Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community

Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community (https://www.overclock.net/forum/)
-   Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles (https://www.overclock.net/forum/379-rumors-unconfirmed-articles/)
-   -   [Forbes] AMD In Shock Intel-Smashing Performance Claim: Is Cinebench Score Really True? (https://www.overclock.net/forum/379-rumors-unconfirmed-articles/1726326-forbes-amd-shock-intel-smashing-performance-claim-cinebench-score-really-true.html)

Lexi is Dumb 05-24-2019 04:22 AM

Personally I think the problem is everyone is looking at these rumours from the perspective of having only had 3% IPC jumps on similar nodes for like 4 years now, AMD included with Zen+. This isn't a minor architecture tweak, it's a new architecture coupled with a decent node shrink.. I think we've forgotten what is reasonable to expect from that.

As far as I can tell, edging out intel on a newer better smaller process through TSMC over their old GloFo 12/14nm process with a new architecture VS Intels same iterative architecture from the last like 3-4 years still on 14nm.. is actually pretty underwhelming. Impressive given their position over the last 7 years, but frankly these are the performance gains we should be expecting at minimum not calling an over hyping dream. We aren't back to real competition until its just normal for a new CPU generation to beat the competitors last one.

epic1337 05-24-2019 05:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hwgeek (Post 27977566)
if 8c es were able to score 2000+pts at +-65W, whats the problem getting 4300pts with OCed 16C? This level of performance is possible and it's only a question if and how AMD would choose to position it.

because of scaling.
https://www.cgdirector.com/cinebench...core_5000_area

you can't just stuff more cores and expect the score to rise up proportionately.

Particle 05-24-2019 06:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Imglidinhere (Post 27976978)
Didn't AMD already state that they didn't want to be stuck in the lower-end segments anymore? I mean, call me crazy, but if AMD produces something faster than Intel, they shouldn't have to resort to selling it for cheaper to maintain market share.

If this is true, I wouldn't mind seeing it sold for over $750. If its genuinely that much faster, then why should they hinder their own potential profit making?

I'd rather argue that Intel is overpricing instead of AMD is underpricing.

Ultimately, I'm sure they'll generate estimates from which to derive the ideal price/volume/profit ratio. If they think they can sell five times as many units by taking a twenty percent cut to per-unit profit versus what they would make at a competitor's price point, they should and would go with the lower price.

ZealotKi11er 05-24-2019 06:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Particle (Post 27977658)
I'd rather argue that Intel is overpricing instead of AMD is underpricing.

Ultimately, I'm sure they'll generate estimates from which to derive the ideal price/volume/profit ratio. If they think they can sell five times as many units by taking a twenty percent cut to per-unit profit versus what they would make at a competitor's price point, they should and would go with the lower price.

Intel is definitely overpriced. Once you factor how there is next to no R&D since 6700K-9900K only thing that has changed is larger die size but 14nm has gotten better. It probably cost intel <$100 to make 9900K. The margins are huge. They are a high margin company after all. Same thing with Nvidia.

Hwgeek 05-24-2019 07:00 AM

I think Intel will announce X299 22C CPU, there was already such core count on X99(E5-2699 v4) so they will do the same to answer Amd's 16c.
The hard part will be finding the right model name- since they already used 9990XE for 14c LOL.

bmgjet 05-24-2019 07:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hwgeek (Post 27977694)
I think Intel will announce X299 22C CPU, there was already such core count on X99(E5-2699 v4) so they will do the same to answer Amd's 16c.
The hard part will be finding the right model name- since they already used 9990XE for 14c LOL.

Could call it the 9999XE.

Then they are ready to annouce there 10K series on all new 10NM.

Hwgeek 05-24-2019 07:10 AM

ROFL!

bigjdubb 05-24-2019 07:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hwgeek (Post 27977694)
I think Intel will announce X299 22C CPU, there was already such core count on X99(E5-2699 v4) so they will do the same to answer Amd's 16c.
The hard part will be finding the right model name- since they already used 9990XE for 14c LOL.

Sounds about right. Intels answer to AMD's $600 16 core processor will be a $2,200 22 core that comes with it's it's own 50 amp breaker (installation not included) so you can overclock it. It'll sell.

Hwgeek 05-24-2019 08:10 AM

Maybe we will be lucky to see it in LIVE Demo @5.0Ghz! LOL.

ZealotKi11er 05-24-2019 10:29 AM

5GHz seems like a stretch. Maybe some core but not all. 5.0GHz XFR... 2700X technically 4.35Ghz XFR.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:08 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.