• 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.

INTEL BRING THE BIG GUNS!

Journey said:
Lol, just photoshop one :D
Click to expand...

Haha, i would never do that!

giphy.gif
 
james_2k said:
Just had a look at the hexus review of the TR 1950 and 1920.

and what the hell is this:

(Memory Read)

image.png


image.png


image.png


image.png


So, they use 3200 RAM in the TR, and 2666 in the intels. No wonder the results look crap. Just goes to show how easily benchmarks can be manipulated.

ill just leave this here:
Capture.png


And going by the cinebench results for the overclocked 1920x, its still slower than a 7900x at 4.7/4.8ghz even in a highly threaded app and with two more cores. I think the higher core intels will be something to behold tbh..
Click to expand...

Actually the bandwidth on TR is pretty decent, so expect similar if not better results at the same frequencies, but with higher latency. That isn't an apples to apples comparison, though, so it means absolutely nothing.
 
Silent_Scone said:
Actually the bandwidth on TR is pretty decent, so expect similar if not better results at the same frequencies, but with higher latency. That isn't an apples to apples comparison, though, so it means absolutely nothing.
Click to expand...
Why show the charts then, if they mean nothing? Stock for stock, the TR ram is overclocked, the others are not. unfair comparison. I saw amigas aida64 results at the top end of the TR envelope memory-wise, nice results sure, but still quite a long way behind even moderate 4ghz intel quad channel. in both bandwidth and latency.
 
did a run at 3200mhz with the same timings as my 4ghz, so very loose; wouldn't say this is particularly comparable, let alone behind. And bare in mind this is mega slow for the x299 platform.

image.png


image.png


image.png


image.png



Also, putting aside the intel vs amd aspect.

If anything could be compared it would be the Ryzen and TR scores, as they use a similar arch with different channel counts (dual vs quad), these charts again make Ryzen look hopeless in bandwidth, but its hardly the case.

I've gone off reviews after this and that video that was posted a few posts ago, the websites can prove whatever they want, get some nice pretty graphs showing large differences in performance and generate traffic. When the truth is somewhat harder to discern. Only have to look at Humbug and that picture of average game performance which must be the single most posted image on this board, to see how taken in people get by relying on one outlets review(s), its a minefield out there.
 
Last edited:
Just for comparison purposes (I know the timings are a bit tighter than yours) - it's not meant to prove anything, just interesting.

3k4Xn9u.png
 
shall i rerun mine at CL 14? :p - Sure it has bandwidth, just not as much ;)

actually seriously cant be arsed. ill stick with my 115GB/s and 48ns. (and cute cinebench score):D
 
I think you missing the point - the distinction is the difference between "the most" and "enough". Its like the difference between 180fps in a game and 200fps. Both are fine.
 
james_2k said:
shall i rerun mine at CL 14? :p - Sure it has bandwidth, just not as much ;)

actually seriously cant be arsed. ill stick with my 115GB/s and 48ns. (and cute cinebench score):D
Click to expand...

Or you could just wait for Intel's equivalent part so you're not having to compensate in other areas ;)

No workloads are really bandwidth constrained, anyway. It's also no secret Intel are ahead on memory, especially once you delve into the sub timings and concurrent high frequencies possible.

It's not easy to run close to the chipset spacing at 3600 on TR, yet with the right modules it can almost be done at 4000 on SKL-X
 
Silent_Scone said:
Or you could just wait for Intel's equivalent part so you're not having to compensate in other areas ;)

No workloads are really bandwidth constrained, anyway. It's also no secret Intel are ahead on memory, especially once you delve into the sub timings and concurrent high frequencies possible.

It's not easy to run close to the chipset spacing at 3600 on TR, yet with the right modules it can almost be done at 4000 on SKL-X
Click to expand...
Had no choice, killed my old cpu/motherboard and had to replace :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom