Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community

Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community (https://www.overclock.net/forum/)
-   Hardware News (https://www.overclock.net/forum/225-hardware-news/)
-   -   [ZoLKoRn] R7 vs i7 - core for core - clock for clock (https://www.overclock.net/forum/225-hardware-news/1625300-zolkorn-r7-vs-i7-core-core-clock-clock.html)

Imglidinhere 03-11-2017 12:20 PM

Source

Looks like someone wanted to see exactly how powerful Ryzen really was. Disabled one of the core clusters so it's a 4-core, 8-thread CPU duel.

The results... are amazing... biggrin.gif AMD is nipping at the heels of the i7. Still a bit slower by about 5-10%... but it's awesome to see this guys. biggrin.gif

[[[[[Okay since the entirety of the thread is formed from comments of people who have not actually understood the point of the article I shall be explaining it below...]]]]]

The context of this article is based around the whole idea of seeing how far AMD has progressed and how close AMD actually is compared to Intel's offerings in a REALISTIC OFFERING from products to be released in the future.


This entire article SIMULATES an i7 vs a Ryzen R5 or R3 processor and shows exactly how close a new Ryzen AMD CPU gets to an identically clocked i7.

4Ghz quad vs 4Ghz quad. Same Ram, same frequency, same amount, same GPU, same SSD... and AMD is nipping at the heels of the i7 in every application. That's the entire post in a nutshell.


If you are saying 5GHz is a realistic overclock for any i7 or i5 owner since Sandy Bridge, you obviously have no idea how rare it is to maintain such a clock speed at a safe voltage, or how high and UNSAFE that voltage needs to be to handle such an overclock.


What I'm trying to say is... (Click to show)
CONTEXT MATTERS.

deepor 03-11-2017 12:30 PM

Here's the English version of that article:

http://www.zolkorn.com/en/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-vs-intel-core-i7-7700k-mhz-by-mhz-core-by-core-en/

Slomo4shO 03-11-2017 12:32 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imglidinhere View Post

Source

Looks like someone wanted to see exactly how powerful Ryzen really was. Disabled one of the core clusters so it's a 4-core, 8-thread CPU duel.

The results... are amazing... biggrin.gif AMD is nipping at the heels of the i7. Still a bit slower by about 5-10%... but it's awesome to see this guys. biggrin.gif

AMD already stated that the IPC delta between RyZen and Kaby Lake is about 6.8%... The real gains from Kaby Lake come from the clock speed difference.


Also, why am I seeing a reference cooler for the Intel build even though the write-up states different?


ZealotKi11er 03-11-2017 12:36 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slomo4shO View Post

AMD already stated that the IPC delta between RyZen and Kaby Lake is about 6.8%... The real gains from Kaby Lake come from the clock speed difference.


Also, why am I seeing a reference cooler for the Intel build even though the write-up states different?


In perfect case yes but looking at those benchmarks Zen has IVY-Haswell IPC like. Thats 2012 CPU performance.

buttface420 03-11-2017 01:11 PM

these clock for clock comparisons are pretty pointless . ryzens are only hitting 4 ghz meanwhile those 7700k's are hitting 5 ghz on avg.

Artikbot 03-11-2017 01:14 PM

Looking at those benchmarks, Ryzen is (excluding extreme results like AIDA raytrace) between a 10% slower to a 5% faster.

 

That doesn't normalize to Ivy-Haswell, that normalizes to Broadwell.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by buttface420 View Post

these clock for clock comparisons are pretty pointless . ryzens are only hitting 4 ghz meanwhile those 7700k's are hitting 5 ghz on avg.

 

And Ryzen has twice the cores, what's your point?


Tobiman 03-11-2017 01:14 PM

That much is obvious. The objective is to measure IPC at the same clock speed.

Artikbot 03-11-2017 01:24 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by buttface420 View Post


but yet in these tests they had to disable half those cores and overclock the ryzen to its max to make it seen comparable to a stock 7700k.

 

They're testing clock-for-clock and core-for-core, not processor vs processor. You entirely missed the point of the article.


Laserlight 03-11-2017 01:34 PM

Good to know that Ryzen's IPC is just fine.
Now they need to improve the clocks on Ryzen 2.

ZealotKi11er 03-11-2017 01:41 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Laserlight View Post

Good to know that Ryzen's IPC is just fine.
Now they need to improve the clocks on Ryzen 2.

Its ok and nothing more. 4C/8T will be much cheaper than 7700K and 20-25% slower.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:03 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.