1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

AMD THREADRIPPER VS INTEL SKYLAKE X

Discussion in 'CPUs' started by faceman123, Jun 1, 2017.

  1. muon

    Capodecina

    Joined: Nov 8, 2006

    Posts: 14,795

  2. Kelt

    Soldato

    Joined: Nov 14, 2007

    Posts: 6,540

    Location: With the færies

  3. gavinh87

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Jan 29, 2015

    Posts: 1,725

    Location: West Midlands

  4. humbug

    Capodecina

    Joined: Mar 17, 2012

    Posts: 23,045

    Thats a very bad slide for AMD, the performance there is absolutely atrocious. thats really really really bad, there is almost no difference between the cheapest 6 core and the best 8 core indicating this program just doesn't scale at all with AMD, its only scaling with Mhz, not threads.
    Infact i suspect with this even the 4 core Ryzen 3 would look the same as the rest of the Ryzen chips.

    If anyone ever wanted to drive home an agenda of how bad AMD's performance is this is the slide they would use as its little more than half as fast as Intel's old 8 core. that is bulldozer 2.0 if anyone was looking for such a thing.
     
  5. pete910

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Oct 3, 2013

    Posts: 1,460

    Don't tell me, they used intels compiler :p

    Side note, it would be nice if they showed how they derived said benchmark, as in what they used compiler wise, flags ect
     
  6. humbug

    Capodecina

    Joined: Mar 17, 2012

    Posts: 23,045

    BINGO!!!!!!!!!!
     
  7. faceman123

    Hitman

    Joined: Jun 9, 2011

    Posts: 972

    bring on threadripper. drain the swamp amd. honeslty x299 is extremely disappointing
     
  8. gavinh87

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Jan 29, 2015

    Posts: 1,725

    Location: West Midlands

    Agreed, that program does not favour AMD at all.
    However this is a worst case scenario and my point would still stand. I could get the same performance using x2 desktops for the same amount of money.
     
  9. N19h7m4r3

    Sgarrista

    Joined: Mar 13, 2008

    Posts: 8,386

    Location: Ireland

    Thing is, in Linux and GCC Ryzen doesn't have that issue. This is launch day reviews results and look how well it does there.
    I wonder what compiler Anandtech was using.

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=amd-ryzen-1700&num=4

    [​IMG]
     
  10. humbug

    Capodecina

    Joined: Mar 17, 2012

    Posts: 23,045

  11. CAT-THE-FIFTH

    Capodecina

    Joined: Nov 9, 2009

    Posts: 14,552

    Location: Planet Earth

  12. Rroff

    Caporegime

    Joined: Oct 13, 2006

    Posts: 47,876

    Gonna be an interesting story I think with some of the upcoming CPUs and inter-chip latency. For big data tasks it isn't too much of an issue but for stuff like gaming can be another matter.

    EDIT: Oh they do actually touch on that later on in the article:

    It is something people probably will want to keep a close eye on especially if they have multi die CPUs in mind for gaming.

    In a slightly different and more complex way it is why you don't tend to see GPUs forever rehashing the same architecture with ever increasing SP counts.
     
  13. N19h7m4r3

    Sgarrista

    Joined: Mar 13, 2008

    Posts: 8,386

    Location: Ireland

    It's the cause of RyZen's lower gaming performance as well, yet even with that competes well against Broadwell, despite lower clocks.

    Here Skylake X is losing to Broadwell-E while being clocked much higher. It's like an IPC decrease in gaming nearly.

    To think people and even Anandtech thought this new cache structure could provide nearly up to a 13% IPC increase. Yeah... So far it seems Skylake X only beats Broadwell-E in compute because of its drastically increased clock rates, and then losing in games despite higher clocks. So one can say a decrease in IPC nearly.

    http://www.anandtech.com/show/11464...ng-18core-hcc-silicon-to-consumers-for-1999/3
     
    Last edited: Jun 20, 2017
  14. =XDC=FluphyBunny

    Mobster

    Joined: Feb 16, 2010

    Posts: 3,672

    Location: North East England

    So for 6 core wait for Coffee Lake and for multi-threaded wait and see what Threadripper brings.

    Does that sound about right?
     
  15. jaffveyda

    Gangster

    Joined: Sep 26, 2010

    Posts: 327

    Location: London

    Nope, smash your head against a wall get concussion and order bundle twice expensive than AMD with little to no benefit at all. sarcasm off :)
     
  16. N19h7m4r3

    Sgarrista

    Joined: Mar 13, 2008

    Posts: 8,386

    Location: Ireland

    If CoffeeLake brings some nice IPC gains and 6 cores, 12 threads, I wouldn't touch the lower end Skylake X chips at all.

    Not with them performing worse in games than Broadwell and Kabylake
     
  17. DragonQ

    Mobster

    Joined: Jun 13, 2009

    Posts: 3,975

    Remember that code optimisations could improve matters, just as with Ryzen.

    Why do people still expect IPC gains? It's a hex core Core i7-7700K.
     
  18. Panos

    Mobster

    Joined: Nov 22, 2009

    Posts: 3,818

    Location: NE Lincolnshire

    Your pricing is off.
    R7 1700 goes for £280. 7820K £600. That's more than double.
     
  19. N19h7m4r3

    Sgarrista

    Joined: Mar 13, 2008

    Posts: 8,386

    Location: Ireland

    Since Intel was claiming improvements.
    Then again, they claimed the same with Kabylake over Skylake, and the only real difference was clocks.
     
  20. Tom B

    Gangster

    Joined: Oct 20, 2007

    Posts: 433

    Unfortunately it looks like Intel is hitting the limits of both frequency and IPC. I can't imagine we'll start seeing an improvement in single core performance until Intel move to 10nm
     


Share This Page