4.7Ghz Boost, 5Ghz overclock (+300Mhz)
5600X 4.65Ghz boost, +200Mhz offset (4.85Ghz) or +350Mhz (5.0Ghz) if you use an older BIOS.
-
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 Core i9-12900K allegedly scores 30K points in Cinebench R23
- Thread starter Dave2150
- Start date
4.7Ghz Boost, 5Ghz overclock (+300Mhz)
5600X 4.65Ghz boost, +200Mhz offset (4.85Ghz) or +350Mhz (5.0Ghz) if you use an older BIOS.
But Intel aren’t worth buying.
Not right now but anyone who bought an 8700K for £350 4 years ago has had great value for money.
Will those who spent £300+ on a 5600X feel the same in 4 years time?
Yes, you and i can agree on that.
People that bought AMD have had a better time.
4 years from now the 5600X will be trailing a similarly priced chip by around 70% though.
But a lot of people who bought a 5600X can always upgrade to 5800x, 5900x or 5950x at greatly reduced prices over the next couple years and can also drop in the XT variant or 3D variants should they be different.
Plus all cpus bought now will be trailing there counterparts in 4 years time Intel and AMD
Associate
- Joined
- 27 Apr 2007
- Posts
- 966
"The 5950X is a HEDT chip. The 5900X too."
Fortunately they aren't, otherwise the motherboard pricing would be annoying.
The great thing about those chips is that they are for the mainstream platform.
So you get the extra cores without having to pay a large premium for all the HEDT goodies that many don't need; more PCIe lanes, RAM capacity and bandwidth.
Fortunately they aren't, otherwise the motherboard pricing would be annoying.
The great thing about those chips is that they are for the mainstream platform.
So you get the extra cores without having to pay a large premium for all the HEDT goodies that many don't need; more PCIe lanes, RAM capacity and bandwidth.
They are bonkers fast. You can have the HEDT goodies with the right X570 board.
The flip side though is if you want more lanes / ram etc then you have to pay a premium on the CPU unless you go with Intel.
Core counts are going to get silly.
AMD played the core count game which killed Intel's HEDT, now Intel are looking to play AMD at their own game, revenge? Bad move, its far too easy for AMD to ramp the core count up to play them at that game, all Intel are doing is escalating it.
Zen 4
R3 - 6/12
R5 - 8/16
R7 - 12/24 and 16/32
R9 - 20/40 and 24/48
AMD played the core count game which killed Intel's HEDT, now Intel are looking to play AMD at their own game, revenge? Bad move, its far too easy for AMD to ramp the core count up to play them at that game, all Intel are doing is escalating it.
Zen 4
R3 - 6/12
R5 - 8/16
R7 - 12/24 and 16/32
R9 - 20/40 and 24/48
Sure but if May not be as easy as you think for AMD.
when it comes to desktop there is no point to increase cores at the sacrifice of single core performance. We can look at the 3960x and 3970x to see what 7nm 24 and 32 core chips look like - higher tdp and lower clock speeds.
The key is increasing core counts while maintaining the same tdp and same or better clock speed. If AMD is going to make 24/32 cores for Zen 4, it better make sure they're 105w tdp and 5ghz instead of 280w and 4ghz like it's 7nm chips
Last edited:
It would be great if AMD up core count on zen 4 so long as they don't increase price too much.
A 2 chiplet 5950X is 105 Watts, about 130 watts package power, you add another chiplet bring's it to about 190 Watts, that's no more power than an 11900K, less in fact, but its not doable on the AM socket which has a package limit of 142 Watts.
Zen 4 is moving to LGA, and Zen 4 is on 5nm.
Intel call their CPU's 95 Watts, its marketing BS, they are 95 Watts at 3.7Ghz, they don't run at 3.7Ghz, my 5800X is 110 Watts (admittedly with a negative curve set) at 4.7 to 4.8Ghz in Cinebench or Handbreak. 11900K double it!
They wont be sacrificing ST performance, a 16 core 5950X has a higher ST performance than my 5800X, stock at least, because there is some clever #### going on inside them.
Yeah, hopefully a 6 core Zen 4 will still be £300 or less, if the 24 core is £1000 i don't care to be frank, get the 20 core for £700 that's still 4 more than 16.
Single thread performance will be AMD's biggest worry. They've used up Jim Keller's work, so may not be able to increase IPC greatly going forward.
At stock, rocket lake (11900k) has higher single core performance out of the box than a 5950x has. Alder Lake looks to increase this by 15-20%. Then next year we have Raptor Lake, with further IPC increases, which will compete with Zen3 refresh. At this point, it may be Meteor Lake that finally competes with Zen4 and AMD's first DDR5 platform.
That said, I do hope AMD can keep executing as we could have a few really exciting years with big increases in performance from both vendors then
Single thread performance will be AMD's biggest worry. They've used up Jim Keller's work, so may not be able to increase IPC greatly going forward.
At stock, rocket lake (11900k) has higher single core performance out of the box than a 5950x has. Alder Lake looks to increase this by 15-20%. Then next year we have Raptor Lake, with further IPC increases, which will compete with Zen3 refresh. At this point, it may be Meteor Lake that finally competes with Zen4 and AMD's first DDR5 platform.
That said, I do hope AMD can keep executing as we could have a few really exciting years with big increases in performance from both vendors then
Pitty 11900k out of the box has lower gaming performance than the 10900k, which was already slower than the 5950x.
By the way, you didn't mention how fast the 12900k is at AVX512
Single thread performance will be AMD's biggest worry. They've used up Jim Keller's work, so may not be able to increase IPC greatly going forward.
At stock, rocket lake (11900k) has higher single core performance out of the box than a 5950x has. Alder Lake looks to increase this by 15-20%. Then next year we have Raptor Lake, with further IPC increases, which will compete with Zen3 refresh. At this point, it may be Meteor Lake that finally competes with Zen4 and AMD's first DDR5 platform.
That said, I do hope AMD can keep executing as we could have a few really exciting years with big increases in performance from both vendors then
Alderlake will be competing against the Zen3 refresh at the start of the year, probably with the 3D Cache so that should bring parity to the situation as part of Intels performance enhancements is their higher clock speeds at the sake of power consumption. Zen 4 is due out around this time next year.
Single thread performance will be AMD's biggest worry. They've used up Jim Keller's work, so may not be able to increase IPC greatly going forward.
At stock, rocket lake (11900k) has higher single core performance out of the box than a 5950x has. Alder Lake looks to increase this by 15-20%. Then next year we have Raptor Lake, with further IPC increases, which will compete with Zen3 refresh. At this point, it may be Meteor Lake that finally competes with Zen4 and AMD's first DDR5 platform.
That said, I do hope AMD can keep executing as we could have a few really exciting years with big increases in performance from both vendors then
Jim Keller has not been at AMD for 4 years, If you're waiting for AMD to fall back to their between Althon and Zen box you will get more and more frustrated as time goes on, that happened through a perfect storm of circumstances at the time, it was a combination of Intel shenanigans denying AMD sales, for which Intel have been convicted, AMD's own mistakes and a global financial crash.
Intel can't buy off every vendor, its not just Dell and HP anymore, there are about two dozen others and Intel don't have anything like the fraction of the money needed to buy them all off, AMD are far less dependant on X86 than they have been at the time.
AMD are an extremely capable and formidable company, always have been and now they have learned from mistakes which makes then even more dangerous to Intel, Intel are miles behind AMD in packaging technology and they have given up trying to keep up, buckle up because Intel are in for a rough ride.