Intel Core i5 13600K + Core i9 13900K "Raptor Lake" Linux Preview

[qarium]

Intel is offering 14 cores unlocked K and KF CPUs around $300 price point where AMD only offers 6 cores and you are complaining about Intel’s prices? How about lowering the 7700x that gets beaten by an i5?

thats right but amd was first with set the prices and intel did release later and this price differences are only because of this because amd did not have the change to lower prices in this short persiod of time.
and the cpu prices are not even the big part of what happens right now if you check mainboard prices the intel mainboards are also much cheaper. its is 100-130€ cheaper... the AMD mainboards are 300€ and the cheapest intel mainboard is at 170€
also ddr4 vs ddr5 you can build an intel system with ddr4 save much money by this alone.

but on the other side to buy these intel cpus and mainboards are NOT a good advice

because you can use ECC ram on the AMD cpus and some mainboards and even ECC plus overclock the cpu and even ram.

and the ECC ram makes overclocking much more save.

so if you only want to save money intel has competive price but as soon as you want anything more professional you go with amd.

[qarium]

Perspective from someone who works in semiconductors, both fab, and back end high speed testing, for many many years:

nm process is pretty much meaningless. Why, there is no standard on how to measure and where do you measure, oh in this one place we have a 5nm gap, therefore we have a 5nm process. Don't think manufacturers aren't pulling that, I know of companies doing that. Sounds good on the marketing sheets.

TDP pretty much meaningless because they have an equation with fudge factors in there. Want to know the real TDP, look at actual measured power consumption, almost all of the power that goes into a CPU gets turned into heat.

Benchmarks, manufactures tune to certain ones to post the big numbers. I skip over those. I go to the real world testes that apply to me. I look at the types of games I play and applications I use. I think look to see if it is a meaningful result. For example in games, I run at 3440x1440 @ 120hz, so I am GPU bound in almost all games and anything over what my monitor can display is not going to help me. The blender renders are taking 20% less time, but I don't use it daily so waiting another minute is better for me than spending the money.

When comparing upgrades you want to look at what you have, where you are looking to upgrade to and the competitors at that level. Then go through and check:

1. Power draw, actual reviewer numbers from several sources.
2. performance in the real world applications
3. Take a hard look to see if you would really notice it, figuring at least a 10% bump is where you can just perceive an increase. I personally don't upgrade unless I get around 2X or more the performance of my current system.
4. Price, how much is that upgrade going to cost you. For example the new AMD systems need a new motherboard, and ram, the system might need a new power supply.
5. Don't be a fan boy. They are all mega corporations that are in the business to make money. They have no love for you, your identity isn't based on what you purchase. If you relate who you are to the brands you purchase, I suggest you talk to a counselor or therapist. I have owned blue and red over the years based on the one that best met my criteria at the price point I wanted.

Keep in mind it can be easy to get caught up in the "Look at that shiny new thing and I will be faster than all of my friends."

"They are all mega corporations that are in the business to make money"

you lag the ability to seal the real differences some companies are only there to make money and of course they are mega corpoirations. but outside of this role of making money they do nothing.

and there are companies who have monopoles also also make money and they also are mega corporations but their goal is not only to make money like the other company but instead they want to defent their monopole.

Nvidia has this monopole in CUDA/GPU-Compute
Intel has this monopole in x86-64 ISA WAR (in the last 20 years amd also do x86 cpus but they allways did lose the ISA WAR)
and Microsoft has the monopole in win32-api and directX and so one and so one.

if you buy amd cpu or ARM cpu and AMD gpu or appe m1/m2 gpu then it is only a mega corporations who do make money

but if you buy from intel/nvidia/microsoft then you fuel the evil monopoles who are complete anticompetitive evil entities.

and this has nothing to do of beeing a fan boy...

[qarium]

Just some notes:
"They are all mega corporations that are in the business to make money":
CEOs usually have an additional motive: fame
"If you relate who you are to the brands you purchase.... I have owned [Intel] and [AMD] over the years based on the one that best met my criteria at the price point I wanted":
I disagree with you in this case. The primary source of fanboyism today is that the differences between AMD/Intel/ARM are very small. AMD/Intel (today +ARM) meet ~90% of the criteria one can think of. The part of your sentence "the one that best met my criteria at the price point I wanted" is referring only to the 10% where those CPU/GPU vendors differ from each other.
]Today isn't the 80-ties/90-ties of 20th century when the differences between, for example, ZX Spectrum and Commodore 64 were much larger than the differences between AMD, ARM, Intel and NVIDIA are today. In the 80-ties, [home] computers were incompatible with each other and they weren't interconnected to form a world-wide network.
If the user has enough money to afford 2 GPUs in a single machine then the only way of getting access to the above-mentioned 10% is to buy 1 GPU from each vendor

in my point of view the only real difference you have today is you support a monopole with your buy
and the second difference is you support closed source or opensource.

if you buy a cpu from intel you support a monopole and API-WAR (in the last 20 years AMD lost the API war game in x86 all the time)

if you buy a gpu from intel you support opensource drivers but closed source firmware...

if you buy an ARM cpu you do not support the x86 monopole

if you buy an Nvidia GPU you support closed source drivers even if people claim nvidia has changed no they did not change they only where forced to open the kernel driver buy still no userspace driver.

if you want opensource gpu with opensource driver and opensource firmware then you go with libre-soc ,.,..

in my point of view people should avoid monopoles at all cost means intel+nvidia+microsoft they are pure evilness.

[qarium]

Yes I am. Technological progress should result in more generational performance/features/resources for about the same amount of money (inflation adjusted). Not more performance/features/resources for more money. Companies try to brainwash users that the latter one is a norm now - but it should not be. "Thanks to" such outlets as LTT who regularly rationalize corporate side of story and help to propagate such a narrative.

in my point of view both is a valid technological development.

it is in fact a technological challenge to make something with more features and faster at a higher price point.

and of course it is a technological challenge to make something faster at the same or lower price point.

AMD did in fact all cases ... the 6600XT has similar performance as a vega64 and the vega64 was in 2017 at a price of 666€-740€
and the 6600XT is 8% faster and at release of the card the price was something like 550€ means faster but lower price.
the 6600 without XT had much more features like AV1 cideo decode and the price was lower than vega64

the 6400/6500 has pure lower price as a target.

the 6700XT gpu had the "price per FPS'" target

and 6800 had the "FPS per watt" target

the 6900/6950XT had the more features and faster at a higher price point targets.

this means AMD did serve all markets at the same time.

today nvidia always target this market: more features and faster at a higher price point targe

and intel always go at the cheapest price. ...

"Companies try to brainwash users that the latter one is a norm now"

the only company who always target this is nvidia...

[qarium]

There doesn't exist a version control system which would enable open-source contributors to receive payments for their contributions. Unless somebody develops such a system, the quality of open-source software will remain to be worse than the quality of closed-source software. The belief that IQ=130+ software developers are willing to contribute to open-source software without being paid for their work is a false belief.

i fully agree to this... and i had similar talk with my brother who has the money to start a software company he told me opensource is great because developers work for free with that... i told him he is wrong and of course some developers work for free but what he does not unterstand is that these developers only do this because of their own interest and not his interest.

i told him the same that these high skilled software developers need to be paid because they need to buy food to and need to buy cars to and need to buy houses to and so one and so one.

GIT is a very good version control system but of course you are right that we need a micropayment system to pay the developers for their contributions. do you know steemit ? in steemit they solved this problems people who read get paid and people who write get paid better.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steemit

we need a GIT version control system with similar blockchain payment system like Steemit.

and like steemit we not only need to pay the people who write new code we also need to pay people who just read it and we need to pay the people who validate code.

it is not the problem that there is no money in opensource companies like redhat proof there is money in such but we lag a micropayment system similar to steemit combined with GIT.

just tell me how hard would it be to remix Git with Steemit to get such a system ?

[vsteel]

"They are all mega corporations that are in the business to make money"

you lag the ability to seal the real differences some companies are only there to make money and of course they are mega corpoirations. but outside of this role of making money they do nothing.

and there are companies who have monopoles also also make money and they also are mega corporations but their goal is not only to make money like the other company but instead they want to defent their monopole.

Nvidia has this monopole in CUDA/GPU-Compute
Intel has this monopole in x86-64 ISA WAR (in the last 20 years amd also do x86 cpus but they allways did lose the ISA WAR)
and Microsoft has the monopole in win32-api and directX and so one and so one.

if you buy amd cpu or ARM cpu and AMD gpu or appe m1/m2 gpu then it is only a mega corporations who do make money

but if you buy from intel/nvidia/microsoft then you fuel the evil monopoles who are complete anticompetitive evil entities.

and this has nothing to do of beeing a fan boy...

You fail to realize that none of them would be any different if the roles were reversed. Do you think AMD would behave better than Intel if they had 80% of the market, no they wouldn't.

You missed the point that none of the companies are deserving of our admiration. NONE of them are on your or my side. I have been involved with all of your mentioned corporations and I can tell you none are more or less evil, it is what they can or think they can get away with to increase their profits.

[vsteel]

[*]"If you relate who you are to the brands you purchase.... I have owned [Intel] and [AMD] over the years based on the one that best met my criteria at the price point I wanted":

• I disagree with you in this case. The primary source of fanboyism today is that the differences between AMD/Intel/ARM are very small. AMD/Intel (today +ARM) meet ~90% of the criteria one can think of. The part of your sentence "the one that best met my criteria at the price point I wanted" is referring only to the 10% where those CPU/GPU vendors differ from each other.
  • Today isn't the 80-ties/90-ties of 20th century when the differences between, for example, ZX Spectrum and Commodore 64 were much larger than the differences between AMD, ARM, Intel and NVIDIA are today. In the 80-ties, [home] computers were incompatible with each other and they weren't interconnected to form a world-wide network.
  • If the user has enough money to afford 2 GPUs in a single machine then the only way of getting access to the above-mentioned 10% is to buy 1 GPU from each vendor

[/LIST]

I don't know as there is a disagreement. While I agree the CPUs are much closer now than in the past like the examples you mentioned. They do differ some and price could be big if you look at today's differences. If you have some DDR4 you want to use then Intel might make a cheaper choice based on memory and motherboard. You know with AMD you have to use DDR5 which is going to cost more right now.

Yes they are very close and you are not really going to go wrong based on brand. That being said, there are still differences to segregate choices based on a person's specific needs.

[qarium]

You fail to realize that none of them would be any different if the roles were reversed.

Thats an hypothetical situation with no practical user-case for our reality.
the roles are in fact NOT reversed and even if they would had a monopole the culture in the good guys companies are very different to that.
Valve for example has a defacto monopole but they are the "good-guy-company" good guys do not become evil just because they have monopole.

Do you think AMD would behave better than Intel if they had 80% of the market, no they wouldn't.

i strongly disagree with you here.

You missed the point that none of the companies are deserving of our admiration. NONE of them are on your or my side. I have been involved with all of your mentioned corporations and I can tell you none are more or less evil, it is what they can or think they can get away with to increase their profits.

I disagree here i in fact studied history very closely and the culture in these companies are in fact a big difference.
and the origin of these differences is Religion and also Philosophical and also in fact connected to secret societies.

[yump]

(0.o)

[smitty3268]

Based on what you just wrote: you didn't study unbiased history - you studied a conspiracy theory of history and the conspiracy meme took over your mind.

The 1st Soviet government was mostly African - all people living currently on planet Earth are most likely descendants of Homo sapiens who migrated from Africa roughly 70–50,000 years ago. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_human_migrations

I stopped taking Q seriously back when he tried to explain how Africans were genetically inferior to whites and how Hitler wasn't actually as bad as most people thought. Pretty sure he got banned for a while due to that post.

Which is to say, probably discussing Jewish-related conspiracy theories with him isn't going to be the most productive conversation.