• 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

Robert896r1 said:
Samsung 850pro 1TB SSD (Sata3!) but it's got 500gb free and I don't notice it slowing me down in anything so I plan to keep it as is.
Click to expand...

Yeah that will be fine. I think I will be getting a 256/512GB NVMe drive to go with the upgrade though, and using my Samsung 500GB SSD as a Games drive.

nlel1975 said:
Yeah I was surprised it says "setting up devices" then not long after you're back at your desktop.
Click to expand...

Not like in the past where it would just plain refuse to boot with a ton of errors. Even switching between AMD and Intel platforms it usually still works.
 
SiDeards73 said:
I have a theory that with Ryzen 1, the motherboard manufacturers thought that the CPU would not be anywhere near as successful as it is / was, so hedged bets and put little investment into the products. However with the refresh and sales so far, im pretty certain that come X570 or whatever it will be called and the B550 etc, that we may well see a lot more options from the vendors as there is already a massive following now behind AMD, they have gone from a curiosity to an actual competitor and are taking sales.

If i manufacturer for 2 people and one of those only sells 1 unit for 10 of the other, then my focus is going to be on the one with the most sales, however once i see an uptake in sales for the smaller vendor, im going to want a slice of that pie and try and keep current etc.
Click to expand...

Because the engineering samples were no were where near as accurate as retail versions they shipped. Before they knew actual performance, boards were pretty much designed, manufactured etc .

Also AMD didn't give much in the way of Marketing as they have nothing to give

Also, intel will generate more cash for Vendors due to the nature of of 2 gens to a Socket . That makes money, not 4 gens on one socket . Had DDR5 not been scheduled for 2020 then AM4 might of gone further
 
Hotwired said:
The games are not meant to be using comedy RAM, you're using 32GB to compensate for incompetent original or third party code.

Which means you do have 32GB for a novel reason.
Click to expand...

Well to play a game isnt novel to me :)

Also with 16 gig of ram even with no game loaded I found myself having to restart chrome every now and again to free up ram, now I dont need to bother.

Granted the vast majority of people 16 gig of ram is plenty, I never said its a common requirement, just that for some people its not a novelty.

IT Troll said:
I agree, for the most part. Your chosen CPU, GPU and monitor should be well balanced so that they compliment each other well and perform together optimally. However, presenting a GPU limited benchmark chart as "evidence" for CPU performance is simply flawed. According to that chart the Ryzen 7 2700X is only 5% faster than a Ryzen 3 1200!

Low resolution benchmarks on high-end cards do not represent real world usage. But the intended purpose is to remove any GPU bottleneck from the equation so that your are only comparing the performance of CPUs. This is useful for projecting future performance; e.g. games which may be more CPU demanding and new GPU hardware which can take advantage of the the additional CPU performance. It's not just about getting insane frame rates in e-sport games.
Click to expand...

It actually annoys me when I see things like only 4k benchmarks on say a ti card or developers forcing specific configuration to "ensure there is no gpu bottleneck". To me the system works as a whole, so e.g. when you bench/review a GPU you dont deliberately pick non cpu bottlenecked games.

It also annoys me if someone says e.g. if you buy a ti you shouldnt be 1080p gaming, these are all assumptions about what people want or do, and also assumptions that every game you play is well coded and optimised, the earlier example about disregarding my 32gig ram needs for FF15 is an example of that "oh the code is a mess, so its not relevant in terms of hardware requirements".

I agree with you on the balance, the balance is different for each person tho, and many reviews dont emphasise that either like say pairing a gtx 1060 with a 8700k. The excuse will be we dont want to have the cpu slowing down the gpu, in real life these things happen and tests should reflect real life, in real life people play horribly unoptimised games, tests should reflect that also, I also cannot remember the last time I seen a single or dual threaded game on a hardware review yet those games exist in large numbers.

Instead reviews are often done in a manner to paint the hardware been reviewed in the best light possible, hence 4k only reviews for RTX series ti cards, and using unbalanced hardware with the aim of ensuring the bottleneck is fully on the hardware been reviewed.
 
Last edited:
andy_mk3 said:
Picture shows i9+, does that mean the 9900k will get a refresh next year on 10nm?
Click to expand...
The picture is probably just a filler for something to put on the page, but they should have just put this quoted right by the image instead of at the start:

Intel’s continuously delayed 10nm chips has put significant strain on its 14nm range, resulting in the company doing a round of damage control to assure it has enough stock to meet its full-year revenue outlook.
Click to expand...
 
Even if Intel does get 10nm out the door next year it will almost certainly not be for performance parts. Their own charts even show that they expect 10nm to perform worse than current iterations of 14nm, so it will likely be for low power parts initially.
 
andy_mk3 said:
That's good to know. Didn't want to be buying an i9 for it to be replaced 6 months later :D
Click to expand...
As I said earlier I think Intel will need to be on 10nm++ to pass current 14nm stuff including the new 9 series.

They better hope AMD drops the ball on 7nm and definitely can't get a refresh on 7nm before they do get their 10nm desktop stuff out lol, otherwise it will be a massacre
 
CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
I do wonder if Intel saying 10NM is coming "soon" is also an attempt to try and stop people buying AMD. I also find it hard to believe that if the 9900K is coming out this month,that in under 9 months it will be replaced.
Click to expand...

It won't be, I doubt they'll beat the 9900k til 2020 at the earliest. And potentially by then they may have 7nm Zen2 refresh to deal with as well.

It will feel odd Intel being the underdog again.. didn't think that would happen again in my lifetime.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom