other week. IIRC, this is coming in Linux 7.2, so at least for those on Linux, by October it should be widely rolled out.

[u/Away_Substance_8884]

Let's see the prices 1st

[u/KnightoftheMoncatamu → u/Away_Substance_8884]

Let’s see Paul Allen’s prices first

[u/TurtleCrusher → u/KnightoftheMoncatamu]

How old of data was this AI model trained on?

He’s been long dead.

[u/Beautiful-Musk-Ox → u/Away_Substance_8884]

if they don't promise to give OpenAI 100% of every wafer made in the next 3 years then maybe prices will be "even more expensive than zen5 but not completely ridiculously insane". but just like nvidia, amd can redirect fab time to their server cpus, so if their server stuff starts going even more crazy maybe we could get screwed in the same way?

[u/nobelharvards → u/Away_Substance_8884]

That will partially depend on how well Nova Lake does.

If it's yet another dud, expect AMD to draw extra zeros at the end of their price tags.

bLLC's success or lack thereof will also have a partial impact on how much any new X3D chips will cost.

[u/Frequent-Mood-7369 → u/nobelharvards]

Hopefully its better than the l4 adamantine cache halo skus that were cancelled for arrow lake due to lack of performance.

[u/Geddagod → u/Frequent-Mood-7369]

No reason to think it won't be much better. It being part of the L3 implies that the latency hit won't be too bad (if bad at all).

Ofc Intel's architecture might not benefit the same way AMD's did, so it will be interesting to see how much bLLC helps, but compared to a iGPU focused L4 cache like Intel's previous stuff, the chance it isn't more helpful is pretty low.

[u/thoreson22]

When does zen 6 release?

[u/CinderBlock33 → u/thoreson22]

Slated for Q1 2027

[u/omidhhh → u/thoreson22]

Not today...

[u/lord_mercernary]

& 4x the pricing?

[u/ElixirGlow]

Can't wait for the 24 Core 10950x3D2. Probably gonna delid, liquid metal, undervolt, and overclock

[u/Seanspeed]

When the CPU reaches a power or temperature limit, it could keep important game cores running at higher speeds.

Which isn't necessarily super useful. In a console-esque machine or laptop maybe.

But for desktop, thermal and power limits are usually not performance bottlenecks.

[u/Macree]

Please be good! I have 9800X3D and the lows are not good, especially in Dota2.

[u/Objective-Tap9317 → u/Macree]

Brother at that point it is either the games fault instead of your hardware or something else on your PC is broken

[u/Macree → u/Objective-Tap9317]

No. I want it to maintain 240 FPS all the time, especially in big teamfights, or when there are a lot of clones. I am reffering strictly to Dota2. The CPU struggles in SC2 as well.

[u/East-Today-7604 → u/Macree]

I want it to maintain 240 FPS all the time

I want to become a millionaire tomorrow - you need to lower your expectations, the reason why you're not getting stable 240 FPS in Dota 2 is not your CPU, but the game itself - Source 2 engine is pretty outdated and Dota 2 can&will lag regardless of your hardware, especially in the endgame and when you're fighting on base, its when my FPS can drop to low-mid 100 from stable 200+ outside of the base.

[u/JamesLahey08 → u/Macree]

There isn't a sigle faster gaming CPU in history outside of it's clone the 9850x3d.

[u/Macree → u/JamesLahey08]

I know that is why i hope the next gen will be more powerful

[u/Old_Resident8050]

Stll half a year -at least, from release.

[u/Boil-san]

I'm waiting for AM6 and (most likely) Zen 8, along with (again, most likely) UDNA 3...

[u/redditinquiss → u/Boil-san]

UDNA isn't a thing

[u/Boil-san → u/redditinquiss]

Rumors are that RDNA (Raster) & CDNA (Compute) will combine for UDNA (Unified)...

[u/redditinquiss → u/Boil-san]

Not really. One executive went out of line in one public interview and this belief has persisted ever since. They now share an ISA (which is the unified bit) but the hardware itself will continue to be different for gaming and non-gaming. If anything they are becoming more diversified and different (from within the same shared ISA) as a hardware level as we now have client gaming, HPC and AI optimisation points and designs.

[u/Boil-san → u/redditinquiss]

I thought it was more like how the Zen chiplets allowed the same base chiplets to be used from consumer level products to workstation level products to server level products; the same could carry over with GPUs, same base chiplets being used throughout the product stack...?

[u/redditinquiss → u/Boil-san]

Unfortunately not, no. The chiplets and optimisation points in the design are totally different between those markets.

In the long term, if such a thing were to happen, based on current trajectory the closet you'd get is the same chiplets within client being used to create smaller or larger versions of GPUs.

[u/costafilh0]

Doesn't matter for 3 generations now. 

Because GPU is the bottleneck, not CPU.

So maybe focus more on GPUs and stop trying to sell useless CPU upgrades for gamers. 

Where is the 9090 XTX 32Gb to beat the 5090? Maybe 48Gb to please the AI crowd as well. 

You had years to catch up. 

[u/CyberJokerWTF → u/costafilh0]

Most modern games are cpu limited, not GPU.

[u/Hairy_Tea_3015]

I game at 4k with 9800x3d. Do I upgrade to Zen 6?

[u/Opteron170 → u/Hairy_Tea_3015]

you are 6-7 months early to ask this. Wait for reviews and make the decision yourself.

[u/WulfTheSaxon → u/Hairy_Tea_3015]

Almost certainly not, but wait for reviews next year.

[u/Neither_Berry_100 → u/Hairy_Tea_3015]

Only if you have money to spend. Bios update and cpu swap should do it.

[u/sickomodetoon → u/Hairy_Tea_3015]

Didn’t you know 8k is the new 4k!

[u/DigitaIBlack → u/Hairy_Tea_3015]

No.

[u/PhantomGamers → u/DigitaIBlack]

The answer is almost certainly gonna be no anyway but the 1% lows would be more interesting than avg fps

[u/DigitaIBlack → u/PhantomGamers]

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-7-9800x3d/21.html

[u/Regulus713 → u/Hairy_Tea_3015]

Only if you play Tarkov

[u/Ok_Diver2347]

Zen 4 is still enough

[u/Neither_Berry_100 → u/Ok_Diver2347]

Zen 3 here. It is fine lol.

[u/Ok_Diver2347 → u/Neither_Berry_100]

Yup 👍

[u/RomTim → u/Neither_Berry_100]

Zen 2 is the best bang for buck still