Wheres the pricing info?
-
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.
Core 9000 series
- Thread starter orbitalwalsh
- Start date
Soldato
Hopeless, 2 more cores but 4 less threads against 8700k. This is unlike the current i5s vs older i7s whereby you get 2 more cores and only loose 2 extra threads. For longevity, it almost forces you to go hopefully reduced price 8700k or 8c16 flagship. That or AMD which looks more and more appealing. 8 core is fine for now but in 2-3 years, far less certain.
Soldato
If you are refering to gaming I am almost 100% confident that 8 cores will be more than enough for gaming for at LEAST 4 years. probably more.
Soldato
Probably, be interesting to see how they compare with 8700k at same clock speed.
Caporegime
2X 8350K, minus core scaling.
Soldato
Do you think we will see active VRM cooling on any Z390 boards? I would be interested in that for sure.
Caporegime
BTW,looking at the different roadmaps Videocardz published in the last few days,I suspect another launch where the CPUs have been pushed forward a few months,like with CFL.
Associate
- Joined
- 31 Aug 2017
- Posts
- 2,209
Ok October sounds much more reasonable, lets face it January is a still born - it will be far too close to Zen3 and lucky if it sees 3 months of decent sales as everyone will be holding out for the big guns from AMD. August was always too early in my book, if it did appear today it would have been brought way way forward in a panic, have low availability and cost intel a bomb to push out.
Soldato
Will they though? I don't seem to recall everyone skipping 7700k 8700k for amds big guns. The 9900k will sell to enthusiast gamers regardless of what AMD do.
Caporegime
"Anyone" is far too much of a sweeping word, You saw the sales lists in the other thread, AMD have gone from basically nothing to 40 - 60% sales share since Ryzen, thats a massive swing to AMD that can only happen if those people switch from buying Intel to buying AMD.
The Big Guns are when AMD's chips clock more like Intel's with 12 core Mainstream and possibly as much as a rumoured 15% IPC jump, that will put Intel behind unless they can get 10nm out and they have some pretty special chips on it.
Right now and for the rest of the year Intel are in full damage limitation mode.
Last edited:
Soldato
I don't think AMD will clock match Intel. Not in the next decade. It's a totally different technology. No chance. Core for core Intel will be faster for a good while to come. (And thats coming from me an AMD fanboi).
They arent in damage limitation mode at all. Their stock is up and they are still at the milking what with removing hyperthreading from i7s and charging £100 to put it back in! (9900k)
Associate
- Joined
- 31 Aug 2017
- Posts
- 2,209
Gamers wont but then gamers are a teensy wee part of the market, i dont know why this forum keeps bringing it up that gamers matter... they dont.
So Amd have already started taking back decent market share, i doubt the 8 core intels will slow that by much until next year.
Edit
I think AMDs clock will be at least as high as intels next year, if not higher.
So Amd have already started taking back decent market share, i doubt the 8 core intels will slow that by much until next year.
Edit
I think AMDs clock will be at least as high as intels next year, if not higher.
I'd like to jump ship, I'm hitching for an upgrade, the problem is that with AMD we're always saying "in the future" this and that is going to happen.
But today even moving from my old Haswell to the 2700X would still mean less frames in many games.
But today even moving from my old Haswell to the 2700X would still mean less frames in many games.
It kinda shows how far behind AMD really were when you consider that Intel can still milk the Skylake architecture for a fourth time, which itself is just a minor revision of Haswell that was launched five years ago. They can only continue that path for so long though: I don't think ringbus will work beyond 8 cores, and AMD are catching up fast. The 10 nm delays are really hurting them and will probably do so for at least a decade in total.
Associate
- Joined
- 31 Aug 2017
- Posts
- 2,209
But you really wont loose frames will you? Unless your a 1080p player or something..
Thats the thing, AMD processors are ok for gaming. I have a 1080ti doing almost everything at 4k and its fine with my 5820k.... fine.
FPS totally overblown.
Thats the thing, AMD processors are ok for gaming. I have a 1080ti doing almost everything at 4k and its fine with my 5820k.... fine.
FPS totally overblown.
There are many games where the 2700X is slightly faster. What I mean is that the current Ryzen still isn't any better than an old Haswell (of course just gaming-wise, which for most of us is anyway all that matters).
And if games used more cores this wouldn't be the case.
Caporegime
I didn't say match, they don't have to match, right now @5Ghz the 8700K is <15% better in games than the Ryzen 2700 at 4.2Ghz, Global Foundries are citing 40% higher performance 7nm vs 14nm, GloFo 14nm is rated for 3Ghz, add 40% to that and you get 4.2Ghz, of course that rating is the ideal clock speed, the best balance between clock speed and power, so i wouldn't count out 4.8Ghz overclock and what difference is that from Intel 5Ghz when the difference between Ryzen at 4.2 and 8700K at 5Ghz in games is 15%?
I'll tell you, its nothing, 0, add to that an IPC bump, rumoured to be 15% and 12 cores Mainstream the 9800K even the 9900K gets humiliated.
Soldato
A potato would be ok at 4k. 144hz is where intel shines.