• 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 has a Pretty Big Problem..

Skylake in its many forms beat AMd till 5000 when AMD finally matched them on IPC. the problem is intel stopped trying lets say when Skylake was so good its like they had no drive.
AMD kicking there ass right now is good as with AMD when your on the back foot you work harder.

Not even close. Skylake beat some Zen 1 parts.
 
Zen wiped the floor with Intel’s parts. Intel couldn’t compete.

on core count, but until 5000 intel had the ipc advantage that's literally a fact.
i had a 1800 that 3600.. 5600.. 5700x and a 5700x3d i not an intel fan boy i just saying

do you think the 3600x was better than a 9900k on ipc?
intel can call the 9000 whatever they want but it was a skylake core

10th/11th gen was also based on the skylake core, only 12th gen+ is a new core type
 
Last edited:
on core count, but until 5000 intel had the ipc advantage that's literally a fact.
i had a 1800 that 3600.. 5600.. 5700x and a 5700x3d i not an intel fan boy i just saying

do you think the 3600x was better than a 9900k on ipc?
intel can call the 9000 whatever they want but it was a skylake core

Very strange comparison.
Not even close. Skylake beat some Zen 1 parts.

What exactly triggered you about this comment?
 
Very strange comparison.

sorry i thought the 9900k was 6c/12t, this this better? the 9700k still killed the 3600x/3700x in ipc

3600x 6c/12t 2019
9700k 8c/8t 2018
IPC is single core an i3 vs a 3900x still have better IPC

the 5000 range of CPU was AMD finally stepping upto the table on IPC.
 
Last edited:
sorry i thought the 9900k was 6c/12t, this this better? the 9700k still killed the 3600x/3700x in ipc

3600x 6c/12t 2019
9700k 8c/8t 2018
IPC is single core an i3 vs a 3900x still have better IPC

the 5000 range of CPU was AMD finally stepping upto the table on IPC.

Are you asking If the absolute highest single core performance is the object of my build which chip would I choose?
 
Last edited:
Are you asking If the absolute highest single core performance is the object of my build which chip would I choose?

well i mean that's what IPC means, its the cpu's ability the do instruction pre core...
again on a single core performance skylake was only match by AMD's 5000 line up, not including the G chips


@jigger ive seen your posts and agree with so much that you say, but on this one your wrong.
skylake was 6th to 11th gen and AMD didnt match them till the 5000 chips on single core performance.

lests face it 12th, 13th and 14th gen was a fighting with 7000, its only the X3D that really pulled away.
but if the photo/video editing intel still have it in some cases
 
Last edited:
well i mean that's what IPC means, its the cpu's ability the do instruction pre core...
again on a single core performance skylake was only match by AMD's 5000 line up, not including the G chips

So I’d look at the those handful of chips where Intel still had the edge, but with insight once Intels security flaws got patched I think AMD faster even for those use cases.

It would have been a toss up between the Xeon quad cores with 60mb of cache (£6-10k) or an i3k
 
So I’d look at the those handful of chips where Intel still had the edge, but with insight once Intels security flaws got patched I think AMD faster even for those use cases.

have AMD have no security flaws....

It would have been a toss up between the Xeon quad cores with 60mb of cache (£6-10k) or an i3k
lol just lol
 
Last edited:
skylake was then, what is now AMD's X3D. it was just so fast it was silly.
intel have a very big fight on there hands

i remember having a 6500 @ 6.4ghz it was a monster

I used a Xeon 1650 V2 for a long time, clock for clock core for core it put up a good fight against Zen 1 despite being a 4+ years older CPU, especially for gaming, and due to better overclocking headroom could hang in there with the Zen parts (sadly a lot of the benchmarks use loose timing 1600MHz RAM as is stock Intel spec - pair it up with low latency 2400MHz RAM and the Xeon does quite a bit better).

CPUs are in a really funny place at the moment, few have a good balanced performance profile and a proportional price.
 
Last edited:
Zen1's general "IPC" was fine. Max clocks were not.
And for gaming, Zen1/2's gaming performance was behind especially the more memory dependent games.
As always IPC is a problematic term, but so is overall performance (IPC * clocks).
Even just above, I probably hinted at 3 definitions of IPC.
General IPC
Memory-bound gaming IPC.
General gaming IPC.
And there are tons more as even with Zen 3 sine games continue to perform better on Intel. Same with applications, certain ones favour Intel either due to AVX, memory latency, clocks, etc. or even the old Intel compiler tricks.

At the end of the day, a buyer has to look at reviews of what they actually want run.
 
if your still gaming at 1080p the CPU is very important, but at 1440 or 4k i feel 11th gen / 5000 is still fine and i think i lot will still be using older.
so many people put too much focus into the CPU, you see system with 7800x3d/9800x3d but a 3080 or older

when people have say 5800/3080 that go and buy a 9800x3d for gaming, when it would have been better to have a 5800 and a 4080
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom