Intels Skylake-X and Coffee Lake CPUs Discussion

[Life-Binder]

can we please can the Ryzen talk, please

at least until there are 8700K/8600K/8400 vs 1600X gaming benchmarks or something

[Evildeffy]

What does Ryzen Pro, Threadripper or (god forbid) EPYC have to do with the mainstream lineup? I should've worded it differently if I was talking to you, but I wasnt, so please stop derailing the thread.

You replied directly to me, ergo you were talking to me.

Businesses already use Ryzen, OEMs are building Ryzen and believe it or not Ryzen Pro will be mainstream as well as they cost almost the same just with additional features you can likely unlock/use with the current motherboard line-up or are we now selectively changing the subject content to "GAMERS ONLY!111oneone" even though you specifically replied to other tasks which "In the scope of all things those are irrelevant."?

I also find it hilarious you're the one who replied to a discussion about Ryzen and how it's not worth the money and then accuse me of derailing the thread.
My Coffee Lake indication is still in my reply.

- - - Updated - - -

can we please can the Ryzen talk, please

at least until there are 8700K/8600K/8400 vs 1600X gaming benchmarks or something

Honestly I don't believe anything will change in the current hierarchy..
From everything so far Coffee Lake = Kaby Lake +2C and possibly +4T (HT or not).

It should alleviate some of the "bottlenecks" in newer games with the i5 since that's going 6C ... but I expect the game to remain as is.

7700K still the king of gaming, supplanted by the 8700K.
Possibly a new variant of the G4560 (G5560?) and everything remaining as is.

The question is: Paper launch on the 5th or not?

[Thunderball]

You replied directly to me, ergo you were talking to me.

No, I replied to Mrgreenthump.

- - - Updated - - -

Possibly a new variant of the G4560 (G5560?) and everything remaining as is.

No. If i3-8100 is indeed $120 it's gonna replace all 4-core Ryzens in gaming builds. For everything else you have a new HT Pentiums (I'd guess that all Coffee Lake Pentiums are going to have HT, and 2c/2t are gonna be Celerons), then R5 1600<i5-8600K<i7-8700K.

The question is: Paper launch on the 5th or not?

Motherboards have already shipped, have no idea about the CPUs.

[Evildeffy]

No, I replied to Mrgreenthump.

Nice quick edit there removing the fanboy comment... dodged the bullet there.
Also you replied to me and made an incorrect statement at that and are trying to back off, not my problem if you do not think about your statements before posting.

When you answer another person's post regarding the subject you are speaking of it means you've replied to them as well.
A discussion goes both ways, not just your own when it suits you.

No. If i3-8100 is indeed $120 it's gonna replace all 4-core Ryzens in gaming builds. For everything else you have a new HT Pentiums (I'd guess that all Coffee Lake Pentiums are going to have HT, and 2c/2t are gonna be Celerons), then R5 1600<i5-8600K<i7-8700K.

Except that, and this is a point you love bringing up, the i3-8100 is locked to 3,6GHz and you cannot overclock it where you can with Ryzen, it will not "take over" that position it'll simply sit next to it, both capable and Ryzen capable of RAM speeds gaining more performance where the i3 will be limited to 2666MHz.
More than 1 factor is involved, platform cost is another.

Ryzen 5 1600 will still have the same position it does now as the 6 extra threads still are making a difference, less of a factor perhaps in gaming but overall the CPU still has a higher upper ceiling, the 8600K will also sit next to it like the previous one, both as capable as another in general (you can take outliers for both in performance but they are the exception rather than the rule).

The 8700K of course will take over (as it'll be a better binned 8600K in general) as the best gaming CPU if costs are of no concern and offer better stock speeds (artificially as we are aware most 8600Ks can reach close to the same speeds without too much issues).

The question is whether or not the 8700K that was benched with CB was getting the score of 1230 @ 3,7GHz (which I'm inclined to believe) or that it was doing that @ 4,3GHz as the PC was equipped with water cooling where it was tested on, remember that from all the leaks so far it is just Kaby Lake + 2 cores, nothing else.
If it's 3,7GHz then it could mean firmware immaturity, Engineering Sample with bugged all-core turbo or other limitations set in place such as a power limit scenario (that TDP discussion of requiring a ~60% power efficiency improvement comes into play here).
If it's 4,3GHz then scoring 1230 is rather disappointing for Intel's terms of performance, making the CPU a literal 1-on-1 tie with the Ryzen 5 1600X for multi-threading meaning there's 0 difference in gaming that can make use of threads (pretty much most of the recent 2015 games and higher) vs. the Ryzen 5 1600X barring the single core performance which would only affect old games (WoW among them).

Motherboards have already shipped, have no idea about the CPUs.

Skylake launch... same thing, since we're no longer dealing with a 4C die but a 6C one it won't be as easy to "supply" as Kaby Lake, even though it's inherent uArch is the same, we have an actually different silicon design to deal with.
Combine this with the fact that Intel is trying to rush it out ASAP makes it very easy to have this date be a paper launch.
Of course this is speculation... but it's a plausible one at that.

[Thunderball]

Except that, and this is a point you love bringing up, the i3-8100 is locked to 3,6GHz and you cannot overclock it where you can with Ryzen, it will not "take over" that position it'll simply sit next to it, both capable and Ryzen capable of RAM speeds gaining more performance where the i3 will be limited to 2666MHz.
More than 1 factor is involved, platform cost is another.

The fact that you can overclock a 4 core Ryzen doesnt help to beat locked i5s consistently at the moment, and i3-8100 and i3-8300 (love to hear about the pricing on this one too) are going to slightly faster. Motherboard prices are going to be unstable for Coffee Lake for some time, but we can fully expect for them to reach the same prices as current gen motherboard do, making overlockable Ryzen platform considerably more costly (and that's not even taking into the account the fact you need faster memory for Ryzen).

Ryzen 5 1600 will still have the same position it does now as the 6 extra threads still are making a difference, less of a factor perhaps in gaming but overall the CPU still has a higher upper ceiling, the 8600K will also sit next to it like the previous one, both as capable as another in general (you can take outliers for both in performance but they are the exception rather than the rule).

I agree. Intel can compete with R5 1600 with their locked i5s but so far prices look too high for that to happen.

The 8700K of course will take over (as it'll be a better binned 8600K in general) as the best gaming CPU if costs are of no concern and offer better stock speeds (artificially as we are aware most 8600Ks can reach close to the same speeds without too much issues).

The question is whether or not the 8700K that was benched with CB was getting the score of 1230 @ 3,7GHz (which I'm inclined to believe) or that it was doing that @ 4,3GHz as the PC was equipped with water cooling where it was tested on, remember that from all the leaks so far it is just Kaby Lake + 2 cores, nothing else.
If it's 3,7GHz then it could mean firmware immaturity, Engineering Sample with bugged all-core turbo or other limitations set in place such as a power limit scenario (that TDP discussion of requiring a ~60% power efficiency improvement comes into play here).
If it's 4,3GHz then scoring 1230 is rather disappointing for Intel's terms of performance, making the CPU a literal 1-on-1 tie with the Ryzen 5 1600X for multi-threading meaning there's 0 difference in gaming that can make use of threads (pretty much most of the recent 2015 games and higher) vs. the Ryzen 5 1600X barring the single core performance which would only affect old games (WoW among them).

Cinebench have never been a good indicative of game performance, simply because of how important clock speeds are for games. 7700K routinely has lower CPU loads in optimized games (not talking Watch Dogs 2 here, that thing can load even a 8 core) than a R5 1600 that has 2 more core and 4 more threads.

Skylake launch... same thing, since we're no longer dealing with a 4C die but a 6C one it won't be as easy to "supply" as Kaby Lake, even though it's inherent uArch is the same, we have an actually different silicon design to deal with.
Combine this with the fact that Intel is trying to rush it out ASAP makes it very easy to have this date be a paper launch.
Of course this is speculation... but it's a plausible one at that.

Nothing but wishful thinking. So far I just like the lack of hype around Coffee Lake. Very refreshing after Ryzen and Vega launches.

[Evildeffy]

The fact that you can overclock a 4 core Ryzen doesnt help to beat locked i5s consistently at the moment, and i3-8100 and i3-8300 (love to hear about the pricing on this one too) are going to slightly faster. Motherboard prices are going to be unstable for Coffee Lake for some time, but we can fully expect for them to reach the same prices as current gen motherboard do, making overlockable Ryzen platform considerably more costly (and that's not even taking into the account the fact you need faster memory for Ryzen).

It depends on the age of the game and it's type, both have it's merits.
Some types of games cannot be multi-thread optimized further than a certain point in which IPC and Frequency of those cores that do work matter.
Other types of games can offload everything and split it equally making more threads better than raw performance.

It's a toss-up but you can actually state that OCed Ryzen 3 (provided you don't have the suckiest of the suckiest mobo) can beat locked i3 and i5 (currently, i5 for Coffee Lake MAY alter things, unsure as of yet) if the game is not WoW-esque but actually relatively new.
That said the difference is minimal in both ways overall, the memory is something Ryzen loves but does not need.

In fact lately most standard memory kits (f.ex. Corsair Vengeace LPX 3200MHz CL16) are capable of running full speed on the boards I generally work with from ASUS and MSI, GigaByte tends to lack in this department unless it's a high-end board (UEFI stuff), but it signifies that "more expensive memory" is no longer true.

That said platform costs of Intel will never reach equity with AMD's line-up, Z370 boards will drop but never to the point of being as cheap as B350, so irrevocably that's 1 advantage of AMD.
The other is that AMD delivers a very capable cooler if you know how to OC as a stock unit, Intel does not with it's K-series as you get no cooler at all.

Intel has it's lead in frequency and IPC and will keep that lead but the importance of this in newer recent games is diminishing, that's when Coffee Lake should step in.
Hardware Unboxed has a video they uploaded rather recently that shows how far Ryzen has come.
It is mostly what you'd expect but at the same time it's also so stupidly close that in general there's very little difference.

There are multiple facets to each story and technology but developers tend to go where they get the most performance for the least amount of money as that is in general the consumer computer standard, multi-core development got a kick in it's arse in February from AMD and Intel is feeling the pressure.

And that's the beauty of this... competition!
AMD has literally bitchslapped Intel overall with it's launches and now Intel is forced to react and because of this we hopefully will get more technology for cheaper.

I agree. Intel can compete with R5 1600 with their locked i5s but so far prices look too high for that to happen.

They can.. up to a point, Ryzen still has the 6 extra threads advantage which may or may not be useful in gaming but are useful in almost everything else.

Cinebench have never been a good indicative of game performance, simply because of how important clock speeds are for games. 7700K routinely has lower CPU loads in optimized games (not talking Watch Dogs 2 here, that thing can load even a 8 core) than a R5 1600 that has 2 more core and 4 more threads.

Yes that's due to how game engines work and if they are dependant on certain stuff (like Draw Calls), this will continue to be as such but CineBench may not be the best game performance indicator but it is a good indicator for raw capability of a CPU for more than just games.
That means the statement I made does not change, if Intel's Coffee Lake 8700K scores 1230 @ 4,3GHz then that means it's either sacrificing multi-threaded performance or IPC in which case everything you see now with the 7700K will remain as such with the 8700K only diminished performance in games that are multi-threaded meaning the Ryzen series should be able to perform better down the line.

Hence why I believe that the HP Omen system was not running that CB @ 4,3GHz as advertised due to whatever reason.

Neither of the CPU lines however... suck.

Nothing but wishful thinking. So far I just like the lack of hype around Coffee Lake. Very refreshing after Ryzen and Vega launches.

Wishful thinking? Of what? It being a paper launch?
Remember that Intel moved up Coffee Lake by 2 Quarters and the difficulty they had with Skylake release... plenty of motherboards and almost no CPUs.

If they can launch it and sell it without delays... awesome, I'll look forward to building them, if not... well kind of expected when rushing things (see Vega FE for that).

[Thunderball]

It depends on the age of the game and it's type, both have it's merits.
Some types of games cannot be multi-thread optimized further than a certain point in which IPC and Frequency of those cores that do work matter.
Other types of games can offload everything and split it equally making more threads better than raw performance.

Latter dont exist so far. Maybe we could see something like that with proper DX12 implementation, but right now there are simply no game engines capable of doing so.

It's a toss-up but you can actually state that OCed Ryzen 3 (provided you don't have the suckiest of the suckiest mobo) can beat locked i3 and i5 (currently, i5 for Coffee Lake MAY alter things, unsure as of yet) if the game is not WoW-esque but actually relatively new.
That said the difference is minimal in both ways overall, the memory is something Ryzen loves but does not need.

No. Ryzen 3 is 10-15% behind any locked i5, even when overclocked. It gets beat by G4560 in games when not OCd.

In fact lately most standard memory kits (f.ex. Corsair Vengeace LPX 3200MHz CL16) are capable of running full speed on the boards I generally work with from ASUS and MSI, GigaByte tends to lack in this department unless it's a high-end board (UEFI stuff), but it signifies that "more expensive memory" is no longer true.

Not what I meant. You need faster memory for Ryzen to achieve those results you see in tests, for Intel you just slap any memory, performance wont differ much.

That said platform costs of Intel will never reach equity with AMD's line-up, Z370 boards will drop but never to the point of being as cheap as B350, so irrevocably that's 1 advantage of AMD.
The other is that AMD delivers a very capable cooler if you know how to OC as a stock unit, Intel does not with it's K-series as you get no cooler at all.

AMD doesnt have competition for 8700K and 8600K in gaming so Z370 is pretty much irrelevant in this comparison (unless you get an i3-8350K, which you shouldnt). AMD does indeed have adequate stock coolers, Intel did aswell, but they are bumping core counts this time, let's see what they use this time: the old one is probably not adequate for even locked 6 cores.

AMD has literally bitchslapped Intel overall with it's launches and now Intel is forced to react and because of this we hopefully will get more technology for cheaper.

Come on, stop this fanboyism. Intel couldnt have made this CPUs in the period that Ryzen has been out. Either Intel knew about Ryzen long before it's release (which is possible) or they've been putting stuff away to counter any possible competition.

They can.. up to a point, Ryzen still has the 6 extra threads advantage which may or may not be useful in gaming but are useful in almost everything else.

As I've said earlier: anything else is literally workstation tasks that cannot take advantage of GPU encoding. The amount of people who cannot afford prosumer grade hardware and have specific usecase is very small. Theoretically streaming lands into this category, but in reality we are pretty far from achieving comfortable performance in gaming+streaming on mainstream platforms, even with Ryzen 7.

meaning the Ryzen series should be able to perform better down the line.

Ryzen 7 - probable. Anything else doesnt have a CPU load buffer to be able to do more on the CPU side.

Hence why I believe that the HP Omen system was not running that CB @ 4,3GHz as advertised due to whatever reason.

No, I think it was running 4.3GHz alright. There is a reason why AMD keeps relying on CB for CPU comparison.

Wishful thinking? Of what? It being a paper launch?
Remember that Intel moved up Coffee Lake by 2 Quarters and the difficulty they had with Skylake release... plenty of motherboards and almost no CPUs.

Yeah, why do you want for it to be a paper launch? Nothing indicates that so far. I remember Skylake launch: they had a bunch of issues with architectural stuff, microcode updates, bugs all over the place. I dont see anything like that here. If anything it's motherboard manufacturers that should be complaining about the lack of time to prepare their boards.

[Life-Binder]

oh wow

http://forum.notebookreview.com/thre...#post-10601641

Eurocom Support
Company Representative

We are planning to update Tornado F5 to Z390 chipset supporting 8C/16T CPUs coming in H2/18. We will launch F7 at the same time too. We will skip z370 chipset. Meantime we added support for Quadro P5000 and P3000.

Ice Lake confirmed having an 8c/16t i7/flagship ? or will it be i8 now ?

- - - Updated - - -

wonder if it will still have an iGPU

[moremana]

oh wow

http://forum.notebookreview.com/thre...#post-10601641

Eurocom Support
Company Representative

Ice Lake confirmed having an 8c/16t i7/flagship ? or will it be i8 now ?

- - - Updated - - -

wonder if it will still have an iGPU

Well this is interesting, wonder what kind of clock speeds we will have?

[Evildeffy]

Latter dont exist so far. Maybe we could see something like that with proper DX12 implementation, but right now there are simply no game engines capable of doing so.

They are very much in existence, all you have to do is look at those who can.
And they are the norm for new games further, remember just because something runs a CPU @ 90% thread load doesn't mean it's bottlenecked, it simply means it has headroom for more.
Some were mentioned prior in this thread.

No. Ryzen 3 is 10-15% behind any locked i5, even when overclocked. It gets beat by G4560 in games when not OCd.

I would like a source for this large margin, I've seen way less and stock speeds of the 1200 reaching that at worst case scenario, all are within 5% of each other when OCed, so I would like to see this large gap where I've seen them equal to within 5% of each other with an i5-7500.
As far as the G4560 goes... Yes and no, the 3,5GHz speed is of benefit if you count the 1200 stock speeds which are really atrocious (technically so is the 1400/1600/1700).

Not what I meant. You need faster memory for Ryzen to achieve those results you see in tests, for Intel you just slap any memory, performance wont differ much.

Not so much the case as the 3200MHz LPX basic kit is the exact same price to often cheaper than it's 2133 - 3000MHz counterparts, so using it as an argument is mostly irrelevant... having stated that Ryzen doesn't need that RAM's performance to score as is, plenty of benchmarks for that around with 2666 or 2400 ... but if you can feed it and it gains speed, why not?

AMD doesnt have competition for 8700K and 8600K in gaming so Z370 is pretty much irrelevant in this comparison (unless you get an i3-8350K, which you shouldnt). AMD does indeed have adequate stock coolers, Intel did aswell, but they are bumping core counts this time, let's see what they use this time: the old one is probably not adequate for even locked 6 cores.

Oh but it is highly relevant as if you do not have a Z370 (or Z390 in the future) you cannot use RAM beyond 2666MHz nor overclock where the B350 is capable of both, hence it's rather relevant unless you plan on never OCing.
But then the argument could be made "Oh but I'm not OCing the Intel so you shouldn't count the AMD to either!" ... Don't do that.
As far as stock coolers go... Intel USED to have OK-ish stock coolers back during LGA1366 and before, now they're the joke of the cooler market.
They sufficed to do their job at stock speeds and could be very loud at that where the AMD ones are almost dead silent, which is a complete departure from their previous junk coolers (the old APUs actually still use junk ass crap).
Intel's new coolers... well I hope they learned from AMD but I doubt it, we'll see though.

Come on, stop this fanboyism. Intel couldnt have made this CPUs in the period that Ryzen has been out. Either Intel knew about Ryzen long before it's release (which is possible) or they've been putting stuff away to counter any possible competition.

I stated nothing of the sort that it was made in the time between Feb -> Oct 2017, I stated Intel was forced to react by shortening Coffee Lake's release by 2 quarters, that's rushing it and they did so because they assumed no competition would rise.
Do remember that the original Coffee Lake release was planned Q1 - Q2 2018 by Intel itself and now it's (supposedly) October 5th, that is a forced reaction.
And AMD most certainly did bitchslap Intel, that's why they are now selling more CPUs than Intel according to Mindfactory.de (a very large e-tailer) and you it's assumed that that trend is following suit with most e-tailers around the world.

This isn't even remotely fanboyism... these are just pure facts put forth.

As I've said earlier: anything else is literally workstation tasks that cannot take advantage of GPU encoding. The amount of people who cannot afford prosumer grade hardware and have specific usecase is very small. Theoretically streaming lands into this category, but in reality we are pretty far from achieving comfortable performance in gaming+streaming on mainstream platforms, even with Ryzen 7.

So in this case you would state that Intel's Skylake-X line is not prosumer but simple consumer line and that only Xeons and ThreadRipper (and Ryzen Pro) are Prosumer grade hardware?
A great many companies and prosumers use consumer hardware to do their jobs because the difference is about 4 times the consumer price with almost no to completely no gain at all, except for a rise in cost.
I'm not even speaking about just streamers or the like but actual companies, not every single company uses Xeon/Ryzen Pro/ThreadRipper class hardware, a very large quantity actually uses off the shelf components and technically if you want to look at it that way the AMD CPUs are more Prosumer grade than Intel.
The use of ECC memory f.ex. is non-existant on Intel chips barring Xeons where they are freely allowed and used on Ryzen.

The audience is everyone in the world using software, doesn't have to be workstation software but content creation of any form.

Or do you believe every company in the world with computers uses Xeons and Quadro/FirePro cards?

Also regarding gaming and streaming comfortably... Gamers Nexus and even Linus Tech Tips *shudder* disagrees with you.

Ryzen 7 - probable. Anything else doesnt have a CPU load buffer to be able to do more on the CPU side.

This would mean that their 6-core is no more powerful than AMD's 6-core despite having clockspeed and IPC advantage, that's a pretty "meh" place to be in.

No, I think it was running 4.3GHz alright. There is a reason why AMD keeps relying on CB for CPU comparison.

Contrary to popular belief AMD does not sponsor CineBench .. it is an independent software that is used to render images (for actual work projects) and benchmarking to simply showcase the raw capabilities of a CPU.
If it scores 1230 on 4,3GHz it means that there's an IPC deficit or HyperThreading is broken on Coffee Lake, far more than Skylake/Kaby Lake.
Seeing as how the Single Core IPC is the same (slightly higher due to 4,7GHz (196 CBP) vs. 4,5GHz (191 CBP) between generations, I doubt it's IPC.
So we're left with broken HyperThreading or, what I think is more plausible, there's a frequency deficit and the CPU wasn't hitting 4,3GHz All-Core Turbo.
Just for you a quick napkin math taken earlier from this thread from me:

991 (average score of an i7-7700K in CB, multithreaded) / 4,5GHz (all-core Turbo) = 220,22
220,22 * 3,7 (Base Clock of the 8700K) = 814,82
814,82 * 1,5 (50% more cores/threads over the 7700K) = 1.222,23 CineBench Score extrapolated

991 (average score of an i7-7700K in CB, multithreaded) / 4,5GHz (all-core Turbo) = 220,22
220,22 * 4,3 (All-Core Turbo Clock of the 8700K) = 946,96
946,96 * 1,5 (50% more cores/threads over the 7700K) = 1.420,43 CineBench Score extrapolated

This falls in line with previously recorded leaks and live CineBench test scores, it also shows there's no difference between Coffee Lake and Skylake/Kaby Lake and would also reiterate my previous point of requiring a 60% power efficiency increase in order to deliver this in a 95W TDP package.

Unless you can show me that CineBench is somehow AMD biased, I will assume it for what it shows clearly.

Yeah, why do you want for it to be a paper launch? Nothing indicates that so far. I remember Skylake launch: they had a bunch of issues with architectural stuff, microcode updates, bugs all over the place. I dont see anything like that here. If anything it's motherboard manufacturers that should be complaining about the lack of time to prepare their boards.

I don't want it to be a paper launch however I face reality and what happens when you rush something.
AMD has given that example enough times of rushing something and look how that turned out.

As far as Skylake goes... like I said it was paper launched, there was a major shortage of the CPUs in the beginning months because they literally only started mass production on the day it was launched and they couldn't produce it fast enough without defects to have any sensible stock. (remember me saying that Intel has had enormous difficulties with 14nm earlier in this thread?)
Now that we're entering an entirely new silicon into the mix with 6 cores and Intel's skipped 2 quarters ahead with the Coffee Lake launch it is rushed and they could make the same mistake again to "steal AMD's thunder" like they did with the 18-core Skylake-X news.

This also happened to nVidia's GTX 10 series.. that too was a crime to get with the stupidly shit low amount they delivered.

All new hardware launches have bugs and unless they are critical bugs I generally don't care as they'll get fixed over time so I'm not counting those otherwise I'd make a big issue out of that such as the P67 B3 revision of the SATA bus.

- - - Updated - - -

oh wow

http://forum.notebookreview.com/thre...#post-10601641

Eurocom Support
Company Representative

Ice Lake confirmed having an 8c/16t i7/flagship ? or will it be i8 now ?

- - - Updated - - -

wonder if it will still have an iGPU

Interesting indeed... that'd be 2 jumps Intel would be making in order to bring more cores to the mainstream.
Coffee Lake and then Ice Lake... feeling the heat from Ryzen to heat up the Coffee? (ok ok ... I found that funny but it was a bit lame as a joke )

[Afrospinach]

wonder if it will still have an iGPU

gotta be honest, at this point I would not want it to NOT have an igpu. They are great for diagnostics when everything goes to shit and also for depreciating old systems to media centres and whatnot.

[Life-Binder]

http://wccftech.com/intel-10nm-ice-l...ream-cpu-leak/

wccf got in on it too

[Thunderball]

They are very much in existence, all you have to do is look at those who can.
And they are the norm for new games further, remember just because something runs a CPU @ 90% thread load doesn't mean it's bottlenecked, it simply means it has headroom for more.
Some were mentioned prior in this thread.

List of them if they are. I dont know what games going further you're talking about, but for example Destiny 2 is notorious for poor logical thread usage (was even unable to take advantage of AMD SMT at all in beta). Unity engine based games are obviously not going in that direction anytime soon too. Best optimized engine currently is Frostbite, but even that is very far from what you're talking about, there are simply no such requirements.

I would like a source for this large margin, I've seen way less and stock speeds of the 1200 reaching that at worst case scenario, all are within 5% of each other when OCed

Just find any test with a GTX 1060, they are pretty common.

Not so much the case as the 3200MHz LPX basic kit is the exact same price to often cheaper than it's 2133 - 3000MHz counterparts, so using it as an argument is mostly irrelevant... having stated that Ryzen doesn't need that RAM's performance to score as is, plenty of benchmarks for that around with 2666 or 2400 ... but if you can feed it and it gains speed, why not?

Where? 3200 MHz kits are usually 30% more expensive than 2400 MHz kits. All tests that people are basing their opinion about Ryzen are conducted with fast memory, you need that to meet the expectations you might be having when looking at those. Sure, it will work fine with slower memory, maybe you can even overclock it, but ultimately performance will suffer significantly, unlike Intel.

Oh but it is highly relevant as if you do not have a Z370 (or Z390 in the future) you cannot use RAM beyond 2666MHz nor overclock where the B350 is capable of both, hence it's rather relevant unless you plan on never OCing.

No, it's not. We both know how relevant RAM overclocking is for Intel platforms, and your CPU will be faster regardless.

But then the argument could be made "Oh but I'm not OCing the Intel so you shouldn't count the AMD to either!" ... Don't do that.

Problem for AMD is that it's irrelevant if you OC Ryzen or not. They are still gonna trail behind. OCing just for the sake of it is not fun on modern platforms.

As far as stock coolers go... Intel USED to have OK-ish stock coolers back during LGA1366 and before, now they're the joke of the cooler market.
They sufficed to do their job at stock speeds and could be very loud at that where the AMD ones are almost dead silent, which is a complete departure from their previous junk coolers (the old APUs actually still use junk ass crap).
Intel's new coolers... well I hope they learned from AMD but I doubt it, we'll see though.

Stop the fanboying.

Do remember that the original Coffee Lake release was planned Q1 - Q2 2018 by Intel itself and now it's (supposedly) October 5th, that is a forced reaction.

That's farfetched. Intel also planned to release mobile Cannon Lake before Coffee Lake, which we know didnt and wont happen.

And AMD most certainly did bitchslap Intel, that's why they are now selling more CPUs than Intel according to Mindfactory.de (a very large e-tailer) and you it's assumed that that trend is following suit with most e-tailers around the world.

This isn't even remotely fanboyism... these are just pure facts put forth.

That's exactly what this is. Otherwise you wont be using those words.

So in this case you would state that Intel's Skylake-X line is not prosumer but simple consumer line and that only Xeons and ThreadRipper (and Ryzen Pro) are Prosumer grade hardware?

No.

A great many companies and prosumers use consumer hardware to do their jobs because the difference is about 4 times the consumer price with almost no to completely no gain at all, except for a rise in cost.
I'm not even speaking about just streamers or the like but actual companies, not every single company uses Xeon/Ryzen Pro/ThreadRipper class hardware, a very large quantity actually uses off the shelf components and technically if you want to look at it that way the AMD CPUs are more Prosumer grade than Intel.
The use of ECC memory f.ex. is non-existant on Intel chips barring Xeons where they are freely allowed and used on Ryzen.

Fanboyism again.

The audience is everyone in the world using software, doesn't have to be workstation software but content creation of any form.

There is no way around stuff like AutoCAD or SolidWorks, you have to use it. Those licenses are as expensive as said hardware.

Or do you believe every company in the world with computers uses Xeons and Quadro/FirePro cards?

On the CPU side there are other options, but that's not AMD. In the case of GPUs if they're doing high precision design work they better be.

Also regarding gaming and streaming comfortably... Gamers Nexus and even Linus Tech Tips *shudder* disagrees with you.

LTT is supposed to have a reputable opinion? It's not. Gamers Nexus agrees with me.

This would mean that their 6-core is no more powerful than AMD's 6-core despite having clockspeed and IPC advantage, that's a pretty "meh" place to be in.

You can be a fanboy, but dont be delusional, please.

Contrary to popular belief AMD does not sponsor CineBench .. it is an independent software that is used to render images (for actual work projects) and benchmarking to simply showcase the raw capabilities of a CPU.

I have different information.

[chronia]

gotta be honest, at this point I would not want it to NOT have an igpu. They are great for diagnostics when everything goes to shit and also for depreciating old systems to media centres and whatnot.

Having a iGPU is important for the OEM market though, i reckon not having a iGPU is one of the bigger reasons that we werent really seeing entry level (business) desktops yet from the big OEMs with Ryzen, for example all HP Prodesk / elitedesk with AMD cpu's are still sporting A6 to A10 APU's

[Evildeffy]

List of them if they are. I dont know what games going further you're talking about, but for example Destiny 2 is notorious for poor logical thread usage (was even unable to take advantage of AMD SMT at all in beta). Unity engine based games are obviously not going in that direction anytime soon too. Best optimized engine currently is Frostbite, but even that is very far from what you're talking about, there are simply no such requirements.

Like I said .. prior in this thread.
If you won't take the effort of mentioning information than I won't do the effort of looking for it either for you, discussion goes both ways.

Just find any test with a GTX 1060, they are pretty common.

Like I said I did and I get very different results when Ryzen 3 is OCed to your huge gaps.
I specifically asked for a source for this gap where what I see the gap is there only on stock speeds of the 1200 and not OCed as prior mentioned.
I even gave a specific counterpart example and still got nothing from you.

Where? 3200 MHz kits are usually 30% more expensive than 2400 MHz kits. All tests that people are basing their opinion about Ryzen are conducted with fast memory, you need that to meet the expectations you might be having when looking at those. Sure, it will work fine with slower memory, maybe you can even overclock it, but ultimately performance will suffer significantly, unlike Intel.

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...82E16820231884 <-- Example 1
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...82E16820231977 <-- Example 2
Granted there is a unbelievably HUUUUUUGE 9 USD difference, it's so vast it'll never be affordable by anyone, especially since the difference is 5,51% .. so much larger than your 20% - 30% (!).
RAM increases performance on Ryzen but it's not a huge gain, it's not "needed".

No, it's not. We both know how relevant RAM overclocking is for Intel platforms, and your CPU will be faster regardless.

So not counting platform price for Intel is how it's supposed to be just because AMD can overclock and Intel cannot?
That's a skewed way of looking at things no matter how you twist and turn it.
Whether you like to admit it or not the fact is AMD's platform costs are cheaper and can overclock, a limitation Intel will not change on their non-Z boards.

Problem for AMD is that it's irrelevant if you OC Ryzen or not. They are still gonna trail behind. OCing just for the sake of it is not fun on modern platforms.

I gave you a video link to look at "how far behind" AMD is with Ryzen in gaming, I'm going to assume you skipped that.
OCing has various benefits, you were so eager to mention those in prior discussions and now you're leaving those out.
Nice selective standards there, hypocrisy ... thy name is Thunderball.

Stop the fanboying.

No this is a fact, nothing to do of the sort with your accusation.
Intel's stock coolers are beyond atrocious in comparison to AMD's new stock coolers.
This is a pure cold hard fact .. live with it.

That's farfetched. Intel also planned to release mobile Cannon Lake before Coffee Lake, which we know didnt and wont happen.

You have no idea about economics do you?
It's not far-fetched at all, it's a simple response as would you if you had dominance.
Explain to me then: Why has Intel moved up Coffee Lake release by 2 quarters immediately after having Ryzen launch where just shortly before it's roadmaps were still on Q1 - Q2 2018?

That's exactly what this is. Otherwise you wont be using those words.

So hold on.. stating something that are facts which you do not approve of is fanboyism?
That's rather ironic .. whether you agree with it or not Intel did get bitchslapped, the selling numbers are all you need.

No.

No? That's however exactly as you defined it.
Or is Skylake-X somehow prosumer and Ryzen and ThreadRipper are not?

Fanboyism again.

I'm sorry you don't like facts and that when you run out of arguments you simply accuse of fanboyism.
Either come with actual argumentation of why or simply admit you are yourself what you accuse me of being so I know what I'm dealing with and move on.

There is no way around stuff like AutoCAD or SolidWorks, you have to use it. Those licenses are as expensive as said hardware.

Like I said .. there exists more in this world of software that has multi-thread capability other than the bigger names.
FYI Autodesk AutoCAD is absolutely atrocious in regards to multi-threading.. a point you should've known if you actually knew what it is you are talking about.

On the CPU side there are other options, but that's not AMD. In the case of GPUs if they're doing high precision design work they better be.

How interesting.. so AMD isn't a choice in these tasks and Intel's CPUs apparently are... you're going to have to elaborate this with technical and logical reasoning as your statement is already viewed by many, if not all, as a load of crock.
Because barring having a wider AVX pipeline there's 0 reason why there can't be an AMD CPU used in such PC's.
Remember that it's either Xeon or Consumer Intel as you cannot use Xeon chips in consumer boards leaving very little room for your definition of alternative to be used that isn't AMD .. perhaps VIA Nano chips? Or IBM Cell?

LTT is supposed to have a reputable opinion? It's not. Gamers Nexus agrees with me.

Funny how you dismiss LTT and change Gamers Nexus to agree with you when their conclusion is that Ryzen 7's CPU rendering allows you to comfortably play without stutter which the 7700K cannot do because it either drops frames or destroys gameplay and this is a 4,9GHz 7700K vs. stock Ryzen 7 1700.
But it's not the first time you've done this and twist what's said to suit your own argument.

For others:
Video source: Click me!
Written source: Click me!

You can be a fanboy, but dont be delusional, please.

You states this and how you came to this conclusion is your own design.
Are you perhaps incapable of reading and comprehending what you yourself have written?

I have different information.

Like I said.. source for this and detailed so otherwise you're just grasping at straws now, you've also implied right now that every techie that uses CineBench as a reference is a biased AMD fanboy in your own words.
If you have no overall actual arguments and only are here scream fanboy and "No because I said so!" then please we're better off without your lack of knowledge.

Because that's all your arguments entailed.. "No because I say so!" and "Fanboy!" when you have no counter.

However one thing has been pointed out clearly.. you only work on the "Because I said so!" and "Fanboy!" principle.
Why do you hate competition to Intel so much? Do you really believe competition is so bad that Intel should be the only one left standing?
Or is it the usual purchase justification ritual?

[Sorshen]

Can you two stop it with the AMD vs Intel walls of text? Clicking on these threads has me rolling my eyes recently... ugh

[Enfilade]

Can you two stop it with the AMD vs Intel walls of text? Clicking on these threads has me rolling my eyes recently... ugh

Agreed. I called for them to stop a while back and got infracted. Neither of them are going to back down so I don't know what they or the mods hope to achieve from this.

[Kagthul]

Agreed. I called for them to stop a while back and got infracted. Neither of them are going to back down so I don't know what they or the mods hope to achieve from this.

Yeah, the moderation around here is hillariously awful. I pointed out in another thread that the information being posted was wrong - got personally attacked by two posters.... and *I* caught the infraction/ban for being "off topic" even though i was directly posting to the topic.

Its like the blind leading the deaf, dumb, and mentally handicapped on the "moderation" team.

My solution is to just put the idiots on Ignore. All i see is a small wall of "this person is blocked" posts; and the rest are actually constructive and worth reading.

[moremana]

Well, It use to be a constructive debate. Now its a one sided debate as one has resorted to calling the other "Fanboy". I actually learned alot from @Evildeffy. The other, not so much.

OT, who is going to jump on Coffee and who is waiting on Icelake. I have a 7700K and a R7 1700, no need to be hasty on this release, if it was compatible with Z270s then I would have.

Im waiting on Icelake

[Life-Binder]

I am waiting on Icelake but I also really want at least PCI-E 4.0 after waiting so long (if not DDR 5 lol)

I might jsut wait for Tiger Lake then