3 ms·

Intel did a really shitty job marketing these (maybe the i9 name will help). They are hardly known even amount enthusiasts but they are really good processors

by paulmd 10y ago

Intel did a really shitty job marketing these (maybe the i9 name will help). They are hardly known even amount enthusiasts but they are really good processors for the exact same reasons that people like Ryzen. A moderate tradeoff in gaming for a big gain in productivity tasks. They are even priced essentially the same as the 4C8T i7s. I basically had Ryzen performance at Ryzen prices a year ago when I built my 5820K system. Motherboard, processor, and 32 GB of DDR4-3000 CAS15 cost me $600 all together. I hit 4.13 GHz all-core on stock voltage and still run well under the rated TDP. Ryzen was an incremental improvement at best. 8 core Ryzen is slightly faster (being that it has 33% more cores) but I'm still winning vs the 6-cores. The real change Intel needs to make is dropping the cost of the 8-core and higher chips, because they're just past any reasonable budget.

013a 10y ago
The 5820K was an amazing processor. I have one as well. Its coming up on two years old, yet for $390 (at release) its only ~10-20% slower than a brand new $490 Ryzen 1800x, and much of that drop can be attributed to two fewer cores. You're right on all counts. Ryzen was vastly overhyped. Its highly likely Cannonlake and KabyLake-X will destroy it when they are released in a couple months. The world needed Ryzen to push Intel to lower prices on their high end chips. But, like most of the times when AMD "pushes ahead", Intel will beat them within a year, and hold that position for another 4 years. And then the cycle repeats. I don't know how much longer AMD can keep this up. It seems like they're being propped up by their dominance in console tech.
dis-sys 10y ago
Without the so called incremental improvement offered by Ryzen 7, there is no motivation for Intel to drop its prices on 8 cores chips. Intel now has to answer the challenges both on the 8c16t category and 16c32t as well.
- paulmd 10y ago
  I suspect the answer to the 8C16T category is going to be "Skylake-X". Intel is still sitting on a ~10% lead in per-core performance in real-world applications, and Broadwell-E is handicapped in a number of ways. Skylake-X is going to be a huge step forward. I think the 6C Skylake-X chips are going to come real close to the 8C Ryzen 7s (let's call it within 5-10%). And that leaves the 8C Intel chips with a pretty solid lead. (Synthetics like Cinebench are definitely tilting AMD - but I don't see a corresponding lead in real-world applications, on a core-for-core basis) If Intel can maintain premium performance, they can also maintain premium pricing. No question the race is on, though. Next year is gonna be interesting, when both companies have sized up the other and fully prepared their responses. There's some obvious fixes for AMD (like the interconnect, or just getting memory stability fixed), and Intel could do something like put the L4 eDRAM back on their dies to get minimum framerates up[0]. [0] http://techreport.com/review/28751/intel-core-i7-6700k-skylake-processor-reviewed/6 http://techreport.com/review/28751/intel-core-i7-6700k-skyla...

by paulmd 10y ago

013a 10y ago

The 5820K was an amazing processor. I have one as well. Its coming up on two years old, yet for $390 (at release) its only ~10-20% slower than a brand new $490 Ryzen 1800x, and much of that drop can be attributed to two fewer cores. You're right on all counts. Ryzen was vastly overhyped. Its highly likely Cannonlake and KabyLake-X will destroy it when they are released in a couple months. The world needed Ryzen to push Intel to lower prices on their high end chips. But, like most of the times when AMD "pushes ahead", Intel will beat them within a year, and hold that position for another 4 years. And then the cycle repeats. I don't know how much longer AMD can keep this up. It seems like they're being propped up by their dominance in console tech.

dis-sys 10y ago

Without the so called incremental improvement offered by Ryzen 7, there is no motivation for Intel to drop its prices on 8 cores chips. Intel now has to answer the challenges both on the 8c16t category and 16c32t as well.

paulmd 10y ago
I suspect the answer to the 8C16T category is going to be "Skylake-X". Intel is still sitting on a ~10% lead in per-core performance in real-world applications, and Broadwell-E is handicapped in a number of ways. Skylake-X is going to be a huge step forward. I think the 6C Skylake-X chips are going to come real close to the 8C Ryzen 7s (let's call it within 5-10%). And that leaves the 8C Intel chips with a pretty solid lead. (Synthetics like Cinebench are definitely tilting AMD - but I don't see a corresponding lead in real-world applications, on a core-for-core basis) If Intel can maintain premium performance, they can also maintain premium pricing. No question the race is on, though. Next year is gonna be interesting, when both companies have sized up the other and fully prepared their responses. There's some obvious fixes for AMD (like the interconnect, or just getting memory stability fixed), and Intel could do something like put the L4 eDRAM back on their dies to get minimum framerates up[0]. [0] http://techreport.com/review/28751/intel-core-i7-6700k-skylake-processor-reviewed/6 http://techreport.com/review/28751/intel-core-i7-6700k-skyla...