Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ryzen 9 3900X/3950X vs. Core i9 10900K In 380+ Benchmarks

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by birdie View Post
    2. That's called PL1 and it is within thermal dissipation limits, asshole. Read the Anandtech review closely, because surely you haven't read a single line from it and just saw this useless screenshot. The fact that AMD is lying through their teeth about their CPUs TDP doesn't move you one bit it seems.
    Crap. Intel is marketing their 10900K ist being 125W TDP, see here:


    I see it consuming up to 250Watts while in PL1, thats a freaking 200% of its rated TDP. I'm not talking about thermal velocity boost, just PL1. Yes, in theory that goes down to 125W after 53 of boost time, sacrificing performance quite heavily. In practice they don't. Intel CPU Mainboards very often don't adhere to official limitations, instead they keep the CPU in PL1 all the time, so the consumption is quite real. The 125W TDP are a marketing trick, the behaviour is officially tolerated.

    AMD 90W CPUs are rated 90W and consume up to 125W, thats 138%. The delta on AMD CPUs is much smaller than on intel ones! All the time!

    3. Beat it, as well.

    Originally posted by birdie View Post
    Most of the code ever written cannot or is extremely expensive to be properly parallelized/optimized, asshole. Even most modern video codecs for fuck's sake, e.g. x265 which barely scales beyond 16 cores. Libaom (av1) barely uses more than two. For 99% of people out there 15 cores of your super duper Ryzen 9 3950X are worthless. You can have 1000 slow cores but if you have a task which fully saturates just one core, your additional 999 cores are worth literal crap. And again, absolute most applications run this way.
    In older times you would've partly right, nowadays all kind of modern apps really start to scale with cores. If your special app doesn't scale well we're in times of multitasking. You want to play music while waiting for a rendering with Blender? You're multitasking. You even dare to use a browser while waiting? You're multitasking. Modern computers don't do just one task most of the time.

    Originally posted by birdie View Post
    I'm not saying I'm against having more cores available for the average Joe. I'm against crapping on Intel at every turn because they don't have access to an advanced node like AMD does.
    But thats integral to their products. They're not able to keep up with the competition and their product sold is inferior? They're responsible, it's their very own problem.

    Originally posted by birdie View Post
    Their uArchs are extremely competitive. This effing comparison pits an architecture from 2015 to a brand new AMD arch from 2019 for fuck's sake and Intel still beats the crap out of AMD in a lot of tests. In fact Intel is only losing in truly parallel benchmarks because again, surprise, 16 >> 10. By retarded AMD logic an ARM CPU with 64 cores is better than an AMD CPU with 16 cores. God, AMD fanboys (actually fanboys of almost all companies) literally have crap instead of gray matter.
    Intel does lose in comparisons in quite many areas. Their uarch also has a lot of design flaws sacrificing security for performance, they still haven't fixed their new CPUs to be secure without software workarounds. Being secure is part of the uarch, and they're really in trouble there. Their ringbus architecture and monolith dies also doesn't scale beyond 10 cores. That's really not modern.

    Comment


    • #32
      I would like to ask you for power usage during CPU-bound workloads, especially compared to the other CPUs. When you say the average power usage is close to the TDP (125W) it means it exceeds this value most of the time but averages at this value (due to idle periods). The average doesn't tell that at all. The other CPUs might peak above their TDP as well, but you are not comparing that at all. I haven't seen CPU power use comparison with Intel 10th gen at all.

      Is that an oversight or a deliberate action? I hope it is the former...

      https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...-10900k&num=10

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by birdie View Post
        I'm not saying I'm against having more cores available for the average Joe. I'm against crapping on Intel at every turn because they don't have access to an advanced node like AMD does. Their uArchs are extremely competitive. This effing comparison pits an architecture from 2015 to a brand new AMD arch from 2019 for fuck's sake and Intel still beats the crap out of AMD in a lot of tests. In fact Intel is only losing in truly parallel benchmarks because again, surprise, 16 >> 10. By retarded AMD logic an ARM CPU with 64 cores is better than an AMD CPU with 16 cores. God, AMD fanboys (actually fanboys of almost all companies) literally have crap instead of gray matter.
        Using your own logic it would be like comparing a 2015 Intel to a 2017 AMD. Just saying that if you're gonna call the Intel 2020 rehash of a 2015 architecture a 2015 CPU then you should also call the AMD 2020 rehash of the 2017 architecture a 2017 CPU.

        You should think about the contents of your post before you call an entire demographic retarded.

        Also, it's grey matter.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Wielkie G View Post
          I would like to ask you for power usage during CPU-bound workloads, especially compared to the other CPUs. When you say the average power usage is close to the TDP (125W) it means it exceeds this value most of the time but averages at this value (due to idle periods). The average doesn't tell that at all. The other CPUs might peak above their TDP as well, but you are not comparing that at all. I haven't seen CPU power use comparison with Intel 10th gen at all.

          Is that an oversight or a deliberate action? I hope it is the former...

          https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...-10900k&num=10
          Only as of this week is the AMD Energy driver now in hwmon-next (https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...r-Working-Well), so in future articles can do the CPU package power consumption between Intel and Zen. In the earlier Comet Lake article I think I showed some CPU package power consumption tests on Intel where it was possible at the time given their long-standing driver.

          The WattsUp Pro I use when doing AC system power consumption comparison is busy with other tests at the moment.
          Michael Larabel
          https://www.michaellarabel.com/

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Hibbelharry View Post
            AMD 90W CPUs are rated 90W and consume up to 125W, thats 138%. The delta on AMD CPUs is much smaller than on intel ones! All the time!
            Are you insane? Intel has 125W writen on the box and 10900K consumes exactly 125W after the PL1 budget has been spent. No lies, no exaggerations, everything to the spec. Meanwhile AMD does lie about its CPUs TDP. 3700X has 65W written in its specs and it consumes 90W!! No matter the duration of a test!! Likewise with 3800X and 3900X which are all consuming far more than AMD claims.

            Originally posted by Hibbelharry View Post
            In older times you would've partly right, nowadays all kind of modern apps really start to scale with cores.
            Fuck it, can you even read? Lots of modern video codecs cannot scale properly: x265: 16 threads limit. AV1 (libaom): barely two threads. Absolute most modern tasks the end user faces barely scale. Have ever ever written a single line of code? 99% of users out there never run Blender. Users run a web browser and lo and behold, even the task of launching an application from the disk is mostly serial and cannot be really parallelized effectively for fuck's sake.

            Originally posted by Hibbelharry View Post
            Intel does lose in comparisons in quite many areas. Their uarch also has a lot of design flaws sacrificing security for performance, they still haven't fixed their new CPUs to be secure without software workarounds. Being secure is part of the uarch, and they're really in trouble there. Their ringbus architecture and monolith dies also doesn't scale beyond 10 cores. That's really not modern.
            I'm gonna address just this part because again crap on top of crap.

            1) Intel does win in absolute most single threaded scenarios by a huge margin despite having an old uArch riddled with "vulnerabilities" (all fixed btw).
            2) Intel still wins in many multithreaded benchmarks despite having a lot fewer cores.
            3) AMD does win in truly parallel benchmarks by the virtue of having 60% effing more cores. If that's a win for you, you need to have you brains checked. Some common sense and logic are missing because again, by the same token a 64 core ARM CPU is better than Ryzen 3950X. God. What's wrong with people?

            Stop BS'ing me with "AMD has a super advance uArch". Intel has Ice Lake/Willow Cove which has a ~18% IPC advantage over Sky Lake and it obliterates AMD CPUs (given the same number of cores and thermal constains). Intel has long resolved most of the vulnerabilities and Ice Lake and Zen 2 have a feature "parity" in terms of CPU vulnerabilities, yet you're parroting this effing outdating crap. Yes, Intel did cut corners, but so did ARM, Sun and IBM for fuck's sake.

            God, this is so effing stupid. Each thread about Intel and AMD and AMD fanboys continue with the same lies or outdated now completely irrelevant facts.
            Last edited by birdie; 28 May 2020, 05:52 PM.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Hibbelharry View Post
              In older times you would've partly right, nowadays all kind of modern apps really start to scale with cores. If your special app doesn't scale well we're in times of multitasking. You want to play music while waiting for a rendering with Blender? You're multitasking. You even dare to use a browser while waiting? You're multitasking. Modern computers don't do just one task most of the time.
              Ah yes, the turn of the millennium technology of preemptive multitasking. We haven't had that at all on single core CPUs. Remember back when you could only run Notepad and not anything else at the same time? No? Oh, me either.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by skeevy420 View Post

                Using your own logic it would be like comparing a 2015 Intel to a 2017 AMD. Just saying that if you're gonna call the Intel 2020 rehash of a 2015 architecture a 2015 CPU then you should also call the AMD 2020 rehash of the 2017 architecture a 2017 CPU.

                You should think about the contents of your post before you call an entire demographic retarded.

                Also, it's grey matter.
                I'm sorry I've lost you here. Zen 2 uArch was released in 2019. Comet Lake features exactly the same core as Sky Lake from 2015 sans HW vulnerabilities. Again, AMD fans have problems with logic and common sense.

                Dr. Ian Cutress, Anandtech:

                It is hard not to ignore the elephant in the room – these new processors are minor iterative updates on Intel’s 2015 processor line, moving up from four cores to ten cores and some extra frequency, some extra security measures, a modestly updated iGPU, but by and large it is still the same architecture.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by birdie View Post

                  I'm sorry I've lost you here. Zen 2 uArch was released in 2019. Comet Lake features exactly the same core as Sky Lake from 2015 sans HW vulnerabilities. Again, AMD fans have problems with logic and common sense.

                  Dr. Ian Cutress, Anandtech:
                  Zen+, Zen 2, and Zen 3 are all essentially Zen with refinements and mitigations just like how Comet Lake is essentially Skylake with some refinements and mitigations. If, using your own logic mind you, if Comet Lake being a refined Skylake makes Comet Lake a 2015 CPU then Zen 2 being a refined Zen makes Zen 2 a 2017 CPU.
                  Last edited by skeevy420; 28 May 2020, 06:21 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by skeevy420 View Post

                    Zen+, Zen 2, and Zen 3 are all essentially Zen with refinements and mitigations just like how Comet Lake is essentially Skylake with some refinements and mitigations. If, using your own logic mind you, if Comet Lake being a refined Skylake makes Comet Lake a 2015 CPU then Zen 2 being a refined Zen makes Zen 2 a 2017 CPU.
                    God, people who knew little in the past used to be shy and tried not to be conspicuous. Nowadays, everyone has the right to speak.

                    Zen 2 features a massively reworked Zen+ core:
                    1. anandtech: rising the bar
                    2. wikichip zen_2

                    Zen+ features a seriously reworked Zen core:
                    3. anandtech: second generation ryzen
                    4. wikichip zen+

                    Comet Lake has exactly the same core as Skylake (aside from the number of cores, frequencies, fixed HW vulnerabilities and slightly improved GPU media capabilities which do not affect performance in any shape or form).

                    https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/intel/m...res/comet_lake
                    ICC -march=skylake -mtune=skylake
                    GCC -march=skylake -mtune=skylake
                    LLVM -march=skylake -mtune=skylake
                    Visual Studio /arch:AVX2 /tune:skylake
                    Could you stop embarrassing yourself?

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      TDP is not what you think it means. It is not a direct measurement of power. While it could be, the way Intel and AMD come up with the number it is meaningless. The numbers are a relative scale on how much heat and power they use but it is only meaningful in their own company and chip family. Basically they are just marketing numbers.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X