5 ms·

On another hand, in the cpu space, I went to top of the line Intel CPU overheating and throttling, to 8 core Ryzen, doing 45 celsius at 100 percent load and alm

On another hand, in the cpu space, I went to top of the line Intel CPU overheating and throttling, to 8 core Ryzen, doing 45 celsius at 100 percent load and almost 4ghz across 8 cores. Stuff like Intel unable to perform below 80 degrees on 4 cores, makes people switch with ease.

paulmd 9y ago
> I went to top of the line Intel CPU overheating and throttling Frankly I've never heard of a 6950X overheating and throttling, the lid is soldered on those processors. Sounds like a personal problem.
- quickben 9y ago
  I wasn't taking about the lid. The raw thermal output is different under a full non-transient load. Why the cynism?
  - paulmd 9y ago
    Real-world power consumption between the 6950X and the 1800X aren't supposed to be terribly different either. What did you measure before and after? https://www.bit-tech.net/reviews/tech/amd-ryzen-1800x-and-am4-platform-review/8/ https://www.bit-tech.net/reviews/tech/amd-ryzen-1800x-and-am... https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Processors/AMD-Ryzen-7-1800X-Review-Now-and-Zen/Power-Consumption-and-Conclusions https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Processors/AMD-Ryzen-7-1800X-R... > Why the cynism? Because in performance and efficiency Ryzen is basically equivalent with Haswell-E/Broadwell-E. The sole advantage it has is that the 8C Ryzens are cheaper than the 8C and 10C Intel SKUs (the 6C have been competitive for a long time), and the tradeoff is you are moving to a much more immature platform. Claims like "oh my Ryzen was so much cooler than my 6950X" set off my bullshit detector real hard because that's not what the people who are actually measuring things are saying. They usually end up being made on the basis of the TDP figures, which AMD's marketing department has massaged significantly downwards from their actual measurements. Ryzen is basically on par with Haswell, it's not the second coming of Jesus unless you've been in a coma since Bulldozer was released.
    - quickben 9y ago
      http://www.anandtech.com/show/9959/samsung-announces-14lpp-mass-production http://www.anandtech.com/show/9959/samsung-announces-14lpp-m... https://semiaccurate.com/2016/09/01/intel-finally-narrows-14nm-process-technology-gap-samsung/ https://semiaccurate.com/2016/09/01/intel-finally-narrows-14...
      - paulmd 9y ago
        I think you might have forgotten to type a post to go with those links. Later iterations of Ryzen are undoubtedly going to fix some of the teething issues (segfaults, memory clocks, etc), and probably get the clocks up too. But they will also be going up against Coffee Lake and others - Intel can iterate on their products too. Consumer Ryzen is basically just Haswell with an AMD sticker on it, and it's just so transparently fake to see all the fanboys cooing over a product they wouldn't even give the time of day to when it was released under an Intel badge. It's an incremental improvement on pricing, but not really that drastic except in a few special cases (the 8C and 10C Intel processors had very steep pricing). As it's on a newer stepping with a better platform and fully-validated ECC support, Epyc is much more interesting product to me. But it's also a market that doesn't care about throwing money at the problem if that's what it takes to get performance/stability - there are plenty of companies who are not even using COTS hardware let alone off-brand. Also, bear in mind that "nm" measurements are pure marketing. It's now the spacing between features that determines total density, not feature size. Intel is at least a full node ahead of everyone else in density, even if others claim to have "14nm" nodes.
        deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
  - temac 9y ago
    If you change the thermal resistance, you can very well overheat or not with the same constant TDP.
BoorishBears 9y ago
The top of the line Intel CPU comparable to an 8 core Ryzen CPU is probably the 7700k, which has a higher absolute power draw "ceiling", but also has better performance and higher clocks to match. I think Intel's value based on performance isn't good compared to Ryzen, but the product isn't inherently flawed, and that combined with AMD's shaky history is enough to keep myself, and lots of people I know from switching. (Right now stories of RMAs for the Risen GCC crash bug taking ages are popping up)
- quickben 9y ago
  7700k is an awesome CPU. I just prefer 4 more cores at the $400 mark price, and was willing to risk it :)
- sliken 9y ago
  7700k seems kinda overpriced. Why not pay $40 more for the i7-7800X and get 50% more cores and double the memory bandwidth/channels?
  - BoorishBears 9y ago
    Plenty of reasons: Higher base clock on the 7700k, biggest reason for entertainment alongside: Higher OC potential (back in the 4790k days 5Ghz on air was something else, for the 7700k not getting 5Ghz is considered "losing the silicon lottery") Cheapest 7800X motherboard is 100$ more than cheapest 7700k motherboards (which are still quite good) because X299 is a HEDT platform Most entertainment machines won't benefit from quad channel over dual channel in a meaningful way. The 7700k is generally regarded as the fastest gaming CPU available, that's why so many benchmarks use it. I'm pretty sure AMD used it to showcase Vega because even if it becomes a bottleneck, no other CPU on the market can be "less of a bottneck" And I'll add, this is all with my entertainment/gaming hat on. For a dev machine where I'd expect to work with compiled languages or compiling OSes I'd definitely go with more cores.

paulmd 9y ago

> I went to top of the line Intel CPU overheating and throttling Frankly I've never heard of a 6950X overheating and throttling, the lid is soldered on those processors. Sounds like a personal problem.

quickben 9y ago
I wasn't taking about the lid. The raw thermal output is different under a full non-transient load. Why the cynism?
- paulmd 9y ago
  Real-world power consumption between the 6950X and the 1800X aren't supposed to be terribly different either. What did you measure before and after? https://www.bit-tech.net/reviews/tech/amd-ryzen-1800x-and-am4-platform-review/8/ https://www.bit-tech.net/reviews/tech/amd-ryzen-1800x-and-am... https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Processors/AMD-Ryzen-7-1800X-Review-Now-and-Zen/Power-Consumption-and-Conclusions https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Processors/AMD-Ryzen-7-1800X-R... > Why the cynism? Because in performance and efficiency Ryzen is basically equivalent with Haswell-E/Broadwell-E. The sole advantage it has is that the 8C Ryzens are cheaper than the 8C and 10C Intel SKUs (the 6C have been competitive for a long time), and the tradeoff is you are moving to a much more immature platform. Claims like "oh my Ryzen was so much cooler than my 6950X" set off my bullshit detector real hard because that's not what the people who are actually measuring things are saying. They usually end up being made on the basis of the TDP figures, which AMD's marketing department has massaged significantly downwards from their actual measurements. Ryzen is basically on par with Haswell, it's not the second coming of Jesus unless you've been in a coma since Bulldozer was released.
  - quickben 9y ago
    http://www.anandtech.com/show/9959/samsung-announces-14lpp-mass-production http://www.anandtech.com/show/9959/samsung-announces-14lpp-m... https://semiaccurate.com/2016/09/01/intel-finally-narrows-14nm-process-technology-gap-samsung/ https://semiaccurate.com/2016/09/01/intel-finally-narrows-14...
    - paulmd 9y ago
      I think you might have forgotten to type a post to go with those links. Later iterations of Ryzen are undoubtedly going to fix some of the teething issues (segfaults, memory clocks, etc), and probably get the clocks up too. But they will also be going up against Coffee Lake and others - Intel can iterate on their products too. Consumer Ryzen is basically just Haswell with an AMD sticker on it, and it's just so transparently fake to see all the fanboys cooing over a product they wouldn't even give the time of day to when it was released under an Intel badge. It's an incremental improvement on pricing, but not really that drastic except in a few special cases (the 8C and 10C Intel processors had very steep pricing). As it's on a newer stepping with a better platform and fully-validated ECC support, Epyc is much more interesting product to me. But it's also a market that doesn't care about throwing money at the problem if that's what it takes to get performance/stability - there are plenty of companies who are not even using COTS hardware let alone off-brand. Also, bear in mind that "nm" measurements are pure marketing. It's now the spacing between features that determines total density, not feature size. Intel is at least a full node ahead of everyone else in density, even if others claim to have "14nm" nodes.
      - deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
- temac 9y ago
  If you change the thermal resistance, you can very well overheat or not with the same constant TDP.

BoorishBears 9y ago

The top of the line Intel CPU comparable to an 8 core Ryzen CPU is probably the 7700k, which has a higher absolute power draw "ceiling", but also has better performance and higher clocks to match. I think Intel's value based on performance isn't good compared to Ryzen, but the product isn't inherently flawed, and that combined with AMD's shaky history is enough to keep myself, and lots of people I know from switching. (Right now stories of RMAs for the Risen GCC crash bug taking ages are popping up)

quickben 9y ago
7700k is an awesome CPU. I just prefer 4 more cores at the $400 mark price, and was willing to risk it :)
sliken 9y ago
7700k seems kinda overpriced. Why not pay $40 more for the i7-7800X and get 50% more cores and double the memory bandwidth/channels?
- BoorishBears 9y ago
  Plenty of reasons: Higher base clock on the 7700k, biggest reason for entertainment alongside: Higher OC potential (back in the 4790k days 5Ghz on air was something else, for the 7700k not getting 5Ghz is considered "losing the silicon lottery") Cheapest 7800X motherboard is 100$ more than cheapest 7700k motherboards (which are still quite good) because X299 is a HEDT platform Most entertainment machines won't benefit from quad channel over dual channel in a meaningful way. The 7700k is generally regarded as the fastest gaming CPU available, that's why so many benchmarks use it. I'm pretty sure AMD used it to showcase Vega because even if it becomes a bottleneck, no other CPU on the market can be "less of a bottneck" And I'll add, this is all with my entertainment/gaming hat on. For a dev machine where I'd expect to work with compiled languages or compiling OSes I'd definitely go with more cores.