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

[voidshatter]

It's well known that a certain batch had issues, if you have one just RMA it. Not all of the early batch had the problem, like mine don't .

But my friend T wasn't talking about a particular bad batch. His previous conversation with me was talking about a generic ecology issue for AMD in the market. I posted it here and was sentenced for the crime of personal vendetta against anything AMD.

Translation of the previous conversation (in which you could see I actually wasn't supporting Intel):

T: When I was working inside Baidu, I was in charge of reading the internal reports about the deployment of CPUs (brands, models, numbers), which raid controllers's firmware are buggy etc. Now the other guy in charge of this is sitting besides me.

Me: So your conclusion is that Intel's CPUs are more reliable?

T: Very simple: the one leading and unchallenged in the market is more reliable, since it's moving on its own pace.

T: If Intel rush announces something in the 14nm fab process just because AMD has released something in the 14nm fab process earlier, then Intel's got a problem.

Me: But Intel is now having a hard time because of AMD's Ryzen.

T: Samsung just f'ed up because it was in a rush.

T: Yes, but it (Intel) isn't in a hurry to push out something new.

Me: Intel's got so many bugs, while I hardly heard about any issue with the ARM-based CPUs used by Nikon cameras.

T: For example, I could tell you according to the internal reports inside the enterprise that there are far less bugs with Intel than with AMD.

Me: Intel's 4G band for iPhone 7 doesn't work that well, and got beaten hard by Qualcomm.

T: There's a higher chance to get illegal instructions with AMD CPUs for the same programs.

Me: (link)

T: Because there's barely anyone (in these big companies) using AMD, it's more likely that the compilers would mess up the optimisations with AMD.

T: So in the end it's either AMD running slower, or AMD being more prone to core crash (segmentation fault), resulting in no one using AMD (in our enterprise).

 

[humbug]

@voidshatter you work at Baidu? hows those AMD EPYC CPU's working for you?

 

[voidshatter]

@voidshatter you work at Baidu? hows those AMD EPYC CPU's working for you?

No I don't. My friend T used to work in Baidu. I mentioned the recent deployment of AMD to him, and his reply was already posted earlier. It appears that his colleague regrets deploying AMD CPUs.

Don't get me wrong - I totally support AMD to make great CPUs. Ryzen is surely something novel and forces Intel to react. His point is that now AMD has the hardware, it is still a challenge for AMD to get all the software support (debug and optimisation).

 

[humbug]

No I don't. My friend T used to work in Baidu. I mentioned the recent deployment of AMD to him, and his reply was already posted earlier. It appears that his college regrets deploying AMD CPUs.

Read it thanks.

I think Baidu are more intelligent than you and your friend 'who you say' worked at Baidu imply, more intelligent than to fall for a "sales pitch"

Even i know Baidu have been in partnership with AMD developing the platform for long before the announcement, even then it was actually known about this time last year.

For you to suggest it was a sales pitch which an employee blindly feel for just doesn't wash, its a nonsense. companies do not get to the size of Baidu by falling for sales pitches, AMD are a partner not a simple supplier

 

[voidshatter]

Read it thanks.

I think Baidu are more intelligent than you and your friend who you say worked at Baidu imply there, more intelligent than to fall for a "sales pitch"

Even i know Baidu have been in partnership with AMD developing the platform for long before the announcement, even then it was actually known about this time last year.

For you to suggest it was a sales pitch which an employee blindly feel for just doesn't wash, its a nonsense. companies do not get to the size of Baidu by falling for sales pitches, AMD are a partner not a simple supplier

My friend and his colleague are obviously not those fancy presidents of Baidu. They work at lower levels and sort out the technical issues. My guess is that they do know more about these lower-level technical issues than the presidents of Baidu do. Sometimes neither tech0 nor dev0 know every detail for these dirty work.

Of course, it's also valid to say Baidu's higher level decision to deploy AMD could be an excellent strategy. Competition is a good thing isn't it?

 

[Journey]

Yep, this is a weird one because it does use 8 cores yet a dual core is beating ryzen.
Either this exposes a weakness in ryzen or is plain broken.

You missed the third option, in typical game developer fashion they don't care because they'll sell many more copies at a much higher price on the consoles, and rake in more profit, who cares if it's not as efficient on some systems as others, the port is done (you've said it's beta but finished) and they can now move along to the next dev project.

Back in reality though, it's one game and most sensible people don't change a whole PC over for one game, you have other reasons, granted, but people expecting miracles from new systems will mostly always be disappointed.

 

[humbug]

Yep, this is a weird one because it does use 8 cores yet a dual core is beating ryzen.
Either this exposes a weakness in ryzen or is plain broken.

Thats far too simplistic. neither...

There is a difference between using an 8 core and needing an 8 core, if the game isn't demanding enough a Socket 478 Pentium 4 HT will keep pace with a 5Ghz 7700K even if the game can make use of 32 cores, that doesn't mean there is something wrong with the 7700K, it just means the game doesn't need that kind of power.

However in this case as CAT pointed out an i3 can just about keep pace with an i7 while Ryzen is 'apparently' struggling to keep pace with both, what that tells us is this game is in fact bottlenecked by low threading, its not making use of the extra threads the i7 or Ryzen have....

Yet even that is still far too simplistic.

The fact of the matter is all this says about Ryzen is that its different to Intel, if you look at extensive game benchmarking what you find is that Ryzen appears to have much higher IPC vs any Intel is some games and much lower IPC in others, of course, hey are both equally capable CPU's, there just not the same CPU's.

PS: this perfectly illustrates how a game can benefit one CPU in one moment and be completely bottlenecked by it in the next.

Its an Intel Win... of course right? higher clocks. apparently higher IPC...

But wait... the next moment its a massive AMD win, almost twice as fast, of course Ryzen 5 has more threads but is it reall two times the CPU the i5 is? It is not twice as fast as the the i5 so how do you suppose it can thrash the i5 like this?

Different CPU's behaving differently when different demands are placed on it, with it you can make Intel or AMD look like the winner. the truth is in another scene of Destiny 2 Ryzen could just as easily make Intel CPU's look like there is something wrong with them. certainly if you look only at the second image here you'd think something was wrong with the Intel CPU there, right?

Intel win...

Massive AMD Win

Ryzen is every bit as capable in games as Intel, it just isn't an Intel clone.
Don't get so hung up on bar chart slides, they are utterly meaningless, worse with some vendors having a history of paying for a desired narrative they can be used to push a false agenda.

https://youtu.be/4RMbYe4X2LI?t=5m

 

[Deleted member 66701]

It is more extensive yes, I just preferred the GN review as they show testing methods etc. And include a video for the lazy people like me.
Hardware unboxed/tech spot did a small CPU test

Its a crazy world when someone thinks 136fps on a new game out is "poor performance".

Destiny 2 on threadripper @ 3440x1440 is working great for me though

 

[SiDeards73]

Its a crazy world when someone thinks 136fps on a new game out is "poor performance".

Destiny 2 on threadripper @ 3440x1440 is working great for me though

This is so true, its a lot of posturing and nonsense most of the time.

Many people now are using Variable sync monitors like G-Sync / Freesync, and if so often cap the fps to keep within sync ranges (Freesync).

Then you have the people who just *Have* to buy something like a 1080ti and put it on their 1080p 60hz screen, yes there are actually a lot more people that do this than most realise, and end up having to use Vsync etc

Lets be honest, i run a 144hz screen, its Freesync, with a 1070 on it, im going to Vega because i want to utilise Freesync again, i will cap the fps at 143 anyhow, and as long as the fps does not dip below 45fps or whatever the lower freesync range is, i couldnt give a monkeys if its 50, 60, or 140 constant fps.

As many people say, lows and averages are more important nowadays than highs when it comes to fps, id rather something that keeps move over the minimum freesync range than something that goes well over the maximum but can often dip below.

 

[AllBodies]

Its a crazy world when someone thinks 136fps on a new game out is "poor performance".

Destiny 2 on threadripper @ 3440x1440 is working great for me though

And just think, that's with clearly no optimisation as not even SMT works!

Remembering as well that AMD's SMT gives a larger gain than Intel's.

 

[gavinh87]

Its a crazy world when someone thinks 136fps on a new game out is "poor performance".

Destiny 2 on threadripper @ 3440x1440 is working great for me though

I have said I am in the minority here

 

[gavinh87]

Thats far too simplistic. neither...

There is a difference between using an 8 core and needing an 8 core, if the game isn't demanding enough a Socket 478 Pentium 4 HT will keep pace with a 5Ghz 7700K even if the game can make use of 32 cores, that doesn't mean there is something wrong with the 7700K, it just means the game doesn't need that kind of power.

However in this case as CAT pointed out an i3 can just about keep pace with an i7 while Ryzen is 'apparently' struggling to keep pace with both, what that tells us is this game is in fact bottlenecked by low threading, its not making use of the extra threads the i7 or Ryzen have....

Yet even that is still far too simplistic.

The fact of the matter is all this says about Ryzen is that its different to Intel, if you look at extensive game benchmarking what you find is that Ryzen appears to have much higher IPC vs any Intel is some games and much lower IPC in others, of course, hey are both equally capable CPU's, there just not the same CPU's.

PS: this perfectly illustrates how a game can benefit one CPU in one moment and be completely bottlenecked by it in the next.

Its an Intel Win... of course right? higher clocks. apparently higher IPC...

But wait... the next moment its a massive AMD win, almost twice as fast, of course Ryzen 5 has more threads but is it reall two times the CPU the i5 is? It is not twice as fast as the the i5 so how do you suppose it can thrash the i5 like this?

Different CPU's behaving differently when different demands are placed on it, with it you can make Intel or AMD look like the winner. the truth is in another scene of Destiny 2 Ryzen could just as easily make Intel CPU's look like there is something wrong with them. certainly if you look only at the second image here you'd think something was wrong with the Intel CPU there, right?

Intel win...

Massive AMD Win

Ryzen is every bit as capable in games as Intel, it just isn't an Intel clone.
Don't get so hung up on bar chart slides, they are utterly meaningless, worse with some vendors having a history of paying for a desired narrative they can be used to push a false agenda.

https://youtu.be/4RMbYe4X2LI?t=5m

I'm thinking this is a case of a game needed more cores in this instance. Yes the 1600 beats the i5 in heavier scenes but that doesn't happen with the i7 Vs the ryzen 1700.

 

[illuz]

I think you should have blurred out the face of your friend potentially in those screenshots. Hes from China, right?... Just thinking of your friends job security here.

 

[Doobedoo]

I think that's supposed to be a 14yo him rather than his mate. To be taken with a pinch of salt imo.

 

[~>Dg<~]

I'm thinking this is a case of a game needed more cores in this instance. Yes the 1600 beats the i5 in heavier scenes but that doesn't happen with the i7 Vs the ryzen 1700.

if thats the case why does the 7900x destroy the top threadripper chip in crysis 3 benchmarks ?
even the lower chips clocked do.

 

[humbug]

I'm thinking this is a case of a game needed more cores in this instance. Yes the 1600 beats the i5 in heavier scenes but that doesn't happen with the i7 Vs the ryzen 1700.

Um... well its certainly nothing like as pronounced but the 7700K can still fall behind even the Ryzen 1600X let alone the 1700.

What that means is the 7700K @ 4.8Ghz is in these instances bottlenecking the GPU more than the 4Ghz 1600X, when push comes to shove the 1600X has more grunt, no getting away from that.

And look at the light blue 7700K line, its all over the place compared with the smooth lines on the AMD chips.

https://youtu.be/2_fAzBB_oAQ?t=8m47s

 

[gavinh87]

if thats the case why does the 7900x destroy the top threadripper chip in crysis 3 benchmarks ?
even the lower chips clocked do.

I should have explained it better. Yes the 1600 beats the i5, I think this is due to having 4 threads.
When you give that 4 core hyperthreading as is the i7, then the opposite happens even beating out ryzens 8c 16t.

I've been saying for ages quads are no longer enough. But even when games can use those cores it still comes down to IPC

Games that have been patched for ryzen such as AoTS still lose out.

Instances where ryzen does do better with things such as frame times etc will be eliminated with coffee.

 

[Journey]

Gotta love those super consistent Ryzen frame times, compared to the Intel bar graph, no wonder people say Ryzen is a smoother experience.

 

[gavinh87]

Gotta love those super consistent Ryzen frame times, compared to the Intel bar graph, no wonder people say Ryzen is a smoother experience.

I can certainly say that ryzen is a lot smoother than my 4770.

 

[humbug]

@gavinh87 read above you, even the 1600X @ 4Ghz is beating out the 4.8Ghz 7700K in those heavy scenes, all be it not much it is there.