What? For this moment in time, it's exactly what we need. It provides genuine competition in the CPU space, which is good for all of us. And all you can do is whine about it for not exactly living up to your expectations? First world problems on steroids.
-
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.
Zen 2 7 nm, does it do enough ?
- Thread starter cosmogenesis
- Start date
What? For this moment in time, it's exactly what we need. It provides genuine competition in the CPU space, which is good for all of us. And all you can do is whine about it for not exactly living up to your expectations? First world problems on steroids.
Associate
- Joined
- 27 Apr 2007
- Posts
- 967
The Brexit mess still hasn't been resolved and Zen 2 has been out for 3 days so I consider the release a total failure.
Or were you actually asking a serious question?
Or were you actually asking a serious question?
It will take Intel another three iterations of Skylake to match AMD in IPC.
Given the tiny progression had up to now? Yeah.
Munson'd didn't get the recognition it deserves
Associate
- Joined
- 12 Nov 2018
- Posts
- 68
I am currently deciding between intel and AMD, trying to optimise my decision for gaming. Not that I don’t do anything else on my pc but I don’t really mind if unzipping is +/- 30% faster, whereas cpu limited gaming (not that last gen amd/Intel would be limiting now but in 2 years who knows) can be a bummer with stuttering.
I was really looking forward the zen 2 launch, looking at 3700x and 3800x but for me, as of now, it looks like the 9700k has a better value in terms of gaming performances. I get that it doesn’t have HT but is it that’s big a deal ? I have always had i5 and I never really saw the need for it looking at game benchmarks. Is it something games will definitely use in the futur?
It also looks like there is gonna be interesting promo covering the i7 and i9 with the 9900k currently at £450. I really want to do the switch to AMD but I feel like a need to be more convinced so my questions is: is there things that I am missing in my description, looking for a long term performance, that makes it more sensible to go for amd?
I was really looking forward the zen 2 launch, looking at 3700x and 3800x but for me, as of now, it looks like the 9700k has a better value in terms of gaming performances. I get that it doesn’t have HT but is it that’s big a deal ? I have always had i5 and I never really saw the need for it looking at game benchmarks. Is it something games will definitely use in the futur?
It also looks like there is gonna be interesting promo covering the i7 and i9 with the 9900k currently at £450. I really want to do the switch to AMD but I feel like a need to be more convinced so my questions is: is there things that I am missing in my description, looking for a long term performance, that makes it more sensible to go for amd?
HT isn't expressly needed on the higher core count CPU's, I'd say 6core and up CPU's will be fine for a years especially the higher clocked ones! HT only adds about 15-20% on average, slightly more on AMD than Intel last time I looked, but with all the CPU vulnerabilities affecting Intel it is, I think, definitely better to get a CPU without HT as more of the vulnerabilities can be mitigated by switching it off - or not having it in the first place in CPU's like the 9700k.
The only think I would look at is for online/member reviews of the 9700k with all the mitigations turned ON, I don't know what % performance reduction you are talking about but I do now it's big with the HT enabled CPU's. Also keep in mind that you don't know what else(CPU vulnerabilities) are coming next(if any), that can affect both AMD and Intel but going on what has been seen so far Intel is vulnerable to way more than AMD - AMD just built their CPU architecture more resilient than Intel.
The only other thing I can think of is Ryzen 3K has only just been released and judging by all the comments things are a bit rough around the edges. AMD will, in time, get things sorted, but any increases in CPU performance will be relatively small.
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 13,125
- Location
- The Orion Spur
Really I don't get statements like these, @ 1440p chips like the I5 9400f are very good value for money for 'gaming'.
True, I also love MG42s! Best LMG ever made.
Unless you are purely focussed on gaming the 2600 has generally been available for the same money or less - it is currently slightly cheaper - and is in the same ballpark for gaming and quite a bit faster at most productivity tasks. But mainly I think having only 6 cores on an i5 and 4 on the i3s and in most cases not even HT in ridiculous in 2019.
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 13,125
- Location
- The Orion Spur
Focused productivity I agree, but tbh for gaming and general office based systems they've not needed to go down the 'more cores' route, I use my PC for gaming and basic office tasks, I'm not going to AMD anytime soon, intel has been far more stable imo, you just drop the chips in and they work, I don't have to think about bios updates, instabilities, correct VRM's etc, and like I said, outside of high end productivity they are still faster.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 12 Nov 2018
- Posts
- 68
I quite agree with that but also , as the number of amd consumers increase, I’m confident the experience will get smoother and the instabilities vanish. That’s the price to pay for a novel architecture.
But even the second generation based 3400g APU significantly outperforms the 9400f at those tasks whilst being cheaper and including an IGP and a better cooler. And if you are gaming with a discrete card, picking a cheap 2 series CPU (with an upgrade path) or a 3600 for 40 quid more would last you comparatively ever and massively outperforms the 9400f in everything.
The i5's dont make sense currently, and anything but the top and newest versions of the i7 and i9's seem debatable depending on workload.
For a first stab at a CPU process and packaging technology, it ain't half bad. Shame there isn't a revision on the roadmap like they did with Zen+... Intel have said they expected a clock regression with 10nm since the early days of that node (2015? 
), seems to be the nature of very small semiconductors. Zen 2 will undoubtedly age far better than Intel monolithic chips, being able to drop a 12 core chip in a half decent board a couple years down the line is something to behold.
), seems to be the nature of very small semiconductors. Zen 2 will undoubtedly age far better than Intel monolithic chips, being able to drop a 12 core chip in a half decent board a couple years down the line is something to behold.
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 13,125
- Location
- The Orion Spur
The 3400g significantly outperforms the 9400f in gaming? I don't believe that, the 9400f outperforms the 2600 in games, and even 2600x in some games.
Last edited:
With the 2600 I've had none of those problems - while I won't buy AMD for myself I've bought and/or built half a dozen maybe a dozen 2600 systems for people and so far it has been plug and play - even XMP working with 2 clicks! not the experience with the 1600, 1700 and 1800 though - IIRC I had to RMA 2x 1700 just because they didn't work right like some kind of manufacturing defect and some fun and games with BIOS updates never mind getting XMP working.
But I just can't take the current config i3 and i5 seriously in 2019.
- Joined
- 15 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 3,717
Not moaning at all, just asking people’s thoughts. At 7nm I was expecting a bit more, after all if intel was 7nm you’d expect it to be faster than its current fastest ?
Associate
- Joined
- 21 Sep 2018
- Posts
- 895
That's the price to pay in making the processor more secure. Making sure all the security holes are patched before it is even made available to the consumer. The vulnerabilities may have not affected us gamers, it certainly created havoc to a number of companies.