Maybe, but it’s still a jump in core count. The 10900 was at 10c 20t 3 years ago now?
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
AMD Zen 5 rumours
- Thread starter Grim5
- Start date
Maybe, but it’s still a jump in core count. The 10900 was at 10c 20t 3 years ago now?
Caporegime
Bulldozer was a jump in core count.
Associate
Look like another 35% boost in performance tho....
So long as they keep doing that, IMO that's better than just adding more cores, its all good, this is not stagnation
Yeah for sure, increasing core counts not really that big of an issue. If they can get this level of performance uplift whilst still using same number of cores thats a win win all round
Associate
Yes they do. But the core count stagnation does not matter much if the IPC/architecture improvements are yielding double digit performance increases with each generation
Soldato
Uhm?
Have you played and recent releases? Developers can hardly be asked to use more than 1 core, but that's a different issue and I get your point.
Processing across multiple threads is not an easy task, so there is also value in improving what 1 core can do.
AMD are a better chip builder than Intel, AMD can do more with less etc. It’s been this way for a some time and the lead AMD have is borderline embarrassing.
Last edited:
IMHO I wouldn't discount Intel, IF they can do properly heterogeneous architecture they can bring some serious innovation.
AMD does have an advantage in chiplets but so far they have been relatively homogeneous, specialized chiplets could in theory be a lot more efficient in some workloads if properly exploited.
This isn't the first time we see this, specialized instructions were the precursor to that (from MMX to AVX) and with node improvements becoming less cost effective it might very well be the future.
I’m not discounting Intel at all. I’m sure at some point Intel will emerge from the doldrums. Equally, I’m not discounting the strength of AMD or the distance between both firms that AMD have opened up.
Last edited:
Caporegime
To be fair 12 and 13'th gen are pretty good and right now Intel have a $100 CPU that's decent, AMD don't.
There isn't anything to complain about RE: Intel, its a very very long way from AMD's Bulldozer, its just not that at all.
But, and there is a but, Intel's CPU's are not profitable, Intel are not profitable, they are churning out CPU's that are far more expensive to make than AMD's and then selling them at cost, that's not BOM costs but the overall costs of running Intel, despite already having sacked 30% of their staff. A lot of whom are now at AMD, Intel can't keep going like that and they don't have an advantage with these specialised instructions that they are trying to charge a recuring fee for, AMD have the largest and best FPGA people under their umbrella, Xilinx, the sort of #### they can do with that could blow both Intel and Nvidia out of the water RE: specialised instructions, its their bread and butter.
Intel shout a lot, they constantly big themselves up to look like the leaders they used to be, the problem is they have been doing that and failing to deliver for so long now they have become a joke, hence their market position compared to AMD now who just quietly do.
Last edited:
Soldato
Yeah, right. In what world are 14 intel cores equivalent to amds 8? In anything that makes use of those cores there is a big gap in performance.
I agree with Humbug here, and think it’s worth keeping in mind that one firm has a history of delivering innovative hardware on time and at spec, while Intel have a history of releasing underperforming hardware years late. Intel have a lot of work ahead of them and must start delivering to have any chance of reaching parity. I hoped that Intels A18 fab would be the point Intel could make inroads, but true to form, Intel have already delayed at least twice.
Maybe try to be a little less hormonal and read the thread?
Caporegime
R23 on that CPU is about 21K for the 14 core Intel, its about 19K for the Ryzen 7700.
that's is good, for Intel, but as i say it comes at a cost to them.
Soldato
Maybe don't make claims you can't back up?
Soldato
You talking about the 13600k? That does over 24k at stock. It's faster than a 12700k. You talking about something else?
Try again with more context please and less feels.
Soldato
I can come up with a context that makes the 16core zen 4 slower than the 4 core Intel 12100f. Doesn't make me any less wrong just cause there is a context to it
Read thread? Going to have to report you soon chap.
Soldato
Ignored. This is beyond salvageable