Intel to launch 6 core Coffee Lake-S CPUs & Z370 chipset 5 October 2017

[humbug]

What? 7700K used 30% more than 8 core Ryzen 7 in gaming power consumption?

That are not true.

Deus Ex: Mankind Divided

7700K: 237W
5 1400: 247W
5 1500X: 240W
5 1600: 252W
5 1600X: 252W
7 1700: 245W
7 1700X: 254W
7 1800X: 262W

http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/cpu/105961-amd-ryzen-5-1400-ryzen-5-1600-14nm/?page=7

Thief

7700K: 283W
7700K OC 5GHz: 310W
5 1500X: 261W
5 1500X OC 4.2GHz: 287W
5 1600X: 268W
5 1600X OC 4.1GHz: 285W
7 1700: 254W
7 1700 OC 4GHz: 288W
7 1700X: 261W
7 1800X: 273W

http://www.legitreviews.com/amd-ryzen-5-1600x-overclocked-benchmark-results-4-1ghz_194024/9
http://www.legitreviews.com/amd-ryzen-7-1700-overclocking-best-ryzen-processor_192191/9

I think there are so many other games used less power consumption on 7700K than Ryzen 7 8 core CPUs. Wished all hardware websites reviewed PC games should included PC system power consumption in all games reviews and benchmarks.

I remembered played Evil Within 3 years ago first time on GTX 970, the system power consumption was 250W then I played Evil Within again few weeks ago on GTX 1070 and was surprised to see it used less than half system power consumption at just 120W.

Even by your links the 8 Core Rysen is using no more than the 4 Core Intel, it also depends on how much stress in on the CPU, this is an average across 20 games..

 

[humbug]

I see it...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpoies2JcmI&feature=push-u-sub&attr_tag=F6C0kvxDl9dodo3H-6

Its 4.8Ghz with a 280mm Water cooler.

Its obviously a reaction to all the well deserved negative press Intel have been getting for the ridiculous pricing of their CPU's, 8Pack has also been running round in these threads trying to put out those fires, fires started by well establish tech journalists.

Guys like him are sponsored by Intel, (how do you think they get these chips before everyone else) he will have a crate of already binned CPU's, he will further bin out of them to find the most golden sample to get them to run at those speeds, if you think the ones you buy off the shelves are going to run at anything like 4.8Ghz you're in for a huge disappointment. I'm pretty sure golden samples of X99 also ran at around those speeds, the ones you buy would do 4.4 max.

No one in their right and independent mind would dispute that paying 100% more for a lesser CPU than the competition is anything less than overpriced, be it by request or their own vested interest they are acting as a PR arm for Intel, and i think thats a shame, i can't trust a thing they say any-more, its happened before, in the AthlonXP era, we had all the Intel vested running round trying to put-out fires... its an absolute Deja Vu.

4.8Ghz 20% higher than 4Ghz on a golden sample by a world leading bencher.

Threadripper has 60% more cores and 200% more PCIe lanes and will no doubt do 4Ghz given they already run at 3.6Ghz.

8Packs signature

8Pack Supernova 6950X 4.6ghz, Three way SLI
8Pack MATX Parvum 5960X 4.8ghz Two way SLI

Comedy gold....

 

[zornyan]

I see it...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpoies2JcmI&feature=push-u-sub&attr_tag=F6C0kvxDl9dodo3H-6

Its 4.8Ghz with a 280mm Water cooler.

Its obviously a reaction to all the well deserved negative press Intel have been getting for the ridiculous pricing of their CPU's, 8Pack has also been running round in these threads trying to put out those fires, fires started by well establish tech journalists.

Guys like him are sponsored by Intel, (how do you think they get these chips before everyone else) he will have a crate of already binned CPU's, he will further bin out of them to find the most golden sample to get them to run at those speeds, if you think the ones you buy off the shelves are going to run at anything like 4.8Ghz you're in for a huge disappointment. I'm pretty sure golden samples of X99 also ran at around those speeds, the ones you buy would do 4.4 max.

No one in their right and independent mind would dispute that paying 100% more for a lesser CPU than the competition is anything less than overpriced, be it by request or their own vested interest they are acting as a PR arm for Intel, and i think thats a shame, i can't trust a thing they say any-more, its happened before, in the AthlonXP era, we had all the Intel vested running round trying to put-out fires... its an absolute Deja Vu.

4.8Ghz 20% higher than 4Ghz on a golden sample by a world leading bencher.

Threadripper has 60% more cores and 200% more PCIe lanes and will no doubt do 4Ghz given they already run at 3.6Ghz.

or maybe he's just talking sense, amd and the fanatic cult that tries to over hype every release since the dawn of man.

I mean look at ryzen release, so so many reviewers got sent death threats and trolled to the high heavens because they pointed out the flaws with ryzen on release.

and your comment sums it up entirely, there aren't any fires to put out, Intel in all honesty don't give a **** about ryzen or thread ripper, they have the far superior product and people will buy Intel over amd. the only people that are making 'fires' are amd fans for some reason.

seriously, Intel reddit for example just had discussions over skylake x, like when's it going to release, what features etc.

amd reddit is full of posts like "LOLZ AMD EPYC INTEL IS GOING OUT OF BUSINESS" like, seriously fanatical.

you've never mentioned all the upsides to skylake x, for example many professional programs are still single threaded, like auto cad, adobe etc.

using this programs on a 7820x, against an 1800x will be roughly 35% faster, and in multi threaded workloads you still have amazing performance.

basically ryzen sacrifices single threaded performance for more cores (bulldozer) where as Intel offers the same exceptional multi threaded performance, whilst also having the highest single threaded performance available.

I don't get why amd fans can't be happy with what they have, you've got a half decent cpu, Intel merely offers a better product for more money. why feel the need to start up so many arguments over it?

 

[humbug]

or maybe he's just talking sense, amd and the fanatic cult that tries to over hype every release since the dawn of man.

I mean look at ryzen release, so so many reviewers got sent death threats and trolled to the high heavens because they pointed out the flaws with ryzen on release.

and your comment sums it up entirely, there aren't any fires to put out, Intel in all honesty don't give a **** about ryzen or thread ripper, they have the far superior product and people will buy Intel over amd. the only people that are making 'fires' are amd fans for some reason.

seriously, Intel reddit for example just had discussions over skylake x, like when's it going to release, what features etc.

amd reddit is full of posts like "LOLZ AMD EPYC INTEL IS GOING OUT OF BUSINESS" like, seriously fanatical.

you've never mentioned all the upsides to skylake x, for example many professional programs are still single threaded, like auto cad, adobe etc.

using this programs on a 7820x, against an 1800x will be roughly 35% faster, and in multi threaded workloads you still have amazing performance.

basically ryzen sacrifices single threaded performance for more cores (bulldozer) where as Intel offers the same exceptional multi threaded performance, whilst also having the highest single threaded performance available.

I don't get why amd fans can't be happy with what they have, you've got a half decent cpu, Intel merely offers a better product for more money. why feel the need to start up so many arguments over it?

You're far too exited about your perceptions, yes there will always be raving lunatics raging at Youtubers, that happens the world over, its not by any stretch of the imagination confined to 'AMD Fanboys' there are hardware fanboys of any and all hardware colours and, also those who have never held a lump of PC hardware in their lives or ever will.
The fact that you think this is a trait only AMD enthusiasts share says far more about you than it does about 'The Church of Hardware' get that looked at.

PS: I use Autocad and Adobe products, they are not single threaded and yes its exactly the sort of workload these CPU are designed for.

 

[Simon Belmont]

amd reddit is full of posts like "LOLZ AMD EPYC INTEL IS GOING OUT OF BUSINESS" like, seriously fanatical.

you've never mentioned all the upsides to skylake x, for example many professional programs are still single threaded, like auto cad, adobe etc.

using this programs on a 7820x, against an 1800x will be roughly 35% faster, and in multi threaded workloads you still have amazing performance.

basically ryzen sacrifices single threaded performance for more cores (bulldozer) where as Intel offers the same exceptional multi threaded performance, whilst also having the highest single threaded performance available.

I don't get why amd fans can't be happy with what they have, you've got a half decent cpu, Intel merely offers a better product for more money. why feel the need to start up so many arguments over it?

PC hardware always has it's fanboys. AMD fanboys are extremely fanatical. Mostly because they've been on the losing stick for so damn long they have something to finally get excited about for once. It is slightly annoying, but totally understandable. I'm not crazy for just one product. I hope every company does well. I will say it's nice to see competition.

 

[humbug]

You're far too exited about your perceptions, yes there will always be raving lunatics raging at Youtubers, that happens the world over, its not by any stretch of the imagination confined to 'AMD Fanboys' there are hardware fanboys of any and all hardware colours and, also those who have never held a lump of PC hardware in their lives or ever will.
The fact that you think this is a trait only AMD enthusiasts share says far more about you than it does about 'The Church of Hardware' get that looked at.

PS: I use Autocad and Adobe products, they are not single threaded and yes its exactly the sort of workload these CPU are designed for.

Just one other thing, this raging AMD fanboy must be confused, he cant even tell Red from Blue, or Green

I'm not an AMD fanboy, i just think Intel have lost the plot with thier gimping of lower priced CPU's and the price of their CPU's in general, do i disagree Intel will sell them in droves? do i disagree Intel will out sell AMD 10 to 1? no, i don't.
Do i think Intel's products are worth anything more than AMD's let alone 100% more, no. you obviously do and i disagree. thats all.

 

[zornyan]

You're far too exited about your perceptions, yes there will always be raving lunatics raging at Youtubers, that happens the world over, its not by any stretch of the imagination confined to 'AMD Fanboys' there are hardware fanboys of any and all hardware colours and, also those who have never held a lump of PC hardware in their lives or ever will.
The fact that you think this is a trait only AMD enthusiasts share says far more about you than it does about 'The Church of Hardware' get that looked at.

PS: I use Autocad and Adobe products, they are not single threaded and yes its exactly the sort of workload these CPU are designed for.

I use autocad too, it's primarily single threaded.

AutoCAD and AutoCAD for Mac only support multi-core technology in specific areas of the product, including:

• 2D regeneration
• MentalRay rendering

To fully benefit from multi-core processors, you need to use multi-threaded software; AutoCAD is predominantly a single-threaded application.

straight from their website....

 

[humbug]

I use autocad too, it's primarily single threaded.

AutoCAD and AutoCAD for Mac only support multi-core technology in specific areas of the product, including:

• 2D regeneration
• MentalRay rendering

To fully benefit from multi-core processors, you need to use multi-threaded software; AutoCAD is predominantly a single-threaded application.

straight from their website....

Prominently yes, not totally. its one in a whole lot of competing applications most if not all of which are multi-threaded, its just the usual cherry picking, to proclaim one application among hundreds is at best incredibly misleading. its blatantly done to push one 'Hardware Church' over another, my god is better than your god, only people who think like this do this.

In the real world people know there is a very good reason why CPU's have more than one core, as many as 8 +, you would have to be mad to think this sort of crap washes with intelligent people. The people who actually buy these CPU's know you're talking nonsense so why bother?

 

[Chuk_Chuk]

I use autocad too, it's primarily single threaded.

AutoCAD and AutoCAD for Mac only support multi-core technology in specific areas of the product, including:

• 2D regeneration
• MentalRay rendering

To fully benefit from multi-core processors, you need to use multi-threaded software; AutoCAD is predominantly a single-threaded application.

straight from their website....

In software the function/feature that use up the most time are generally multi threaded. Things that do not take a significant amount of time are generally not because it is not worth investing resources into and in some circumstances they cannot be multi-threaded. I think having faster render/simulation times would save a person significantly more time than having their boolean tool take 10 seconds less.

 

[AthlonXP1800]

Even by your links the 8 Core Rysen is using no more than the 4 Core Intel, it also depends on how much stress in on the CPU, this is an average across 20 games..

Hmmm I found that chart from AMD Ryzen 7 1800X 3.6 GHz review. I guessed author wizzard wrong calculated average gaming power consumption on 20 games after read emails and comments on review. After 1800X review wizzard reduced games tests from 20 to 15.

This is from latest AMD Ryzen 5 1400 3.2 GHz review on 29 May.



https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_5_1400/18.html

 

[humbug]

Hmmm I found that chart from AMD Ryzen 7 1800X 3.6 GHz review. I guessed author wizzard wrong calculated average gaming power consumption on 20 games after read emails and comments on review. After 1800X review wizzard reduced games tests from 20 to 15.

This is from latest AMD Ryzen 5 1400 3.2 GHz review on 29 May.



https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_5_1400/18.html

I guessed author wizzard wrong calculated average gaming power consumption on 20 games after read emails and comments on review. After 1800X review wizzard reduced games tests from 20 to 15.

So they Re-jiged the conclusion by excluding 25% of the results to appease Intel and or their fanboys, they obviously took out the ones where Intel's power consumption was much higher than AMD's so that they can conclude the power consumption is the same. maybe Tech Power Up got death threats from Intel Fanboys. eh?

Of course you advocate fixing the results so that Intel look less bad than they actually are but don't pretend you can't see what's wrong with that, i'm sure you do, right?

The real result is the one with all the games included, not the ones where only the results where Intel don't do that bad in are included. like it or not the full review is the real one, the fake one is, well, fake.

I'll tell you what tho, i didn't know about this, wow, just wow TPU way to cave in to to fanboy pressure, another one on off my list of impartial reviewers.

 

[Chuk_Chuk]

I'll tell you what tho, i didn't know about this, wow, just wow TPU way to bend to fanboy pressure, another one on off my list of impartial reviewers.

Probably had nothing to do with fanboys. Intel probably spoke to them after the previous review

 

[humbug]

Yeah ^^^^^ makes me sick. i want to throw-up.

 

[Chuk_Chuk]

When coffee lake and Skylake X comes out it will be interesting to see how many reviewers will simply gloss over power figures and temperatures.

 

[humbug]

When coffee lake and Skylake X comes out it will be interesting to see how many reviewers will simply gloss over power figures and temperatures.

You could guess which ones, with Techpower Up now giving in to Intel pressure there is now an absolute commonality with all of them, only the ones who do actual game-play video reviews are the ones who show often wildly different results to the ones who only do bar-chart result with no gameplay footadge, like Toms Hardware, Techpower Up, PCPer.... the Youtube reviewers are also the only ones who have ever had anything at all critical to say about Intel, as well as AMD. Linus, Jat2Cents, Joker Productions.

For me bar-chart slides without substantial gameplay footadge with OSD monitoring running are just not to be trusted, anyone can write anything in a bar-chart, but its far more difficult to cheat what you can see with your own eyes as its happening.
I think these days we have to realise that money plays a huge part in tech journalism and with that bar-charts should be taken with a pich of salt, these days we cannot trust them no matter who published them. Money talks.

Jay2Cents, Joker Productions, these are one or two guys with a single channel, the likes or Techpower Up and Toms Hardware employ multiple staff in multiple offices across multiple continents.... thats not cheap, Google ads don't pay for all that, that costs tens of thousands a month, only multi-billion $ sponsors can afford to support that, and who do you think they are.

 

[Chuk_Chuk]

Even video reviews can be tampered. All you need to do is pick which section of the game you choose to benchmark and it can sway things wildly.

 

[zornyan]

Probably had nothing to do with fanboys. Intel probably spoke to them after the previous review

much like amd telling reviewers to only benchmark games at 4k to make their cpus better I guess, bad from both sides isn't it?

 

[humbug]

Even video reviews can be tampered. All you need to do is pick which section of the game you choose to benchmark and it can sway things wildly.

True

much like amd telling reviewers to only benchmark games at 4k to make their cpus better I guess, bad from both sides isn't it?

Yes, precisely this, the only difference is Intel can back that up with crates of CPU's or whatever, AMD don't have two pennies to rub together so who do you think they will listen to?

AMD are no different to Intel in at least wanting to influence the results of their hardware's reviews, of course they do, its a perfectly natural thing to do... they need to make money just as much as anyone... the difference is Intel can afford it. in the same way that if you as a business are bidding for a Google add slot you'll only get it if you out bid all your rivals. AMD can't out bid Intel.

Only when someone who is more passionate about hardware than money do you get an actual tech journalists opinion.

Edit: rude words in vid, removed, forum rulz :O

 

[Chuk_Chuk]

much like amd telling reviewers to only benchmark games at 4k to make their cpus better I guess, bad from both sides isn't it?

I don't think a manufacture should have control over a review, I can understand wanting to demonstrate/talk about new features but that's a different story and not what you are asking.

Your comparison is interesting because it is one thing to manipulate reviews of your own product to make them look good but it a different level of low to manipulate review on your competitor product to make them look bad.
I'm sure you will agree with me that manipulating reviews of your competitors product is worst than manipulating reviews of your own product. But if you don't I look forward to hearing your reason as to why.

 

[N19h7m4r3]

So they Re-jiged the conclusion by excluding 25% of the results to appease Intel and or their fanboys, they obviously took out the ones where Intel's power consumption was much higher than AMD's so that they can conclude the power consumption is the same. maybe Tech Power Up got death threats from Intel Fanboys. eh?

If you look at the image you posted versus AthlonXP1800, you'll notice the original lists Gaming Power Consumption, and nothing else.
Where are the "updated" one, says "Whole System".

The results from the 1800X review are still up, with the conclusion of
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_7_1800X/14.html

At stock speeds, the energy-efficiency of Ryzen is truly phenomenal. Prime95 loads all cores and threads on the chip, and the Ryzen ends up with as much power draw as the quad-core Intel i7-7700K.

This is epic. We're assuming you've sifted through our game-test results before seeing this page, and so you'll find that the gaming power draw of the 8-core Ryzen makes Intel's quad-core i7-7700K look bad. Power draw is as much as 30W lesser!

Ryzen is hands down the most energy-efficient performance CPU AMD ever made, and easily outclasses Intel's 14 nm "leadership." Good show.