4 ms·
This may be an oversimplification. There is more to it than just megahertz or gigahertz. The most important metric in this case is work done per clock, on aver
by jaytaylor 7y ago
This may be an oversimplification. There is more to it than just megahertz or gigahertz. The most important metric in this case is work done per clock, on average.
- vbezhenar 7y agoI don't believe that AMD made better architecture than Intel in regards to performance. They might be similar, but definitely not 10% better. So in the end it comes to frequency (and core count for niche tasks).
- abdulmuhaimin 7y agojust based on the previous gen benchmark, the perfomance/clock of Zen+ cpu is better htan intel offering. What makes you say it isnt so?
- vbezhenar 7y agohttps://www.anandtech.com/show/13400/intel-9th-gen-core-i9-9900k-i7-9700k-i5-9600k-review/7 https://www.anandtech.com/show/13400/intel-9th-gen-core-i9-9... this page compares 9900K and 2700X. 9900K should work at 4700 MHz with all cores loaded. 2700x should work at 4300 MHz. So the difference is roughly 10%. And Intel in most benchmarks scores more than 10%.
- the_why_of_y 7y agoThose benchmarks were done 3 or 4 Meltdown microcode mitigations ago... the problem with Intel CPUs is, they become slower the longer they're exposed to security researchers.
- vbezhenar 7y agoNot everybody uses those mitigations.
- skummetmaelk 7y agoIt's like 10 years ago when all hardware shops were advertising the size of their PCs harddrives as if that made them faster.