- Tested: AMD's Windows 11 Patch Wins Some, Loses Some
AMD's original advisory pointed out that some eSports games can suffer 10 to 15%, but we didn't see that in any of our tests.
Also toms hardware: Tests only 1 esports gameID: hioxyhu
AMD says that the issue could cause 3–5 percent worse performance in most affected applications, while some games (AMD specifically calls out those “commonly used for eSports”) could see performance dips of 10–15 percent.
That's because it's 3-5% on average. 'Applications' being everything including games, only the esport title games and some very cache sensitive programs were hit harder.
Go ahead and launch up your games and benchmark them pre and post patch, its single digit changes. People in this very sub have done this already.
If this wasnt the case, AMD PR would've fired back already to Intels benchmarks. They had 3 business days to run the same benchmarks and say 'Hey performance numbers are way better on the patch, here's what they should look like'. But it never happened. AMD doesnt have to prove Alder Lake tests were wrong, they just had to show their own product performed better than represented, it shouldve been easy if that was the case.ID: hiqf6o4
AMD doesn't need to prove anything as Intel will be exposed when real benchmarks come out, just like what happened with Rocket Lake when they declared wins in gaming, and it turned out that 5000 was better.ID: hisiukz
I honestly have not seen a difference in performance on surface pro 3 which is dated and a more optimum system which is 6 months old. Granted, I focus more on CAD software than I do gaming these days, but still my games have not suffered. Mechwarrior 5 melted a sub par power supply and it still moving along just fine with the updates and patches thus far.
We found that synthetic measurements of AMD's L3 latency and fabric have returned to normal. We still see a small reduction in L3 bandwidth measurements in Windows 11, but these don't appear to have a performance impact in most of our tested games.
Nevertheless, I fully expect the "I installed Windows 11 and suddenly my granpa's pacemaker lost a 6% performance." posts to keep coming.ID: hipwbp9
The test are being done on clean Windows 11 systems. It's quite possible those that have upgraded suffer for any number of reasons.ID: hirocfb
When upgrading from 10 Pro to 11 Pro, my 5600x (paired with a 3080 FE both purchased at MSRP) had crashes, took a solid minute to boot up cold or on restart, lagged when opening explorer windows, and stuttered in games. It wasn't until I bit the bullet and did a fully clean install of 11 that most of that went away and returned to normal 10 functionality. Being that I'm on a 5600x with PBO and fast RAM, I didn't notice much difference for either of the patches, but the benchmarks were markedly improved.ID: hitdicf
If it's a stuttering piece of shit and the only thing that changed is windows 11 over 10 then it is what it is. Making fun of people that are frustrated makes you a soycuck, you're not clever or funny, but if it gets you some updoots I guess fuq it dud
Back when W11 became readily available via Insider build I updated my W10 daily build to W11, so previoius to any performance patch or update.
SOTR benchmark saw an increase of 10 FPS average while lows and highs remained similar vs my W10 build, I literally broke my Time Spy CPU record and reached an astoninishing 14059 CPU points on W11 on my 5800X...
In reality, other than AIDA, the limited testing I did (SOTR, TimeSpy, Warzone, CPU-Z, Cinebench R23, Geekbench and other suites) showed no measurable difference and even increasing performance in some scenarios.
I have no doubt some very niche and specific workloads that rely on L3 cache all the time could see some degradation in performance but for the average joe, if nobody told them about it, they wouldn't even notice.
This was somewhat overblown by the usual coping redditors that can't accept a new CPU is better and faster than an older CPU...
Calm down, Zen3D is where everything gets interesting.ID: hisz4d8
I thought the issues pertained to tasks hopping between CCXs, which the 5800X has one of
I have a 5900X, and all the headlines have definitely made me weary. I'm gonna check back in a month or two and hopefully the reports of issues go away and I'll look through benchmarksID: hitdyif
but for the average joe, if nobody told them about it, they wouldn't even notice.
Your average joe doesn't exist. Also, not everyone has the same experience, we're not programmed npcs set up in your shitty world scenario where everything goes the exact same way as it did for youID: hitnk7p
Don't cry baby boy.
Its been already tested by various outlets the difference between patched and unpatched is basically within margin of error.
I'm here to see what incredible lengths some of you guys will go to spin this.
I ended up installing Win 11 on my 5600X PC the other day, games play pretty much similar to Win 10 but load times are noticeably slower.
Overall it feels much the same as Win 10 with a new look, getting used it already.
Post patch CPU-z bench results just a few minutes ago. 5800x Will add more results through out the day." class="reddit-press-link" target="_blank" rel="noopener">https://valid.x86.f
5900x suffered the worst. I could have told you that. Latency is still not back to normal. Its 10% off from Win 10.
Basically, if you don't have Alder lake, you don't need Windows 11. Why bother?
The Windows 11 patch undoubtedly corrected some issues with L3 cache latency and bandwidth, but the profound differences in synthetic measurements simply didn't carry over to most of our real-world gaming tests.
Guess this debunks the theory of Intel boosting 12th gen performance gains over Zen 3 by using pre-patched AMD performance.
Performance gains are single digits and basically flat from pre-patch to post-patch due to some games losing performance. Similar story with Windows 10 to 11, not even significant enough to care about.
If Intel had only given us a preview of synthetic performance that would've been a huge red flag, but as the article mentions and demonstrates, those large synthetic performance decreases didn't manifest into performance loss in real world situations like gaming for AMD.
Edit: Dispute this all you want but AMD themselves claimed this issue only accounts for 3-5% performance loss on average in games. So either AMD, Toms and Intel are lying to you, or its true and it was negligible for GAMES. The real reason it was patched is because some cache sensitive (more than games) applications were seeing double digit losses.
Tom's & Intel only tested one game in common: SOTTR.
Also very weirdly Tom's own figures showed pre-patch win 11 crippled cache bandwidth by a factor of 7.5 and latency by a factor of 3. Unless someone wants to make the case bandwidth and latency don't matter much and AMD has wasted time and money to improve them, something unexplained is going on.
This is false I information, because most of the performance losses with Windows 11 were due to the old chipset drivers.
AMD’s new chipset drivers for Windows 11 fixes a bug where the fastest core on the CPU was not being properly selected as the default core for Single-Threaded tasks.
Since Intel’s incredibly disingenuous benchmarks were done on October 1st then those Windows 11 figures reflect both the Windows 11 L3 latency AND chipset bugs. The two updates together are needed for full effect.
It's not just chipset and L3.
Main memory latency is also garbage. My 3900x 3800cl14 bdie is 62ns with Windows 10.
Windows 11 it's at 64ns, kinda upsetting since I spent time tweaking the kit.
And Intel also there's a huge gap, 2ns+ slower latency. So something is not 100% working.
You made the same exact comment on /
Funny to see the different reactions.
Ryzen 9 5900X Pre-Patch vs. Post-Patch — Tom's HardwareTom's Hardware Ryzen 9 5900X / Win11 + Chipset Patch Ryzen 9 5900X / Win11 Patch Only Project Cars 3 +7.5% +4.6% Shadow of the Tomb Raider -6.7% -2.8% Dota 2 +2.9% Even Strange Brigade +2% +1.5% Red Dead Redemption 2 Even Even Far Cry 5 -1.5% Even Grand Theft Auto V Even Even
Just.. actually read the article?
It could still be intel lying, though. they have lied about performance on every launch for generations, why would it be different this time?
There's a missing factor here... Intel's own testing was done with the 5950x locked at the TDP base and therefore unable to fully boost, which will tend to inflate any performance problems.
In my personal experience with a first gen Ryzen, the issue did cause performance problems in some titles, the difference might be variable depending on what titles you test but it's still highly deceptive for intel to test with the opposition's hardware both tdp and software bug gimped.
They were both at specification, Intel's specification just allows for around double the power.
There will be some impact on some 5950x game results, but not much for many. Those CPU's genuinely use a lot less power.
These two bugs did not squeeze through they were flat out ignored by both Microsoft and Intel* see below.
They had both been extensively reported to Microsoft who ignored all the many many bug reports on these 2 bugs.
AMD could not do anything until MS was ready to deal with it.
Further Intel was heavily involved in the entire CPU Windows 11 CPU scheduler development. And AMD was excluded.
Windows 11 caused my pcs memory latency to go into the hundreds of nanoseconds, switched back to Windows 10 and haven't had a problem, Microsoft needs to fix this asap