There's either a general lack of understanding about architecture by a vocal few on here or either they're being intentionally obtuse. A lot of the comments in this thread have little merit.
For example; look at the fabricated surprise and awe at the 10core running those temps on a 240 AIO. What is the expectation these people had when a 9900k exhibits similar behavior? Now add 2 more cores to the same node and architecture, what exactly are they expecting?
I mentioned a while back in this thread about how intel could improve on the thermal density vs the 9900k. Same crowd thought those notions to be laughable. Now we learn intel is doing just that.
I just don't understand how some of the membership who have been here for many years with thousand of posts are unable to learn anything useful along the way and drag out the same tropes?
Although I think AMD Ryzen offers a more rounded product for my purposes,I have pointed out for years Intel is still ahead due to a combination of better latency,higher overclocked headroom and games being better optimised for Intel ring bus CPUs. AMD has to generally brute force things - it might get better when the new consoles get more traction,but this is the market currently.
Its less than that of my wife's 3600 non-X type.
Hers isn't even tuned, its jus throw in the box with a stock amd cooler and left to its own devices.
Scores 480 single and 3540 multi.
That's within range but still the 3600 is 10% in both single and multi, and I'll bet doesn't cost as many watts.
Intel will need massive price cuts if you've to buy a cooler and mobo for these.
I just went by what the article said - it will be interesting to see where gaming performance is. AFAIK,the 6C/12T Core i7 8700K and Ryzen 7 3700X tend to trade blows in reviews.
That's exactly the point. Intel held back for years to rob their customers blind. Cashing in on their customers gullibility. Treating us like fools.
Then all of a sudden, the i3 performs like an i7? That's not good, is a huge scandal! That's not even taking into account the way they blackmailed manufacturers to stop selling AMD products.
Releasing good products now will never make up for the past. Their CEO will have to knock on my door and beg me. Even then I'll tell him where to stick it.
I don't care how much they drop their prices either.
Yes I am quite aware of Intel tactics. What put me off them finally is when at Skylake they artifically blocked Xeon E3 CPUs from consumer sockets. These were Core i7 CPUs for well under £200,but branded differently,and they got so greedy they couldn't let it pass. Then the whole blocking of overclocking on H series and B series chipsets,etc.
However,even AMD when they got to the top last time they did stuff like socket 754,quadFX,held back on the Phenom to sell more Athlon X2s,etc. So as much as I prefer AMD and have given them my custom this generation,don't ever think they won't pull the same stunts Intel will,as they have in the past. If not the accountants and shareholders in the company will be looking at Intel and Nvidia tactics(which obviously make them a lot of money),and ask why AMD isn't doing this. Some of the biggest shareholders in AMD,Intel and Nvidia are a group of large investment funds,who no doubt can have sway over what these companies will do.
Ultimately the best for consumers,is for both companies to compete with each other,to keep things real. It's why the period between 1999 to 2007,was so fantastic. AMD,Intel and Nvidia were really fighting for people's money.
