• 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.

General CPU question.

rn2

rn2

rn2

Associate
Joined
13 Mar 2017
Posts
523
Location
England
Hey guys, I am a bit confused about how the 5900x out performs the I910900k at slower turbo boost speeds. I know it's not all about core speeds but I wondered if the 5900x will still perform better on other games such as building games where there are a lot of calculations going or will a higher turbo speed help more in this scenario? Probably not but thought I'd ask for confirmation :)

Thank you.
 
It isn't just about MHz - instructions per clock, the bandwidth of various caches and the efficiency of cache hits amongst other things will all have an impact on performance at the same MHz.
 
MHz comparisons are only really useful within the same series. In theory, they could introduce a 5100x that only had 4 cores but boosted much higher, which could be useful if your only priority is single-threaded performance.

Comparing it to the previous series isn't helpful here, as the IPC on the 5900x is up to 20% higher at the same clock speed.

Once you start comparing clock sppeds to Intel, you may as well compare box colours.
 
IPC (instructions per clock) improvements has exactly the same impact on performance as frequency; Increasing the GHz by 20% is exactly the same as increasing the IPC by 20%. Either will make the CPU 20% faster.
 
rn2 said:
I wondered if the 5900x will still perform better on other games such as building games where there are a lot of calculations going or will a higher turbo speed help more in this scenario?
Click to expand...
From what we know so far, 5900x will outperform 10900K across the board. Really CPU bottlenecked titles like building games you mention stand to gain most.

By the way, Zen3 has deceptively high turbo boost. 5900x was seen boosting to 4.94GHz, which is not miles off what Intel does in long term workloads. And that is added to massive IPC gain mentioned above
 
Tank you guys I read all of the comments and this helped a lot :)

alec said:
From what we know so far, 5900x will outperform 10900K across the board. Really CPU bottlenecked titles like building games you mention stand to gain most.

By the way, Zen3 has deceptively high turbo boost. 5900x was seen boosting to 4.94GHz, which is not miles off what Intel does in long term workloads. And that is added to massive IPC gain mentioned above
Click to expand...

This sounds really good for me, definately going to go for the 5900x then. Not only that but running cooler than a kettle is a great advantage too :)
 
Last edited:
Running cooler ? hmm not sure about that.
Any comparison I have seen shows curent AMD cpu's running around 10 degrees over the intel 10 series in gaming and load stress tests. I don't expect the new gen will be any different in temps to the current gen.
Its the one thing that I am trying to prepare myself to accept, as I transition from a very cool running older i5 to an AMD 5 series, and also considering I am going AIO this time not using the current custom loop !
 
Vogon said:
Running cooler ? hmm not sure about that.
Any comparison I have seen shows curent AMD cpu's running around 10 degrees over the intel 10 series in gaming and load stress tests. I don't expect the new gen will be any different in temps to the current gen.
Its the one thing that I am trying to prepare myself to accept, as I transition from a very cool running older i5 to an AMD 5 series, and also considering I am going AIO this time not using the current custom loop !
Click to expand...

It's a fact that Intel generates more heat. Although if you fit good cooling to Intel and poor cooling to AMD, then it will appear as you describe.
 
I suppose it depends what the reviewers were using too cool, but in every comparison I watched intel was running cooler.
We will find out soon enough :)
 
Screenbeat said:
Ffs! These threads

Have to be classed as spam!
Click to expand...

Why? He's asking about the technology, not unknown benchmarks - it's a fair question given how technology is evolving and how you can't just equate performance to clock speed. Obviously benchmarks need to happen to see the real picture.
 
its easy.. you cannot compare 2 different cpu from different vendors.. they used different ways to do stuff.
it is not just about MHz .. as people said IPC is really important..
cpus are very complex so it depends on many things
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom