• 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.

Uses where AMD or Intel fail?

Orange Nexus said:
This comparison would still be based on Ryzen 1 and 1+ and intels 14+++. May have to revisit once the 7nm come out.
Click to expand...
This is true. You would hope that AMD will close the performance gap on things like Photoshop with Ryzen 3. Perhaps DAW latency with also be improved with the new chipset and Windows scheduler. We will have to wait for benchmarks. In which case it will just be the fringe cases remaining which rely on specific silicon / CPU features.
 
IT Troll said:
This is true. You would hope that AMD will close the performance gap on things like Photoshop with Ryzen 3. Perhaps DAW latency with also be improved with the new chipset and Windows scheduler. We will have to wait for benchmarks. In which case it will just be the fringe cases remaining which rely on specific silicon / CPU features.
Click to expand...

Afaik, AMD has already tighten the gap based on the number of agesa since that chart was made coupled with the amount of mitigations intel have had so far.

Use case will dictate which is a fail. One uarch is improving, while the other regressing.
 
IT Troll said:
Premiere Pro encoding is faster on Intel - mostly because it makes use of the iGPU.
Click to expand...

It's massively faster on HEDT too. Almost 2:1.

Reason being that it scales very poorly beyond 4 cores (but does benefit a lot from cache), uses an ancient version of Intel's compiler, the MS scheduler seems to particularly punish AMD here too, and up until now Intel have had the IPC lead in poorly threaded task (looks like they definitively lost it - certainly on anything above 1 core).

Premiere is an absolute dog. It barely functions. Davinci Resolve, which has much better workflow, more features (including on the vital colour work and grading), much better UI, is literally 2-3x faster depending on task on Intel, and up to 6x faster depending on task on AMD (particularly the Linux version). Davinci scales with however many cores you have, too.

Nobody but nobody should be using Premiere anymore. It's a legacy product which fails to function or perform in an even remotely acceptable manner.

There are a lot of badly optimised Adobe products with ancient, unupdated code bases ... but of widely used still extant ones, Premiere takes the biscuit.
 
Last edited:
IT Troll said:
This is true. You would hope that AMD will close the performance gap on things like Photoshop with Ryzen 3. Perhaps DAW latency with also be improved with the new chipset and Windows scheduler. We will have to wait for benchmarks. In which case it will just be the fringe cases remaining which rely on specific silicon / CPU features.
Click to expand...

The only way Adobe are going to update their code bases is if Apple move to AMD, and that won't happen. Because the US market demands an Intel sticker, and that's by far Apple's largest market.
 
Plex media server. The lack of igpu on Ryzen high end processors means that an Intel UHD 630 found on a i5/i7 is a much better bet for transcoding. I've got two 2700X and a 9700K system and the Intel is much more power efficient for Plex duties.
 
If you want to build a hackintosh then you have to go with an Intel CPU. Conversely you then need an AMD GPU.
 
something that I have wondered about a lot is:

I like to play Total war Warhammer 2 mortal empires - when your empires and regions increase into the game (say 50 to 100 turns), the turn times can be several minutes. I tested a cloud saved game on my FX8350 8 core = 3.5 mins and on my Athlon X4 880k = 5 mins. I imagine that an AMD cpu would be faster than a comparative Intel one here (say for £260 2700x vs I5-8600k). I don't suppose there is anyone with comparable AMD and INTEL systems who could do a test?
 
smilingcrow said:
LMAO.
The irony being that AMD's whole chip business is dependent on a license that they got to use Intel's IP because IBM wanted a 2nd source of chips.
Intel have many failings but that is not one. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

LMAO.
The irony being that Intel's whole chip business is dependent on a license that they got to use AMD64. :rolleyes:

Anyway, I agree that Intel are capable of Innovation but only when it suits them. In their ideal world, they would still be mass producing 2 and 4 core CPUs with 6 cores for enthusiasts. AMD ruined all that for Intel.
 
Last edited:
CuriousTomCat said:
The irony being that Intel's whole chip business is dependent on a license that they got to use AMD64.
Click to expand...
Which is completely dependent on the underlying x64 architecture which Intel innovated. It's merely a small but elegant addition to Intel's ISA.
I laugh when people tell me how innovative AMD are as they still released crap for a decade. It's good to see that AMD's latest innovation is to finally release a decent CPU again.
I can get behind that sort of innovation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom