8700K @ 4GHz vs 1700X/1800X @ 4GHz Tests ?

[Dicehunter]

Anyone by chance seen any clock for clock tests done on the above CPU's ? would just be interesting to see the results.

 

[james_2k]

have you seen any tests with 2/4 cores of the ryzen disabled vs the 8700k?

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

have you seen any tests with 2/4 cores of the ryzen disabled vs the 8700k?

Yes,they are called the Ryzen 5 series!

 

[Rainmaker]

Yes,they are called the Ryzen 5 series!

 

[james_2k]

ha! so compare the different cpus then, not gimp one just to try make it fit! i wonder how my cpu does with 9 cores disabled vs an e6600 , oh no wait, i dont!

 

[Dicehunter]

ha! so compare the different cpus then, not gimp one just to try make it fit! i wonder how my cpu does with 9 cores disabled vs an e6600 , oh no wait, i dont!

I'm simply interested in the clock for clock performance stats.

 

[Ste]

Don't have links but they are out there for sure. Google.

 

[prjwebb]

I saw a single thread CB score from jumper, I think 2700X @ 4.975ghz - 210cb which is the same as an 8700k at 4.8ghz.

 

[Jumper118]

This is true

 

[Phixsator]

This is true

Spoiler: picture

Now the burning question in my mind is how the heck did you manage getting the 2700x stable at that clock speed?

 

[Jumper118]

A little bit of help from frosty the snowman and some dice dice baby.

 

[Phixsator]

A little bit of help from frosty the snowman and some dice dice baby.

Ahh should have known thanks for sharing..

 

[Jumper118]

Ahh should have known thanks for sharing..

you get your hopes up that there was air water 4.9ghz 2700x's if only they would be so so fast

 

[Phixsator]

you get your hopes up that there was air water 4.9ghz 2700x's if only they would be so so fast

Noo never thought it was going to be on air.. a silly part of me had thought perhaps some golden chip on an excessive water cool loop(with cold water) and if not that then maybe phase change

 

[AndreiD]

The Stilt did IPC testing:

Excl >=256b is the average after excluding instructions wider than 128-bit since Intel has a significant architectural advantage there. ER is with extremities removed, aka removing the best and worst scenarios.
So about 7% IPC advantage for Coffee Lake, and ~8% for Skylake-X if you don't care about a handful of professional scenarios (X265, fluid simulation, N-body simulation, etc.).

Caveat is that the IPC difference will not be reflected in gaming, as seen with Skylake-X which suffers from similar memory latency issues and the decreased L3 cache only compounds the issue gaming wise. For Ryzen it's a mix of CCX-CCX latency, memory latency and the L3 cache being a victim cache.

 

[prjwebb]

 

[hudson86]

This popped up this morning.

For the unaware, IPC (instructions per cycle) provides a good indicator of how fast a processor is and having both a high IPC with a high operating frequency is the best combination for maximum performance. Such is the case for Intel's 8th-Gen Coffee Lake CPUs, and although AMD is clearly trailing when it comes to frequencies, the company appears to have really closed in on Intel's IPC performance. That's likely the reason why so many of you have been asking for this kind of test.

To see how much headway AMD has made here, we're going to limit as many variables as we can, while also keeping things as realistic as possible. The first and most obvious step is to remove core frequency from the equation and to do this we've locked all of the CPU cores at 4GHz. Any type of boost technology has been disabled and the cores cannot go past 4GHz.

https://www.techspot.com/article/1616-4ghz-ryzen-2nd-gen-vs-core-8th-gen/

 

[prjwebb]

4.3ghz comparison

 

[Zeed]

https://www.techspot.com/article/1616-4ghz-ryzen-2nd-gen-vs-core-8th-gen/

Full test 1000 2000 and 8th gen.

 

[5punk3monk3y]

Shame, I forgot about this post, as I just finished reclocking my CPU @4.9 / 1.275v I would have run the 4ghz for you if I'd rememberd.