Soldato
At 5ghz? Impressive.......
-
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
At 5ghz? Impressive.......
Caporegime
It doesn't do 5Ghz and yet its still faster than an 8600K running at 5Ghz.
clock speed isn't everything.
Soldato
Well some of us get frustrated at Intel milking the same architecture for years yet charging a premium with every generation for nothing but the smallest of tweaks and no real boost in actual performance. Oh, and charging a further premium to add Hyperthreading back into a chip that's traditionally always had it.
Oh, and did Meltdown and Spectre pass you by? It might be nice if Intel sorted them out, rather than rushing a rebrand with a couple extra cores just because AMD caught them with their pants down.
So yes, performance is what matters, but performance isn't just ALL TEH GIGZ!!1!, it's power efficiency, heat output, scalability and security. I certainly am not going to shout from the rooftops that an 8c/16t chip can hit 5GHz if it requires hundreds of watts of power to get there and is hotter than the sun; AMD's FX9000 series got laughed at for their ludicrous thermals, so why should Intel get a pass for rushing their 9000s?
You seem to miss the fact that you're on an enthusiast forum, and despite much petulant fanboi bickering goes on around here, everybody is passionate about their tech and we're not blind to what we're going to be spending our hard-earned money on.
Soldato
It doesn't do 5Ghz and yet its still faster than an 8600K running at 5Ghz.
clock speed isn't everything.
Can't really compare the 2.
6C 12T should be compared to the 8700K. Pricing aside it loses every battle.
Lets go back to the original comment though, taking the pi$$ about it needing extravagant cooling.
I wonder what cooling ryzen needs at 5ghz, only I seem to remember my 1700 getting rather toasty at just 3.9ghz......... It was well into the 80s under a 240 AIO.
If I clocked my 8700k to a lowly 3.9ghz I'm sure it wouldnt break 65c either.........
Associate
- Joined
- 27 Apr 2007
- Posts
- 966
That’s what the fanboys do on these forums, as soon as you have a valid point they just move the goalpost time and time again rather than admit they were wrong.
But that’s not as bad as the numpties who bought 3rd class CPUs for a decade because they couldn’t bear to admit that the object of their infatuation was putting out vastly inferior products.
So now that their favourite company are back on their feet they have ten years of bile to vent which comes out as a constant stream of whining and self-congratulatory back slapping.
If they’d spent just a bit of the last ten years meditating they’d wouldn’t be nearly as bilious.
The irony of AMD’s cores being called Zen when the AMD fanboys are as far from Zen as possible is pointed.
It’s great to see AMD back but not the fanboys. They have about as much class as the shadow side of Intel which is another glorious irony.
True but the fact is that Intel have presumably gotten to the end of the road with their current architecture, considering there have been no noticeable IPC improvements since 2013. They either need something new (which keeps getting delayed) or they just keep pumping the clocks up. That also cannot go on forever now can it? The Pentium 4 is a stark reminder of that.
If they can continue to stay ahead with tweaks and refreshes then good on them but to think that it doesn't matter what's going on under the hood is pretty short-sighted.
And a 1HP water chiller to cool it
I don’t know why you keep banging on about chillers mate, clearly it’s very easy to cool a 5ghz CPU with an AIO or custom loop, probably even most no liquid solutions.
I can run my 8700k water cooled at 5.3 and it’s not exceeding 60c.
Not a 28 core cpu it isn't which is what he's referring to, Intel's little demo that spectacularly backfired.
And a 1HP water chiller to cool it
Well they were discussing the 8 core not the 28 core but some of it is in jest.
In every thread same thing isn’t really in jest but ok
Don’t see him talking about anything of the sort, 8 core mainstream CPU.
Soldato
Accorded to HWbot database, Ryzen 7 2700X at 5GHz needed dry ice, LN2 and phase change cooling to help cooled very high 1.6-1.7V for about 5 mins so nobody will OC Ryzen 7 2700X at 5GHz for 24/7. Sandy Bridge owners can run 2700K at 5GHz for 24/7 at around 75C with 240mm AIO water coolers so i9 9900K will capable to run 5 to 5.5GHz for 24/7.
2700X at 5GHz on either dry ice, LN2 or phase change cooling are slower clock to clock than i9 9900K at 5GHz on TimeSpy CPU score on either air cooler or AIO water cooler.
https://www.3dmark.com/spy/4045611
Soldato
Can I just ask why we're even talking about overclocking in here when we know Zen doesn't overclock worth a damn? Is it even an argument at this point?
Weaker IMC, check
Weaker frequency range, check.
Weaker IMC, check
Weaker frequency range, check.
In every thread same thing isn’t really in jest but ok
Don’t see him talking about anything of the sort, 8 core mainstream CPU.
Well you obviously missed the posts where people were having a laugh at that demo.
Soldato
I honestly don't care what process node it is or anything like that.
Quite simply put I've been waiting for an 8 core consumer chip that can hit around 5ghz.
This is looking to be a good chip for me. Its that simple!
Try and pee on my bonfire all you want. Makes no difference to me.
AMD have made amazing advancements recently yes. And yes I have been tempted by ryzen. Alas there has always been a compromise. (speed and gaming with ryzen, core count and toothpaste with Intel).
IF the 9900k is soldered and hits 5ghz all core overclock and remains cool under my AIO. Its the first cpu (for me) that has ticked ALL the boxes. No compromises. And yes I will buy it. Whether I buy the 9700k or 9900k will depend on pricing but yeah. Don't give a damn about high technical stuff like process nodes. I just have certain boxes I need ticked.
Quite simply put I've been waiting for an 8 core consumer chip that can hit around 5ghz.
This is looking to be a good chip for me. Its that simple!
Try and pee on my bonfire all you want. Makes no difference to me.
AMD have made amazing advancements recently yes. And yes I have been tempted by ryzen. Alas there has always been a compromise. (speed and gaming with ryzen, core count and toothpaste with Intel).
IF the 9900k is soldered and hits 5ghz all core overclock and remains cool under my AIO. Its the first cpu (for me) that has ticked ALL the boxes. No compromises. And yes I will buy it. Whether I buy the 9700k or 9900k will depend on pricing but yeah. Don't give a damn about high technical stuff like process nodes. I just have certain boxes I need ticked.
I'm confused. You don't care what the process node is, OK, but you do care that it hits 5 GHz?? Why, because it's a round number? I thought it was all about performance not individual metrics?
FYI, Intel released an 8 core chip 4 years ago on their HEDT platform: the Core i7-5960X could reach 4.5 GHz comfortably in most cases. Of course, it cost $999, but cost rarely comes up when discussing Intel's top-end chips on this forum.
Caporegime
I'm confused. You don't care what the process node is, OK, but you do care that it hits 5 GHz?? Why, because it's a round number? I thought it was all about performance not individual metrics?
FYI, Intel released an 8 core chip 4 years ago on their HEDT platform: the Core i7-5960X could reach 4.5 GHz comfortably in most cases. Of course, it cost $999, but cost rarely comes up when discussing Intel's top-end chips on this forum.
You seem to forget one thing here - you are assuming many people saw what happened in the late 90s to the mid 2000s(plus Intel really started to break the cycle massively once socket 1366 came out),where AMD and Intel were to-ing and fro-ing and it was a glorious time for enthusiasts. Overclocking cheapo parts to match more expensive parts and so on.
Since AMD dropped the ball with Bulldozer(and also to a degree after the Core i7 920 was released) its an alien concept that AMD might be able to possibly get ahead of Intel,since they have never seen it happen,hence they cannot fathom it.
Last edited:
Soldato
Then this is not the forum for you, is it.
Soldato
Yes! Yes it is!
I want a certain performance. Not to massage my technical ego online.
I want an 8 core, 5ghz coffee lake (or similar) chip. (soldered). I've been waiting 5 years for exactly such a chip. Its the metrics I want.
Is. That. So. Hard. To. Understand?
Soldato
All I keep reading is "AMD GONA CRUSH INTEL NEXT YR INNIT"
With NOTHING to back this up or suggest it to be true.
Why would I not buy a CPU that perfectly fits my needs and criteria. Just to wait a year on the off chance that something better comes out? Ridiculous.
Sure Intel milked the hell out of skylake and coffee lake. And that why I gave all of those a miss. But 8 cores at 5ghz soldered. Is in my eyes actually decent! And a good upgrade from my Haswell.
With NOTHING to back this up or suggest it to be true.
Why would I not buy a CPU that perfectly fits my needs and criteria. Just to wait a year on the off chance that something better comes out? Ridiculous.
Sure Intel milked the hell out of skylake and coffee lake. And that why I gave all of those a miss. But 8 cores at 5ghz soldered. Is in my eyes actually decent! And a good upgrade from my Haswell.
Caporegime
Why is that a problem - do you want to pay more for an Intel CPU?
Or is it just co-incidence that in 18 months Intel has gone from consumer socket sub 5GHZ 4C/8T CPUs with TIM to 5GHZ 8C/16T CPUs with solder. Yet from 2009 to 2016,they stayed at 4C/8T on consumer sockets,which was exactly the period AMD couldn't compete.
AMD NEEDS to beat Intel,to make sure Intel does not run away with prices,and use TIM in parts for overclockers,etc. Intel will up the game to beat AMD,and then AMD will need to up their game and so on. If not it will be back to normal for years to come.
Intel margins are 70% and you moaned about milking - lack of competitive AMD lead to that.
You would have been an utter mess in the late 90s to the mid 2000s,then,the amount of to-ing and fro-ing was hilarious. All the people saying my latest Intel is faster than your latest AMD,then AMD releasing their response,and then it was my latest AMD is faster than your latest Intel,and then Intel responded...! It was hilarious at the time,with the higher end enthusiasts defending their purchases.
The rest of us loved it as,to get each one to their side,each company released CPUs which could overclock a lot,didn't restrict them,and you could even buy £50 motherboards to overclock on. Had everything from Athlons and Pentium 4 CPUs myself. Brilliant.
Last edited: