AMD will Annihilate Intel

[tp4tissue]

Holy frkn' shhhhhh...

Amd's cpu Bests intel in IPC,  Fastest in Gaming and Productivity.

They're selling it for cheaper.

It's  MORE   Power Efficient..

Like wthhh...   How can you win this hard.. This is Haxxx...

Looking at NOTHING ELSE,  just the Cinebench Single Thread score,

Intel 10900k , 544
AMD 5900x,  633, that's +16% just cinebench

5900x also has + 21% League of legend FPS,  + 19% CS Go FPS  vs the 10900k.  IPC INSANE

[Darthbaggins]

Knew that was coming, AMD has been crushing it on their refinement of the Zen line.  Now I want to see what the new line-up of RDNA GPU's do on the revised 7nm process (come one 3080ish performance and better power efficiency).

[tp4tissue]

Knew that was coming, AMD has been crushing it on their refinement of the Zen line.  Now I want to see what the new line-up of RDNA GPU's do on the revised 7nm process (come one 3080ish performance and better power efficiency).

They had a small preview in their keynote, seems to trade blows, but from what I can tell it's about 5-8% slower than 3080,  but u know, just give it to us cheaper. boom, you win.

[absyrd]

3400g at 65w tdp is a little more than I'd like in my inwin chopin. Maybe 4/5500g will be 45w?

[tp4tissue]

3400g at 65w tdp is a little more than I'd like in my inwin chopin. Maybe 4/5500g will be 45w?

Absyrd needs 5900x for 250% m0ar fragzing

[noisyturtle]

ROCKET lake

[Leslieann]

They're selling it for cheaper.

The 5900x will be priced similar to Intel, maybe a little higher, but that's okay.
Not only is it faster and therefore worthy of that increase, when you're building a system at that level a few extra bucks isn't going to change anyone's mind.

[noisyturtle]

Honestly just wait a few years for 10nM, if you have something even relatively modern there's no real point to upgrading

[tp4tissue]

Honestly just wait a few years for 10nM, if you have something even relatively modern there's no real point to upgrading

AMD is using 7nm right now, and TSMC which makes them is going into 5nm for AAPL, and then on track for 3nm

Now,  the nm process doesn't really mean it's 7nm or 10nm ,  it's just a process name.

But in GENERAL,  TSMC is ahead of Intel at the moment both in power efficiency + transistor density.

[Leslieann]

AMD is using a hybrid 7nm and 10nm(?), one size is trace the other is for the gaps between them. Intel uses a true process where the trace and gaps are even. Intel is considering a similar approach and a larger die size in order to stop the bleeding but even if they drop to a smaller size, it will not help computer speeds much.  Sure you will see Intel break 5ghz with ease but that's only going to be a small improvement. Clockspeed and cores aren't the bottleneck they once were.


Even if Intel gets a 5.4ghz chip with 32 cores, it's not going to revolutionize your computing. Oh, it will completely crush benchmarks and tear through data and every pundit is going to rave about them but very few things load up a 32core system and if you're waiting on software (the real bottleneck on a modern high core count system), or the internet, most of those cores are going to be sitting idle 99% of the time. Ask anyone with a high core count system how much normal tasks really load them all up. Sure, 8-12 cores smokes a quad core, but that quad probably had a normal SSD and less memory and it certainly had a less efficient chipset. That jump from 8 cores to 12 is flat out BORING, the same with a jump from 12 cores to 16 or 16 to 32.  This stuff only benefits very specific use cases. Sure, they are faster, but not as much as benchmarks will lead you to think. How much do you really think you can remove from an 8 second boot or 2 second app load time? Many of us already laugh about reboots, "oh no, I lost 20 whole seconds of my life!"

What it will do however is bring tons of cores to the masses, for cheap, which is great. So when you can get on one of these new systems, do it, it will be the last one you need for a while.



We're actually at a really good point in computing right now for the end user. It's also a good time for AMD and Nvidia, but a terrible time for Intel because even if they come back and take the speed crown it's going to be too little too late. Not because of AMD, but because of ARM. ARM commoditizes the CPU. Do you care about the processor in your game console or your cell phone? I'm sure some do, but most people are just happy if it runs well enough to do what they want and ARM is reaching that point and can be made anywhere by anyone, you aren't locked out like with x86 duopoly.  Apple is switching, servers/Linux has already been using it and if Microsoft goes all in on ARM (and it looks like they may) it could wipe out the low to mid range cpu market by the time Intel can really start to regain some footing on AMD. Next gen ARM could take out the entire mid-range and a huge chunk of the server market and once that's gone to ARM it's essentially over for Intel and AMD cpus. Assuming Nvidia doesn't completely destroy ARM.

[yui]

Holy frkn' shhhhhh...
Looking at NOTHING ELSE,  just the Cinebench Single Thread score,

Intel 10900k , 544
AMD 5900x,  633, that's +16% just cinebench

5900x also has + 21% League of legend FPS,  + 19% CS Go FPS  vs the 10900k.  IPC INSANE

Show Image

The problem i see with those comparisons is that it is next gen AMD vs current gen Intel, they both do it and it never make sense, if it was not faster there would be no point on making a new cpu... and no i am not an Intel fanboy, i point out the same thing when i see it on intel's side. i am just a marketing hateboy... this is just to hype you up just i expect the difference on same generation to be smaller, i do not expect intel to beat AMD at multi-thread yet though or actually at all, but you never know.

AMD is using a hybrid 7nm and 10nm(?), one size is trace the other is for the gaps between them. Intel uses a true process where the trace and gaps are even. Intel is considering a similar approach and a larger die size in order to stop the bleeding but even if they drop to a smaller size, it will not help computer speeds much.  Sure you will see Intel break 5ghz with ease but that's only going to be a small improvement. Clockspeed and cores aren't the bottleneck they once were.

Not sure going smaller would help with frequencies, actually i am pretty sure it would hurt it, as the smaller you go the higher the capacitance, and so the lower the frequency you can reach before your cpu just act as one big resistor. right now intel goes high in frequency like they did with Netburst, they use bigger and "very" old and mature tech so they know how to push it further. and as intel proved in the past frequency is not actually that important (Pentium 4 vs Athlon x2)

[tp4tissue]

From the buyer perspective, it's already Gamesetmatch,  If you want to buy any consumer computer, AMD is the ONLY choice going forward unless Intel discounts their parts heavily,  Which traditionally they haven't done out of pride.

But, more importantly DATA CENTER.  Faster raw performance AND more power efficiency is money in their pocket.   That's plain and simple,  it's just business.   AMD will Rapidly eat into Intel as their builder TSMC Roars ahead.

That APPL warchest is funding all of Tsmc's latest 5nm development, and the plan for risk production of 3nm is already underway.  They also have the highest installed capacity of ASML's latest machines.

There's rumor that TSMC due to crazy high demand and orders, is planning to increase expenditures.


Again the 10,7,5,3 nm  number means basically nothing , but we know for a fact that TSMC is ahead in density and power efficiency.

[hong@RebultKeyboards]

Whatever happens in the next year or two, just hope that Intel won't fall too much behind because the consumers will lose. AMD is already starting to raise prices

[tp4tissue]

Whatever happens in the next year or two, just hope that Intel won't fall too much behind because the consumers will lose. AMD is already starting to raise prices

That's unlikely,  Intel is still mega-evil corporation. Whatever their faults, they are still the defacto chip foundry for the American military industrial complex.   It's only a matter of time before they fire Bob Swan and get their act together.

[yui]

Whatever happens in the next year or two, just hope that Intel won't fall too much behind because the consumers will lose. AMD is already starting to raise prices

even if intel cpu x86 division fails intel still has a lot of other divisions working on networking chips, gpu, ARM... so they will not go under unless very very badly managed, and still while AMD raises the prices their are still far bellow intel's pricing from a few years ago, and unlike AMD, intel has the money to tank a few failures, if Ryzen had been a flop i do not think AMD could have ever recovered, intel can keep on throwing **** at the walls until something sticks. and when compared to microsoft or amazon intel is pretty good in my book.

[jamster]

I'm just here to say screw Intel. They coasted over a decade when AMD couldn't get it's act together, pumping out with much fanfare incredibly minor tweaks with 5% performance improvements each generation while keeping prices as high as possible and segmenting the overclocking market with crippled non-K CPUs.

Yeah, I know, this is how markets work when there's a virtual monopoly. But it's gratifying to see the AMD comeback. I went with first gen Ryzen mainly as a middle finger to Intel, and it's been absolutely great.