Page 19 of 78 FirstFirst ...
9
17
18
19
20
21
29
69
... LastLast
  1. #361
    The Lightbringer Evildeffy's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Nieuwegein, Netherlands
    Posts
    3,772
    Quote Originally Posted by Dimsumlol View Post
    As of right now, the top of the line intel chip still beats the top of the line AMD chip in games and everything else, unless you can show me benchmarks that prove otherwise.
    https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017...-ryzen-review/

    Will this one do for you?

    Naturally compare the Ryzen 7 1800X vs. the 6900K since that's 8-core vs. 8-core.
    The 6950X (like your upcoming 7900X) are still the only 10 cores till the Zen2 architecture or ThreadRipper.

    As you can see it's a back and forth battle and that was prior to optimizations, what happens when software devs start utilizing it's strong points?
    Because pretty much every software out there is Intel optimized because of the aforementioned Bulldozer architecture.

    No-one also said "shady business practice" but more along the lines of "Goddamnit Intel get off your ass and give us more performance instead of power efficiency!".

  2. #362
    Quote Originally Posted by Evildeffy View Post
    https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017...-ryzen-review/

    Will this one do for you?

    Naturally compare the Ryzen 7 1800X vs. the 6900K since that's 8-core vs. 8-core.
    The 6950X (like your upcoming 7900X) are still the only 10 cores till the Zen2 architecture or ThreadRipper.

    As you can see it's a back and forth battle and that was prior to optimizations, what happens when software devs start utilizing it's strong points?
    Because pretty much every software out there is Intel optimized because of the aforementioned Bulldozer architecture.

    No-one also said "shady business practice" but more along the lines of "Goddamnit Intel get off your ass and give us more performance instead of power efficiency!".
    Thanks for the link. There's lots of variables when it comes to comparing and it's subjective. Some people say price vs price, cores vs cores etc. I go top end vs top end. Right now you can make the argument that the 1800x is better than intels $450 dollar chip, sure. But Intels best chip is still better than AMD's best chip. At this point we'd be cherry picking facts and nobody would be wrong.

  3. #363
    The Lightbringer Evildeffy's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Nieuwegein, Netherlands
    Posts
    3,772
    Quote Originally Posted by Dimsumlol View Post
    Thanks for the link. There's lots of variables when it comes to comparing and it's subjective. Some people say price vs price, cores vs cores etc. I go top end vs top end. Right now you can make the argument that the 1800x is better than intels $450 dollar chip, sure. But Intels best chip is still better than AMD's best chip. At this point we'd be cherry picking facts and nobody would be wrong.
    Well no as the 6900K is still between 1000 and 1100 USD, as it's the 8-core it can be compared with the 1800X.
    And it fights very favourably with it.

    Though of course if you match an 8-core vs. a 10-core and the playing fields were even it's of course not a match.
    But then we're about to have ThreadRipper 16C32T be available very soon where the 12C+ are all MIA till 2018 for Intel.

    We wouldn't directly compare the 16C vs. 10C either because it'd not be a fair fight in performance.
    Only in monetary value would it be compared and current 16C32T ThreadRipper is said to be 850 USD vs. a 10C20T Skylake-X which is 1000 USD already.
    So the results are skewed.

    The 16C32T ThreadRipper would, without question, be the most powerful consumer CPU available but how would you classify most powerful?
    To some it'd be gaming performance, in which case none of these CPUs, would match current gen LGA1151's i7-7700K.
    To others it's multi-threaded performance, in which case the ThreadRipper would be king.
    To yet other people it'd be some other performance metric not part of either etc.

    But from a simple overall performance metric is that Intel has the edge in gaming if you have the G4560 or the 7700K where in all but very specific AVX tasks AMD hold's the edge everywhere else, you could simply say for the sake of argument that the fight of the i7-6900K and Ryzen 7 1800X is equal.

    In which case price should be everyone's concern and when a competitor can offer the same performance for half the price there simply is no contest unless you specifically need some features belonging only to the original brand.

  4. #364
    Quote Originally Posted by Dimsumlol View Post
    Thanks for the link. There's lots of variables when it comes to comparing and it's subjective. Some people say price vs price, cores vs cores etc. I go top end vs top end. Right now you can make the argument that the 1800x is better than intels $450 dollar chip, sure. But Intels best chip is still better than AMD's best chip. At this point we'd be cherry picking facts and nobody would be wrong.
    But who does that? Like think about it, when your buying a car and have 20k to spend, you don't compare the top end best Chevy to the top end best Lambo. That's just silly. You compare what is in your price range. If you need the top-end stuff, yeah, you go straight to intel currently, though AMD will have answers soon. If you just need a 8c/16t chip though, you compare them to each other. You don't compare then to intels top end.

  5. #365
    Warning: Guys, this thread is ultimately about the new Intel CPU's, so please try to stay at least semi on-topic. Thanks.

  6. #366
    Quote Originally Posted by Vegas82 View Post
    I'm talking about an individual doing independent contracting work. Not corporations.
    That would be a very small market. It's useful but I can't see them designing a whole product around that which goes back to my previous guess that they are expecting businesses to just buy the latest entry level "Business PC", which does make sense. As the saying goes, a fool (the businesses) and his money are easily parted.

    For the 4 core line up, the 7700K is a much better option, even for HEDT users because of the artificial limitations that Intel have added to Kaby X. The upper tier also have Intel not in the greatest position because of competition. That leaves their 8 and 10 cores as the smart choice. They are pretty quick as far as IPC goes and also have cores to burn so why aren't Intel trying to push more people into those brackets?

    I am specifically not mentioning the 6 core because I think that Coffee will be better there.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Dimsumlol View Post
    As of right now, the top of the line intel chip still beats the top of the line AMD chip in games and everything else, unless you can show me benchmarks that prove otherwise.
    This seems to be a thing in the PC world. Because company X has the fastest product, people buy all of their products. Intel have the fastest gaming processor at the moment. That doesn't mean that all of processors by Intel are top of their respective bands. It even applied to different processors of the same model. 7700k is the fastest at X doesn't make all i7's the fastest at X for their respective price points.

    Another example of this type of thing is that the vast majority of gamers don't overclock yet reviewers will rate processors based on the overclocking so users will buy a slower or more expensive processor because the reviewers told them it's the best but they never overclock the processor.
    Last edited by Gray_Matter; 2017-06-07 at 01:52 AM.

  7. #367
    Fluffy Kitten Remilia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Avatar: Momoco
    Posts
    15,160
    Well, original question seems to be what is the point in Kabylake-X and who is it for, which in this case actually is a very good question.
    Quote Originally Posted by MonsieuRoberts View Post
    It might be pointless to talk about at this point, but I'm still wracking my brain trying to figure out WHY Kaby Lake X exists. Was it also the meddling of Sales/Marketing, and if so...who was the target audience? WHO would ever buy these chips? What is appealing about a 100MHz boost over a 7700K and more expensive hardware? Who wants to buy a board they can't fully utilize and pay MORE for it?

    I wonder why they exist, and what they're intended to compete with. They seem to have a lot of overlap with what Intel's already offering, why did they even bother trying to refresh top-end Kaby Lake? They don't seem to throw punches at Ryzen and like I said they're so similar to what Intel already has.
    It's on an Intel proclaimed HEDT platform typically meant for prosumers or business. However the Kabylake chip is a consumer chip with it's GPU fused off with a higher power budget. For a business it really depends on what their workload is, doesn't really matter which brand you're going for, both has it's up sides and downs. Going for CPU rendering or compiling, go for Ryzen. For file compression or AVX heavy work load Skylake-X makes more sense. However those kinds of work loads tend to be better suited for multiple core solutions.

    So it brings up the weird 4c/4t and 4c/8t one. It makes no sense for a business or prosumer to go for these because the workloads don't suit it. It's advertised for higher clock and higher power budget for overclocking, but that's not a business focus, that's a gaming orientated focus. Businesses want things to work out of box so they're not the ones to tinker with overclocking. Prosumers want stability also so overclocking is also not a great idea. Prosumer works tend to be a lot more multi-core utilized too so why go for low core high clock solutions. Rendering, 3D, or filtering are the ones I'm thinking of tend to favor high core count. The type you'd see in 'contract work'. So, what's the point in a low core high clock again on a prosumer/business platform.

    So what's left are enthusiasts, either in gaming or overclockers. To get the easy one over with, overclockers, plain simple, makes sense. They'll delid the damn thing anyways and overclock it for that sweet epeen, but they do this with practically every chip they can, so that's not really saying much.

    So what's left are gaming enthusiasts. The problem is one of the main reasons to go HEDT was PCI-E lanes. So then noting it only has 16 lanes total for use after chipset and all that. For example 2x PCI-E SSD (M.4 or slot, whatever) takes up 4x chipset and then 4x CPU lanes. Or a network card for those amazeballs 10Gbps network bandwidth (pointless for gaming imo, great for network heavy related stuff). With 28 lanes usable this wouldn't be a problem. So you face the same limitations of the consumer chipset. You get the same chip with the same limitations in a more expensive package using more power and a tiny bit of OC potential.

    So we go back to what's the point of Kabylake-X. It makes no sense for business or prosumers to do it cause their workload doesn't fit it.
    Upgrading is a poor excuse. Remember Kabylake-X i7-7740X costs $339 MSRP. Skylake-X i7-7800X, 6c/12t with the typical 28 lanes, quad channel, etc etc. It then makes no sense for a prosumer to not spend $50 more and get all the HEDT benefits and more cores than to spend another $389 minimum to upgrade it again.

    So really, who is this targeted to? Super overclockers? Gamers have the 7700k in existent for those that want it. So who is it targeted for? These two products make no sense whatsoever.
    Last edited by Remilia; 2017-06-07 at 05:50 AM.

  8. #368
    Legendary! MonsieuRoberts's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Weeping Squares, Vilendra, Solus
    Posts
    6,621
    Quote Originally Posted by Remilia View Post
    Well, original question seems to be what is the point in Kabylake-X and who is it for, which in this case actually is a very good question.


    It's on an Intel proclaimed HEDT platform typically meant for prosumers or business. However the Kabylake chip is a consumer chip with it's GPU fused off with a higher power budget. For a business it really depends on what their workload is, doesn't really matter which brand you're going for, both has it's up sides and downs. Going for CPU rendering or compiling, go for Ryzen. For file compression or AVX heavy work load Skylake-X makes more sense. However those kinds of work loads tend to be better suited for multiple core solutions.

    So it brings up the weird 4c/4t and 4c/8t one. It makes no sense for a business or prosumer to go for these because the workloads don't suit it. It's advertised for higher clock and higher power budget for overclocking, but that's not a business focus, that's a gaming orientated focus. Businesses want things to work out of box so they're not the ones to tinker with overclocking. Prosumers want stability also so overclocking is also not a great idea. Prosumer works tend to be a lot more multi-core utilized too so why go for low core high clock solutions. Rendering, 3D, or filtering are the ones I'm thinking of tend to favor high core count. The type you'd see in 'contract work'. So, what's the point in a low core high clock again on a prosumer/business platform.

    So what's left are enthusiasts, either in gaming or overclockers. To get the easy one over with, overclockers, plain simple, makes sense. They'll delid the damn thing anyways and overclock it for that sweet epeen, but they do this with practically every chip they can, so that's not really saying much.

    So what's left are gaming enthusiasts. The problem is one of the main reasons to go HEDT was PCI-E lanes. So then noting it only has 16 lanes total for use after chipset and all that. For example 2x PCI-E SSD (M.4 or slot, whatever) takes up 4x chipset and then 4x CPU lanes. Or a network card for those amazeballs 10Gbps network bandwidth (pointless for gaming imo, great for network heavy related stuff). With 28 lanes usable this wouldn't be a problem. So you face the same limitations of the consumer chipset. You get the same chip with the same limitations in a more expensive package using more power and a tiny bit of OC potential.

    So we go back to what's the point of Kabylake-X. It makes no sense for business or prosumers to do it cause their workload doesn't fit it.
    Upgrading is a poor excuse. Remember Kabylake-X i7-7740X costs $339 MSRP. Skylake-X i7-7800X, 6c/12t with the typical 28 lanes, quad channel, etc etc. It then makes no sense for a prosumer to not spend $50 more and get all the HEDT benefits and more cores than to spend another $389 minimum to upgrade it again.

    So really, who is this targeted to? Super overclockers? Gamers have the 7700k in existent for those that want it. So who is it targeted for? These two products make no sense whatsoever.
    You totally nailed my question Remilia.

    I hope it can Overclock further than the 7700K, and markedly so, because then at least we have an applicable reason. It's just so strange to me. Does Intel really think people looking at an Xtreme platform won't be able to figure out that these chips shouldn't exist?

    Such an odd decision. Just interesting.
    ⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥ "In short, people are idiots who don't really understand anything." ⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥
    [/url]
    ⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥ ⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥

  9. #369
    Quote Originally Posted by MonsieuRoberts View Post
    You totally nailed my question Remilia.

    I hope it can Overclock further than the 7700K, and markedly so, because then at least we have an applicable reason. It's just so strange to me. Does Intel really think people looking at an Xtreme platform won't be able to figure out that these chips shouldn't exist?

    Such an odd decision. Just interesting.
    Yes, and they are likely right. All they have to do is get Dell to put it in a system and push it. Or just give Dell a good discount on the CPUs, Dell will push them, all the sudden the chip has good market share so more businesses buy it.

  10. #370
    Legendary! MonsieuRoberts's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Weeping Squares, Vilendra, Solus
    Posts
    6,621
    Quote Originally Posted by Lathais View Post
    Yes, and they are likely right. All they have to do is get Dell to put it in a system and push it. Or just give Dell a good discount on the CPUs, Dell will push them, all the sudden the chip has good market share so more businesses buy it.
    I always forget about the 3rd party system integrators. Buy this 4c/8t Kaby Lake X and in a year you can ship it to us and we'll replace it with something decent for $499! or some shite like that.

    There's an angle I never considered before. Third parties selling snake oil. "Workstation-grade platform, 4c/8t CPU, BUY BUY BUY"

    - - - Updated - - -

    Wendell & Ryan are here to save the day! Spoiler Alert: Kaby Lake X is for nobody.
    Nobody being extreme enthusiasts who will drop $1000+ for a few extra MHz on a single thread.

    Last edited by MonsieuRoberts; 2017-06-07 at 07:58 PM.
    ⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥ "In short, people are idiots who don't really understand anything." ⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥
    [/url]
    ⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥ ⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥

  11. #371
    Kaby Lake X is a weird product yes, i also can find any audience for it except maybe World Record Overclockers to push world record times in the 4C/4T and 4C/8T categories or something.

  12. #372
    Legendary! MonsieuRoberts's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Weeping Squares, Vilendra, Solus
    Posts
    6,621
    Intel Core i7-7740K Kaby Lake-X Hits 7.5GHz Overclock Breaking World Records

    There's the target audience! LN2 LH2 Overclockers and quite literally no one else on the face of the earth.

    Hrm...let's say that something above 5.0GHz would be possible on liquid with these. Let's be SUPER optimistic and say 5.5 IS reachable with a custom loop or some shite. Other than gaming, what's out there that would really make great use of a few insanely fast cores?
    Last edited by MonsieuRoberts; 2017-06-08 at 03:19 AM.
    ⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥ "In short, people are idiots who don't really understand anything." ⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥
    [/url]
    ⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥ ⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥

  13. #373
    Fluffy Kitten Remilia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Avatar: Momoco
    Posts
    15,160
    Quote Originally Posted by MonsieuRoberts View Post
    Intel Core i7-7740K Kaby Lake-X Hits 7.5GHz Overclock Breaking World Records

    There's the target audience! LN2 LH2 Overclockers and quite literally no one else on the face of the earth.

    Hrm...let's say that something above 5.0GHz would be possible on liquid with these. Let's be SUPER optimistic and say 5.5 IS reachable with a custom loop or some shite. Other than gaming, what's out there that would really make great use of a few insanely fast cores?
    By the way it's two cores disabled, HT disabled as denoted by the image. So I doubt 5.5 is reachable either unless they also want to disable some cores, which at that point may as well be a G3258 in Kabylake form. Even with gaming, 2c/2t is so little due to background activity. Just stutters when something else wants to play around in the background. Or have like youtube or a stream or me being retarded with billions of browser tabs.

  14. #374
    Legendary! MonsieuRoberts's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Weeping Squares, Vilendra, Solus
    Posts
    6,621
    Quote Originally Posted by Remilia View Post
    By the way it's two cores disabled, HT disabled as denoted by the image. So I doubt 5.5 is reachable either unless they also want to disable some cores, which at that point may as well be a G3258 in Kabylake form. Even with gaming, 2c/2t is so little due to background activity. Just stutters when something else wants to play around in the background. Or have like youtube or a stream or me being retarded with billions of browser tabs.
    Turn your quad core without Hyperthreading into a dual core, AKA the anniversary chip, and you can get some stellar performance! Weeee!

    So we're back to this chip truly being for no one then.
    ⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥ "In short, people are idiots who don't really understand anything." ⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥
    [/url]
    ⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥ ⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥

  15. #375
    Quote Originally Posted by MonsieuRoberts View Post
    Turn your quad core without Hyperthreading into a dual core, AKA the anniversary chip, and you can get some stellar performance! Weeee!

    So we're back to this chip truly being for no one then.
    Well they did achieve the world record in fastest DDR4 speed of 5500 MHz with Kabylake-X. So guess it's for the 3 people that go for world records.

  16. #376
    KBL-X is for the people who want fastest gaming perf today (without future-proofing)

    5.0 Ghz speeds without silicon lottery or delidding

  17. #377
    Legendary! MonsieuRoberts's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Weeping Squares, Vilendra, Solus
    Posts
    6,621
    Quote Originally Posted by Life-Binder View Post
    KBL-X is for the people who want fastest gaming perf today (without future-proofing)

    5.0 Ghz speeds without silicon lottery or delidding
    If Kabylake X was the strength required to drive something like a 200 Hz monitor properly, something a 7700K couldn't do, then maybe it would have a sensible place in the market? Maybe? So much of that depends on your other hardware though, but if someone wants to drop thousands on a 5% performance boost over a great 7700K then they're free to do so I suppose.

    If you REALLY want 5 Ghz then there you go, Kaby Lake X. For no one but you and your infinite budget.™
    ⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥ "In short, people are idiots who don't really understand anything." ⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥
    [/url]
    ⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥ ⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥

  18. #378
    well its not thousands, 7740X costs about the same as 7700K (maybe up to $50 more, I forgot), the X299 mobo can be $100-200 more expensive then Z270


    but yeah

  19. #379
    Quote Originally Posted by Life-Binder View Post
    well its not thousands, 7740X costs about the same as 7700K (maybe up to $50 more, I forgot), the X299 mobo can be $100-200 more expensive then Z270
    A given x299 board should be around $200 more expensive than same level Z270 board, because how complex the x299 has to be to support 16/28/44 PCI-E and 2/4 memory channels.

    Plus it's Intel HEDT, so it will bring extra anyways. Would be surprised if we see any proper boards under $300.

  20. #380
    Quote Originally Posted by mrgreenthump View Post
    A given x299 board should be around $200 more expensive than same level Z270 board, because how complex the x299 has to be to support 16/28/44 PCI-E and 2/4 memory channels.

    Plus it's Intel HEDT, so it will bring extra anyways. Would be surprised if we see any proper boards under $300.
    there might actually be some that make a "special" Kaby X overclock mobo which only has the complexity for 16 lanes and dual channel, as i dont think its a actual requirement of the platform to support all configurations. But even then i doubt it will be lower end Z270 prices, but more comparable to mid to high end Z270 pricing.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •