Intel Core i5 10600K + Core i9 10900K

[vegabook]

*PRO INTEL* : I absolutely hate the idiots who continue parroting the old fixed Intel HW vulnerabilities as if the company was the only one who'd made those mistakes.
*PRO INTEL* : I absolutely hate the idiots who continue parroting that AMD is unequivocally faster in all workflows despite losing in many.
*PRO INTEL* : I absolutely hate the idiots who continue parroting that Intel has nothing to offer despite having a huge advantage in IPC for their Ice Lake CPUs and having an even higher IPC for future Tiger Lake (engineering samples are already out). It'll be released later this year.
*PRO INTEL* :I absolutely hate the idiots who continue parroting that Intel hasn't solved their 10nm node despite AMD not having their factories at all.

So much for "rational", "pro logic", "not buying on affiliation" etc etc

[CochainComplex]

I pay $80/mo for 10 Mbps in America...with a 1TB bandwidth quota.

the 1TB quota is bearable ...but 10 Mbps for 80 bucks ...well it seems to be worse elswere I have 35€/m 50/10 Mbits and recently my provider stopped that 300gb/m for 3 monts limit ...so if you exceed two month the 300gb limit its ok but not the third one in a row ...now its without limit.

[CochainComplex]

No irony. We have 1000/100 Mbps download/upload without quotas @ 26 Euro/month at my location.

Netherlands ? ...well germany is rather down in the top list of internet speed in eu ....If you wouldn't have written € I would have had assumed you are from South Korea ..internet .nerds paradise

[CochainComplex]

Ouch... I get this with no data caps for 15 Euro while 10/10gbit is 27, but I lack home networking support for this (yet ).

..at my Institute I can compete ....but at home ....no way.....ehm south korea ?

[numacross]

..at my Institute I can compete ....but at home ....no way.....ehm south korea ?

South Korea is not ~650km from Frankfurt I'm still in the EU.

[smitty3268]

I didn't run around screaming off the top of my lungs that "Intel sucks, AMD rulez".

The only person I see going around screaming in this thread so far is you. I'm not sure what exactly set you off, but most of the other people here have seemed pretty reasonable to me. Maybe you're pulling this over from some other thread?

I think it's pretty impressive what Intel has managed to do given their constraints with an old process here, but we're not grading on a curve. The truth remains that they're only barely managing to be competitive in MT workloads for double the power use. Single threaded performance is quite impressive but I'm not convinced it's worth the downsides.

I personally thought the Phenom sucked, too.

[birdie]

No offence but I really doubt that you have a Ryzen. Your arguments would even assume that you might reject it even if it is a gift for you.

God, you're something.





And the receipt doesn't contain the cost of shipping which was around $20. I've seen less than bright AMD fans but you've trumped them all. According to you I should praise AMD, revile Intel and throw logic and reasoning out of the window if I've bought AMD's CPU and GPU.

[birdie]

So much for "rational", "pro logic", "not buying on affiliation" etc etc

So, no arguments then? And four upvotes from similarly "brilliant" AMD fans? Yeah, I've seen it all. When you've got no arguments you start doing crappy things like upvoting one another. Again, a prime example of the lack of intelligence among AMD fans.

The 10600K is 262$ (this is tray price, not what you pay in a shop) while 3600X is 223$ on newegg. That X in Ryzen is not really needed either and that's 172$

AMD: an option for price sensitive customers who aren't seeking for the highest performance as it's been for the past 25 years now (with the rare exceptions of Athlon 64 and Ryzen 3950X which is necessary/suitable/required only for professionals).

Too bad AMD instantly started gauging once they got the competitive edge. Remember FX-62 and its whopping price of around $1031 in 2006? A mere dual core CPU which was several percent faster than other FX CPUs?

The only person I see going around screaming in this thread so far is you. I'm not sure what exactly set you off, but most of the other people here have seemed pretty reasonable to me. Maybe you're pulling this over from some other thread?

I think it's pretty impressive what Intel has managed to do given their constraints with an old process here, but we're not grading on a curve. The truth remains that they're only barely managing to be competitive in MT workloads for double the power use. Single threaded performance is quite impressive but I'm not convinced it's worth the downsides.

I personally thought the Phenom sucked, too.

I'm just tired of seeing Intel being bashed all the time as if they are the absolute evil of the world and make the worst CPUs. Intel was the first HW company to embrace Linux/Open Source, BTW. They had open sourced their GPU drivers years before AMD even though of it. They have 01.org

[AmericanLocomotive]

AMD: an option for price sensitive customers who aren't seeking for the highest performance as it's been for the past 25 years now (with the rare exceptions of Athlon 64 and Ryzen 3950X which is necessary/suitable/required only for professionals).

The AMD Athlon, Athlon XP and Athlon 64 were the most performant CPUs available at least one point in their product life cycle. When Ryzen 1000 came out, it was the most performant CPU in MT loads in its class. The Ryzen 2000 series start fall a little behind, but the 3000 series came in hard and basically rocketed past Intel in just about everything except ST optimized games.

I use my all the cores on my 3900x on a weekly basis. I create tons of video content for my students, and am constantly encoding and editing videos. I'm not a professional, but it sure is convenient to be able to quickly encode high quality 1080p60 video. Not to mention modern games are becoming more and more highly threaded. Half Life: Alyx is barely playable on most Intel quad-core CPUs if you want to play at 120 Hz. It will take advantage of every available bit of power on an 8-core system.

There is more to computing than single-threaded, mainly gaming applications.

Too bad AMD instantly started gauging once they got the competitive edge. Remember FX-62 and its whopping price of around $1031 in 2006? A mere dual core CPU which was several percent faster than other FX CPUs?

The Athlon 64 FX-Series were always $900-1000 parts. They cost what they did not because they were marginally more performant than equivalent non-FX CPU, but because they had unlocked multipliers which were highly desirable for enthusiasts. They were enthusiast halo parts. The equivalent Intel P4 Extreme Edition ALSO cost $999, mind you.

I'm just tired of seeing Intel being bashed all the time as if they are the absolute evil of the world and make the worst CPUs. Intel was the first HW company to embrace Linux/Open Source, BTW. They had open sourced their GPU drivers years before AMD even though of it.

Intel deserves all of the flack. They pushed quad-core CPUs as high-end and dual-core parts as mainstream for nearly 7 years. There was an absolute ton of stagnation in the market. In just three years with AMD pushing core counts, we've gone from dual-core CPUs being the norm, to 6-core CPUs being entry level, and 10-16 core parts being high end. Just look at the Steam Hardware Survey. 6-core parts in less than 2 years have gone from ~4% of Steam user marketshare to over 20%. That's insane in such a short time span!

Intel had been sitting on their laurels and was abusing their position while AMD was struggling. They completely and utterly failed to innovate for those ~7 years, and their response 3 years after AMD debuted Zen is a marginally better performing lineup that costs more and consumes nearly twice the power.

Additionally, AMD has been embracing the open source community in one way or another for an extremely long time - just as long, if not longer than Intel. The Linux community is one of the main reasons x86-64 is even a thing. AMD worked very closely with Linux developers back in 1999-2000 when developing AMD64, and those developers had a lot of input on the architecture. The first functional AMD64 Linux build was released two years before the first AMD64 hardware ever shipped!

So, no arguments then? And four upvotes from similarly "brilliant" AMD fans? Yeah, I've seen it all. When you've got no arguments you start doing crappy things like upvoting one another. Again, a prime example of the lack of intelligence among AMD fans.

You constantly berate and insult other members. Instead of arguing their points, you call them stupid in an attempt to belittle them and incite an argument. It's called ad hominem attack and it basically means you don't have a good response. So you result to attacking their person in some attempt to discredit them, or make their argument seem frivolous unimportant because they're a "lesser person". If you want people to take you seriously, you need to stop hurling insults and being disrespectful.

[angrypie]

Lulz, the king has returned.

This thing won't survive Zen 3.