Ryzen vs i7 (Mainstream); Threadripper vs i9 (HEDT); X299 vs X399/TRX40; Xeon vs Epyc

Discussion in 'Hardware Components and Aftermarket Upgrades' started by ajc9988, Jun 7, 2017.

  1. hmscott

    hmscott Notebook Nobel Laureate

    Reputations:
    7,094
    Messages:
    20,398
    Likes Received:
    25,151
    Trophy Points:
    931
    IDK, Coffee Lake is supposed to be full line Kaby Lake refresh...Cannon Lake same, so it seems like a real uncertain mess.

    I guess we will see them for sure when they go on sale, and not before. :newpalm:
     
  2. TANWare

    TANWare Just This Side of Senile, I think. Super Moderator

    Reputations:
    2,547
    Messages:
    9,585
    Likes Received:
    4,996
    Trophy Points:
    431
    Agreed I am in no hurry to jump to 10nm or even 7nm. You in either have to get all the fab issues settled out before seeing great silicon. I am happy for now staying with 14nm but 14nm+ for AMD will hopefully be a nice update and painless transition.
     
  3. ghegde

    ghegde Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    40
    Messages:
    323
    Likes Received:
    109
    Trophy Points:
    56
    intel still has a nice pipeline of products
    • ulv quads (think quadcore surface pro)
    • 6c/ 12t mainstream dt/mobile chips
    that amd will not have an answer for.reality is that TR/i9 setups will be niche
     
    tilleroftheearth and Vasudev like this.
  4. TANWare

    TANWare Just This Side of Senile, I think. Super Moderator

    Reputations:
    2,547
    Messages:
    9,585
    Likes Received:
    4,996
    Trophy Points:
    431
    Agreed, the TR/I9 competition setups for now are niche. Way beyond what the average consumer needs to spend on. Now all the 8 core variants though are mass consumer targeted. It is just a matter of time before games and other software catches up and eventually the mobile market may have to come along for the ride.

    I am not sure what Ryzen mobile is going to be yet, so we can't count our eggs just yet. They did show it in a tablet though, so who knows.
     
  5. Papusan

    Papusan TURDBOOKs Sucks! Dont waste your $$$ on FILTHY

    Reputations:
    35,671
    Messages:
    27,800
    Likes Received:
    52,756
    Trophy Points:
    931
    www.bit-tech.net
    7900X tested but with lower Overclock. 4.6GHz - 2464cb
     
    hmscott likes this.
  6. TANWare

    TANWare Just This Side of Senile, I think. Super Moderator

    Reputations:
    2,547
    Messages:
    9,585
    Likes Received:
    4,996
    Trophy Points:
    431
    That is somewhat better. Still out a bit but much closer. 2187/4*4.6 is 2515. 2464 is only 50 points off here before from 2488 to 2569 we were 81 points off. For consistency 4.5 GHz may be it, it could be a thermal throttle etc. too. Still a substantial bump from a Ryzen7 but at what overall cost?

    Come on AMD we need further info soon to prevent people jumping on the x299 train. I might just have to be one of them too, awful tempting to get a ticket and go for a ride.
     
    Rage Set and Vasudev like this.
  7. ajc9988

    ajc9988 Death by a thousand paper cuts

    Reputations:
    1,704
    Messages:
    6,083
    Likes Received:
    8,742
    Trophy Points:
    681
    That looks cherry picked. Considering the 1700 Ryzen is present in single core, but not multi, I'm calling not perfect on it. I still need to go through the article to compare settings on Ryzen, but...

    That does show something is off. But, considering this is a 10 core (25% more cores), and getting around 1900 on the 8 cores is more common since AGESA 1.0.0.6, allowing 3200mhz ram, you have Ryzen right behind, marginally, at a scaled score on cores, while comparing 4.0-4.2 to Intel's 4.5-4.7. I'd wait on that basis alone, or see if the Epyc chips are unlocked.



    Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk
     
  8. TANWare

    TANWare Just This Side of Senile, I think. Super Moderator

    Reputations:
    2,547
    Messages:
    9,585
    Likes Received:
    4,996
    Trophy Points:
    431
    I need to start another thread, but I have yet another major concern. I will probably wait though as it is spurred on only by the two instances of overclocking, the delided 5.0 and this now 4.6 GHz.
     
  9. Deks

    Deks Notebook Prophet

    Reputations:
    1,230
    Messages:
    5,162
    Likes Received:
    2,037
    Trophy Points:
    331
    Switching from 14nm to 14nm+ should be relatively painless.
    Generally speaking (and if I'm not mistaken) it's the same process with various tweaks that improve efficiency and possibly density.

    You know, to a certain extent what is generally being done here is that most benchmarks are actually comparing a regular 14nm process Ryzen products, with Intel's 14nm+ (or is it 14nm++?) the 7700k.

    Intel is ahead AMD in this regard that they can release their i9's on 14nm+... so technically, we'd be better off comparing Ryzen on 14nm+ (when its released) with i9's to get a better outlook of performance and overall efficiency.

    Still, I doubt that Intel will hold too much of an advantage for long. Ryzen will definitely be competitive again at half the cost essentially while offering most of Intel's performance.
     
  10. ajc9988

    ajc9988 Death by a thousand paper cuts

    Reputations:
    1,704
    Messages:
    6,083
    Likes Received:
    8,742
    Trophy Points:
    681
    I disagree. Comparing market availability is proper. The calls to compare to unrealized hardware when the numbers are not even available is wrong. But we do want more. Also, calling for as much data as a chip on presale on the 19th, released on the 26th when the chip you want information on is about 7 or so weeks from release is equally improper. Epyc will have any scaling issues amplified with four dies present. So, we will have enough to start figuring out where they stand on the 20th.

    But, you can't give infinite time then say compare them. That is why Intel at 10nm and AMD at 7 is where all the fun is. I'm also wondering whose hardware will be used to show DDR5 on the 19th.

    Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk
     
Loading...

Share This Page