Wow, I'm amazed at how much performance can be achieved.

The table above shows the relationship between MCLK and UCLK at various DDR speeds. As you can see, once you go above DDR5-6000, the memory controller has to run at MCLK of over 3000 MHz, which is getting close to its maximum frequency limits.

When the 1:2 mode is active, the memory runs at twice the frequency of the memory controller, which means the memory controller can run at lower speeds, which it can handle better. This lets you achieve higher memory speeds without compromising the stability of the memory controller. While memory bandwidth is increased, additional latency is introduced, because the memory controller has to manage the data flow without being able to synchronize perfectly with the memory clock.

Source: https://www.techpowerup.com/review/ddr5-memory-performance-scaling-with-amd-zen-5/2.html

 

Serious Correction: I phoned back to my supplier today, as i'm expecting a couple of Samsung ssds and i spoke with the tech guy again. That particular system turned out to be unstable eventually, after Win 11 install and when gaming. System was tested with COD Black Ops 6 and Baldur's Gate 3. Reportedly my tech friend got bsod in both games. So, he went back to a 1:2 ratio for the UCLK and gaming was smooth as butter.
But what i saw yesterday was outlandish! Remember we were only in BIOS running memtest off a usb stick, that's what i was able to see mainly. It just felt as these 9800X3D cpus are sort of more "cherry picked" silicon than their Ryzen 9 counterparts.
The 1:2 makes sense running smoothly though, as the DDR5 8000 is actually a (double data rate) 4000 mhz ram, so when the UCLK is config'd at 1:2, UCLK and Infinity Fabric Clock (FCLK) run synchronously at 2000mhz. Which theoretically is optimum, as any other speed will have both the unified memory controller and fabric clocks running asynchronously, causing a constant data buffering. Reflecting on this from a serious gamer's perspective though (something which i was really passionate about when younger), this will not have a significant performance increase as timings even with this top end ram are high and will introduce more latency than the most tight clocked DDR5 running at ie. 5600 or 6000 mt/s. This kind of large bandwidth is more suited for productivity workloads rather than gaming.
Still shocked though about the initial witnessing of the 9800X3D build. Well, you can't have it all in one lifetime can you hahaha...
Cheers mate

 

https://www.scanproaudio.info/2024/...-round-up-intel-ultra-series-and-amd-9800x3d/

Arrow Lake DAW benchmarks.

TLDR:

Excellent performance in effects plugins, beating Intel's previous gen and AMD's current gen solidly.

Mixed bag in memory sensitive sample/instrument workloads. ARL slightly worse than previous gen at larger buffer sizes, but beats AMD - and increasingly so as buffer size increases.

Mix bus test: Improvement over last gen, but comfortably beaten by current gen AMD chips.

 

Intel announces the retirement of CEO Pat Gelsinger and his resignation from the Board of Directors effective December 1, as well as the appointment of David Zinsner and Michelle Johnston Holthaus as interim co-CEOs.

 

When profits fall, someone always has to go. Whether they can make up for the losses remains to be seen in the near future.
What are the odds that they will make it? Or will AMD win the race?

 

Second head rolling and counting. And I'm totally not enjoying it

 

Intel is a public company and shareholders want returns:

Wikipedia say:
Intel's corporate structure shows a dominant free float shareholding of 83.47%. BlackRock Inc. and The Vanguard Group, Inc. hold 8.10% and 8.43% of the shares respectively.

Capital pools like Blackrock and Vanguard only want returns returns returns, the invested money must multiply on its own...!

 

Considering Intel current situation they might as well invest in bee hives.

 

November 4:

Toms Hardware: "Speculation is rife that Gelsinger was forced out, especially in light of the company's poor performance in the stock market — Intel's stock price is down 61% since Gelsinger took over."

 

Last edited: Dec 2, 2024

Xe2 slides from Intel (product release 13th December)

< click this tiny boi

 

Oh lol
https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-com...rs-his-entire-salary-earned-during-his-tenure
What to take from all this? Gelsinger, in Intel's worse period ever, snatched 50 mil/year during his time as CEO. Talking about absurd is an understatement.

 

Seems like Xe2 is much more CPU dependent than AMD's and Nvidia's offerings, which puts it in a place where it can't be recommended for mainstream systems, which is also the only tier where you'd consider Intel in the first place. (Xe2 also absolutely needs ReBar support, but I guess that's less of an issue)

 

Per DIGITIMES:

 

Small ot.. Remember when intel had no competitors, and 4 cores were the standard for the average consumer? Luckily ryzen arrived.. Now nvidia is doing the same thing with the Vram..

 

Unfortunately, at this point they might have to go the TSMC route.
While I'm not a huge fan of Intel, this is bad on a global scale. It is one step closer to a fab monopoly of TSMC.
Thats dangerous. The whole world depending on that one fab on that one island about that, one day maybe, a war could start.

 

I'm afraid we're already at that point.
There's just no competition. Intel can't compete, neither can Samsung. And I don't know about others even remotely close.

Something should be done but it's an extremely difficult problem.

 

Well... there is no real danger in that, as they don't design/sell semi-conductors so they don't compete with their potential customers like Intel does. They just manufacture them. And that is why TSMC fabs rule and Intel fabs mainly do Intel only, because their supposed fab clients would most likely be their own competitors and here you have a very strong conflict of interest. Add to this, Intel's -current and past- shady background, with a series of lawsuits and false public reports and their quality as a trustful company has declined a lot, especially among the leading companies of the tech industry, that is their potential fab customers.
But i don't see how is TSMC to be blamed in this scenario. They do their best to expand in other countries, ie building a huge fab in Arizona, if it's not already operating.
Cheers
EDIT: A little but important sidenote here, the whole world depending on TSMC is what keeps China from doing the obvious hehe. They would then have to face the whole world. I hope you get my notion.

 

Last edited: Feb 15, 2025

That's not exactly how it is unfortunately.
While it is true that TSMC does not design chips and that there are plenty of competing chip designers out there, there's that one catch: Atm TSMC is the only fab that pulls off 3nm and is on the way to 2nm. So that basically means: There is noone else that could produce M4, Ryzen or any other bleeding edge chips. There is no other fab to go to when it comes to the latest stepping in chip manufacturing.
If Intel or anyone else could pull it off, they sure would. Intel invested billions in 3nm nodes and they were not able to do it economically and reliable. While TSMC is on the way to the next node.
And what TSMC is building an Murica is not going to be the most advanced node. They would be stupid of they did. TSMC is Taiwans live insurance.
Oh, and by the way: there is only one company in the world that is able to procuce the lithography machines modern nodes need. That one is located in the Netherlands.
It's scary. The world depends on two companies, without those we fall back to 10 year old manufacturing processes.

 

Check what I posted above. If true, then the US is trying to strongarm the Taiwanese government and TSMC into transferring the necessary tech.

Digitimes speculate that the non-deal on the table is:

For TSMC: Buy part of Intel, transfer your tech to the US in some form, or face 100% tariffs on your chips.

For the Taiwanese government: Approve the transfer & investment, or we'll let the Chinese know how committed to your defence we really are.

 

I hear you but it's been like that for 15+ years (beginning with AMD outsourcing to TSMC) and suddenly now it became scary? Why, because Intel has fallen behind? So, 3 companies is safe, 2 companies scary? Cmon man, this is a bit ridiculous.
In my book, the only thing scary, is US gov wanting to impose tariffs and exhibiting all kinds of stupid "bully" policies. You don't strengthen your US factories (Intel) by deliberately making up obstacles to slow down the competition's spread in the market. That's a confirmed Intel tactic and look where it got them.
I hope this is not perceived as a political comment, it is only an observer's point. Imho tariffs won't hurt TSMC one bit, only consumers will be hurt.
Cheers.