4 ms·
Biggest surprise seems to be the 65W 8/16 3700X. Hopefully that means a bit of overclocking headroom.
by loser777 7y ago
Biggest surprise seems to be the 65W 8/16 3700X. Hopefully that means a bit of overclocking headroom.
- DuskStar 7y agoConsidering that the 105W 8/16 3800X only gains 300MHz base and 100MHz turbo for the extra 40W, I'm not sure that's the case. Still almost certainly what I'll be replacing my 4790k with though
- SketchySeaBeast 7y agoYeah, I think this might finally be the reason to replace my old Haswell.
- tracker1 7y agoGoing to wait a couple more months to see if 16c 39xx shows up, or a new Threadripper... also on a 4790k.
- XMPPwocky 7y agoThis might just be a case of TDPs being essentially arbitrary. The 9900K is allegedly a 95W part, but even a moderate all-core OC means you have powers in the 200W and up range. AMD might have just jumped on the same bandwagon.
- IanCutress 7y agoAMD's TDPs are calculated at all-core turbo. Intel's are only valid for base frequency.
- XMPPwocky 7y agoAh, so AMD doesn't have cheesy numbers- good to know.
- effie 7y agoNot entirely true, some AMD processors too can draw more power than the TDP value would suggest, due to XFR.
- nolok 7y agoAgreed but the effect is much more limited. If you compare manufacturer TDP against each other, it can only go even more in AMD's favor in real world scenario. Not very surprising even only from the manufacturing process used difference though, since Intel's next desktop generation is still 14nm it won't be changing soon.