6 ms·
>Yes, Intel is drawing way more power for super CPU intensive tasks, but for what most people will be doing, it's pretty even. This. I honestly don't get why p
by ChuckNorris89 5y ago
>Yes, Intel is drawing way more power for super CPU intensive tasks, but for what most people will be doing, it's pretty even.
This. I honestly don't get why people are so focused suddenly on the power consumption for a desktop CPU designed for enthusiasts who want top performance at any cost.
GPUs are consuming way more power than that(Nvidia's Ampere is a notorious power hog), pushing consumers to 700W+ PSUs and nobody bats an eye, but seem to throw their hands in the air when their CPUs get close to that of a GPU.
Like why? It's the top spec model, it's supposed to be ludicrous, not be good value for money or highly efficient, they have other models more competitive for that. It feels like people are just looking for reasons to to create outrage about a product they're not gonna buy anyway.
- GhettoComputers 5y agoBecause there isn't a proportional performance gain, and the heat generated will degrade the computer, at what cost? A few irrelevant percentage points?
- ChuckNorris89 5y agoIf you're concerned about proportional performance gains, this product isn't for you. So why are you complaining about something you're not gonna buy anyway? Most tech products that are the tip of the spear are bad value for money and less energy efficient than the ones down the range (Nvidia 3090 vs 3080 for example) as they pass the point of diminishing returns of what the design can do and what's cheap and easy to manufacture. But they exist because there is a marke of enthusiasts for whom efficiency or price does not matter, they just want the best performance money can buy because maybe their business use case benefits from the 10% shorter render/compile times at the cost of 50% extra power consumption. Who are you to judge?
- GhettoComputers 5y agoTo feel better about my non Intel purchase by laughing at the performance. If that is true they should be comparing it to the Epyc 7763 or other CPUs that aren't meant to be reasonably priced. No reason a true enthusiast would pick this CPU over Epyc.
- ChuckNorris89 5y ago>To feel better about my non Intel purchase by laughing at the performance. That just sounds childish.
- renewiltord 5y agoIt’s a self deprecating joke, dude. People make these to de-escalate situations safely. I sometimes really wonder at the social skills of people on this website.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- jrir9rjrjjr 5y agoSome people want to read comments that have something interesting to say, not comments making up for lack of real life friends to bs with. If you attention go somewhere else.
- ChuckNorris89 5y ago>It’s a self deprecating joke, dude. Jokes are usually meant to be funny. >I sometimes really wonder at the social skills of people on this website. One's social skills are not defined by comprehension of poor attempts at snarky humor on the internet.
- nawgz 5y ago> they should be comparing it to the Epyc 7763 That's a server chip/line, no? And therefore will have significantly worse per-core performance, one of the most important things for non-embarrassingly-parallel compute tasks? Edit: and after a cursory search, is it not also true that Epyc line is 4-8x higher priced than the 12900k MSRP?
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- alisonkisk 5y ago> maybe their business use case benefits from the 10% shorter render/compile times at the cost of 50% extra power consumption. Much more common is that they want bragging rights.
- porb121 5y agoheat barely degrades consumer pc components, and certainly not on timescales dominated by Moores law.
- GhettoComputers 5y agoYou really believe that? Feel free run your computer after you take off the heatsinks of your computer, removing all the fans, and removing all the heatsink paste if you truly believe heat doesn't degrade pc components. Feel free to post the results.
- porb121 5y agoyou should feel bad for posting such an obviously obtuse comment in bad faith
- GhettoComputers 5y agoI don’t, because you are wrong about heat. Heat matters to everyone. If heat didn’t matter on regular timescales graphics cards would never break and crypto miners wouldn’t care about their hardware getting hot.
- porb121 5y agohow do you explain benchmarks showing no difference between used and new gpu performance? if a card posts its age is not a concern https://youtu.be/44JqNJq-PC0 https://youtu.be/44JqNJq-PC0 https://youtu.be/hKqVvXTanzI https://youtu.be/hKqVvXTanzI
- GhettoComputers 5y agoThe 480 was probably barely used and the mining GPU are used at low power and controlled temperatures. It proves my point. Old doesn’t mean heat abused. Gaming laptops or ones with discrete GPUs often have issues and it’s always because of the GPU. If it posts it doesn’t mean that the GPU won’t die soon or is problem free, gaming laptops have the most heat abuse and are constantly dying and having issues. Performance degradation because it’s old is a different claim from saying heat damage doesn’t exist.
- 24t 5y agoIntel have a rich and storied history of paying for biased and dishonest reviews. You should be thankful that people are willing to fill in the gaps so you hear the full story.
- pipodeclown 5y agoBut we're talking a small lead in many cases, a lot of times a tie, for 30% higher power draw here.
- chmod775 5y ago> I honestly don't get why people are so focused suddenly on the power consumption for a desktop CPU designed for enthusiasts who want top performance at any cost. Because if you up the Power/Current limits on a Ryzen, they will run faster - especially in tests like Cinebench. You won't even have to 'overclock' them. Simply allow them to draw more power if your cooling, motherboard, and PSU can handle it. To make that a fair test the tester would have had to crank those settings up as far as they go, or until they match the Intel processor. If the Intel processor is allowed to draw 250W, the Ryzen should get the same treatment. For example a Ryzen 5900X at ~135W (CPU Package) should score around 8200 in Cinebench r20, and at ~200W it should score around 8900. Since in the test those 200W are apparently for the whole system, it's pretty obvious the tester left those at the stock values.
- BoorishBears 5y agoSo will Intels parts and so will GPUs for that matter. It's still overclocking. PBO will drive a 5950X to something like 310W in some applications.
- chmod775 5y agoOverclocking is running a CPU at higher clock speeds than advertised. If you just change PBO limits, it never goes beyond what AMD knows their silicon can handle, and what is sold to the customer. Individual cores might already be boosting to those clock speeds over short intervals. You're just allowing more cores to do that and longer, within your configured power limits. The expectation here is thermal throttling, not an unstable system.
- BoorishBears 5y agoOh please. No one pretends PBO is not overclocking. Not even AMD: > Precision Boost 2 is a performance-maximizing technology available in all AMD Ryzen™ and Ryzen™ Threadripper™ 2000 Series processors (or newer). This technology can improve your PC’s performance by raising clockspeeds - And PBO still voids your warranty and does not magically respect some limit: https://community.amd.com/t5/gaming/understanding-precision-boost-overdrive-in-three-easy-steps/ba-p/416136 https://community.amd.com/t5/gaming/understanding-precision-... > Because Precision Boost Overdrive enables operation of the processor outside of specifications and in excess of factory settings, use of the feature invalidates the AMD product warranty and may also void warranties offered by the system manufacturer or retailer. - Reply because I'm getting rate limited, probably over that one time I wasn't nice to dang > Changing these values will not make your CPU reach voltages it wouldn't otherwise have reached, nor will it make your CPU reach clock speeds it wouldn't otherwise hit. This is patently false! I don't know where you got this idea when I literally just quoted AMD saying it raises clocks past factory specifications! Also sure where you think the additional power draw comes from... AMD literally uses the tagline: "Precision Boost Overdrive: A Smarter Way to Overclock" - I see no point in continuing a conversation with someone who doesn't understand the basic tenets of the technology they're trying to split hairs over. PBO is overclocking. Simple as that.
- leetcrew 5y agoit affects cooling. gpu dies are way bigger than cpu dies. a cpu that draws almost as much power as a high end gpu is way more difficult to cool. I don't really care about price/performance that much, but I don't want my pc to sound like a jet engine at load.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- fortran77 5y ago> I honestly don't get why people are so focused suddenly on the power consumption for a desktop CPU designed for enthusiasts who want top performance at any cost. These are individuals with an interest in harming Intel and propping up AMD.
- GhettoComputers 5y agoIntel is doing a fine job themselves in terms of harming intel and propping up AMD. Intel themselves has focused on power efficiency after ivy bridge, and people care about energy bills and being green. Who do you recommend this CPU to?
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- ClumsyPilot 5y ago"These are individuals with an interest in harming Intel and propping up AMD" Harming the compaby that was fines billions for market manipukation against AMD?
- porb121 5y agofeels like m1 broke a lot of people's brains about performance-per-watt. like, maybe that metric matters if you're running a laptop that has a battery and physically heats up your lap. but nobody with a desktop pc cares about a 100w tdp difference so long as the chips can be cooled
- nyanpasu64 5y agoI care about a 100W TDP difference in that a cheap cooler will sound like a jet engine, and a powerful cooler will cost more, in addition to a hot CPU making my room warmer.
- porb121 5y agowho are these mythical consumers that are so price sensitive for a $100 cooler but not when it comes to an $800+ cpu