14th Gen "Raptor Lake Refresh"

[jigger]

Just looking at some of Intel’s other investments.

50 billion upgrade in Ireland
25 billion in Israel
68 billion in Germany
33 billion in training.
20 billion in Ohio rising to 100 billion (Yikes)
7 billion in Malaysia
5 billion in Poland
8.5 billion funding
16.5 billion in charitable donations
15 million to Justin Bieber
200 million PA to Will I am

1.4 billion per month R&D budget past two years (double yikes) Intel must really be cooking something for early 2030~

 

[Bencher]

AMD is crushing them not only in performance

Yeah I know, they are crushing them in performance as much as they are crashing them in marketshare. The i5 13600k is twice as fast as the R5 7600x, the i7 13700k is 50% faster than the R7 7700x. AMD is dominating as hard as they did in the bulldozer era

 

[Vulture]

Just looking at some of Intel’s other investments.

50 billion upgrade in Ireland
25 billion in Israel
68 billion in Germany
33 billion in training.
20 billion in Ohio rising to 100 billion (Yikes)
7 billion in Malaysia
5 billion in Poland
8.5 billion funding
16.5 billion in charitable donations
15 million to Justin Bieber
200 million PA to Will I am

1.4 billion per month R&D budget past two years (double yikes) Intel must really be cooking something for early 2030~

Yes, they're cooking up debts, as they always have, so they will seek state assistance, the cycle repeats.

 

[jigger]

Yes, they're cooking up debts, as they always have, so they will seek state assistance, the cycle repeats.

Intel seem to be releasing cash at a sustainable rate while selling stakes in companies made years ago. Intel already have government funding in place and they can write a lot of this investment off. The key will be to execute on it’s manufacturing capacity globally, although I’d imagine governments have already made commitments.

 

[Armageus]

Yeah I know, they are crushing them in performance as much as they are crashing them in marketshare. The i5 13600k is twice as fast as the R5 7600x, the i7 13700k is 50% faster than the R7 7700x. AMD is dominating as hard as they did in the bulldozer era

Twice as fast? 50% faster?

Behave


Edit:
Also interesting that none of the productivity benchmarks where the Intel chips do well, seem to have been tested with DDR4 (why is that? given that being able to keep on a DDR4 platform was such a big point to some here?)

Intel Core i7-13700K Review: Ryzen 7 7700X Versus

The Core i7-13700K is a much more practical CPU compared to the 13900K, power and thermals are kept in check, and performance is pretty solid. We'd seriously...

www.techspot.com

Intel Core i5-13600K vs. AMD Ryzen 5 7600X

The Core i5-13600K is the most affordable model in Intel's new Raptor Lake range. Its predecessor, the 12600K was a personal favorite of ours, so we are...

www.techspot.com

 

[Bencher]

Twice as fast? 50% faster?

Behave

Intel Core i7-13700K Review: Ryzen 7 7700X Versus

The Core i7-13700K is a much more practical CPU compared to the 13900K, power and thermals are kept in check, and performance is pretty solid. We'd seriously...

www.techspot.com

Intel Core i5-13600K vs. AMD Ryzen 5 7600X

The Core i5-13600K is the most affordable model in Intel's new Raptor Lake range. Its predecessor, the 12600K was a personal favorite of ours, so we are...

www.techspot.com

Τhose are games. Im talking about MT performance. In games all recent CPUs are pretty much similar and overkill.

Even a 4090 is a huge bottleneck at 4k with any modern CPU.

 

[Vulture]

Τhose are games. Im talking about MT performance. In games all recent CPUs are pretty much similar and overkill.

Let me guess, you need MT performance because of 150 tabs and an equal number of accounts on forums for the holy war against AMD, lol . That's why AMD has the 7950x3d, offering the best of both worlds with MT performance and gaming capabilities. Although it belongs to the high-end segment, that's all I'm looking at, so the choice is easy. In the future, I'll be able to upgrade to Zen 5-3d, which will bring a tremendous performance boost as it features a completely new design and the third generation of 3D cache built on TSMC's 5nm processor. Even the 3D cache will receive significant treatment. It's a clear victory for AMD.

 

[Armageus]

Τhose are games. Im talking about MT performance. In games all recent CPUs are pretty much similar and overkill.

You can't have it all ways - you said that Intel were "crushing them in performance"? And yet in arguably the biggest market for enthusiast processors, gaming, they seemingly aren't crushing AMD?

People who genuinely need MT performance for rendering and the like aren't using consumer processors anyway (let me know how well the latest Xeon stack up against Epyc in MT performance )


Again, it would be interesting to see some DDR4 13600k/13700k productivity benchmarks, but I don't imagine they even exist, as despite DDR4 compatibility being touted as a big win for 12xxx/13xxx, I have a feeling there wouldn't be the huge advantage that exists when using DDR5.

 

[Bencher]

Let me guess, you need MT performance because of 150 tabs and an equal number of accounts on forums for the holy war against AMD

Does it matter what I want and why? The point is Intel offers much more MT for much cheaper, and AMD is responding the only way it can, massively cutting prices to the point where their R7 CPU is priced as Intel's i5. And even that comparison doesn't do them any favors cause the i5 is still faster, lol

hat's why AMD has the 7950x3d, offering the best of both worlds with MT performance and gaming capabilities

I agree, the 7950x 3d is currently the best CPU on the desktop segment. It's also the most expensive so it makes sense.. Still not great for my use case since it consumes 10 times as much power as my Intel while im working. If they fix that thing yeah, it would be my next upgrade.

 

[Bencher]

You can't have it all ways - you said that Intel were "crushing them in performance"? And yet in arguably the biggest market for enthusiast processors, gaming, they seemingly aren't crushing AMD?

Are you suggesting that - for example, the R5 1600 and the R7 1700 weren't crushing Intel back then? Because Intel still had the gaming lead, yet people kept insisting how badly they were getting crushed. It seems a lot like double standards to me.

 

[Bencher]

Again, it would be interesting to see some DDR4 13600k/13700k productivity benchmarks, but I don't imagine they even exist, as despite DDR4 compatibility being touted as a big win for 12xxx/13xxx, I have a feeling there wouldn't be the huge advantage that exists when using DDR5.

Why do you think that? The vast majority of MT workloads don't care about ram. You can easily test that, downclock your ram to the lowest it can go and run cbr23. Youll barely lose 1% performance if even that. Corona benefits a bit from ram but still not a lot. 7 zip and encryption might benefit from the bandwidth but im not even sure about those, need some testing and currently im out of mobos, gave them all away so im stuck with ddr5

 

[jigger]

Are you suggesting that - for example, the R5 1600 and the R7 1700 weren't crushing Intel back then? Because Intel still had the gaming lead, yet people kept insisting how badly they were getting crushed. It seems a lot like double standards to me.

That’s just what it seemed like to you though. So not based in reality.

 

[Armageus]

Are you suggesting that - for example, the R5 1600 and the R7 1700 weren't crushing Intel back then? Because Intel still had the gaming lead, yet people kept insisting how badly they were getting crushed. It seems a lot like double standards to me.

Only in your head - a quick scan of google for "ryzen 1700 review" and these are some of the summaries I'm seeing, none of which reads like "AMD crushes Intel"

The 1700 performs well in heavily threaded workloads, but lags behind Intel's quad cores in most gaming scenarios.

AMD's entry-level Ryzen 7 chip impresses on multi-core tasks, and our test chip overclocked to nearly 4GHz. But Intel's "Kaby Lake" chips are better at lightly threaded workloads and 1080p gaming—at least for now.

For those who regularly run CPU-heavy tasks – such as video encoding, 3D rendering or decryption – on their PC, the Ryzen 7 1700 is the ideal CPU at its price. For the gaming-focused, however, the Intel Core i7-7700K remains the better choice.

It is the perfect processor for content creation and it's very good with gaming and it's very hard to beat with its great price. Something that ...
Pros and cons: Very good with gaming

 

[Armageus]

Why do you think that? The vast majority of MT workloads don't care about ram. You can easily test that, downclock your ram to the lowest it can go and run cbr23. Youll barely lose 1% performance if even that. Corona benefits a bit from ram but still not a lot. 7 zip and encryption might benefit from the bandwidth but im not even sure about those, need some testing and currently im out of mobos, gave them all away so im stuck with ddr5

Just a thought - the DDR4 gaming results show a big drop, if the application ones dropped by as much, then suddenly they wouldn't look as "crushing" in terms of MT performance.
Likely reviewers were told not to do application benchmarks with DDR4 as part of the Intel review kit.

 

[Zarax]

Can't we be just glad that both solutions are competitive and that is fostering the healthiest competition we've seen in a decade or more?

 

[Vulture]

Does it matter what I want and why? The point is Intel offers much more MT for much cheaper, and AMD is responding the only way it can, massively cutting prices to the point where their R7 CPU is priced as Intel's i5. And even that comparison doesn't do them any favors cause the i5 is still faster, lol


I agree, the 7950x 3d is currently the best CPU on the desktop segment. It's also the most expensive so it makes sense.. Still not great for my use case since it consumes 10 times as much power as my Intel while im working. If they fix that thing yeah, it would be my next upgrade.

You mean the use of forums, xD.

 

[Vulture]

Let Intel users use their processors for forums and idle states, while we AMD users focus on gaming, and both of us will be happy. It's astonishing to see how much power Intel processors consume for gaming. They definitely need to work on that with the next generation.

 

[Bencher]

Just a thought - the DDR4 gaming results show a big drop, if the application ones dropped by as much, then suddenly they wouldn't look as "crushing" in terms of MT performance.

From my testing there isn't much difference between DDR4 and DDR5. Actually some games perform better with DDR4 (warzone for example). Granted, I don't run XMP, I run both DDR4 and DDR5 manually tuned, 7600c34 for DDR5 and 4200c14 for DDR4.

Likely reviewers were told not to do application benchmarks with DDR4 as part of the Intel review kit.

Nonsense. There was much testing between DDR4 and DDR5 with the alderlake launch, and most reviews actually concluded that DDR5 isn't worth it. Hwunboxed included.

 

[Bencher]

Let Intel users use their processors for forums and idle states, while we AMD users focus on gaming, and both of us will be happy. It's astonishing to see how much power Intel processors consume for gaming. They definitely need to work on that with the next generation.

The heaviest game on a 4090 at 1080p pushes my 12900k to 110w. That's the extreme, at 4k that im actually playing the CPU sits at 50 watts. Also tested Warzone 2 with LTmatt's 7950x 3d, we were both pulling around 70 watts at full cpu bound settings. So yeah, very accurate information you got there

 

[jigger]

Only in your head - a quick scan of google for "ryzen 1700 review" and these are some of the summaries I'm seeing, none of which reads like "AMD crushes Intel"

That’s pretty much how I remember the release. Ryzen delivered much needed well priced, high performance 8c16t chips, just lacking a little in IPC or clock speeds to win by a landslide.

I was comparing a Skylake i7 to the Ryzen 1800X at the time.

9.5/10 on price
9.5/10 on platform
8.5/10 single thread
9/10 multi thread