AMD Ryzen 9 5900X + Ryzen 9 5950X Dominate On Linux

[scjet]

Everything as expected however I am not a fan that AMD has OC'ed their CPUs to the absolute limit this time around in order to beat Intel at 1080p by a few percent and by doing so worsened their thermals quite a lot. It would be nice to see all these CPUs with TDP being lowered by 5-20% - that could make them a lot more power efficient and cooler.

https://tpucdn.com/review/amd-ryzen-...emperature.png (75C under load FFS).

Also, and I know I've repeated it a dozen times already but I don't understand why AMD has the right (and not only that people somehow find a justification for that) to increase their prices so much. Intel used to release new substantially faster CPU architectures without doing this: Sandy Bridge, Haswell, Sky Lake were all a lot faster than previous generation CPUs without price hikes and in certain cases even cost substantially less than their predecessors, e.g. the Intel Core i5-2500K was released for $216 while the Intel Core i7-920 cost $305.

People keep saying that $50 is practically nothing, only AMD has decided to start the lineup with the 5600X which costs $300, vs the 3600 which costs $200. It's not a $50 price hike, it's a $100/50%(!) price hike. Intel would have been decimated by the internet mob if they had ever attempted to be sneaky like this. I don't give a damn about the X suffix because it doesn't change anything and it's just a marketing differentiation. There's no 5600 CPU for $250.

Lastly, AMD is playing a monopoly card and it's just ugly. They force people to buy the 5900X/5950X CPUs because both the 3600/3700X were the most popular models for the Ryzen 3000 series, while for this generation, the 5800X is the worst (!) investment in terms of the bang for the buck. Margins decide everything not only for Intel and NVIDIA, as AMD has happily joined the "we'll rip you off because we are the fastest" club. I'm quite appalled by all of this.

ba bye birdie
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1t3cBTb3xPc

[scjet]

The problem like I've said three dozen times already is that neither of these CPUs have been even announced, so you're blaming me for an incorrect comparison yet you're insisting that AMD will release the said CPUs without being 100% sure about that. You have assumptions, I am dealing with facts and the fact is a $100 and $120 price increase at least for the next few months which means AMD is in for fat margins and they don't eschew ripping off their customers.

Again with the Ryzen 3000 series both 3600 and 3700X were announced from the get go.

The nonsense argument is yours because you love to imagine that 5600 and 5700X will be released while having zero information and confirmation about that. I will be laughing like mad if AMD never release them and all their fanboys have been proven wrong.

So why did Apple drop Intel as of late, mmm?

[birdie]

So why did Apple drop Intel as of late, mmm?

How is this relevant for this discussion?

[f0rmat]

How is this relevant for this discussion?

It is as relevant as you are to the discussion.

[birdie]

It is as relevant as you are to the discussion.

Ad hominem attacks for the lack of proper arguments is an indication of a very limited brain capacity. Cheers, amigo! Keep on posting.

[ejr2122]

All AMD cpus were tested with @3600 Mhz DDR 4 ram, where stock ram specification is 3200 Mhz (https://www.amd.com/en/products/cpu/amd-ryzen-9-5900x) .

I see that Core i9 10900K stock ram is DDR 4 2933 Mhz (https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us...-5-30-ghz.html).

I think that all cpus should have been tested with their own specification to get a fairer picture .

Regards

Thanks for the helpful facts. I wonder what the benchmarks would look like at 2666 MHz speeds, because I'm planning on a Ryzen build with ECC RAM. I would like to have that great 5950X performance shown here, especially for the timed compilation benchmark, but at 2666 MHz, the RAM might become a significant bottleneck. How much of a bottleneck would determine whether or not I go for a 5950X or something less powerful/expensive.