Intel 9000 series cpus

[Gryffes]

Lol.

i9 9900k 600 euros
i7 9700k 459 euros
i5 9600k 315 euros

One of the cool things ( I guess ) is that intel lets a single core boost to higher speeds - 5ghz with a reduction in other cores - so for very single threaded stuff - shittily coded games, simulators, etc. it will be good performance - for multi threaded it keeps normal ish clocks.

Similarly it can boost 2 cores to 4.8ghz etc.

Now for the retarded.

With the introduction of the i9 as the top of the range, there needs to be some differentiation from the i7 beyond extra cores, and with the i5 upper end being 6 cores... they decided to remove Hyperthreading from the i7 series.

That's right!

i9 8 core, 16 threads.
i7 8 core, 8 threads.
i5 is 6 core 6 threads.

All my wat, especially given they added HT to the i5 in kaby lake....
I guess intel thinks it's consumers are fucking idiots.

[Kalmado]

Wow. That is pretty crazy and stupid. Hopefully Ryzen will get even more attention now. But of course die hard fanboys will never change their minds and will somehow turn it into Intel doing something great.

[Gryffes]

Some other stuff: Intel will "allow" a bios update to 370 board series ( 8000 series ) to give compatibility to this gen.
I guess part of the CPU increase is that 8000 series owners will find the upgrade a bit more palatable than usual if they don't have to eat the mobo cost as well... ( also a response to AM4 possibly? ).

Either way any pretense at being pro consumer with this move is fiction when you look at the removal of HT + the price hikes.

[Kalmado]

Right now I see zero reason to upgrade if you're already on 1151 or AM4 unless you're on a dual core or a weaker quad core like the Athlon 950. For anyone doing regular stuff even including photo and video editing I see no reason not to go with an eight core Ryzen or even the six core or the equivalent with Intel. Stupid to overpay for these new processors.

[Melena]

Honestly, my I5 from 5 years ago is still going strong. I don't PC game as much as I used to, but in a year or two I may finally take the plunge and do a full rebuild. Will have to keep an eye out on Ryzen after this bullshit with Intel.

[Kalmado]

Honestly, my I5 from 5 years ago is still going strong. I don't PC game as much as I used to, but in a year or two I may finally take the plunge and do a full rebuild. Will have to keep an eye out on Ryzen after this bullshit with Intel.

I'm trying to do a rebuild for my buddy with a I5-3570K (can't find a Z77) because Linus did a video where the I5 wasn't really that much behind. I bought the I5 for $50.

I've benched FX-6300, FX-8320, FX-8320E, and FX-8350 and was against AMD for gaming for obvious reasons. But My Ryzen 7 1700X (3.9GHz on stock voltage cooled by a Corsair H80i GT) has been excellent. $225 sub Ryzen is incredible value and there is zero reason to go Intel at this point unless you have specific needs.

[Sonomaa]

I still have my 2600k and while it is showing its age a little (starting to max CPU on some stuff) Im still not really seeing how it would make too much of a difference. I think I might upgrade next year but I might hold off if they are just not doing a good job at making CPUs

[Kalmado]

I've only constantly upgraded because I constantly flip parts. If not for that I'd still be on a 4690K. But when you buy a 1070 for $240 and sell it for $700, well.....

[Gryffes]

I still have my 2600k and while it is showing its age a little (starting to max CPU on some stuff) Im still not really seeing how it would make too much of a difference. I think I might upgrade next year but I might hold off if they are just not doing a good job at making CPUs

I upgraded to Ryzen last year from my 2600k, nice benefits from both single threaded and multi threaded advancements.
Best part is next year when 7nm Ryzen hits I can just drop one into this system and not have to touch anything else to upgrade it.

[Gredival]

I was on a i7 920 Bloomfield until two months ago and it still performed like a champ.

[Scizor]

I love my little 920, its performed beautifully for years.

[Gryffes]

Intel doing some very scummy things.




tldr

Used lower speed ram than amd can handle in general, infinity fabric speed increases w/ ram, so they used below the amd systems max to lower results.
Used XMP ram profiles for intel, didn't use XMP for amd and used default mobo timings for ram.
Used motherboards performance mode profile to "performance" on intel, while using balanced for amd.
Used a quad channel memory config - something that increases latency on amd , a dual channel setup is recommended.
Used 1080p with a 1080 ti - however didn't use ultra settings , tanked settings to medium to avoid any cpu bottlenecking at all, compares to perhaps 720p ultra in reality.


While youtube reviewers cant post their 9900k results due to nda, they can put 2700x results up to compare to the "independent" benchmarks and are seeing roughly a 10-20% improvement just using stock motherboard+XMP settings.


As has been the case for the last 5 years, 1080p benchmarks using 1080 ti is complete nonsense.
Who is buying a 9900k and a 1080ti ( realistically a 2080ti now ) and playing at 1080?
The issue here is that intel has a 1-2ms latency advantage at the cpu level that results in higher frame rates when you do this kind of nonsense.

If this was tested at 1440p or 2160p the performance gap would be <1fps in most cases.

Somewhat surprised intel didn't ask them to perform the tests at 480p.

[DrClout]

Can't say I'm surprised really

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[Gryffes]

Even worse, they were using game mode in ryzen master ( setting for threadripper ) on the 2700x ( not intended to be used ), but turns the 2700x from 8/16, into 4/8.

[Shenrien]

Intel does something scummy, water is liquid, you are dry, the sky is blue, trumps hands are small.

Nothing new in the news.