AMD Vs intel

[humbug]

Does the same apply for socket TR4? Not that I'm likely to get another CPU for a long time as this one cost me a fortune but it's nice to know the option is there.

I don't know, but EPYC / Threadripper are the same CPU's as Ryzen so if they ain't changing the AM4 socket i can't see them changing that slab of a 4096 pin socket for subsequent HEDT / Server, the 7nm 64 core EPYC chips are already going out to customers for Sampling, in fact a bunch of people like Dropbox have just put orders in for them, they are on the same socket.

That BTW is how ready 7nm Zen 2 is, they are already sampling, now.

 

[BTVA]

not sure about the TR4 platform, but for AM4, you probably need to invest in some decent boards, as a lot mid to low range boards have relatively weak VRMs that won't be suitable when the mainstream 10+ cores @ 5Ghz from AMD available.

 

[ilc72]

Clockspeed, oc potential AND ipc you mean?
But sure, if you value your money then choose amd, I've never disputed value or performance per pound, my point still remains the same however...Intel has the fastest cores and is the fastest core for core. You could also say that your own theory on longevity is a little bit flawed also. You talk about the future and how amd can go on and on and on on with the same socket and last for years yet contradict this. You state anything over 1080p won't show amds slower cores and lesser ipc like it does at lower resolutions (admitting amd suffers here). Well if amd is so futureproof, tell me what happens in the future when the gpus improve each and they start to push bigger framerates at higher resolutions? Surely you will start to see the very same old situation of having slower clocks and ipc reflecting on the fps meter once again?...That is not what I'd exactly call 'most futureproof'. I'd say if you want to stay on top with the pinnacle of performance each year then this point/debate is far from flawed.



I also say the same once again, if amd takes over in speed for my uses then i will happily jump ship. i have no need to be loyal to any single brand name, I simply go for what I find is fastest for what i do, regardless of pricing (within reason of course).

Intel is as of now faster per core and there is no denying it, however I also agree with lots of points you've made and I never stated Intel doesnt have it's issues. I agree and feel that amd has taken them by suprise, i also agree Intel can be greedy and this is why they are in this situation.

Intel has been laid back with no competitor for the best part of a decade, they didn't innovate as had no need to and overcharged consumers for 4 cores amd little improvements for many, many years. They didn't think about anyone coming from behind and so saved r&d costs and innovation costs whilst milking customers with their superiority. I actually thank amd for the competition and making intek try to innovate whilst keeping their prices a bit more in check.

I've never stated what I think about the future as that's not what the topic was about (I've been talking about mostly the here and now) but sure, in the future i think Intel will have issues and become 2nd best...as you say, intel has issues with the shrinking process and amd are already pencilled in.

You have kind of got to also hope intel do well with discreet graohics because Nvidia forgot the mining craze has gone for now and are milking the consumers with a monopoly just as Intel were when they had no competition. Hopefully intel push them to keep their pricing in check as well, because their prices ate starting to get out of hand (I highly doubt intel will be successful here).

But you're right and i agree with pretty much all of that last post.

So can we agree that we pretty much agree!

I am on my first ever AMD processor, I bought it for price/performance and might buy an 8086K simply as it represents a piece of history.

I have a lot of respect for Intel in driving technology forward for so many decades, I didn’t like their anti-competitive practices back in the Athlon days since the consumer always suffers when one company dominates the market.

In terms of the future Intel has every opportunity to continue to make outstanding products and continue innovating, however for this happen they need a culture change at the top and empower their outstanding engineers and new hires to make use of their enormous R&D budget.

I like most hope that AMD and Intel succeed in the discrete GPU market, I feel that nVidia has presented an opportunity (albeit a narrow one) by focusing on Ray Tracing when the technology isn’t quite ready for the mainstream. But we all as consumers need to look at the monster we have created with nVidia, yes they have the best products but back when AMD were more competitive in the space (especially in the low to mid-range and before the mining craze), buying nVidia when better options were available has effectively pushed AMD out of the market as unlike Intel they don’t have the R&D budget to compete.

As a result each generation of GPU’s have become more and more expensive and if not checked it will eventually really hurt gamers as more and more people switch to consoles as PC gaming becomes the preserve of the well off enthusiast.

 

[Jamie Archer]

So can we agree that we pretty much agree!

I am on my first ever AMD processor, I bought it for price/performance and might buy an 8086K simply as it represents a piece of history.

I have a lot of respect for Intel in driving technology forward for so many decades, I didn’t like their anti-competitive practices back in the Athlon days since the consumer always suffers when one company dominates the market.

In terms of the future Intel has every opportunity to continue to make outstanding products and continue innovating, however for this happen they need a culture change at the top and empower their outstanding engineers and new hires to make use of their enormous R&D budget.

I like most hope that AMD and Intel succeed in the discrete GPU market, I feel that nVidia has presented an opportunity (albeit a narrow one) by focusing on Ray Tracing when the technology isn’t quite ready for the mainstream. But we all as consumers need to look at the monster we have created with nVidia, yes they have the best products but back when AMD were more competitive in the space (especially in the low to mid-range and before the mining craze), buying nVidia when better options were available has effectively pushed AMD out of the market as unlike Intel they don’t have the R&D budget to compete.

As a result each generation of GPU’s have become more and more expensive and if not checked it will eventually really hurt gamers as more and more people switch to consoles as PC gaming becomes the preserve of the well off enthusiast.

Totally fair and i totally agree with all of that

I also agree with what people are saying about always having a close competitor as amd, intel or whoever, it only hurts the consumers to have a clear outright market leader, that is why i really hope intel or amd can do something about Nvidias recent price increases, theyre getting a bit daft and its almost impossible for the average mere mortal to own a relatively new card these days.
For some on particularly low budgets i can only recommend console gaming to them with the way these gpu prices are lately, ram prices are getting no better as has been suggested that they would do either.

 

[ilc72]

Totally fair and i totally agree with all of that

I also agree with what people are saying about always having a close competitor as amd, intel or whoever, it only hurts the consumers to have a clear outright market leader, that is why i really hope intel or amd can do something about Nvidias recent price increases, theyre getting a bit daft and its almost impossible for the average mere mortal to own a relatively new card these days.
For some on particularly low budgets i can only recommend console gaming to them with the way these gpu prices are lately, ram prices are getting no better as has been suggested that they would do either.

Market analysts are saying the memory market should move towards a balance between supply and demand, or possibly slight oversupply, in early 2019 though with one big caveat for the UK! If a hard Brexit becomes a reality and the exchange rate weakens we could start to see prices increase further!

 

[humbug]

Totally fair and i totally agree with all of that

I also agree with what people are saying about always having a close competitor as amd, intel or whoever, it only hurts the consumers to have a clear outright market leader, that is why i really hope intel or amd can do something about Nvidias recent price increases, theyre getting a bit daft and its almost impossible for the average mere mortal to own a relatively new card these days.
For some on particularly low budgets i can only recommend console gaming to them with the way these gpu prices are lately, ram prices are getting no better as has been suggested that they would do either.

On that we can agree too, AMD or Intel i don't care who but someone needs to put up a better fight against nVidia than AMD are currently, i for one welcome Intel into the gaming GPU space with enthusiasm.

 

[Lokken86]

Very good video here that sums up a lot of the things that have been said.

 

[Troezar]

Very good video here that sums up a lot of the things that have been said.

Good video.

 

[Beren]

Just to reply to the OP. You are editing at 4k and with the choice of card it would imply you are probably looking to game at 4k also.

Assuming the press price for the cards is correct and you can actually get a 2080ti for $1000 (950GBP? After VAT and UK landed pricing...) and a 2080 for $700 (675GBP?)

You could go for a 8700k Plus an RTX2080 for 1025GBP or you Could go for a 2600 plus an RTX2080ti for 1130GBP

For 95 Quid difference you would get a slightly weaker CPU, but one that is upgradable to 7nm next year but you would get the flagship GPU. If you game more than you code I know where I would put my money.

 

[Lokken86]

Just to reply to the OP. You are editing at 4k and with the choice of card it would imply you are probably looking to game at 4k also.

Assuming the press price for the cards is correct and you can actually get a 2080ti for $1000 (950GBP? After VAT and UK landed pricing...) and a 2080 for $700 (675GBP?)

You could go for a 8700k Plus an RTX2080 for 1025GBP or you Could go for a 2600 plus an RTX2080ti for 1130GBP

For 95 Quid difference you would get a slightly weaker CPU, but one that is upgradable to 7nm next year but you would get the flagship GPU. If you game more than you code I know where I would put my money.

The 2600 system with the 2080ti would be better for gaming and coding.

 

[Beren]

I would think the 8700k would be significantly faster than the 2600 once you clock it up a bit you dont get a k chip to run at standard clocks. But I dont know if you could use the GPU to make up the difference.

 

[AndreiD]

The 2600 system with the 2080ti would be better for gaming and coding.

Better than a 8700K? Maybe better than an i5 8400 for IDEs but a 2600 is slower in both gaming and applications than an i7 8700K. But the 2600 will be cheaper if you don't care much about getting high RAM speeds.

 

[Lokken86]

Better than a 8700K? Maybe better than an i5 8400 for IDEs but a 2600 is slower in both gaming and applications than an i7 8700K. But the 2600 will be cheaper if you don't care much about getting high RAM speeds.

Yes because it also has the 2080TI.

Made a mistake about the coding, thought it was the 8600k which is the actual competitor to the 2600 and not an 8700k.

 

[DragonQ]

Better than a 8700K? Maybe better than an i5 8400 for IDEs but a 2600 is slower in both gaming and applications than an i7 8700K. But the 2600 will be cheaper if you don't care much about getting high RAM speeds.

Huh? The comparison was between an R5 2600 + GTX 2080 Ti and an i7-8700K + GTX 2080.

 

[Swinbag]

Very good video here that sums up a lot of the things that have been said.

Really interesting video, thanks - does give me something to think about; shamefully I haven't been paying much attention to AMD's roadmap, but Zen2 does look promising...

 

[AndreiD]

Oh, my mistake then, I'd go for 2600 + 2080 Ti in that case. But I'd personally wait on the 2080 Ti until benchmarks are out and prices subside a few months after launch.

 

[Lokken86]

Really interesting video, thanks - does give me something to think about; shamefully I haven't been paying much attention to AMD's roadmap, but Zen2 does look promising...

What I though was most interesting was about the market leadership with the 1st quad cores etc. It has been said by someone a few pages back that Intel could have just added more cores if they wanted to but they probably couldn't or at least if they did the processors won't be cheap and won't clock as high.