• 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

hmm, I think ring bus bottleneck should be something that needs a bit more quantitative data on, not just some theoretical overview or tech demo article. If mesh is so superior to RB for anything above 6 cores then surely the 9900K should be based on mesh right? but all the leak till now pointing toward 9900K is a 2-more-cores-added-RB-8700K if that the case then surely 9900K RB should be slower than 7820X when operating at the same clock, which I pretty much doubt it. Skylake HCC with mesh seems like an experiment just like adding FIVR into Haswell and later remove it. Mesh has its merit but the crucial thing is when.
 
BTVA said:
hmm, I think ring bus bottleneck should be something that needs a bit more quantitative data on, not just some theoretical overview or tech demo article. If mesh is so superior to RB for anything above 6 cores then surely the 9900K should be based on mesh right? but all the leak till now pointing toward 9900K is a 2-more-cores-added-RB-8700K if that the case then surely 9900K RB should be slower than 7820X when operating at the same clock, which I pretty much doubt it. Skylake HCC with mesh seems like an experiment just like adding FIVR into Haswell and later remove it. Mesh has its merit but the crucial thing is when.
Click to expand...

The problem is the cost of mesh CPU's are uncompetitive and AMD do it better. Intel need new from the ground up designs across the board. For the desktop that needs to be a dual memory channel design too.
 
jigger said:
The problem is the cost of mesh CPU's are uncompetitive and AMD do it better. Intel need new from the ground up designs across the board. For the desktop that needs to be a dual memory channel design too.
Click to expand...
wait how is this relevant to our current discussion about ringbus and upcoming 8 core CPU?
 
BTVA said:
hmm, I think ring bus bottleneck should be something that needs a bit more quantitative data on, not just some theoretical overview or tech demo article. If mesh is so superior to RB for anything above 6 cores then surely the 9900K should be based on mesh right? but all the leak till now pointing toward 9900K is a 2-more-cores-added-RB-8700K if that the case then surely 9900K RB should be slower than 7820X when operating at the same clock, which I pretty much doubt it. Skylake HCC with mesh seems like an experiment just like adding FIVR into Haswell and later remove it. Mesh has its merit but the crucial thing is when.
Click to expand...

We already have that chip from Intel as you point out. The issue is the overall costs and application. Plus Intel need to at least be looking competitive.
 
BTVA said:
wait how is this relevant to our current discussion about ringbus and upcoming 8 core CPU?
Click to expand...

Nothing Intel do short of a major overhaul will bring anyhing we haven't already got in the market at a better price. Intel have managed to paint themselves into a corner. The in's and out's as to why that is are irrelevant.
 
Last edited:
jigger said:
Nothing Intel do short of a major overhaul will bring nothing we haven't already got in the market at a better price. Intel have managed to paint themselves into a corner. The in's and out's as to why that is are irrelevant.
Click to expand...

This will be the fastest 8 core cpu you can buy. No matter how much you complain about the ring bus there is not getting away from that. The only thing AMD will have over this is price. And not everyone thinks that saving £100-200 is worth the performance hit.

Even if this CPU turns out to be a massive flop. Intel have cash to keep them afloat until they bring the next architecture in, and them some.
You make it sound like they are doomed lol.
 
gavinh87 said:
This will be the fastest 8 core cpu you can buy. No matter how much you complain about the ring bus there is not getting away from that. The only thing AMD will have over this is price. And not everyone thinks that saving £100-200 is worth the performance hit.

Even if this CPU turns out to be a massive flop. Intel have cash to keep them afloat until they bring the next architecture in, and them some.
You make it sound like they are doomed lol.
Click to expand...

Yay!
 
AthlonXP1800 said:
Videocardz leaked 9700K Geekbench 4 benchmark.

Wow 9700K is faster than my 8700K and Ryzen 7 2700X too. Faster than 8086K as well. :eek:

Cant wait to upgrade to 9900K. :cool:
Click to expand...
Err did you not expect that? Oh wait you're just an Intel marketing machine, I forgot.

gavinh87 said:
This will be the fastest 8 core cpu you can buy. No matter how much you complain about the ring bus there is not getting away from that. The only thing AMD will have over this is price. And not everyone thinks that saving £100-200 is worth the performance hit.

Even if this CPU turns out to be a massive flop. Intel have cash to keep them afloat until they bring the next architecture in, and them some.
You make it sound like they are doomed lol.
Click to expand...
Yeah Intel have enough cash and market share that they can redesign from the ground up with ease.
 
AndreiD said:
You can definitely see the Ring Bus bottleneck that 9700K in that Geekbench result, given that it's faster than a 2700X, 8086K/8700K, wew.
Click to expand...

Yeah it is scary - based on purely that one leak and a massively unscientific base of the most recent 5 2700X results as a comparison... this new processor is about 20% Faster single core than Ryzen - but only 6% faster multithreaded.

I have absolutely no idea how the different cores are performing but the core scaling on Intel at 8 cores looks about 14% worse than AMD over 8 cores.

It is undoubtedly and unquestionably significantly faster though. Nice find.
 
Beren said:
Yeah it is scary - based on purely that one leak and a massively unscientific base of the most recent 5 2700X results as a comparison... this new processor is about 20% Faster single core than Ryzen - but only 6% faster multithreaded.

I have absolutely no idea how the different cores are performing but the core scaling on Intel at 8 cores looks about 14% worse than AMD over 8 cores.

It is undoubtedly and unquestionably significantly faster though. Nice find.
Click to expand...

Its pretty public knowledge that Intels Multithreaded performance is actually lower than AMD's.... but Intel has an IPC advantage per physical core. If AMD manage to close or pass that gap with 7nm (no reason they shouldnt be able to imho) then the multithreaded performance of AMD will push even further ahead.

Infact thats about the one thing AMD does better than Intel right now, AMD's virtual core if you want to call it that, is actually faster than Intels virtual core, i think i read somewhere that Intels is about 18-25% performance of a physical Core, where AMD's is about 35-50% or something.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom