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)

Streetdragon 05-24-2019 10:37 AM

16 cores i would say, all cores 4.2Ghz, 8 Cores 4.6Ghz and one core 5.2Ghz or so

Simular to 12 core cpu

bigjdubb 05-24-2019 10:57 AM

I think he was making a joke about the 22 core Intel processor we made up.

I will be happily surprised if there are any 5.0ghz all core Zen 2 processors.

rdr09 05-24-2019 12:44 PM


Originally Posted by epic1337 (Post 27977642)
because of scaling.

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

Maybe you are right.

R5 1600 @ 3.9 > 1360/6 = 227
R7 2700 @ 4.1 > 1903/8 = 238
16 @ 4.2 > 2478/16 = 155

Now it's right.

Gunderman456 05-24-2019 01:46 PM


Originally Posted by Section31 (Post 27977046)
Hopefully AMD does price close to rumored. That is way tech should be priced, we let intel/nvidia get away with there high pricing and they maintain way too high gross margin percentage on consumer side. Enterprise has it worse than us though, they are paying lot more than they really should be.

You can already see the pricing effect on phones, they keep on going up each year and even the Apple Iphone yearly upgrade group is now going through longer upgrade cycles.

No, no like some here are pleading, AMD should price it at $1000. It's not like Intel and Nvidia have been fleecing or anything. So since Intel's price is at $700 and AMD's will be faster and they are a business after all they should price their superior product at $1000. Hurp, Durp...

I'm going to bang my head on the wall. Be right back to price my new system at $7000 so I can play the latest and greatest games!

AlphaC 05-24-2019 02:13 PM


Originally Posted by rdr09 (Post 27978010)
Maybe you are right.

R5 1600 @ 3.9 > 1360/6 = 227
R7 2700 @ 4.1 > 1903/8 = 238
16 @ 4.2 > 2478/16 = 155

Now it's right.

Amdahl's law

rdr09 05-24-2019 02:26 PM


Originally Posted by AlphaC (Post 27978088)
Amdahl's law

I messed up. It's . . .

4278/16 = 267

Too high.

tubers 05-24-2019 03:42 PM

Man. 16 Cores sounds crazy compared to i9-9900K

I have a feeling it'll be more like:

12C/24T R9 to compete with i9.
10C R7 no SMT to compete with i7.
8C R5 no SMT to compete with i5.
6C R3 no SMT to compete with i3.

NihilOC 05-24-2019 04:45 PM


Originally Posted by ZealotKi11er (Post 27977680)
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.

Whilst I appreciate that there is probably very little R&D for recent generations they have a 13 billion USD R&D budget, it's not like they can go "oh well we only did x R&D for this specific product, so let's sell it at ~20% over cost." Especially since they'd then be massively reducing demand for their next generation of CPUs, no matter the performance gain if they just swamped the market with half decent processors at 1/5 the price they won't sell anything new for a while.

Taking NV as an example their revenue in 2018 was 9.71B, cost of goods sold was 3.88B with 1.88B spent on R&D. Less some overhead and their earnings before tax were 3.21B. Fairly extraordinary, and I imagine that more competition would have the potential to lower card costs given the margin available, but they certainly aren't gouging consumers to quite the extent that some make out on these forums. I also doubt we'd be seeing significant reductions across the board, it would likely only be particularly pronounced on the very high margin products.

Section31 05-24-2019 05:22 PM

Pricing will be key for consumer side. If its pricing is close to rumored and hits 5ghz, watch those x299 owners (with 7900x onwards) jump boat. If its pricing is 1000usd, I will use my 7920x for another couple years till intel 7nm comes out.

The shortfalls of that whole x299 platform make me want to dump it but I don't want to spend too much on stop gap solution. Its actually an win-win for people if AMD does that because the people looking for good deals can then get these x299 owners mobo/cpu for incredibly low prices. (say 150usd for 7900x and 400usd for 7980xe and maybe even get the mobo for free - since the owners probably used monoblocks or watercooled vrm and probably didn't keep or destroyed the original cpu heatsink).

epic1337 05-24-2019 05:33 PM

well technically, although their CPUs have only gone through refinements, their R&D is largely focused on their IGP.
they even went so far as ditch the processor and make a dedicated GPU, they're pretty serious with their graphics processor.

so you're probably paying for the R&D of the part which you didn't really want.

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:07 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.