Iirc gamers Nexus said they’d tried double 3d cache CCDs and there was diminishing returns for the 2nd cc’d 3d cache. At least on the 5000/am4 generation
[lack of] Diminishing performance returns isn’t the reason I was excited about the idea though :( I just don’t want to worry running something on the “wrong” CCD.
The cache location being flipped mitigates some of the clock speed gap (and I personally don’t like how inefficient recent-gen CPUs are in lightly threaded workloads, so skimming 5% off the 1T clockspeed without affecting the nT clockspeed isn’t much of a con for me personally). I don’t mind being virtually-imperceptibly (<5%) slower in workloads that are not sensitive to cache if the tradeoff is having the workloads that are sensitive to cache always, without fail gaining that respective benefit.
Or maybe I’m completely wrong, and they’ll release a dual 3d cache cpu a couple months after they start selling the 9950x3d to maximize profit
Haha, I think they would have both a branding problem for the SKU (what do they call it?), and significant backlash from both press and the public if they did that, but it’s not unheard of for a hardware manufacturer to trip over themselves doing something like that :P
I seem to remember it being mentioned during a factory tour or interview with one of the head honchos. I don’t think they got into specifics, but my bet was that thermals were holding it back since the cache was on top of the ccd. Now that they’re below, I bet we see one next generation after they reduce the cost of putting it below the ccd.
Dual 3D v cache won’t help gaming since most games stay on one CCD. Having the “gaming” ccd and the “everything else” CCD is really the best of both worlds as long as windows can get their scheduler shit together. If you could run just the game on one CCD and everything else on the other then that’d be perfect for multi taskers like me.
Dual 3D v cache won’t help gaming since most games stay on one CCD. Having the “gaming” ccd and the “everything else” CCD is really the best of both worlds as long as windows can get their scheduler shit together. If you could run just the game on one CCD and everything else on the other then that’d be perfect for multi taskers like me.
This does seem like optimal solution. But from what I read about a year ago, in practice it does not work this way (on Windows at least, no idea about Linux). Things may have changed since then.
Linux I think has made some improvements, but windows is largely still too dumb to figure it out. You can manually try to fix it by setting the affinity of your game to only run on one CCD, but if as bad as the hybrid CPU situation then it will just ignore it.
But this is a solveable. Linux mostly figured it out the other day if I remember right, and it’s just software. Plus there’s zero benefit to having dual 3D vcache for games since they can’t properly take advantage of 2CCDs without a big performance hit.
Iirc gamers Nexus said they’d tried double 3d cache CCDs and there was diminishing returns for the 2nd cc’d 3d cache. At least on the 5000/am4 generation
[lack of] Diminishing performance returns isn’t the reason I was excited about the idea though :( I just don’t want to worry running something on the “wrong” CCD.
If you had to keep it cool by clocking so low that a normal 16 core outperforms it, it doesn’t make sense.
Or maybe I’m completely wrong, and they’ll release a dual 3d cache cpu a couple months after they start selling the 9950x3d to maximize profit
The cache location being flipped mitigates some of the clock speed gap (and I personally don’t like how inefficient recent-gen CPUs are in lightly threaded workloads, so skimming 5% off the 1T clockspeed without affecting the nT clockspeed isn’t much of a con for me personally). I don’t mind being virtually-imperceptibly (<5%) slower in workloads that are not sensitive to cache if the tradeoff is having the workloads that are sensitive to cache always, without fail gaining that respective benefit.
Haha, I think they would have both a branding problem for the SKU (what do they call it?), and significant backlash from both press and the public if they did that, but it’s not unheard of for a hardware manufacturer to trip over themselves doing something like that :P
Will have to check this out. From my understanding 3D cache on a single CCD in a X2 CCD CPU setup does not work well.
I seem to remember it being mentioned during a factory tour or interview with one of the head honchos. I don’t think they got into specifics, but my bet was that thermals were holding it back since the cache was on top of the ccd. Now that they’re below, I bet we see one next generation after they reduce the cost of putting it below the ccd.
There’s another thing to look out for: cost
Dual 3D v cache won’t help gaming since most games stay on one CCD. Having the “gaming” ccd and the “everything else” CCD is really the best of both worlds as long as windows can get their scheduler shit together. If you could run just the game on one CCD and everything else on the other then that’d be perfect for multi taskers like me.
This does seem like optimal solution. But from what I read about a year ago, in practice it does not work this way (on Windows at least, no idea about Linux). Things may have changed since then.
Linux I think has made some improvements, but windows is largely still too dumb to figure it out. You can manually try to fix it by setting the affinity of your game to only run on one CCD, but if as bad as the hybrid CPU situation then it will just ignore it.
But this is a solveable. Linux mostly figured it out the other day if I remember right, and it’s just software. Plus there’s zero benefit to having dual 3D vcache for games since they can’t properly take advantage of 2CCDs without a big performance hit.