3 ms·
I don't think the situations are as few as you report. The heat/consumptions and single-core speed aspects are not negligible. In addition (although this is d
by pizza234 9y ago
I don't think the situations are as few as you report.
The heat/consumptions and single-core speed aspects are not negligible.
In addition (although this is definitely something for a minority of users), I suffered blocking VFIO scheduling issues with AMD (A10) while I didn't with Intel. Even Ryzen seems to be immature for VFIO (but I didn't personally test this).
- gcp 9y agoDoesn't Ryzen have better power efficiency compared to these new Coffee Lake's? The issue is a bit muddled because sites are (for some weird reason?) ignoring the most common Ryzen SKU, which is 65W (R7 1700).
- bilbo0s 9y agoBut the Ryzens being compared... consume quite a bit more power than the intel parts they are being compared against. That said, yes, if power consumption is no item, the Ryzens look better. If you are looking for power efficiency, go with the intel parts.
- gcp 9y agoNo, no, not at all! That's exactly what I was pointing at: most reviews are using the most power hungry Ryzen SKUs (95W), so of course it looks bad in comparison. Meanwhile, the price/perf leader and most sold Ryzen SKU is only 65W. This one is ahead of Intel in power efficiency.
- uep 9y agoI've noticed this as well. It seems outright bizarre that many benchmarks have been leaving out the 1700, when anecdotally, it seems to be the Ryzen that people are buying. It also seems to be the price/performance/wattage sweet spot for Ryzen, since it has low wattage, and also comes bundled with a cooler.