Dolphin, the GameCube and Wii emulator - Forums

(03-19-2017, 02:43 PM)Nintendo Maniac 64 Wrote: [ -> ]I just realized, I don't think the "bcdedit /deletevalue useplatformclock" performance workaround was ever mentioned in this thread...

I'd be interested in seeing how much that effects Dolphin performance, like if it's only a 1-2% difference sort of thing or more like 5-10%.



If you disable the correct cores, then yes; people have already done tests of this very thing on PC games:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQilK2dOJTg

(unfortunately, the above video only tested 4+0 with SMT disabled)

You don't have to wonder - we already know that they'll both be 3x3 and 2x2 cores per CCX with two CCXs each:


The only chips with a single CCX should be those based on Raven Ridge.

O wow. I didn't know 3x3 and 2x2 was already confirmed. I was reading a bunch of people speculate about how the cores would depend on how the chips passed through binning.....

Anyway.....do you have any resources on disabling specific cores and setting it up right? I didn't watch that video yet but does it explain? I haven't gone to in depth with the options yet but I've really only seen options so far to disable "x" # of cores and not to disable certain cores.

(03-19-2017, 03:03 PM)Gregtastic Wrote: [ -> ]O wow. I didn't know 3x3 and 2x2 was already confirmed. I was reading a bunch of people speculate about how the cores would depend on how the chips passed through binning.....

Anyway.....do you have any resources on disabling specific cores and setting it up right? I didn't watch that video yet but does it explain? I haven't gone to in depth with the options yet but I've really only seen options so far to disable "x" # of cores and not to disable certain cores.

By the way I was going to ask you about the [color=#000000]"bcdedit /deletevalue useplatformclock" you mentioned but Googling showed it was enabling HPET? I think using Ryzen Master forces you to enable HPET..........meaning most Ryzen users who are overclocking might already have it enabled.[/color]

Digital Foundry's Ryzen review shows that they also got at least 4% faster performance by using Windows 7 vs using Windows 10:

https://youtu.be/TId-OrXWuOE?t=12m35s

(03-19-2017, 03:03 PM)Gregtastic Wrote: [ -> ]Anyway.....do you have any resources on disabling specific cores and setting it up right? I didn't watch that video yet but does it explain? I haven't gone to in depth with the options yet but I've really only seen options so far to disable "x" # of cores and not to disable certain cores.

Digital Foundry's Ryzen review shows the according setting in the BIOS:

https://youtu.be/TId-OrXWuOE?t=13m27s

EDIT: You can also disable cores via Ryzen Master. To disable an entire CCX, I believe you simply just need to disable the first 4 or the last 4 cores.

(03-19-2017, 03:07 PM)Gregtastic Wrote: [ -> ]"bcdedit /deletevalue useplatformclock" you mentioned but Googling showed it was enabling HPET?

It actually disables HPET. Digital Foundry, once again, also mentioned this:

https://youtu.be/TId-OrXWuOE?t=5m13s

(03-19-2017, 03:12 PM)Nintendo Maniac 64 Wrote: [ -> ]Digital Foundry's Ryzen review shows that they also got at least 4% faster performance by using Windows 7 vs using Windows 10:

https://youtu.be/TId-OrXWuOE?t=12m35s



Digital Foundry's Ryzen review shows the according setting in the BIOS:

https://youtu.be/TId-OrXWuOE?t=13m27s

EDIT: You can also disable cores via Ryzen Master.  To disable an entire CCX, I believe you simply just need to disable the first 4 or the last 4 cores.



It actually disables HPET.  Digital Foundry, once again, also mentioned this:

https://youtu.be/TId-OrXWuOE?t=5m13s

Lol, I knew you could disable 6, 4, or 2 cores in Ryzen Master but didn't know if it would definitely push it to 1 CCX.

Anyway....I'm getting sleepy and running out of beer so I'll test this all out tomorrow when I get off work. Unfortunately I work 11:30-10 but I'll test it after. 

(03-19-2017, 03:32 PM)Gregtastic Wrote: [ -> ]Lol, I knew you could disable 6, 4, or 2 cores in Ryzen Master but didn't know if it would definitely push it to 1 CCX.

Well I don't actually own Ryzen so I can't say for sure - it's just that if all the cores in a single CCX are disabled, then there simply isn't anything enabled that could receive a program thread that was sent across the infinity fabric.

AMD Ryzen isn't a true 8-Core processor, just two Quad core modules , L3 Latency between these modules is
too high, which is effecting game performance.

Ryxen 1600 is 3x3, Ryzen 1400 is 2x2. So these won't be any better either.

I remember when the AMD Phenom came out and how they advertised it as the 'first "true" quad core design'
so why did AMD go Backwards when they released the FX 4100, a dual-core/4 module processor and they repeated this mistake
with Ryzen.

This is ridiculous.

If the Ryzen hadn't "8 real cores" - could not beat the "octa-cores by intel" (5960x and 6900K).

And the performance in games isn't bad.




https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_7_1800X/13.html

A true 8-Core processor, would be one module, with 8-Cores connected to a Level 3 Cache.

AMD Ryzen 7 as two modules, each with 4-Cores connected to it's own Level 3 cache.

Compare Intel and AMD processors on CPU-Z and look at the Level 3 Cache, Intel have a Single pool of L3 cache on all its processors  



Ryzen 1400 also as 2 modules, it will likely be 2 x 4Mbytes.

Quote:A true 8-Core processor, would be one module, with 8-Cores connected to a Level 3 Cache.

This is not a rule.

If it's a rule, want to see the source(intel?). Despite the bugs, Ryzen is far from the (fail) modular architecture of the Bulldozer.

Then why does the Level 3 Cache on AMD Bulldozer have less latency then AMD Ryzen