Overclock.net banner
1 - 20 of 164 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,830 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Quote:




Last week, overclockers pitted AMD's Ryzen Threadripper 1950X against Intel's Core i9-7960X. Now, we have the results, and Intel's CPU boasts a near-clean sweep. In fact, the Core i9 beat out Threadripper in eight out of nine tests. High-profile overclockers Splave, HiCookie, Sofos1990, and TheOverclocker pushed the two processors to their limit. In the process, they broke two world records and set seven new global first places.

The chips broke total of 2 world records and achieved 7 global first place positions. The chip to break world records was Intel's Core i9-7960X which leads in 8 out of the total 9 positions for the testing. The Threadripper 1950X was able to achieve 1 global first position.
Source: https://www.eteknix.com/overclockers-pit-i9-7960x-threadripper-1950x/
Source 2: http://wccftech.com/intel-amd-16-core-cpu-records-core-i9-7960x-ryzen-threadripper-1950x/
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,454 Posts
Cool. I'd still buy the AMD chip first :p
 

·
Politically incorrect
Joined
·
9,522 Posts
It had better perform better than TR otherwise there is absolutely no way Intel could justify the price of this chip. It's terrible value but at least they can claim it's 'better' than TR in some things.
 

·
00110001001001111010
Joined
·
187 Posts
It's $600-700 more... it had better beat the 1950x.
 
  • Rep+
Reactions: WhiteWulfe

·
Registered
Joined
·
106 Posts
Every new upcoming cpu release nowadays starts with a ******ed ln2 benchmark. Well good luck using ln2 for everyday use. Most of these bench numbers are very faraway even from an enthusiast watercooling setup, in other words useless.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,049 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by hkuspc40 View Post

AMD behind Intel since the Athlon days... Maybe someday...
uhh...

Athlon generally outperformed the P3 and Willamatte P4s.
Athlon 64 generally outperformed Prescott and its derivitives like Cedar Mill.

The only time an Athlon chip DIDN'T compete at or near the top was during the brief period before the A64 came out, after C2D came out and when Athlon became a cutdown Phenom brand.
 

·
Fluffy Fennec Foxes!
Joined
·
10,531 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by hkuspc40 View Post

AMD behind Intel since the Athlon days... Maybe someday...
Uhm.... Barton cores were better than Intel's offerings back in the Athlon XP days, and then there's also the first generation of Athlon64 CPU's which utterly destroyed what Intel had at the time.
tongue.gif


Saying "since the Athlon days" could imply Thoroughbred A or B core Athlon, which if you were silly you could cook an egg on. http://www.phys.ncku.edu.tw/~htsu/humor/fry_egg.html
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
50 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by xlink View Post

uhh...

Athlon generally outperformed the P3 and Willamatte P4s.
Athlon 64 generally outperformed Prescott and its derivitives like Cedar Mill.

The only time an Athlon chip DIDN'T compete at or near the top was during the brief period before the A64 came out, after C2D came out and when Athlon became a cutdown Phenom brand.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteWulfe View Post

Uhm.... Barton cores were better than Intel's offerings back in the Athlon XP days, and then there's also the first generation of Athlon64 CPU's which utterly destroyed what Intel had at the time.
tongue.gif


Saying "since the Athlon days" could imply Thoroughbred A or B core Athlon, which if you were silly you could cook an egg on. http://www.phys.ncku.edu.tw/~htsu/humor/fry_egg.html
The definition of "since":
"in the intervening period between (the time mentioned) and the time under consideration, typically the present."

I know the Athlons were better at the time. I owned one.
 

·
Politically incorrect
Joined
·
9,522 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by kd5151 View Post

8/10 records. forgot the most expensive record.
laugher.gif
Intel are set to break their own record with that monstrously priced 2000 USD chip.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
134 Posts
I would have been surprised at anything else. I mean, they're making Ryzen on a process designed for mobile phones. If people couldn't get Intel chips to substantially higher clockspeeds than Ryzen, then Intel would have to have been doing something horribly wrong wrong during development.

I can't wait to see Zen2 go up against whatever Intel has available then. A 7nm high-power process designed by the ex-IBM guys? Should be amazing to see.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,740 Posts
Same number of cores and roughly 5% IPC advantage in Cinebench compared to the 1950X, on a platform that is in many ways (not all) inferior. For $700 more, because it's "Genuine Intel". Yawn.

7800X at $300-$350, 7820X at $500-$550, 7900X at $850-$900, 7920X at $1050, 7960X at $1200, 7980XE at whatever absurd price point -- that would be much more interesting.
 

·
MegaTechPC
Joined
·
19,220 Posts
Obviously the i9's issues with heat are going to be irrelevant in extreme OCing. The real question is how typical daily driver setups will perform compared to each other. But either way TR represents tremendous value for all and the fact that Intel had to match core numbers with AMD to beat it is a huge reversal from the past 10 years of CPU competition. Higher IPC and clock speed kind of made this inevitable after all.
 

·
Professional Proletariat
Joined
·
5,671 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattousai View Post

It's $600-700 more... it had better beat the 1950x.
Basically this.

For $700 more it had better wipe the floor with its competitor. I mean the price differential is enough to get a 1080 Ti.
 

·
FOCAL ARIA FTW
Joined
·
9,445 Posts
Give me a second to run the math.

Intel 7960x: 16 cores : 32 threads
AMD 1950x : 16 cores : 32 threads.

Both pushed to their absolute limit, no mercy, no holds barred, yet this still becomes an AMD apologist thread where 'yeah for the price they charge, it better perform'. History shows that INTEL chips that were priced higher than AMD ones often performed worse. Consequently, INTEL pricing does not always reflect performance.

Having said that, many have missed the point. This was a performance based comparison based on identical number of cores and threads. Nobody said anything about the price, it was just showed that INTEL still has the performance crown even though many AMD apologists are posting doom and gloom scenarios.
 
1 - 20 of 164 Posts
Top