[Tom's/CB] Intel Comet Lake Packs Up to 10 Cores - Page 5 - Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community

Forum Jump: 

[Tom's/CB] Intel Comet Lake Packs Up to 10 Cores

Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #41 of 78 (permalink) Old 03-20-2019, 02:38 AM
Blue and Green Team!
 
The_Rocker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: England
Posts: 10,733
Rep: 705 (Unique: 528)
Quote: Originally Posted by bigjdubb View Post
Is that a fair assessment? What about the 2700x and 8700k? I would say that the 2700x touched the 8700k all over, and touched it a lot. If they were humans instead of processors it would have been considered molestation.
Quote: Originally Posted by m4fox90 View Post
This is untrue in so, so many ways.
No, no and no again.

AMD has certainly picked up their game recently AND ONLY RECENTLY. However for performance, Intel still wins, clearly and like I say, has done for the past 13 years ish. I also note you are all AMD owners. Quite rightly defending your purchases.

2 of you have both AMD CPU's and AMD GPU's.... So you are either firmly in the AMD love camp, or just enjoy using slower hardware, and you certainly can't argue with me on the GPU front. The other 1 of you has a 1080ti, good choice, but a Ryzen 1600X up front.... Im guessing this was a financial decision.


Ryzen offers some nice value for money, the 2700X being a great chip. But then we now have the i7 9700K and i9 9900K from Intels mainstream line. Both of which outperform the 2700X, easily. Infact im fairly sure the 8700k with 2 less cores pretty much still beats it.

Threadripper you say? Priced well yes. But then we have the intel i9 X series. Which again.... for raw performance wins again.

Need a high core count workstation? Theres Xeons for that as well, multisocket if you want as well.

Im not talking price/performance here or bang for your buck. Im talking PERFORMANCE.

20i9 STEALTH
(13 items)
CPU
Intel Core i9 9820X @ 4.5Ghz (1.253v NO AVX OFFSET)
Motherboard
ASUS X299 TUF Mark 2
GPU
2 x ASUS 2080Ti TURBO (Blower, NON-A)
RAM
32GB Corsair Vengeance LPX 3000Mhz (4 x 8GB)
Hard Drive
1TB Samsung 970 EVO PLUS NVMe SSD
Power Supply
Corsair HX1200 1200W
Cooling
Corsair H150i Pro (Corsair ML120's push/pull)
Case
Fractal Design Define S Windowed
Operating System
Windows 10 Pro
Monitor
Acer Predator XB271HU 165Hz GSYNC 1440P
Keyboard
Corsair K70 MXRed
Mouse
Razer Deathadder Elite
Audio
Schiit 2Uber Stack + Beyerdynamic DT1770
▲ hide details ▲



Last edited by CynicalUnicorn; 03-20-2019 at 08:16 PM.
The_Rocker is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #42 of 78 (permalink) Old 03-20-2019, 04:39 AM
Top kek
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Bulgaria , Sofia
Posts: 3,308
Rep: 109 (Unique: 65)
Quote: Originally Posted by The_Rocker View Post
No, no and no again.

AMD has certainly picked up their game recently AND ONLY RECENTLY. However for performance, Intel still wins, clearly and like I say, has done for the past 13 years ish. I also note you are all AMD owners. Quite rightly defending your purchases.

2 of you have both AMD CPU's and AMD GPU's.... So you are either firmly in the AMD love camp, or just enjoy using slower hardware, and you certainly can't argue with me on the GPU front. The other 1 of you has a 1080ti, good choice, but a Ryzen 1600X up front.... Im guessing this was a financial decision.


Ryzen offers some nice value for money, the 2700X being a great chip. But then we now have the i7 9700K and i9 9900K from Intels mainstream line. Both of which outperform the 2700X, easily. Infact im fairly sure the 8700k with 2 less cores pretty much still beats it.

Threadripper you say? Priced well yes. But then we have the intel i9 X series. Which again.... for raw performance wins again.

Need a high core count workstation? Theres Xeons for that as well, multisocket if you want as well.

Im not talking price/performance here or bang for your buck. Im talking PERFORMANCE.
Pretty sure i bought the FX-8320 because it was damn cheap, and i am damn poor.

Also, i do not care what performance the 9900K has, when it costs nearly double as the R7 2700.

Hurr durr, Intel are the best. Thats all you have been saying.

Intel brought an non-existing 28core CPU into the HEDT. A knee jerk reaction, because AMD decided to up the TR game, by bringing the 32c monster.

Yea, sure you can buy the 18c Intel one. For 2k$. Instead of the 32c AMD one. For the same money. And the performance difference is in huge favour of AMD.

If you keep with your Intel bias, i may as well block you. Do not ignore the points of other people.

Previous Hardware:
Spoiler!
Desktop PC
(19 items)
CPU
AMD FX-8320
Motherboard
ASRock Fatal1ty 990FX Killer
GPU
Sapphire Nitro+ RX480
GPU
XFX RX470 Singlefan
GPU
MSI RX580 GamingX 4GB
RAM
Mushkin Redline 996996 2x4GB 2133Mhz
Hard Drive
Western Digital 160GB 7200RPM 8MB
Hard Drive
Maxtor 250GB 7200RPM 8MB
Hard Drive
Corsair Force LS
Hard Drive
WesternDigital Blue 500GB 7200RPM 16MB
Power Supply
Corsair TX850M
Cooling
ThermalTake Frio Silent 14
Case
ThermalTake View 27
Operating System
Windows 10 Enterprise 1607
Operating System
Linux Mint 17.3 Rosa
Monitor
AOC i2267FWH
Keyboard
Logitech K120
Mouse
Bloody V5
Audio
Corsair HS30 Raptor
▲ hide details ▲
ku4eto is offline  
post #43 of 78 (permalink) Old 03-20-2019, 07:47 AM
Senior Overclocker
 
Cryptedvick's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 4,949
Rep: 265 (Unique: 234)
Quote: Originally Posted by The_Rocker View Post
No, no and no again.

AMD has certainly picked up their game recently AND ONLY RECENTLY. However for performance, Intel still wins, clearly and like I say, has done for the past 13 years ish. I also note you are all AMD owners. Quite rightly defending your purchases.

2 of you have both AMD CPU's and AMD GPU's.... So you are either firmly in the AMD love camp, or just enjoy using slower hardware, and you certainly can't argue with me on the GPU front. The other 1 of you has a 1080ti, good choice, but a Ryzen 1600X up front.... Im guessing this was a financial decision.


Ryzen offers some nice value for money, the 2700X being a great chip. But then we now have the i7 9700K and i9 9900K from Intels mainstream line. Both of which outperform the 2700X, easily. Infact im fairly sure the 8700k with 2 less cores pretty much still beats it.

Threadripper you say? Priced well yes. But then we have the intel i9 X series. Which again.... for raw performance wins again.

Need a high core count workstation? Theres Xeons for that as well, multisocket if you want as well.

Im not talking price/performance here or bang for your buck. Im talking PERFORMANCE.
Ryzen offers GREAT performance for the money, to be honest. The 2700x is only 9% slower is games on average at 1080p and 4% slower at 1440p than the 8700k (which is around where most ppls would be at, with a high end CPU like this) and we're also talking about high FPS here too, not as if you won't be getting 60FPS or 75 or 100 or more with the 2700x.
When we're talking about multi core application, the 2700x is just better overall and that's a fact.

The 9900k is ridiculous in pricing compared to the 2700x but indeed its better at everything.

When we're talking about threadripper and CPUs for professional use, cost/performance is a very important factor. It would be just bad business to buy an intel chip if an AMD one can get you almost the same performance for half the cost.

I agree that for absolute performance and technology, intel wins hands down, but there is so much more than that at play in the real world, which is why AMD has chugged up so much more market share since Zen appeared and will continue to do so in the future.

Also, keep in mind that we're expecting the zen 2 architecture which should deliver on par performance of 8c/16t to the 9900k and if it does this at 60-80% price then there's really no point in getting the 9900k.
I just hope that this will push intel to innovate more and drop them prices down a little if they want to stay competitive because they've been top dog for too long now.

All this coming from an 8700k owner.

edit: just noticed something. While you were picking on the guys you quoted for being in the "AMD love camp", it seems you are quite clearly in the Intel love camp judging by your user title being "Blue and Green Team!" haha

C2D 6750 -> C2Q 6600 -> C2Q 9550 -> i7 2600k -> i7 8700k
8800GT -> 8800GTS 512 -> GTX285 -> GTX480 -> GTX580 -> GTX780ti -> GTX980ti -> GTX1080ti
R.I.P. Daniel Costin (Syrillian)
Animal Mother
(19 items)
CPU
i7 8700k 5Ghz/4.8Ghz uncore 1.39v delid
Motherboard
Asrock Z370 Taichi
GPU
MSI GTX 1080Ti GamingX @ 2063Mhz/6000Mhz
RAM
16GB Corsair Vengeance 3600Mhz CL16 1.4v Hynix
Hard Drive
Kingston UV400 240GB
Hard Drive
Western Digital Blue 2x640GB Raid 0
Hard Drive
Western Digital Blue 1TB
Hard Drive
Western Digital Red 2TB
Hard Drive
Western Digital Green 2x3TB
Hard Drive
WD Elements 2TB
Power Supply
Corsair TX750W V2
Cooling
Noctua NH-D15 w/MX4
Case
Cooler Master 690 II Advanced + 7 case fans
Operating System
Windows 10 x64
Monitor
LG 29UM69G 2560x1080 @ 75Hz
Keyboard
Redragon Yama
Mouse
Redragon Titanoboa 2
Audio
Asus Xonar DX / Plantronics Gamecom 777 / Logitech Z506
Other
Oculus Rift CV1 + G27 wheel.
▲ hide details ▲



Last edited by Cryptedvick; 03-20-2019 at 07:59 AM.
Cryptedvick is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #44 of 78 (permalink) Old 03-20-2019, 08:42 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
7850K's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 941
Rep: 91 (Unique: 58)
Quote: Originally Posted by The_Rocker View Post
Im not talking price/performance here or bang for your buck. Im talking PERFORMANCE.
we know, but before you explained that you had a snipey comment that read like an Intel marketing slide.
"AMD hasn't touched intel in the performance dept for nearly 15 years." which intentionally suggest a larger performance gap than exists.

7850K is offline  
post #45 of 78 (permalink) Old 03-20-2019, 01:41 PM
I <3 narcissists
 
bigjdubb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 4,948
Rep: 207 (Unique: 131)
Are we ignoring any classifications?

The 8700k was not better than the 2700x at everything, that's why Intel made the 9900k. At the time of release the 2700x was beat in every performance metric by other Intel processors available in the HEDT lineup, but none of those could beat the 1950x in every metric. I have no knowledge of server class processors, so I can't say for sure if Intel had a processor that could beat the 1950x in every metric. They did it with more cores, but they still did it.

I can only think of two ways that "AMD hasn't touched intel in the performance dept for nearly 15 years." could possibly be a true statement. One is if we ignore any sort of classifications of processors and bring Xeons into the picture. Someone with server class knowledge will have to chime in on how Xeons compared to Epyc when it launched. The other is add an asterisk to the statement clarifying that it is based on single core performance.

El Computer
(15 items)
CPU
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X
Motherboard
Asrock X470 Taichi Ultimate
GPU
Radeon VII
GPU
EVGA 2080ti FTW3 Ultra
RAM
G.SKILL TridentZ RGB
Hard Drive
Samsung 970 EVO
Hard Drive
CRUCIAL 1TB MX500 M.2
Power Supply
EVGA G3
Cooling
CORSAIR H150I PRO
Case
LianLi PC-O11 Dynamic
Operating System
Windows 10 Pro
Monitor
LG 32GK850G
Monitor
50" Vizio 4k TV
Keyboard
Logitech G110
Mouse
G.SKILL RIPJAWS MX780 USB
▲ hide details ▲


bigjdubb is offline  
post #46 of 78 (permalink) Old 03-20-2019, 03:01 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
tyvar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 75
Rep: 11 (Unique: 7)
Quote: Originally Posted by The_Rocker View Post
No, no and no again.

AMD has certainly picked up their game recently AND ONLY RECENTLY. However for performance, Intel still wins, clearly and like I say, has done for the past 13 years ish. I also note you are all AMD owners. Quite rightly defending your purchases.

2 of you have both AMD CPU's and AMD GPU's.... So you are either firmly in the AMD love camp, or just enjoy using slower hardware, and you certainly can't argue with me on the GPU front. The other 1 of you has a 1080ti, good choice, but a Ryzen 1600X up front.... Im guessing this was a financial decision.


Ryzen offers some nice value for money, the 2700X being a great chip. But then we now have the i7 9700K and i9 9900K from Intels mainstream line. Both of which outperform the 2700X, easily. Infact im fairly sure the 8700k with 2 less cores pretty much still beats it.

Threadripper you say? Priced well yes. But then we have the intel i9 X series. Which again.... for raw performance wins again.

Need a high core count workstation? Theres Xeons for that as well, multisocket if you want as well.

Im not talking price/performance here or bang for your buck. Im talking PERFORMANCE.
Uh no in multi core actual "work" work loads the 2700x beats out the 8700k, and the TR 2990x beats out the i9 X series in quite a few work loads, and even beats out the W3175x in at least one major workload type, monte carlo simulations. And thats still a threadripper chip vs a xeon. If you want multi socket you can go Epyc.

Basically from 2018 on to now, and probably through out the end of the year, there are now a decent number of professional use cases where going AMD not only nets you the best bang for the buck, but the highest performance possible.

Last edited by tyvar; 03-20-2019 at 10:02 PM.
tyvar is offline  
post #47 of 78 (permalink) Old 03-20-2019, 03:29 PM
sudo apt install sl
 
WannaBeOCer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,209
Rep: 143 (Unique: 104)
Quote: Originally Posted by tyvar View Post
Uh no in multi core actual "work" work loads the 2700x beats out the 8700k, and the TR 2990x beats out the i9 X series in quite a few work loads, and even beats out the W3175x in at least one major workload type, monte carlo simulations.

Basically from 2018 on to now, and probably through out the end of the year, there are no a decent number of professional use cases where going AMD not only nets you the best bang for the buck, but the highest performance possible.
Depends on the task since the Windows scheduler is broken when it comes to high count Zen processors. Before buying any processor for professional use check the performance. There are task that the 2990WX performs like a 2700x while their 16c parts are slightly slower than a 7980xe. For those task I can see users buying Intel's overpriced 28c since the time saved will allow them to work on other projects quicker and will end up with a net higher than a 2950x. The 2990wx is a perfect processor for Linux though.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/13853...dows-scheduler

Maximus
(22 items)
CPU
Core i7 6700K 4.8Ghz @ 1.4v
Motherboard
Maximus VIII Formula
GPU
Radeon VII @ 2100Mhz/1200Mhz w/ 1150mV
RAM
G-Skill 32GB 3200Mhz
Hard Drive
Samsung 850 Evo 1TB
Hard Drive
Samsung 850 Evo 1TB
Hard Drive
Samsung 850 Evo 500GB
Power Supply
EVGA SuperNova 1200w P2
Cooling
EK Supremacy Full Copper Clean
Cooling
XSPC D5 Photon v2
Cooling
Black Ice Gen 2 GTX360 x2
Cooling
EK-Vector Radeon VII - Copper + Plexi
Case
Thermaltake Core X5 Tempered Glass Edition
Operating System
Kubuntu 18.04.1
Operating System
Hackintosh macOS 10.14.3
Operating System
Windows 10 Pro
Monitor
Acer XF270HUA
Keyboard
Cherry MX Board 6.0
Mouse
Logitech G600
Mouse
Alugraphics GamerArt
Audio
Definitive Technology Incline
Audio
SMSL M8A
▲ hide details ▲
WannaBeOCer is online now  
post #48 of 78 (permalink) Old 03-20-2019, 03:53 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
DNMock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Dallas
Posts: 3,218
Rep: 159 (Unique: 118)
Quote: Originally Posted by The_Rocker View Post
No, no and no again.

AMD has certainly picked up their game recently AND ONLY RECENTLY. However for performance, Intel still wins, clearly and like I say, has done for the past 13 years ish. I also note you are all AMD owners. Quite rightly defending your purchases.

2 of you have both AMD CPU's and AMD GPU's.... So you are either firmly in the AMD love camp, or just enjoy using slower hardware, and you certainly can't argue with me on the GPU front. The other 1 of you has a 1080ti, good choice, but a Ryzen 1600X up front.... Im guessing this was a financial decision.


Ryzen offers some nice value for money, the 2700X being a great chip. But then we now have the i7 9700K and i9 9900K from Intels mainstream line. Both of which outperform the 2700X, easily. Infact im fairly sure the 8700k with 2 less cores pretty much still beats it.

Threadripper you say? Priced well yes. But then we have the intel i9 X series. Which again.... for raw performance wins again.

Need a high core count workstation? Theres Xeons for that as well, multisocket if you want as well.

Im not talking price/performance here or bang for your buck. Im talking PERFORMANCE.
If this were IGN, I would be inclined to agree with you, but since it's OCN, where a lot of people do a lot more than pure gaming on their systems, I think you may need to re-think your claim. The 9900K is indeed on par or above the 2700X, but the gap is rather small. IIRC, the 2700X is actually superior to the 8700K in a lot of non-gaming tasks.

I think the point a lot of people are trying to make is that Intel throwing 2 more cores onto a CPU won't be enough to protect their lead from Ryzen's node shrink.


DNMock is offline  
post #49 of 78 (permalink) Old 03-21-2019, 01:43 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
zGunBLADEz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,349
Rep: 97 (Unique: 70)
9900k with a decent mobo for overclock is twice the price of a 2700x build. If intel dont perform as such at double the price it should retire this business.

You paying hedt prices for mainstream stuff yeah the 9900k is fast and hot also it lacks the stuff a hedt system would have for that price. It aint worth it.

zGunBLADEz is offline  
post #50 of 78 (permalink) Old 03-21-2019, 01:49 PM
Overclocker in training
 
ThrashZone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 5,985
Rep: 46 (Unique: 37)
Hi,
If AMD would ever release something it might be hard for me to not look at it closely

Vaper
(4 items)
CPU
i9-99400x With evo and koolance vrm water blocks
Motherboard
ASUS x299 TUF Mark 2
GPU
Titan Xp with copper Water Block
RAM
Trident Z 3600C16 4x8gb's
Hard Drive
Samsung 850 Pro 256gb for os and 500gb evo for favorite games plus other wd hdd's for data and backup's
Optical Drive
LG Blu-Ray WH16NS40
Power Supply
evga 1200P2
Cooling
2-280GTX Black Ice Nemesis rads with D5 pump-res combo and D5 top before and after rads.
Case
corsair 450D with added 2nd floor to house radiator on top
Operating System
Win-7 pro & 10 pro Win-7 Primary os.
Monitor
ASUS VG248QE 24" 144Hz
Keyboard
Logitech G910 Orion spectrum
Mouse
redragon
CPU
i7-5930k with evo and koolance vrm water blocks
Motherboard
X99 Sabertooth
GPU
EVGA 1080ti FTW3 with Water block
RAM
Trident-Z 3200C14 4x8gb's
Hard Drive
Samsung 850 Pro 256gb for os and 500gb evo for favorite games plus other wd hdd's for data and backup's
Power Supply
EVGA 1000w P2
Cooling
2-240 GTX Black Ice Nemesis rads/ D5 pump-res combo and D5 top before and after rads.
Case
Corsair 450D with added 2nd floor to house radiator on top
Operating System
Win-7 and 10 pro Win-7 Primary os.
Monitor
AOC G2460PG 24"G-Sync 144Hz
Mouse
Red Dragon
Hard Drive
eLeaf MELO-3 4ml
Power Supply
SE US18650VTC6 3120mAh 30A 3.6V 18650 Li-ion Battery - GREENx4
Case
SMOK Alien 220w
Operating System
VapeWild RazzleBerry 50-50-3mg
▲ hide details ▲
ThrashZone is online now  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off