Significant contrast exists between the R5 1600AF and R5 3600 models.
Significant contrast exists between the R5 1600AF and R5 3600 models.
I'd appreciate seeing examples from others. I'll keep this thread open for a couple of days.
The goal isn't just speed, it's about overall efficiency. Power follows the formula Cl × V² × f, which should improve with a drop from 1.3 to 1. A smaller node size means less Cl needed for the same task. The calculation involving Cl(zen1 + idle) multiplied by other factors seems inconsistent with the expected ratio. It looks like you didn't address the original question, and this isn't really about binning.
Exactly what you said, you didn't get their question addressed. The issue was purely about power, not performance. They're correct to raise concerns. The calculation (Cl(zen1+(at idle)) * 5.746 = 1/2 of Cl(zen2(at idle)) * 4) seems inconsistent. It suggests a significant difference in capacitive load between the two chips, even though one is newer. The more plausible explanation is that the measurements weren't identical—perhaps a different program was run on the newer chip.