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

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

  1. TANWare

    TANWare Just This Side of Senile, I think. Moderator

    Reputations:
    2,115
    Messages:
    8,395
    Likes Received:
    2,844
    Trophy Points:
    331
    ajc9988 likes this.
  2. ole!!!

    ole!!! Notebook Virtuoso

    Reputations:
    940
    Messages:
    3,785
    Likes Received:
    1,610
    Trophy Points:
    231
    naw man u know i can't. i need something thats more than 4.6-4.7ghz. also from those review IPC isn't a problem, its the new cache or mesh design losing performance but i have no idea if it'll boost in the area i use or i'd lose performance in the area i use.

    I can always check out turbo boost 3.0 since no review seem to want to do an extensive test about it and this is the hardest part. 1st time building desktop, with so many things i wish to know like VROC/TBM3.0 i'd need a perfect mobo.. the enthusiast life test and spend own money.


    @tilleroftheearth @TANWare
    hey peeps, tiller's got a point, though i dont want to bring too much hate onto both side let me just settle with this. i recall clearly back then when intel first made some CPU skus, they'd have chips like 2500k and 2600k being of the same design, ie just have a better silicon chips named as 2600k and the rest of 2600k disable HT with microcode then becomes 2500k.

    IIRC this is a way to save money really just smart business but back in the day i spread hate about intel being cheap and using cheap tactic to make more, same with what they did with consumer HEDT which is crappier xeons. fast forward to today AMD bringing idea of availability using multiple die and nobody is calling them cheap, you guys see the difference?

    tho they aren't exactly same i'd say both sides are doing similar things, just how it is.
     
    hmscott and tilleroftheearth like this.
  3. ole!!!

    ole!!! Notebook Virtuoso

    Reputations:
    940
    Messages:
    3,785
    Likes Received:
    1,610
    Trophy Points:
    231
    also i just found out theres no E-ATX boards yet.. wtf.

    when E-ATX board comes out theres got to be way more surface area to put stuff on, that might help solve VRM cooling area over regular ATX.

    so far found a board that does 8x8x8x4, MSI not asus though, with onboard ac/bt/audio. just need onboard VGA too, https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813144053
     
    hmscott likes this.
  4. ajc9988

    ajc9988 Death by a thousand paper cuts

    Reputations:
    927
    Messages:
    4,104
    Likes Received:
    5,436
    Trophy Points:
    581
    You suggested waiting for the 18 core previously, which is closer to 4.0 all cores. It is almost always 100-200mhz less with 2 additional cores. I don't know if it acts as a straight line or exponential so that it has a sharper drop off with additional cores (we are in uncharted territory). But, only if having 2 core boost is needed, and that boost can continue as more than 2 cores is used, will you see it be of benefit. If you lock it to two cores by affinity, will you have a dual core, effectively, which gets beat by a quad. The all core has more effect, and the 10 is tops, with reductions on larger. This is also why I put the 12 core in a sweet spot of having the cores needed and the speed. Above that, the speed reductions will get it so that the multi core performance of TR-1950X wins until you switch to having to have higher single IPC with the larger core count.

    And, no, Intel didn't, nor did AMD. Unlike prior attempts, AMD redesigned hypertransport for their chips. Because of that, there is no analogy to be made. That is the problem with Intel saying glued, or trying to say cheaped out. They redesigned an entire standard!

    Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk
     
    hmscott likes this.
  5. TANWare

    TANWare Just This Side of Senile, I think. Moderator

    Reputations:
    2,115
    Messages:
    8,395
    Likes Received:
    2,844
    Trophy Points:
    331
    You have that wrong, even back then with C2Q, which I have in my P79, no one was calling Intel being cheap. The problem lied, as in all of them, the two dies were running as independent CPU's essentially just sharing memory bandwidth. Without scheduler tweaks there was a 10% or greater performance hit along with power and temp issues.

    Ryzen and IF have changed the course of using multiple dies. Nvidia did not look at the C2Q and say "wow, lets do that!". The fact of skewing dies is fine, I just worry the 18 core variants just will not get that high of a clock.

    So if you need 5 GHz as a base you may need to forget about any HEDT for a while. Then again once processes is to where HEDT can yeild 5.0 GHz the quad cores may be close to running 6.0 GHz. At least for now you have to decide you are in need of a core hungry HEDT monger, or you need a zippy quad core fighter, in the end to each their own as nothing wrong with either.
     
    Rage Set, hmscott and ajc9988 like this.
  6. ole!!!

    ole!!! Notebook Virtuoso

    Reputations:
    940
    Messages:
    3,785
    Likes Received:
    1,610
    Trophy Points:
    231
    thats the thing, no one testing them only way to find out is to test it myself. thats why im getting a 8c-10c and 18c will follow through if im happy with what TBM3.0 can do on 2 cores. 8c is the lowest sku to have TBM3.0


    silicon lottery got plenty of 5ghz 6c/8c, tbh i'd happy with just 4.8/4.9 it will be so much faster than my ivy at 4.4ghz, around 30-35% performance boost thats only from the CPU, along with 2-4 more cores if i opt for 8/10c.
     
    hmscott likes this.
  7. ajc9988

    ajc9988 Death by a thousand paper cuts

    Reputations:
    927
    Messages:
    4,104
    Likes Received:
    5,436
    Trophy Points:
    581
    Have you tried writing to reviewers on their corporate email asking for it to be reviewed. Could save you money in the long run.

    As to ivy, I'm going from a 6700K running 4.8 to the TR@4. Why? Because I need more cores for my purposes and 4GHz will be fine for the less threaded tasks, especially since we are seeing continued Multi threaded optimizations that even make the FX 8000 & 9000 chips beat SB chips. Getting something like the 18 core, expect 4.0-4.3 all core, if not less. The IPC benefit will be very little compared to TR, with double the price (you could pick up a 2P board and 2Epyc chips for that). In fact, you could get the 1950X, the most expensive board, and trident Z 4000+ x2x16GB kits for the price of the 18-core. I'm seeing so little benefit above 12-core.

    Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk
     
    hmscott likes this.
  8. TANWare

    TANWare Just This Side of Senile, I think. Moderator

    Reputations:
    2,115
    Messages:
    8,395
    Likes Received:
    2,844
    Trophy Points:
    331
    When I said quad core I was being a bit facetious as we know better than a quad can do 5.0 GHz. I was just setting the extremes to look into/at.
     
    Last edited: Jul 17, 2017
    hmscott and ajc9988 like this.
  9. ole!!!

    ole!!! Notebook Virtuoso

    Reputations:
    940
    Messages:
    3,785
    Likes Received:
    1,610
    Trophy Points:
    231
    yep i have. for turbo boost 3.0 they said maybe in the future, which means a no for now. as for VROC, i know a few individual has gotten full height add in cards that can hold 4 x M.2 PCIE SSDs but those are not what I wish to find out. I wanted to know if optane SSDs will work without the add in cards, or any intel PCIE SSDs for the matter, also the performance of those add in cards.

    what they've told me is intel is still working with oem so its best not to get x299 right now until its all reviewed. i might be forced to buy a 10c cpu due to a mobo that has VROC might not support the 28 lanes split i wanted which is 8x8x8x4..

    all in all im still waiting LOL. and hope i can get a 5ghz from silicon lottery and i can simply downclock it by 200mhz for best temp.
     
    hmscott likes this.
  10. Papusan

    Papusan BGA Filthy = That sucks!! STAHP! Dont buy FILTH...

    Reputations:
    5,611
    Messages:
    13,826
    Likes Received:
    18,028
    Trophy Points:
    931
    FYI. You may have seen this before... But Siliconlottery have now changed from Coollaboratory Liquid Ultra over to Grizzly Conductonaut for their delidding service. Damn, Intel screwed us all with the move from solder to thermal paste. And they know the chips run hot:D
    [​IMG]
     
    jaug1337, hmscott and ole!!! like this.
Loading...

Share This Page