Yeah because purposefully gimping memory latency and bandwidth really affects multi-core gaming. Look you can say what you want. The results however speak for themselves. Go online and compare how these benchmarks *ACROSS ALL THE GAMES TESTED* are not representative of the chip.
Purposefully gimping is a stretch, but I think everyone agrees it was uneven. However, amateur retests of the subject test have been done, and more aggressive but supported memory profiles are predictably barely a rounding error in benchmark performance improvement.
And regardless what you think about game mode, it's a specific mode created for Threadripper CPUs, and Ryzen Master will actually mention that it shouldn't be used unless you have a Threaddripper when you hover over the button.
Every processor with more than 4 cores supports Game Mode, as of the Feb 2018 "AMD Ryzen ThreadRipper and AMD Ryzen" whitepaper.
This would make sense, because again, any Ryzen with multiple CCXs can show better performance with lower-thread-count games if they're isolated to a single NUMA domain.
Shill: adjective: A term used by idiots on Slashdot to describe everything they disagree with.
In this case I was using it to describe someone who is mindlessly defending a company without actually educating himself on the topic at hand.
I have to apologise. I thought we were having an intelligent conversation
No, you didn't. Otherwise you would have bothered educating yourself as to at least feign some form of intelligence.
It is designed for all NUMA Ryzen (Multiple CCX) CPUs.
This includes the CPUs tested.
"Game Mode" improved the performance of every game they tested, minus Ashes of the Singularity.
It has nothing to do with games scaling past 8 cores. It has to do with preventing high-performance low-thread-count applications (usually games) from being moved across a NUMA barrier and hurting the performance of that application.
Sigh. There is so much ignorance at play.
Ryzens are NUMA parts. That means memory access is non-uniform. If your application is not NUMA aware, you can see actual performance degradation on single-threaded applications (when the OS scheduler moves them to a core on the other side of the NUMA barrier) or multithreaded applications that have significant IPC across that barrier, but not enough parallelization to overcome that cost.
This is why game mode exists. Because the AMD, the guys who designed the chip, are smarter than you. There is a reason they call it "Game Mode"
You are of course correct that some games are heavily multithreaded, and can overcome the cost of cross-CCX scheduling fuckery and come out ahead, but for *most* (roughly defined as, almost every fucking game you can buy) performance will be better with one half of the package prevented from being scheduled.
Game Mode is for every Ryzen with multiple CCX modules. These are NUMA chips, and non-NUMA aware applications (see: Games) that aren't utilizing parallelized throughput of the entire package can see significant performance degradations if there is cross-CCX IPC, or thread migration to the other CCX.
This includes the Ryzen 7.
I'm sorry your mom dropped you when you were a baby.
Not quite. It is highly dependent on the game. Quite specifically it is a feature which should be used selectively to gain the best performance. For example in Ashes of the Singularity you will get an approximately 40% performance hit when enabling Game mode. Likewise for any other game that makes liberal use of multi-threadding, of which there are a few in that list.
I quite literally said exactly that. AoS is actually one of a limited amount of games that will perform better. The idea is that IPC between cores on different CCX modules is *expensive*. Game Mode essentially allows a non-NUMA aware application perform better, which is most games.
Regardless of the specifics of *how* they performed the test, the important part is the results, and as plenty of others have said the actual results for the AMD chips are not remotely representative of AMD chips even if simply left in their "Optimised defaults" configuration in the BIOS, and when the actual AMD based features are properly used the gaps between the slightly faster performing Intel chips and the AMD ones are just that, slight.
No, sorry. The configuration of the benchmarks did nothing but hurt the top-end multicore side of the benchmarks. Single-core performance was about on par with most other benchmarks for these two chip families. Throw away the AoS results- they were a mistake. Everything else is just about right. The Intel chips have always been ~15% faster per-core. This is hardly news.
I disagree. They have gone out of their way to disable functionality (fast clocking profiles) that is a core feature of AMDs Ryzen platform (sub millisecond automated core speed / voltage control). They load optimised defaults in a BIOS and then proceed to make a series of changes that serve no purpose than to negatively impact performance. Had they done nothing the benchmarks would have been higher.
Which has precisely no bearing on the throughput of a loaded core running a game.
By your other posts, you clearly know what Game Mode is. I think you're being misleading by saying "disabled half the cores"
The Ryzen performs better in most games with half of its cores disabled, so that's not a bad thing for gaming benchmarks.
However, heavily multithreaded games like AoS will clearly be hurt by this, and it should be disabled for them, as you have also pointed out elsewhere.
This benchmark may not have been great, but I'm not sold that it was intentionally misleading. They seemed to step on a few of the Ryzen landmines, that only the people who are seriously fanatic over the chips know every detail of and how to mitigate.
I'd argue you're being just as desperate to defend AMD as they are Intel.
Another term for disabling one of the CCX modules on the Ryzen is "Enabling AMD's Game Mode"
I wonder why they would have clicked that?
Now it's possible they were just ignorant about whether or not Game Mode is better in all situations, but you? You knew better.
5 sentences starting with "You".
You literary genius, you.
You know what they say, "must have struck a nerve"
Cognitive behavioral therapy may be helpful for you. Read about it.
Ah yes. The old 'I called you gay as a pejorative, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's bad' trope.
You're a sad little man.
Maybe this is why she left, chief.
I've been working on some kernel networking stack performance improvements for work, so the first thing that popped into my head was Linux kernel compilation.
Linking does feel like its an appreciable amount of time compared to the compilation phase.
For most things, that obviously isn't the case.
You invent a "safe" reality you can live in and deny anything that contradicts the safe space you've built for yourself.
Project much?
Psychology is crap science. Plain and simple. You haven't done anything or provided any argument to show otherwise.
No, I didn't provide an argument for psychology being anything but a crap science. You're right.
All I did was discredit your broken logic as to why it was.
And that's all I needed to do.
We're going to add debate to your list of deficiencies.
You started the personal attacks, not me.
Well, I'd argue they were observations. But you know what they say, truth is treason in the kingdom of lies.
That show that you are intellectually and emotionally insecure according to your own "profession".
It could!
I challenge you to provide any evidence for anything you have claimed.
I didn't, nor do I need to. I will simply point out, again, that your assertion that Psychology is crap because you say so is a stupid argument.
Because you are a hack and a charlatan.
Well, I'd argue simply a superior debater who obviously knows a lot more about pointing out flaws in logic than you, but you're certainly entitled to your opinion;)
You probably feel the need to attack others intellectually because you have a deep-rooted insecurity due to the fact that you are a coward
Wait, I attack your intellect because of an insecurity over my cowardice? Yes, I probably also kick my dog because I once pissed my pants.
No wonder you think psychology is a pseudoscience.
I guess I was right, you simply denigrate things you don't understand.
and have never done anything of merit or built anything of value in your life.
Again, project much? Remember that time you were on the front page of slashdot?
Me too;)
Would you also like me to list my CVEs? Security conferences I've been invited to speak at? The code you're likely using this very minute to impotently lash out at me?
While psychologists sit around and navel-gaze about how they can "help" someone who is being abused
No, that's not what a psychologist does.
I kneecap the abuser.
No, no you don't. LOL.
It's a shame you don't believe that the human mind can be studied and understood, because a little bit of education in that subject could possibly offer you a path out from your degenerate existence.
You also seem to make up events that never happened to fit the narrative you use to prop up your self confidence.
Let's talk about that retreating to my "safe space".
Is slashdot.org my safe space? Is it yours?
"Intellectual Superiority"? Why the quotes? Do you *actually* doubt that? There's simply no way someone like you grows up thinking you're smart. People have been ridiculing you your entire life. Why do you think you react so violently to things with answers to questions you can't figure out?
You weave this reality around you, where you pretend that some guy on the internet being an asshole to you and ridiculing your intelligence is afraid of you. It's fascinating.
You are terminally stupid. You really are.
Psychology doesn't say that, your inability to logically address a claim, and then to make equivalences that are in fact non-equivalent says that.
Let's take a look at the facts.
I said you appear to fit the psychological profile of someone who was ridiculed as a child for being stupid.
You then said, "It's pretty obvious that you were molested as a child and now have become an abuser yourself, right?"
Only- you didn't actually say why you came to that conclusion. That differentiates us. There is no circular logic here, there is only your raw lack of intelligence.
You are too stupid to see how badly you're being mocked, and now I just feel bad about it. I'm sorry, kiddo. I get why your dad did it now, though. This has been educational.
Feminists like to single out issues concerning women
So you're saying he's a white separatist?
Why are YOU singling people out who single out Muslims?
Realllllllly, dude?
By that, most Christian-majority nations are secular.
A nation is defined by its character. Constitutionally, the USSR was a free state. The DPRK is democratic. Next stupid assertion.
Which Christian (majority) nations advocate death for apostasy (check out the map in wiki if you need help [wikipedia.org])?
Not sure where he or I mentioned death for apostasy, so any equation I made can't possibly have included that.
You seem to have an ax to grind, as I suspect he did as well, or a very loose grip on logic.
Either it's not valid to ask someone what their motivation is for choosing a specific example for a near universal truth, or you're just a fucking moron. My money is on the latter.
I already explained how you were fitting the psychological profile. You did no such thing. "You see how that works?";)
We're going to have to add reading comprehension to your list of deficits. It's not looking good.
Oh I'm aware that it was an example. I was curious why *you* chose them as your example.
It almost sounds as if you're trying to equate Muslims (literally an entire religion with so much variability that it's almost a bad joke to refer to very little beyond their belief in Allah as diagnostic) with people advocating racial ethnostates.
Your post was good up until that point. You tossed logic out the window for that one, and it made me curious as to why.
You believe that the nonsense that the psychological "profession" advocates actually has some merit because you specifically made a judgement of my character calling it "psychological damage".
Because? In addition to whatever trauma you're dealing with internally, you seem to also have trouble comprehending basic cause and effect.
A psychologist can probably also help you understand why that is. From the hip though, I'll say it's probably just really poor reasoning skills stemming from a bad education.
Damage with respect to what?
I already hypothesized. Daddy making fun of you for trying so hard to fit that square peg in that round hole.
Not respecting and honoring your nonsense?
No, for denigrating things you don't understand.
More circular logic.
The only circular logic here is the logic you invented to defend yourself. Frankly it makes ones brain hurt. It's very Trumpian. You must have the biggest IQ.
You fail again.
Yes, I'm sure that's the conclusion our readers will come to;)
You may be the most consistently dishonest person I have ever seen on this forum.
I dont recall you ever showing any shame about it whatsoever and no doubt will double or triple down on your nonsense.
That is attacking a person rather than their argument. He didn't spell out how he was dishonest, his point was that the argument was moot since the person was dishonest and without shame for the accused dishonesty, and then said there was no point in making a valid argument since he would simply double or triple down on his accused dishonest.
Anti-PC people can't fathom a world where they aren't the victim. Therefore, everyone else is a fascist trying to police their thoughts and take away their freeze peach.
That is in fact the opening point in an argument, he is in fact a hypocrite, and you are in fact a fucking moron.
That certainly is a very simplified, but somewhat accurate description of a well known problem in psychology, well known by psychologists.
However, conflating that with the goal of psychology is either ignorance, or delusion.
I'm still pretty sure I'm looking at the words of someone with some serious psychological damage.
Your claim basically amounts to: In the study of the human mind and human behavior, only that which can be empirically measured can be considered anything but flatly wrong.
In order to refute that terribly broken logic, I would have to talk to you like you were 5.
Normally I don't play the part of a Grammar Nazi.
However, the irony is dripping too fast to ignore when someone so egregiously fucks up while trying to call someone a dumbass, but actually ends up accusing some dim witted person they have some kind of possession over of learning history from propaganda books.
Trump's no Nazi. But I'd like to hear you argue that he wouldn't fellate him on international television and talk about how he was strong and really doing a great job for his people at his campaign rallies.
At which point, it is valid to ask... who exactly are the people at his rallies?
No, friend. This is what arguing looks like nowadays. Pure horse shit.
There was nothing politically incorrect about that, and nobody with any weight claimed it was.
The complaint was that it was someone explaining a trade they know nothing about to a professional woman in that trade.
I don't take sides on whether that act was in itself offensive, and I tend to support the man who posted because I don't think he meant harm.
However, you're the shit who rewrites events to fit your narrative in order to make an argument.
Slashdot Mirror
that's like a two-fer.
I love that drinking game!
Kavanaugh'd.
Yeah because purposefully gimping memory latency and bandwidth really affects multi-core gaming. Look you can say what you want. The results however speak for themselves. Go online and compare how these benchmarks *ACROSS ALL THE GAMES TESTED* are not representative of the chip.
Purposefully gimping is a stretch, but I think everyone agrees it was uneven. However, amateur retests of the subject test have been done, and more aggressive but supported memory profiles are predictably barely a rounding error in benchmark performance improvement.
And regardless what you think about game mode, it's a specific mode created for Threadripper CPUs, and Ryzen Master will actually mention that it shouldn't be used unless you have a Threaddripper when you hover over the button.
Every processor with more than 4 cores supports Game Mode, as of the Feb 2018 "AMD Ryzen ThreadRipper and AMD Ryzen" whitepaper. This would make sense, because again, any Ryzen with multiple CCXs can show better performance with lower-thread-count games if they're isolated to a single NUMA domain.
Shill: adjective: A term used by idiots on Slashdot to describe everything they disagree with.
In this case I was using it to describe someone who is mindlessly defending a company without actually educating himself on the topic at hand.
I have to apologise. I thought we were having an intelligent conversation
No, you didn't. Otherwise you would have bothered educating yourself as to at least feign some form of intelligence.
It is designed for all NUMA Ryzen (Multiple CCX) CPUs.
This includes the CPUs tested.
"Game Mode" improved the performance of every game they tested, minus Ashes of the Singularity.
It has nothing to do with games scaling past 8 cores. It has to do with preventing high-performance low-thread-count applications (usually games) from being moved across a NUMA barrier and hurting the performance of that application.
Sigh. There is so much ignorance at play.
Ryzens are NUMA parts. That means memory access is non-uniform. If your application is not NUMA aware, you can see actual performance degradation on single-threaded applications (when the OS scheduler moves them to a core on the other side of the NUMA barrier) or multithreaded applications that have significant IPC across that barrier, but not enough parallelization to overcome that cost.
This is why game mode exists. Because the AMD, the guys who designed the chip, are smarter than you. There is a reason they call it "Game Mode"
You are of course correct that some games are heavily multithreaded, and can overcome the cost of cross-CCX scheduling fuckery and come out ahead, but for *most* (roughly defined as, almost every fucking game you can buy) performance will be better with one half of the package prevented from being scheduled.
Game Mode is for every Ryzen with multiple CCX modules. These are NUMA chips, and non-NUMA aware applications (see: Games) that aren't utilizing parallelized throughput of the entire package can see significant performance degradations if there is cross-CCX IPC, or thread migration to the other CCX.
This includes the Ryzen 7.
I'm sorry your mom dropped you when you were a baby.
Not quite. It is highly dependent on the game. Quite specifically it is a feature which should be used selectively to gain the best performance. For example in Ashes of the Singularity you will get an approximately 40% performance hit when enabling Game mode. Likewise for any other game that makes liberal use of multi-threadding, of which there are a few in that list.
I quite literally said exactly that. AoS is actually one of a limited amount of games that will perform better. The idea is that IPC between cores on different CCX modules is *expensive*. Game Mode essentially allows a non-NUMA aware application perform better, which is most games.
Regardless of the specifics of *how* they performed the test, the important part is the results, and as plenty of others have said the actual results for the AMD chips are not remotely representative of AMD chips even if simply left in their "Optimised defaults" configuration in the BIOS, and when the actual AMD based features are properly used the gaps between the slightly faster performing Intel chips and the AMD ones are just that, slight.
No, sorry. The configuration of the benchmarks did nothing but hurt the top-end multicore side of the benchmarks. Single-core performance was about on par with most other benchmarks for these two chip families. Throw away the AoS results- they were a mistake. Everything else is just about right. The Intel chips have always been ~15% faster per-core. This is hardly news.
I disagree. They have gone out of their way to disable functionality (fast clocking profiles) that is a core feature of AMDs Ryzen platform (sub millisecond automated core speed / voltage control). They load optimised defaults in a BIOS and then proceed to make a series of changes that serve no purpose than to negatively impact performance. Had they done nothing the benchmarks would have been higher.
Which has precisely no bearing on the throughput of a loaded core running a game.
Sorry, but you're a shill.
By your other posts, you clearly know what Game Mode is. I think you're being misleading by saying "disabled half the cores"
The Ryzen performs better in most games with half of its cores disabled, so that's not a bad thing for gaming benchmarks.
However, heavily multithreaded games like AoS will clearly be hurt by this, and it should be disabled for them, as you have also pointed out elsewhere.
This benchmark may not have been great, but I'm not sold that it was intentionally misleading. They seemed to step on a few of the Ryzen landmines, that only the people who are seriously fanatic over the chips know every detail of and how to mitigate.
I'd argue you're being just as desperate to defend AMD as they are Intel.
Another term for disabling one of the CCX modules on the Ryzen is "Enabling AMD's Game Mode"
I wonder why they would have clicked that?
Now it's possible they were just ignorant about whether or not Game Mode is better in all situations, but you? You knew better.
which is why their world was so much less violent
lol-fucking-what?
5 sentences starting with "You".
You literary genius, you.
You know what they say, "must have struck a nerve"
Cognitive behavioral therapy may be helpful for you. Read about it.
Ah yes. The old 'I called you gay as a pejorative, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's bad' trope.
You're a sad little man. Maybe this is why she left, chief.
Homophobic as well.
Perhaps being made to feel stupid by pops wasn't all he did to you.
I've been working on some kernel networking stack performance improvements for work, so the first thing that popped into my head was Linux kernel compilation.
Linking does feel like its an appreciable amount of time compared to the compilation phase.
For most things, that obviously isn't the case.
You invent a "safe" reality you can live in and deny anything that contradicts the safe space you've built for yourself.
Project much?
Psychology is crap science. Plain and simple. You haven't done anything or provided any argument to show otherwise.
No, I didn't provide an argument for psychology being anything but a crap science. You're right.
All I did was discredit your broken logic as to why it was.
And that's all I needed to do.
We're going to add debate to your list of deficiencies.
You started the personal attacks, not me.
Well, I'd argue they were observations. But you know what they say, truth is treason in the kingdom of lies.
That show that you are intellectually and emotionally insecure according to your own "profession".
It could!
I challenge you to provide any evidence for anything you have claimed.
I didn't, nor do I need to. I will simply point out, again, that your assertion that Psychology is crap because you say so is a stupid argument.
Because you are a hack and a charlatan.
Well, I'd argue simply a superior debater who obviously knows a lot more about pointing out flaws in logic than you, but you're certainly entitled to your opinion ;)
You probably feel the need to attack others intellectually because you have a deep-rooted insecurity due to the fact that you are a coward
Wait, I attack your intellect because of an insecurity over my cowardice? Yes, I probably also kick my dog because I once pissed my pants.
No wonder you think psychology is a pseudoscience.
I guess I was right, you simply denigrate things you don't understand.
and have never done anything of merit or built anything of value in your life.
Again, project much? ;)
Remember that time you were on the front page of slashdot?
Me too
Would you also like me to list my CVEs? Security conferences I've been invited to speak at? The code you're likely using this very minute to impotently lash out at me?
While psychologists sit around and navel-gaze about how they can "help" someone who is being abused
No, that's not what a psychologist does.
I kneecap the abuser.
No, no you don't. LOL.
It's a shame you don't believe that the human mind can be studied and understood, because a little bit of education in that subject could possibly offer you a path out from your degenerate existence.
You also seem to make up events that never happened to fit the narrative you use to prop up your self confidence.
Let's talk about that retreating to my "safe space".
Is slashdot.org my safe space? Is it yours?
"Intellectual Superiority"? Why the quotes? Do you *actually* doubt that? There's simply no way someone like you grows up thinking you're smart. People have been ridiculing you your entire life. Why do you think you react so violently to things with answers to questions you can't figure out?
You weave this reality around you, where you pretend that some guy on the internet being an asshole to you and ridiculing your intelligence is afraid of you. It's fascinating.
You are terminally stupid. You really are.
Psychology doesn't say that, your inability to logically address a claim, and then to make equivalences that are in fact non-equivalent says that.
Let's take a look at the facts.
I said you appear to fit the psychological profile of someone who was ridiculed as a child for being stupid.
You then said, "It's pretty obvious that you were molested as a child and now have become an abuser yourself, right?"
Only- you didn't actually say why you came to that conclusion. That differentiates us. There is no circular logic here, there is only your raw lack of intelligence.
You are too stupid to see how badly you're being mocked, and now I just feel bad about it. I'm sorry, kiddo. I get why your dad did it now, though. This has been educational.
Feminists like to single out issues concerning women
So you're saying he's a white separatist?
Why are YOU singling people out who single out Muslims?
Realllllllly, dude?
By that, most Christian-majority nations are secular.
A nation is defined by its character. Constitutionally, the USSR was a free state. The DPRK is democratic. Next stupid assertion.
Which Christian (majority) nations advocate death for apostasy (check out the map in wiki if you need help [wikipedia.org])?
Not sure where he or I mentioned death for apostasy, so any equation I made can't possibly have included that.
You seem to have an ax to grind, as I suspect he did as well, or a very loose grip on logic.
Either it's not valid to ask someone what their motivation is for choosing a specific example for a near universal truth, or you're just a fucking moron. My money is on the latter.
I already explained how you were fitting the psychological profile. You did no such thing. "You see how that works?" ;)
We're going to have to add reading comprehension to your list of deficits. It's not looking good.
Oh I'm aware that it was an example. I was curious why *you* chose them as your example.
It almost sounds as if you're trying to equate Muslims (literally an entire religion with so much variability that it's almost a bad joke to refer to very little beyond their belief in Allah as diagnostic) with people advocating racial ethnostates.
Your post was good up until that point. You tossed logic out the window for that one, and it made me curious as to why.
You believe that the nonsense that the psychological "profession" advocates actually has some merit because you specifically made a judgement of my character calling it "psychological damage".
Because? In addition to whatever trauma you're dealing with internally, you seem to also have trouble comprehending basic cause and effect.
A psychologist can probably also help you understand why that is. From the hip though, I'll say it's probably just really poor reasoning skills stemming from a bad education.
Damage with respect to what?
I already hypothesized. Daddy making fun of you for trying so hard to fit that square peg in that round hole.
Not respecting and honoring your nonsense?
No, for denigrating things you don't understand.
More circular logic.
The only circular logic here is the logic you invented to defend yourself. Frankly it makes ones brain hurt. It's very Trumpian. You must have the biggest IQ.
You fail again.
Yes, I'm sure that's the conclusion our readers will come to ;)
You may be the most consistently dishonest person I have ever seen on this forum. I dont recall you ever showing any shame about it whatsoever and no doubt will double or triple down on your nonsense.
That is attacking a person rather than their argument. He didn't spell out how he was dishonest, his point was that the argument was moot since the person was dishonest and without shame for the accused dishonesty, and then said there was no point in making a valid argument since he would simply double or triple down on his accused dishonest.
Anti-PC people can't fathom a world where they aren't the victim. Therefore, everyone else is a fascist trying to police their thoughts and take away their freeze peach.
That is in fact the opening point in an argument, he is in fact a hypocrite, and you are in fact a fucking moron.
That certainly is a very simplified, but somewhat accurate description of a well known problem in psychology, well known by psychologists.
However, conflating that with the goal of psychology is either ignorance, or delusion.
I'm still pretty sure I'm looking at the words of someone with some serious psychological damage.
Your claim basically amounts to: In the study of the human mind and human behavior, only that which can be empirically measured can be considered anything but flatly wrong.
In order to refute that terribly broken logic, I would have to talk to you like you were 5.
Normally I don't play the part of a Grammar Nazi.
However, the irony is dripping too fast to ignore when someone so egregiously fucks up while trying to call someone a dumbass, but actually ends up accusing some dim witted person they have some kind of possession over of learning history from propaganda books.
Trump's no Nazi. But I'd like to hear you argue that he wouldn't fellate him on international television and talk about how he was strong and really doing a great job for his people at his campaign rallies.
At which point, it is valid to ask... who exactly are the people at his rallies?
No, friend. This is what arguing looks like nowadays. Pure horse shit.
There was nothing politically incorrect about that, and nobody with any weight claimed it was.
The complaint was that it was someone explaining a trade they know nothing about to a professional woman in that trade.
I don't take sides on whether that act was in itself offensive, and I tend to support the man who posted because I don't think he meant harm.
However, you're the shit who rewrites events to fit your narrative in order to make an argument.