AMD Ryzen Community Update Addresses Windows 10 Thread Scheduling, SMT Performance, and More

Subject: Processors | March 13, 2017 - 08:48 PM |
Tagged: Windows 7, windows 10, thread scheduling, SMT, ryzen, Robert Hallock, processor, cpu, amd

AMD's Robert Hallock (previously the Head of Global Technical Marketing for AMD and now working full time on the CPU side of things) has posted a comprehensive Ryzen update, covering AMD's official stance on Windows 10 thread scheduling, the performance implications of SMT, Windows power management settings, and more. The post in its entirety is reproduced below, and also available from AMD by following this link.

View Full Size

(Begin statement:)

It’s been about two weeks since we launched the new AMD Ryzen™ processor, and I’m just thrilled to see all the excitement and chatter surrounding our new chip. Seems like not a day goes by when I’m not being tweeted by someone doing a new build, often for the first time in many years. Reports from media and users have also been good:

  • “This CPU gives you something that we needed for a long time, which is a CPU that gives you a well-rounded experience.” –JayzTwoCents
  • Competitive performance at 1080p, with Tech Spot saying the “affordable Ryzen 7 1700” is an “awesome option” and a “safer bet long term.”
  • ExtremeTech showed strong performance for high-end GPUs like the GeForce GTX 1080 Ti, especially for gamers that understand how much value AMD Ryzen™ brings to the table
  • Many users are noting that the 8-core design of AMD Ryzen™ 7 processors enables “noticeably SMOOTHER” performance compared to their old platforms.

While these findings have been great to read, we are just getting started! The AMD Ryzen™ processor and AM4 Platform both have room to grow, and we wanted to take a few minutes to address some of the questions and comments being discussed across the web.

Thread Scheduling

We have investigated reports alleging incorrect thread scheduling on the AMD Ryzen™ processor. Based on our findings, AMD believes that the Windows® 10 thread scheduler is operating properly for “Zen,” and we do not presently believe there is an issue with the scheduler adversely utilizing the logical and physical configurations of the architecture.

As an extension of this investigation, we have also reviewed topology logs generated by the Sysinternals Coreinfo utility. We have determined that an outdated version of the application was responsible for originating the incorrect topology data that has been widely reported in the media. Coreinfo v3.31 (or later) will produce the correct results.

Finally, we have reviewed the limited available evidence concerning performance deltas between Windows® 7 and Windows® 10 on the AMD Ryzen™ CPU. We do not believe there is an issue with scheduling differences between the two versions of Windows.  Any differences in performance can be more likely attributed to software architecture differences between these OSes.

Going forward, our analysis highlights that there are many applications that already make good use of the cores and threads in Ryzen, and there are other applications that can better utilize the topology and capabilities of our new CPU with some targeted optimizations. These opportunities are already being actively worked via the AMD Ryzen™ dev kit program that has sampled 300+ systems worldwide.

Above all, we would like to thank the community for their efforts to understand the Ryzen processor and reporting their findings. The software/hardware relationship is a complex one, with additional layers of nuance when preexisting software is exposed to an all-new architecture. We are already finding many small changes that can improve the Ryzen performance in certain applications, and we are optimistic that these will result in beneficial optimizations for current and future applications.

Temperature Reporting

The primary temperature reporting sensor of the AMD Ryzen™ processor is a sensor called “T Control,” or tCTL for short. The tCTL sensor is derived from the junction (Tj) temperature—the interface point between the die and heatspreader—but it may be offset on certain CPU models so that all models on the AM4 Platform have the same maximum tCTL value. This approach ensures that all AMD Ryzen™ processors have a consistent fan policy.

Specifically, the AMD Ryzen™ 7 1700X and 1800X carry a +20°C offset between the tCTL° (reported) temperature and the actual Tj° temperature. In the short term, users of the AMD Ryzen™ 1700X and 1800X can simply subtract 20°C to determine the true junction temperature of their processor. No arithmetic is required for the Ryzen 7 1700. Long term, we expect temperature monitoring software to better understand our tCTL offsets to report the junction temperature automatically.

The table below serves as an example of how the tCTL sensor can be interpreted in a hypothetical scenario where a Ryzen processor is operating at 38°C.

View Full Size

Power Plans

Users may have heard that AMD recommends the High Performance power plan within Windows® 10 for the best performance on Ryzen, and indeed we do. We recommend this plan for two key reasons: 

  1. Core Parking OFF: Idle CPU cores are instantaneously available for thread scheduling. In contrast, the Balanced plan aggressively places idle CPU cores into low power states. This can cause additional latency when un-parking cores to accommodate varying loads.
  2. Fast frequency change: The AMD Ryzen™ processor can alter its voltage and frequency states in the 1ms intervals natively supported by the “Zen” architecture. In contrast, the Balanced plan may take longer for voltage and frequency (V/f) changes due to software participation in power state changes.

In the near term, we recommend that games and other high-performance applications are complemented by the High Performance plan. By the first week of April, AMD intends to provide an update for AMD Ryzen™ processors that optimizes the power policy parameters of the Balanced plan to favor performance more consistent with the typical usage models of a desktop PC.

Simultaneous Multi-threading (SMT)

Finally, we have investigated reports of instances where SMT is producing reduced performance in a handful of games. Based on our characterization of game workloads, it is our expectation that gaming applications should generally see a neutral/positive benefit from SMT. We see this neutral/positive behavior in a wide range of titles, including: Arma® 3, Battlefield™ 1, Mafia™ III, Watch Dogs™ 2, Sid Meier’s Civilization® VI, For Honor™, Hitman™, Mirror’s Edge™ Catalyst and The Division™. Independent 3rd-party analyses have corroborated these findings.

For the remaining outliers, AMD again sees multiple opportunities within the codebases of specific applications to improve how this software addresses the “Zen” architecture. We have already identified some simple changes that can improve a game’s understanding of the "Zen" core/cache topology, and we intend to provide a status update to the community when they are ready.

Wrap-up

Overall, we are thrilled with the outpouring of support we’ve seen from AMD fans new and old. We love seeing your new builds, your benchmarks, your excitement, and your deep dives into the nuts and bolts of Ryzen. You are helping us make Ryzen™ even better by the day.  You should expect to hear from us regularly through this blog to answer new questions and give you updates on new improvements in the Ryzen ecosystem.

(End statement.)

Such topics as Windows 7 vs. Windows 10 performance, SMT impact, and thread scheduling will no doubt still be debated, and AMD has correctly pointed out that optimization for this brand new architecture will only improve Ryzen performance going forward. Our own findings as to Ryzen and the Windows 10 thread scheduler appear to be validated as AMD officially dismisses performance impact in that area, though there is still room for improvement in other areas from our initial gaming performance findings. As mentioned in the post, AMD will have an update for Windows power plan optimization by the first week of April, and the company has "already identified some simple changes that can improve a game’s understanding of the 'Zen' core/cache topology, and we intend to provide a status update to the community when they are ready", as well.

It is refreshing to see a company publicly acknowledging the topics that have resulted in so much discussion in the past couple of weeks, and their transparency is commendable, with every issue (that this author is aware of) being touched on in the post.

Source: AMD

March 13, 2017 | 08:59 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

I don't know how they can say that the scheduler is working properly when we can see that it's not currently, sufficiently accounting for the massive diff in l3 latencies which requires core grading.

March 14, 2017 | 05:16 AM - Posted by Master Chen (not verified)

I think this is simply because AMD fully complied with Windows 10 and expected from Microsoft a good sportsmanship. AMD never expected such an outright BACKSTABBING on Microsoft's side. Basically, AMD's in the "la-la-la-la, I can't hear you!" mode right now in regards to problems with Windows 10, because AMD fully expected great performance oN Windows 10 and never foresaw such problems.

March 14, 2017 | 10:11 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

lol.

March 14, 2017 | 02:50 PM - Posted by Master Chen (not verified)

Yeah, Microsoft is basically Turkey.

March 15, 2017 | 07:41 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Why do i have a slight feeling that you're just a butthurt Amd Fanboy and nothing else?

Relax dude, there is no need to spend all your life defending a company which always manage to screw things up.

March 15, 2017 | 08:50 AM - Posted by Spunjji

Why post anonymously? We all know who these childish comments come from.

March 15, 2017 | 10:53 AM - Posted by Master Chen (not verified)

Check your butthurt feelings twice over, then.
I won't be repeating myself anymore on this: my current main system is on i7 2600K.

March 13, 2017 | 09:08 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

There are problems they wont acknowledge its starting to look very shady imo...

March 14, 2017 | 05:19 AM - Posted by Master Chen (not verified)

The problem is not only in that AMD itself has gone full-blown delusional denial due to the utter shock of being backstabbed by M$, but also because such """""tech xxxperts""""" as PcPer are trying to swipe everything under the rug and are acting like problem doesn't exist at all. PcPer is basically CIA during the period of Snowden's leaks. They're in full damage control mode.

March 14, 2017 | 06:34 AM - Posted by iso (not verified)

...I'm beginning to wonder whether we're being trolled by 4chan or something, these comments are next level stupid.

March 14, 2017 | 06:38 AM - Posted by iso (not verified)

...or Intel shills :p

March 14, 2017 | 09:45 AM - Posted by Master Chen (not verified)

Grow up.

March 14, 2017 | 11:16 AM - Posted by kenjo

Could you just stop posting to this site!

March 14, 2017 | 01:13 PM - Posted by Master Chen (not verified)

ESAD (c) You-know-who

March 16, 2017 | 11:30 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Go back to getting your tech news from 4chan

March 14, 2017 | 01:19 PM - Posted by Allyn Malventano

Damage control for who exactly? Nobody is making anyone out to be a clear winner here, but you sure seem to be locked into believing that everything everyone writes is a conspiracy theory. Still wearing the tin foil hat I see...

March 15, 2017 | 01:11 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Before Ryzen PCPer was supposedly Intel Nvidia shills. Now youre AMD shills? Can these people stfu already? Its like listening to Bernie Sanders and Clinton voters bitching constantly.

March 15, 2017 | 08:52 AM - Posted by Spunjji

Your evident political affiliations are, unsurprisingly, as basic as your comments.

March 15, 2017 | 01:07 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Well i also post a lot about very specific details of semiconductor design and engineering on here. Funny how you assume that my political voting record affects my trchnical knowledge, but if youd like to discuss the intricacies of semiconductor engineering, supercomputer architecture, just about any aerospace or mechanical engineering topic, im all for it.

But my point remains. For years PCPer has been called Intel and Nvidia shills for stating facts, from FCAT exposing the fact that Crossfire didnt work, to covering AMDs lackluster CPUs.

Now theyre being called AMD shills? Ironic how the technically illiterate pop out of the woodwork when their brand isnt doing better than another brand.

I have an i7-6700k and a 1070, but AMD has released what appears to be a good CPU architecture.

Im not crazy about two dies being used with a chip to chip interconnect rather than a monolithic die with a lower latency core to core bus, but they managed to make Ryzen compete with chips that cost 2-3x as much from Intel, on a small socket.

And unlike intel, theyre using solder on their small chip. AMD has gone all out with Ryzen and i am glad that intel will have to stop their "bump the clock and call it a new chip" kaby lake horse shit or 10 core $1700 CPUs that their own quad core architecture CPUs beat in a lot of cases.

AMD isnt the only one eating into Intel's dominance either. Nvidias GP100 is destroying Knights Landing in some cased, which in many ways is a let down of an architecture after years of hype.

Fujitsu is working on the most advanced supercomputer architecture in the world, while their now 6 year old K Computers SPARC architecture is still #1 on HPCG and Graph500, beating machines based on Intel CPUs with nearly 10x the peak FLOPS. They also deployed a 34 core CPU with HMC a year before Intel, with 10x the performance of K. No one, including Intel, really has anything to compete with the likes of that. Especially since its successor will likely beat anything Intel has for exascale.

Skylake Purley, which is on the same socket as Knights Landing, and an absolutely massive chip, cant be a letdown, otherwise Intel is going to lose serious market share. If you can buy Zen based 32 core x86 CPUs that perform close to Skylake 28 cores, for significantly less money, AMD can start to really come back.

March 15, 2017 | 01:40 PM - Posted by kenjo

"Im not crazy about two dies being used with a chip to chip interconnect rather than a monolithic die with a lower latency core to core bus"

It's a single chip/die solution.

https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/ryzen-die.jpg

March 16, 2017 | 01:55 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Thought one of the big issues was getting the core groups, which talk over a fabric that is different than the core to core topology within each core complex was a major source of latency.

Isnt each group of cores a NUMA node that has an inter and intra core communication fabric on chips with more than 4 physical cores?

March 15, 2017 | 02:53 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

It's the bumpkin problem Gaming has a SERIOUS bumpkin problem, so don't expect things to ever be civil!

Gaming with its FPS, and other CS:GO types of games will always attract the angry Bunpkins and their urban equivalents, the JOE Six-Packs!

Gaming has a serious Bumpkin problem!

Replace the Bumpkins/Joe Six-Packs with ROBOTS and Boycott any factories' products in any countries that employ Bumpkins/Joe Six-Packs, ditto for any agricultural production that employs the Bumpkins/Joe Six-Packs!
ROBOTs are that answer to the Bumpkin/Joe Six-pack related problems of the world!

Let the Bumpkins/Joe Six-Packs go back to the 12th century in their isolated communities while the rest of the world goes about living!

March 16, 2017 | 11:32 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

What the fuck are you attempting to incoherently say?

March 16, 2017 | 10:10 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Hey! Hey! Hay! Joe-Sixpack now don't you have no heart attack!

They've moved your jobs on overseas and given them to the Red Chinese!

They'll get Mad Tax Breaks to move the factories back here!

But they'll be using ROBOTS so that's just one more bitter pill!

They don't need you they've used your vote!

To get those Mad Tax Breaks!

Now don't it just get you goat!

The cost of ROBOT labor is now cheaper than the shipping!

So they've got their mad tax breaks and you are up the river!

You still don't have a job, and you still will be a slob!

So maybe they'll feed you some more cornless corn cobs!

'caues they've punked you all over again for the umpteenth time!

And you are still left without one thin dime!

March 13, 2017 | 09:11 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

It seems to me that things are actually going quite well for a completely new architecture. There is going to be differences that will need to be worked out, either by software developers or compiler writers. There could still be some OS tweaks also. Scheduling processes isn't a simple problem to solve. Multi-threaded programming isn't simple either, especially if threads need to share varying amounts of data. I am probably going to build a Ryzen system, but I want to wait for slightly more mature motherboards. I have had issues with "board revision 1.0" before. I had an early AGP board a long time ago that just had issues. It died in a bios flashing accident.

March 13, 2017 | 09:35 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

> "already identified some simple changes that can improve a game’s understanding of the 'Zen' core/cache topology, and we intend to provide a status update to the community when they are ready"

This highlights they know that Zen's 2x CCX design is causing a performance problem in some games more than others. Topology of Ryzen is basically 2 groups of 4 cores, it is not a single group of 8 cores, and Windows does not recognize this unique topology as it freely moves threads around whenever it feels like it.

Technically, the scheduler is fine, it's doing what it's told. However, it's doing a bad job at handling Ryzen's unique topology. So it can be improved.

Pretty simple changes actually.

March 14, 2017 | 01:58 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

This is not a simple thing to fix from the scheduler. The scheduler does not know which thread need to comunicate with each other with high granularity. If it has 8 threads, how would it know whether to schedule them across the 8 physical cores or schedule all 8 on a single CCX? One way may be better than the other, or it may not. It is really up to the developer, since they know what each thread is doing and how much shared data there is.

March 14, 2017 | 08:54 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

I love Ryzen, but it's clear that they took "the budget approach" to get octo-core to the masses by joining two quad-core modules, rather than building "native" octo-core CPUs. If the CCX issues can be fixed with software, that's fantastic, but then it passes the buck to the individual software makers.

Can AMD work with Microsoft to get this done more at a lower level?

March 14, 2017 | 11:21 AM - Posted by kenjo

Well Intel does the same thing on the server cpus with many cores. It's done for a reason and it's here to stay so operating systems/programs just has to learn to live with it just as we had to learn to live with cache when that was added.

March 14, 2017 | 01:32 PM - Posted by Allyn Malventano

Correct. Adding complexity to the scheduler will add latency to thread allocation, which will slow *everything* down. Scheduler code needs to be as tight as possible and adding enough features to detect which threads were sharing which memory and group them by CCX would slow it down considerably. The solution is that the optimization needs to happen at the application (game) level.

March 14, 2017 | 02:17 PM - Posted by Michael Rand (not verified)

If it needs to be done at the game level, how many devs are realistically going to do that, especially for console ports? I doubt the likes of EA, Ubi, Acti etc are going to be making that a top priority.

March 14, 2017 | 02:33 PM - Posted by Allyn Malventano

Therein lies the rub.

March 14, 2017 | 02:36 PM - Posted by Josh Walrath

Well, their workload in DX12 is quite likely to be higher than previous versions because they do have control that has been unprecedented.  But that price is high as well.  In theory they could exploit DX12 to improve perf on Ryzen pretty specifically, but how many devs would consider that a good use of time and manpower?

March 14, 2017 | 03:45 PM - Posted by remc86007

This is why something at the OS level should identify applications that use four or fewer threads and keep them on core complex. This doesn't sound that difficult, but I don't have a programming background.

March 14, 2017 | 06:58 PM - Posted by Allyn Malventano

The problem is that even if such a change was easy to implement, media encoding apps would suffer because they need raw compute power more than they need to share across threads. That's why it is the apps themselves that need to be CCX aware.

March 15, 2017 | 02:39 AM - Posted by Cyric (not verified)

Well, don't be surprised if you see a 2CCX CPU in the next generation consoles. Also PS4 Pro uses 2x4 Jaguar cores already. So it's not a matter of if they want to do it. Its more of a matter, If they can get away with it by being GPU limited before the Port.
At the same time I believe that AMD will have a say in it, pushing for optimization for multiple ccx complexes

March 13, 2017 | 09:41 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Also you guys, WTF is this?

https://archive.is/AzDnA

March 13, 2017 | 09:58 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

This is a baby throwing a tantrum and reveling this is a Nvidia/Intel shill site. I cant believe he posted something as immature as that.

March 13, 2017 | 10:19 PM - Posted by this_is_eric

Turns out getting sprayed with AMD fanboy vitriol takes a toll on one's psyche.

March 13, 2017 | 10:41 PM - Posted by John H (not verified)

Jeremy's version was hilarious..

March 14, 2017 | 06:05 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

^

March 13, 2017 | 11:00 PM - Posted by PixyMisa

It was a response to a comment by an idiot. Probably should have stayed in the comments rather than being made a post on the site, and I have no problem with it having been removed.

March 14, 2017 | 05:29 AM - Posted by Master Chen (not verified)

The only idiot here is the one you're seeing each and every morning in the reflection of your mirror.

March 14, 2017 | 11:25 AM - Posted by kenjo

Just because it's so for you and your mirror does not mean it apply to everybody else.

March 14, 2017 | 01:14 PM - Posted by Master Chen (not verified)

I don't have any mirrors in my house, but nice try anyway.

March 14, 2017 | 11:04 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

You're that horrified by your own reflection. How sad.

March 15, 2017 | 04:22 AM - Posted by Master Chen (not verified)

Nice try, but no cigar. Unlike your fat dirty ass, I workout and wash myself every day. And I have a well-paid job. And I live in my own house.

March 15, 2017 | 05:37 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Not only that but even Master Chen's reflection is so horrified that it looks horrible exactly like the horrible Master Chen that even the reflection itself refuses to even show up on any reflective surface; thereby reducing the resultant Horror by 1/2 or more(Depending on the amount of horrible Master Chen Reflections that themselves are reflected on any reflective surface) for any reflection related horror related horrors of reflections of horrible Master Chen!!

There is of course the matter of those recursive reflections that go on until infinity! So in Master Chen’s case we use the Horror reducing reflection reducing formula of (Infinity_Of-Horrible-Master-Chen-Recursive-Reflections – Infinity_Of-Horrible-Master-Chen-Recursive-Reflections + (1 * (original horror inducing Master-Chen))).

Which still leaves the very non reflective in any reflective surface(because of a very horrified Master Chen reflection’s refusing to reflect the Horror that is Master Chen’s refection), original Master Chen, that is still visible to the necked eye! And one fine and very durable very opaque paper bag can be employed to solve that horrible issue!

March 15, 2017 | 05:46 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Edit: refection
to: reflection

March 16, 2017 | 05:48 AM - Posted by Master Chen (not verified)

You are definitely a virgin.

March 16, 2017 | 12:44 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Youre deinitely a FUCKWIT

March 16, 2017 | 10:22 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

You need to reflect on your horrible reflection! Now if only your reflection could be coaxed out of hiding! The poor horrible horrified thing that it is!

March 14, 2017 | 05:21 AM - Posted by Master Chen (not verified)

Shaved, huh? Good. Let the whole world see their failings.

March 14, 2017 | 11:33 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

No, the men in the white uniforms are coming to get you! As you are a tad bit obsessive in the pathological sense in your train of irrational reasonings. you are a classic case of the obsessive with your compulsive driven and repeated attempts to apportion blame in an unfair and unreasonable manner on one website among many in an industry that has its industry wide and very systemic problems.

You are unable to properly petition the proper elected officials and/or other agencies tasked with the job of properly addressing the grievances of any individual or groups of individuals. You appear to be more interested in the perverse joy of smiting your irrationally perceived wrongdoers than you are interested in truthfully addressing any problems that are endemic in the entire technology and technology reporting industry.

So Really! You need to take this matter up with you elected officials or any of the agencies tasked with addressing consumer/trade issues.

But Knowing you and your MO, like everyone knows across these fourms on this and other websites, you can not do it on your own and thus the men in the white uniforms are coming to get you to that nice place where they have the trained professionals who can help you to get over yourself and get on with your life.

March 14, 2017 | 01:15 PM - Posted by Master Chen (not verified)

Learn to not to wall.

March 14, 2017 | 02:36 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Learn to how to live surrounded by padded walls!

March 14, 2017 | 02:52 PM - Posted by Master Chen (not verified)

Terry, log in already.

March 15, 2017 | 05:52 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

You need to reflect upon your horrible reflection!

March 13, 2017 | 09:45 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

The post they just deleted :) The latency Issues affect any gaming platform that uses more than 4 cores so saying this processor will scale well with the future isn't realistic

March 14, 2017 | 01:26 PM - Posted by Allyn Malventano

Games can scale well past 4 physical cores on Ryzen just fine, but they need to be aware of the architecture to do so. The scheduler is not meant to be smart enough to figure out exactly which game threads need to share what data, but if the game engine itself segments the threads properly, it will be fine.

March 13, 2017 | 09:48 PM - Posted by pdjblum

What a joy to read your post. It is obvious that you do not have an ax to grind. It is nice that you give AMD credit for doing the right thing and trusting them about the improvements that will come as developers get how to best code for ryzen. Wish others on the staff were able to be objective and appreciative of all the fucking amazing stuff we are so lucky to be able to buy and enjoy.

March 13, 2017 | 09:48 PM - Posted by StephanS

The thing I dont get, is why is windows7 better at handling Dx11 titles compared to Windows10 ?

Cant Microsoft integrate some the old windows7 optimization into windows10 ? if indeed this is just code difference VS scheduler .

it make no sense to see windows7 perform better at gaming,
or is it expected ? is this also true with the i7-7700k ?

March 13, 2017 | 10:04 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

I don't think there's been any credible benchmarks that demonstrate Ryzen has larger performance degradation on Win 10 vs Win 7 when compared to intel's CPUs. It's been mostly random forum posts and reddit posts that get circulated.

March 13, 2017 | 10:18 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Yes they can just strip out all that windows 10 spyare, adware, bloatware, UWP(TIFKAM renamed) abstraction layers and orher uncessary to gaming crud that is bogging the system down with uncessary CPU processor cycles stealing thread/cache bandwidth inducing activity that clogges the Infinity Fabric nonsense!

Windows 10 is so full of crud and it's clogging everything a real OS should not have to worry about. Windows 10 is a big land grab by M$ of your system for M$'s monetary milking! Enough with the crud M$ get rid of all that crap!

All you CPU cycles and cache coherency bandwidth are belong to windows 10 and M$! So game on that info fools!

March 15, 2017 | 01:13 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Thats why i used windows 8.1 with windows update disabled on my new machine. Fuck microsoft and windows 10.

March 14, 2017 | 12:28 AM - Posted by Darren (not verified)

Maybe the upcoming windows 10 "game mode" will help. Hey, one can always dream, right?

March 14, 2017 | 02:03 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Simple explanation is that Windows 7 is not trying to spread out the load evenly among cores.
Also, I'm wondering if those Windows 7 tests have been done with or without the Bulldozer hotfixes applied.

March 15, 2017 | 12:14 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

No windows 7 spreads the load evenly and windows 7 has less of the adware/bloat and spyware/bloat and UWP(TIFKAM renamed) translation layers/Bloat!

So it's windows 10 that is spreading out the loads of bloat/crap to fill up all available cores/threads on Ryzen with loads of Bloat-work performing software threads running on CPU core processor threads that are Bloat-work running threads that are shifted all over the place across Ryzens' hardware cores/threads causing the cache subsystems to thrash about with all that windows 10 bloat clogging the L3/l2/l1(D$ and I$) and causing all the Infinity Fabric bandwidth bloat/crap brownouts.

So windows 7 is not affected as much as windows 10 with all of 10's bloat/crap cycles stealing CPU core cache/subsystems taxing musical chairs processor core/thread dispatch style bloatware processor cores/threads taxing by that craploads of pure insanity that is the bloat/adware/crapware/UWP laden OS known as windows 10!

March 14, 2017 | 08:08 AM - Posted by Anonymous Nvidia User (not verified)

Windows 10 main selling point is dx12. Of course DX 11 isn't going to be as good in it. It's so it appears that the performance uplift from using dx12 vs dx11 is greater. Maybe leading to more people ditching older win versions for 10. Obviously win 10 is the only OS that is able to make that comparison.

They have been adding the same spyware to older versions of Windows as well via win update.

March 14, 2017 | 01:28 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

The disparity with Windows 7 is much more mundane: Windows 7 does not implement the various low-power nodes Ryzan (and other modern CPUs) support, so is always in FULL SPEED FULL POWER FINAL DESTINATION mode. Switch Windows 10 to the same power mode, and the disparity disappears.

March 14, 2017 | 01:57 PM - Posted by Pholostan

Different driver models (WDDM), different drivers and also different versions of DirectX 11.
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/jj863687.aspx

March 13, 2017 | 09:50 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Since the topology of the 8 core Rizen is basically 2 groups of 4 cores. And the problem is basically caused by Windows not recognizing this property. We can expeculate that this problem is not going to pass when AMD releases the 4 core processors (if they are all in 1 group and not in 2 groups of 2)...

March 13, 2017 | 10:01 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

And I'm glad AMD is paying close attention of what People are saying

March 13, 2017 | 11:05 PM - Posted by PixyMisa

There does still seem to be an issue, not with SMT, but with some types of workloads straddling both CCXes. This link shows significant performance gains in three games when one CCX is disabled: http://www.hardware.fr/articles/956-24/retour-sous-systeme-memoire-suite...

That said, three other games showed no difference, and four non-gaming tests showed no difference either.

So it might be easier to fix this in the games rather than in the Windows scheduler.

March 13, 2017 | 11:06 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

You can literally just set core affinities to a running game in Task Manager in the mean time.

March 13, 2017 | 11:13 PM - Posted by zme-ul

why you removed the original title? I love seeing AMD's fanbois squirming

March 14, 2017 | 09:27 AM - Posted by Anonymously Anonymous (not verified)

you forgot to mop your chin off, you're dribbling.

March 14, 2017 | 12:04 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

What about this result that shows there is a problem with the scheduler currently not understanding the CCXs? http://www.hardware.fr/articles/956-24/retour-sous-systeme-memoire-suite...

March 14, 2017 | 12:06 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Yeah. People say there is nothing wrong with the scheduler, and while it may not be doing anything 'wrong' with the info it has, the lack of understanding about the CCXs does mean the scheduler is at fault and needs to be fixed to understand the CCXs.

March 14, 2017 | 12:19 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

I don't think the scheduler has a good way of knowing what threads need to be grouped without the developers giving it a hint. Scheduling threads on the same CCX that is already running 4 threads may be very good for some applications and very bad for others.

March 14, 2017 | 11:24 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

True.

Some applications with little inter-communication might prefer to have more L3 (such as 7zip), while others that have high inter-communication (such as battle field 1) prefer to be on the same CCX.

How could the scheduler know where to put what thread? A) a new feature for the developers to give a hint to the scheduler or B) the scheduler could be improved to analyse the behavior of applications and make an intelligent decision.

If naples is going to be using 4 x (2 x CCX) for 32 cores, then it seems like the server industry might start pushing for an intelligent scheduler (some kind of AI or something).

March 14, 2017 | 02:52 PM - Posted by Martin Trautvetter

How do the results you linked support the claim you're making?

Hardware.fr shows that there is software that suffers from high inter-CCX latency, other software that basically doesn't care, and then there's 7-Zip, which apparently enjoys the extra per-thread cache afforded by running it across multiple CCXes.

March 14, 2017 | 01:09 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

The latest kernel change for Ryzen scheduling on Linux didn't actually improve numbers by much. I wouldn't expect Windows to do any better if they did work with Ryzen topology to eliminate having threads accessing required resources in the other CCX.

March 14, 2017 | 03:53 AM - Posted by JohnGR

Nothing strange here. What everyone should be expecting to read.

As with graphics cards in the past, where everything was getting optimized for Nvidia and AMD cards and drivers where looking as bad performers with compatibility issues, the same is true for the Ryzen CPUs.

There are games where the optimization for the Intel architecture don't let Ryzen perform as expected. So what? Ryzen is more than enough for today's applications and games. Only fanboys and crybabies who measure the meaning of their own existence with benchmark results should have a problem here.

In the future when Ryzen's maximum performance will be more needed, games will be optimized for it's architecture. Especially if Scorpio comes with Ryzen cores in it. In that case, all games ported from Scorpio, will be already optimized for the Ryzen architecture.

March 14, 2017 | 04:14 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Yawn.

March 14, 2017 | 09:51 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

If you want to yawn, yawn properly with your body and don't type it out here. We don't want to read about your bodily functions.

What're you gonna do next? Sneeze?

March 14, 2017 | 11:41 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

I'm gunna vigorously scratch mah family jewels and outgas some sulfurious compounds!

March 14, 2017 | 04:02 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Just a different operating system, accept it. NONSENSE!
Sir, I respectfully refuse.

i7 doesn't show a similar performance difference between
Win7 and Win10. This is obviously fixable, but requires
responsible parties to take ownership and not cry "Fake
News."

March 14, 2017 | 12:20 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Well the OS(windows) has been optimized for that i7/other i series SKUs and their market share for damned near a decade and windows 10's excessive services/bloat/spyware/telemetry sure can require some many thousands of software threads to be multitasked across as many hardware based processor cores/threads as are available.

The i7/other series have got a ring-bus(since Sandybridge) that is better for some things but worse at others compared to AMD's more point to point inside the CCX unit and more point to point from CCX unit to CCX unit interconnect fabric(?). So yes there will be a Need in the OSs and Applications(For applications that manage their own Core/thread affinity) for some processor/platform connection fabric topology awareness.

AMD and M$ need to get that optimization work done and that same work needs to be done for an Linux Kernel based OS builds, ditto for any BSD based Kernel based OS builds. The server/HPC market will damn sure get its Linux Kernel based scheduling ducks in order for any OSs/applications and API ecosystems, as will for that server/HPC market that will do the same for any who use any BSD based Kernel OS builds.

OS optimization is an eternally ongoing process, If the OS is being maintained correctly! And if the systems software/OS software engineers are allowed to focus their resources on the OS and are not forced to focus instead on any Silly UI and Silly UWP Run-time nonsense and other coding that is more engineered for extracting UWP software, cloud services fees, and ad/personal metrics gathering related monetary/revenue streams!

March 14, 2017 | 04:13 AM - Posted by Cyric (not verified)

In every benchmark Win10 won in performance over Win7. That could be CPU or GPU benchmarks, anything that I have found on the net. Yet with Ryzen win7 has better performance over win10 on some applications, and its not a windows problem? It baffles me

March 14, 2017 | 04:29 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

So basically they're saying problems, what problems?

While it's to be commended that they've made a public statement on the issues being talked about in the community it doesn't exactly instil confidence that they've all but denied any issues with the way Ryzen is configured (shared memclk and internal Data Fabric clocks)
https://thetechaltar.com/amd-ryzen-clock-domains-detailed/

And they've also denied there are any issue with the way Windows 10 deals with workloads that span CCX's.

March 14, 2017 | 02:51 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

So basically they're saying problems, what problems?

Hey! Johnny Tightlips! You hear somethin' 'bout some problems?

Johnny Tightlips: I ain't sayin' nothin'!

March 14, 2017 | 04:48 AM - Posted by Kronus (not verified)

Glad to see AMD talking about this, bulldozer was left silent for so long before they said anything about community thoughts.

Really want to set the windows 7 vs windows 10 argument because from every windows 7 vs windows 10 benchmark Intel wise the windows 10 bench us usually faster.

Although I do agree with some of the other comments, windows 10 is bogged down by so much unnecessary bloat that it just feels sluggish and hanky at times. Really wish there was a stripped down version out there that had just the essentials.

March 14, 2017 | 05:24 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

thats because they knew it was a dog.
they're response now shows the think Zen is a winner

March 14, 2017 | 03:11 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

It's a winner for AMD and at that 12% more IPC metric than the initial 40% IPC gain that they promised over their excavator micro-arch! But it was never expected to be an outright IPC winner over Intel's latest In that IPC metric!

Ryzen kicks Intel's A$$ in that all around Price/Performance metric! And I can get an 8 core/16 thread Ryzen 7 1700 for $10 dollars less than the reduced proce of the 4 core/8 thread 7700K, and I can overclock that 1700 to perform like the 1800X!

So that's 8 AMD Ryzen 1700 x86 cores for less than the price of 4 i7 7700K x86 cores, and the 1700 is the best all around deal for overclocking at a great saivings! So that's also a great win for AMD's Ryzen 1700 customers!

I'll take that 1700 "dog" any day for any all around workload usage and that 1700 "dog' still games OK for me!

March 14, 2017 | 05:07 AM - Posted by Master Chen (not verified)

So, you deleted that POS of Jeremiah's, but you're still keeping Allyn's BS intact? Something tells me PcPer needs to reevaluate everything.

March 14, 2017 | 06:33 AM - Posted by pdjblum

You have to wonder what is happening to a site that attacks and ridicules its own readers in posts? Not this one, but the deleted one and Allyn's for sure. Really out of control children it seems.

March 14, 2017 | 10:55 AM - Posted by Josh Walrath

I think it is merely a symptom of reading too many article comments.

March 14, 2017 | 02:03 PM - Posted by pdjblum

it the post is inflammatory and incendiary, it will result in angry comments aimed at pcper and staff

the comments on Hilbert's site might be contentious, but never directed at Hilbert or Guruf3d

that is because he is critical but respectful and appreciative and does not act entitled or superior or smug

there is never a hint of bias in Hilbert's reviews or posts

same can be said of Tim's and Sebastian's posts

Allyn is the main culprit of this troubling trend, but I have no doubt Ryan is right there with him

March 14, 2017 | 02:15 PM - Posted by Josh Walrath

If you say so.  I would like to think I have been pretty evenhanded with my coverage of the different manufacturers.  Even when I give kudos, but then talk about a weakness I see in a product, MC and you are quickly all over it implying bias, money, or shilling.  Eventually you sorta stop caring about what the other person says to you and you want to start shoveling it back.  I see that doesn't help the situation, so I guess it is just ignore from here on out.  Enjoy your time at PCPer!

March 14, 2017 | 02:22 PM - Posted by Michael Rand (not verified)

Just ignore them Josh, they're just a set of arseholes.

March 14, 2017 | 06:38 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

^

No nom noms for the bridge dwellers

March 14, 2017 | 02:53 PM - Posted by Master Chen (not verified)

This guy gets it.
Walrus below this comment of mine does not.

March 14, 2017 | 03:09 PM - Posted by Josh Walrath

Master Chen is a paragon of virtue and technical knowledge.  He is generous, forthright, and gracious.  He treats others with dignity and respect.

March 14, 2017 | 03:20 PM - Posted by kenjo

"The sarcasm is strong with this one"
- Master Troll

March 14, 2017 | 03:59 PM - Posted by Master Chen (not verified)

You actually did it. Wow.

March 14, 2017 | 06:30 PM - Posted by pdjblum

sarcastic or not, that response is the way to go

thanks josh for being a stand up guy

March 14, 2017 | 05:39 PM - Posted by Jeremy Hellstrom

If we stated AMD stands for Advanced Micro Devices it would set off angry comments.

March 14, 2017 | 06:27 PM - Posted by pdjblum

you really don't get it

why do you think hilbert never gets any shit

he presents things in a balanced, fair, and unbiased way

he is appreciative and respectful rather than superior and entitled

he does not go out of his way to prove he is smarter than his readers and doesn't believe he is

allyn can't stop chiming in, though couched in a attempt to act unbiased. to prove he was right about the scheduler

big fuckin deal

March 14, 2017 | 06:59 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

I agree.

But saying they're going outta their "way to prove he is smarter....", is a bit inaccurate.

I think any "chiming in" is a direct result of their integrity being called into question. And that is a COMPLETELY different scenario altogether.

However, I still agree. Better to turn the other cheek. Easier said than done although. Lots of empathy for the Per's staff... It's very difficult to take out the garbage without getting dirty yourself.

March 14, 2017 | 09:09 PM - Posted by pdjblum

thanks for your thoughtful reply

i still have to stand by what i said based on this somewhat rhetorical question

why is it that his integrity is so often questioned while Hilbert's never is?

March 15, 2017 | 01:29 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

PCPer articles tend to get into the technical details that most consumer level sites dont, largely because their readers are average consumers who dont care enough to get that in depth.

They also dont pretend to be robots that dont have opinions. I think its fine that they have opinions, even if i dont agree with them all.

Its not like the professional sites like semiengineering, hpcwire, the next platform or even top500 arent FILLED with personal opinions of the people who write there.

I rather enjoy calling them out when theyre wrong about things on those sites as well.

But being technical somewhere in between a consumer and professional site is one of the main reasons that i read PCPer and not other tech sites. Its actually interesting to read the technical details, not just the typical consumer oriented bullshit that most tech sites spew.

March 15, 2017 | 02:55 PM - Posted by Tim Verry

Thanks for the feedback. It's a balancing act between a giving readers a list of specifications and what my thoughts/opinion of something is. I try to stick to the facts and wait towards the end share any opinions I have of them while pointing out that they are just that; opinions. I don't mind if you do not agree with them, heh, it is actually a good thing that you are able to take the information from here and elsewhere and make up your own mind on things. Everyone usually is able to have productive discussions in the comments either way which is good even if its telling me how wrong i am :-). constructive critism is fine/a good thing.

March 16, 2017 | 02:09 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

I wasnt implying that i disagree often. Your articles tend to be spot on. Its more directed at the trolls in the comments section saying "well this other tech site that likes EVERYTHING doesnt have its integrity questioned!"

The reason for that is, they pretend abstain from having an opinion.

You do find THOSE website comments sections with tons of ignorant "oh i wish i hadnt bought this because i didnt know better" type comments or "damn why did i just buy a shitty Maxwell GPU?" AS IF PASCALL WASNT ANNOUNCED YEARS IN ADVANCE!

Thats the difference between a news regurgitation "tech site" and a tech site that gets into the nitty gritty of microarchitecture, storage controller architectue or even the type of semiconductor being used, which PCPer does do.

This is literally the only consumer PC oriented site worth a damn, because it focuses on details like a professionally oriented one(like HPCWire, The Next Platform or Semiengineering etc.) I read those sites as well but they cover totally different subjects than PCPer or other "normal" tech sites.

Thank you and the rest of the PCPer staff for being different and standing apart from the drooling masses.

March 14, 2017 | 06:44 PM - Posted by Master Chen (not verified)

AMD means "American Marvelous Designs".

March 14, 2017 | 07:31 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

AMD---> Allyn Malventano Destroys

March 14, 2017 | 09:01 PM - Posted by pdjblum

lol

March 14, 2017 | 05:20 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

There is a couple possible issues here. One is if the scheduler needlessly bounces a thread between different CCXs. This will obviously thrash the caches a bit. That issue can be reduced by core parking and such. That probably isn't the main issue here though. The main issue is probablly shared data. This isn't really classified as a NUMA issue. Access to memory should be the same for both CCXs. Threads are usually going to share data by mapping shared memory. Both processes map the same area of memory. Any reads and writes have to use a locking mechanism. How much this effects performance will depend on how much and how frequently they read and write the shared memory. If very frequent communication is necessary, then the best case scenario would be for them to actually be on the same physical processor. In that case, the shared memory area would probably end up cached in the L2 cache. The next best thing is to be on the same CCX, since the shared memory would be in the shared L3 cache. If processes running on separate CCXs share memory though, this will cause a big increase in latency due to cache coherency operations and copying modified cache blocks back and forth.

For running on the same CCX, acquiring the lock and reading or writing shared memory doesn't involve any operations on the fabric or memory controller if it is in the CCXs cache hierarchy. Writing to shared memory that is in both CCX caches would require traffic on the fabric just to get the lock. Any modified data would then need to be copied over before the other process can acquire the lock to read it. That is a lot of added latency. This isn't a failure of the scheduler. The scheduler does not operate at that level. It doesn't know which threads need to do a lot of communication. Therefore, changing the scheduler can't really fix this issue.

The scheduler knows not to run two threads on the same physical core, if it can avoid it. When it has to schedule more than 4 threads, it has to choose whether to run it on the same CCX, doubling up one of the processors, or running it on the other CCX. If there is a lot of shared memory accesses (the schedulers probably doesn't know anything about that) then it would be better to run it on the same CCX. If there isn't a lot of shared memory accesses, then it could be much better to run it on the other CCX. On the other CCX, the process gets a core and L2 caches to itself along with reduced L3 load. The scheduler probably doesn't have sufficient information to choose between those. Trying to schedule on the same CCX would hurt performance of many applications. They may be able to do a few things to increase performance, like tending to schedule threads on the same CCXs rather than anywhere, although that could reduce performance for some applications also. You would have a lot of resources on the other CCX going to waste. On Intel's architecture, the exact same core it was on before is best, but if that isn't available, then it doesn't matter which one is chosen. On AMD's architecture, it does matter. There isn't a good way to handle many of these cases unless developers assign core affinities to group the threads that need to do a lot of communication.

If the claims of windows 7 performance are correct, then I would be interested in seeing some testing for that to see what is going on. I would wonder if it was even designed to handle a 16 core processor. Those were probably a lot less common when windows 7 was released.

March 14, 2017 | 07:55 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Your face when you didn't fall for the Rypoo meme

March 14, 2017 | 08:30 AM - Posted by Master Chen (not verified)

The most hilarious thing about all of this is that Linux works with CCX architecture absolutely fine and fully since the day-one. Literally zero problems on Unix-like systems. It's just the Windows that lacks all of the proper support. But PcPer's Intel shillers would defend to death their baked "nothing is wrong with Windows, it's the processor!" BS. They're just like the 'Murican MSMs - caught red-handed and were absolutely rekt for the lies they've spread, but they'll never ever admit any of it because if that happens everything will be over for them. This is truly a very sad sight to behold.

March 14, 2017 | 10:57 AM - Posted by Josh Walrath

Submitted for your entertainment: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=nvidia-1080ti-ryzen&num=2

March 14, 2017 | 01:17 PM - Posted by Master Chen (not verified)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URBZaFhizGc
But keep on trying, Josh. You ARE a walrus, after all.

March 14, 2017 | 01:22 PM - Posted by Josh Walrath

What does that link have to do with Linux and your declaration?

March 14, 2017 | 02:56 PM - Posted by Master Chen (not verified)

>"The minimums? PAH, who cares! I'M JOSH WALRUS!"
Really, now.

March 14, 2017 | 01:38 PM - Posted by Allyn Malventano

Chen: You talk about Linux being perfect, Josh points you to Linux results countering your claim, and you come back with Windows results? Does not compute, bro.

March 14, 2017 | 02:59 PM - Posted by Master Chen (not verified)

Minimums is what matters, not the "Averages" Josh was throwing at me. Averages and Maximums don't mean jack. When it comes down to Intel compiler-abused YOBA GAYMS, only minimums matter. Minimums are good and well on Linux. They are not on Windows. But keep living in denial, I guess.

March 14, 2017 | 03:07 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Minimums? As in framerates?
Try again.
Yeah... Totally matters if framerate minimums are higher if they're consistently lower than the competition overall.
Or, go to techreport and read the article there about why minimum framerates isn't what matters.

March 14, 2017 | 04:08 PM - Posted by Master Chen (not verified)

"Gen1" Zen has minimums of 68 in Windows 7 and 16 in NSA Spyware 10. In the same game, on the same settings, and with the same hardware. Averages don't mean jack because they dip. And they can dip heavily. Minimums are minimums. They never dip, because they're, you guessed it, MINIMUMS. Higher minimums are always better than Averages or Maximums. Especially if you can get very high minimums while maxing everything out and on very high resolutions. High minimums guarantee absolutely smooth experience, if they go 50 and above. Minimums never stutter, so minimums of 60 will always be more preferable than 100500+ of Averages that are stuttering like ducks. "Gen1" Zen can into high minimums on Windows 7. On NSA Spyware 10 it can't for now, because Micro$oft doesn't understand CCX. On Linux RyZen has high minimums in everything, because Linux understands CCX. And "Gen1" Zen's minimums are quite high across the board when on Windows 7 or Linux, unlike InFail's overpriced CrappyFake with dried horse sperm under the cover.

March 14, 2017 | 07:11 PM - Posted by Allyn Malventano

Minimums/maximums are set by a single data point across an entire run consisting of thousands and are a poor representation of the overall performance of pretty much anything. Minimums can also vary wildly from run to run, especially if they are caused by a cache miss, interrupt collision, etc. Also, you can have a game that dips 20% below the average five times a second on one platform compared to the other platform dipping *once* to 40% and then call the former a better experience when clearly it is not. That's the reason Ryan presents frame rating data in percentiles. I take that a step further with latency percentiles for storage performance.

March 15, 2017 | 01:34 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

See, this kind of response is why i read PCPer. They actually get it right when it comes to differentiating overall or real world performance and obsessing over a single data point thats being misused to "make a point".

March 16, 2017 | 05:50 AM - Posted by Master Chen (not verified)

You are a lamer.

March 16, 2017 | 11:37 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Heres an idea: fuck yourself you deranged AMD fanfuck

March 14, 2017 | 03:32 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Linux/OS is not perfect but Linux/OS is one thing! And that one thing is that Linux is not from M$ or controlled by M$!

So I'm looking for that Ryzen/Vega laptop APU SKU used on a Linux OS based laptop. A Linux OEM produced(as if there is any other option for laptops than OEM!) laptop that will give me a relatively M$/Intel/Nvidia free laptop option at an affordable price where I am the real owner of my laptop hardware.

March 14, 2017 | 03:44 PM - Posted by Martin Trautvetter

"And that one thing is that Linux is not from M$ or controlled by M$!"

This is the point in your post when your friendly Microsoft representative enters the office, refers to his an envelope full of Linux-using licencees, and hands you a coffer to fill with your regular 'indemnification' payments.

March 14, 2017 | 04:12 PM - Posted by Master Chen (not verified)

That was a mistake, but M$ would never EVER dare to use that.
Because otherwise, there will be war. And we will win in that war.

March 14, 2017 | 04:11 PM - Posted by Master Chen (not verified)

Linux is freedom (if of "GNU/Linux" Stallman's circle).
So is AMD. So is Zen. So is Radeon.
This is only the beginning.
Free Software was the first step.
The next step - free hardware.

March 15, 2017 | 01:37 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Um what? Theyre going to be giving away free hardware? Where do i go to get my socialist free handout PC from the hardware bureau?

March 15, 2017 | 02:32 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

You are as big a wing nut on your right end as the poster that you replied to is on his(Implied by you) left end of the wing nut teeter totter.

There is nothing more disgusting in this world than the communist and capitalist worshiping wing nut rednecks that are so absolutely abject-morialistic with their crazy obsessive worship of these two systems that do not really work.

But the with a world so full of the masses of Bumpkins and one day they can all be replaced by robots and all the communist and capitalist worshiping wing nut rednecks sent packing out of the world's cities and towns forever.

The real threat to civilization is the bumpkin, whatever system that the bumpkin believes in!

March 16, 2017 | 05:50 AM - Posted by Master Chen (not verified)

Star screeching, landwhale.

March 17, 2017 | 07:53 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Basement dwelling lipid-head!

March 14, 2017 | 02:11 PM - Posted by John H (not verified)

NINE NINETY NINE!!!!!

March 14, 2017 | 02:59 PM - Posted by Master Chen (not verified)

Out of 999999 HP I have.

March 14, 2017 | 09:18 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

The issue has been determined already.

https://community.amd.com/community/gaming/blog/2017/03/14/tips-for-buil...

The problem is not Ryzen, or the Windows scheduler, or SMT. It's because some games are not using the correct CPU topology map.

Fair bet that despite advice to do a fresh install of everything, some reviewers just plugged in their 'review drive' with all their test games on it and proceeded to test using games with the wrong topology map. Hence review scores being all over the place.

Still, it should be a pretty easy fix. As the biggest problem seems to be windows reporting Ryzen as a 16 core processor instead of an 8C/16T one. Which means the topology map will be wrong in any event. Even if generated by a fresh install.

March 14, 2017 | 09:48 AM - Posted by Master Chen (not verified)

No, it's more like a filthy combination OF Windows incapable of CCX AND pro-Intel compiler biased YOBA GAYMS.
It a complete and utter clusterduck, but there's literally NOTHING wrong with the stone itself, it's all on the software side.

March 14, 2017 | 01:41 PM - Posted by Allyn Malventano

AMD is directly contradicting you in their statement, multiple times. You're welcome to take it to the grave, but you're only embarrassing yourself here with the conspiracy theories, as well as making AMD look bad. They say it's not the scheduler and they appear to be making good on their promise to work with developers to optimize their apps and games to work better with Ryzen. Stomping your feet about schedulers is not going to get anyone anywhere at this point.

March 15, 2017 | 07:06 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Yep, the problem is not with the scheduler itself, that works as it should, just look at the MT scores ? The problem is that the topology map that the scheduler bases its decisions on is not necessarily correct.

The effect this has will vary depending on the app. Some games like F1 will probably benefit greatly from a fix, others, hardly at all.

March 14, 2017 | 11:13 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUk5T3AkJYE

Master Chen should just be banned and all his idiotic comments deleted, he's clearly one of those paid AMD Red Team shills.

March 14, 2017 | 11:55 AM - Posted by kenjo

The only thing that is clear regarding Master Chen is that there is some serious mental problems involved.

I do support a ban on that user.

March 14, 2017 | 01:18 PM - Posted by Master Chen (not verified)

Calm your mad ass, InFail shill.

March 14, 2017 | 03:05 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Your mother is a cunt whore? Everyone already knows that though.