Corsair H170i Elite Capellix XT review
Forspoken: PC performance graphics benchmarks
ASRock Z790 Taichi review
The Callisto Protocol: PC graphics benchmarks
G.Skill TridentZ 5 RGB 6800 MHz CL34 DDR5 review
Be Quiet! Dark Power 13 - 1000W PSU Review
Palit GeForce RTX 4080 GamingPRO OC review
Core i9 13900K DDR5 7200 MHz (+memory scaling) review
Seasonic Prime Titanium TX-1300 (1300W PSU) review
F1 2022: PC graphics performance benchmark review
AMD 10-core Ryzen 2800X in response to Intel Core i9-9900K?
Do you remember when Ryzen 2000 (Zen+) launched with the flagship processor being the Ryzen 7 2700X? We all felt that was a little weird, as the previous generation had a Ryzen 7 1800X. In my 2700X review, I already mentioned that AMD might be holding back processors, waiting on Intel to release the Core 9000 series processors.
Well, it's a bit confusing to see really, but a screenshot leaked showing a partially Cinebench score based on a processor called Ryzen R7 2800X. The shocking thing here is that it is listed as being a 10-core processor. The news of this 10-core part surfaced at elchapuzasinformatico and the picture shows clock speeds in Cinebench at 4.00 GHz with a reportedly multi-core score of roughly 2130 points.
To be brutally honest, the photo is a bit of a clusterfrack to see as 10-cores does not make any sense whatsoever. ZEN+ dies have 8 cores, only a multi-die proc would be able to achieve 10 cores. And even then the core complex is in multitudes of four cores, so 12 cores would be the next logical step. There's also no source mentioned of that photo and the 'R7' entry does not match up as well, as that should read Ryzen 7 2x00X.
So that's enough disclaimers I think, grains of salt included.
JamesSneed
Senior Member
Posts: 1654
Joined: 2017-02-14
Senior Member
Posts: 1654
Joined: 2017-02-14
#5583051 Posted on: 09/10/2018 04:08 PM
Maybee it is a pizza with 10 pepperonis?
Maybee it is a pizza with 10 pepperonis?
Agent-A01
Senior Member
Posts: 11616
Joined: 2010-12-27
Senior Member
Posts: 11616
Joined: 2010-12-27
#5583079 Posted on: 09/10/2018 05:06 PM
Intel is a stuttery and choppy and hiccups mess (did you notice your cursor stops moving for 1 second for absolutely no reason ? No such thing on AMD). No idea why all Intel SKUs since the beginning of time have this problem.
no more input lag like it does on Intel, no blocking like it does on Intel, no lockups like it does on Intel, no audio crackle like it does on Intel. You cannot fu****g listen to music on some Intel SKUs without audio crackle while playing certain games.
What?
I've never seen any of that on multiple intel systems.
That sounds like a lot of user error IMO.
Intel is a stuttery and choppy and hiccups mess (did you notice your cursor stops moving for 1 second for absolutely no reason ? No such thing on AMD). No idea why all Intel SKUs since the beginning of time have this problem.
no more input lag like it does on Intel, no blocking like it does on Intel, no lockups like it does on Intel, no audio crackle like it does on Intel. You cannot fu****g listen to music on some Intel SKUs without audio crackle while playing certain games.
What?
I've never seen any of that on multiple intel systems.
That sounds like a lot of user error IMO.
Venix
Senior Member
Posts: 2869
Joined: 2016-08-01
Senior Member
Posts: 2869
Joined: 2016-08-01
#5583102 Posted on: 09/10/2018 06:02 PM
My opinion is that Ryzen FEELS snappier/smoother than Intel, but if you care only about bigger numbers, you should be a theoretical mathematician in the first place.
Intel is a stuttery and choppy and hiccups mess (did you notice your cursor stops moving for 1 second for absolutely no reason ? No such thing on AMD). No idea why all Intel SKUs since the beginning of time have this problem.
I transcode movies with 50% CPU utilization on AMD while playing games and nothing changes about the game, no more input lag like it does on Intel, no blocking like it does on Intel, no lockups like it does on Intel, no audio crackle like it does on Intel. You cannot fu****g listen to music on some Intel SKUs without audio crackle while playing certain games.
AMD feels like it doesn't max out when it reaches 100% per core.
what are you smoking ? I3 330m on a laptop never had such problem ... intel 3770k on my old desktop also no such problem ... also saw multiple core 2 duos in the past and quads ...and various generations of i 3 /5 /7 on other people briefly none of em what so ever did this crackling you talk about
2800x 10 core ? unless they cram in there 2 dies .... i doubt it ! not with zen+ at least
My opinion is that Ryzen FEELS snappier/smoother than Intel, but if you care only about bigger numbers, you should be a theoretical mathematician in the first place.
Intel is a stuttery and choppy and hiccups mess (did you notice your cursor stops moving for 1 second for absolutely no reason ? No such thing on AMD). No idea why all Intel SKUs since the beginning of time have this problem.
I transcode movies with 50% CPU utilization on AMD while playing games and nothing changes about the game, no more input lag like it does on Intel, no blocking like it does on Intel, no lockups like it does on Intel, no audio crackle like it does on Intel. You cannot fu****g listen to music on some Intel SKUs without audio crackle while playing certain games.
AMD feels like it doesn't max out when it reaches 100% per core.
what are you smoking ? I3 330m on a laptop never had such problem ... intel 3770k on my old desktop also no such problem ... also saw multiple core 2 duos in the past and quads ...and various generations of i 3 /5 /7 on other people briefly none of em what so ever did this crackling you talk about
2800x 10 core ? unless they cram in there 2 dies .... i doubt it ! not with zen+ at least
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 7163
Joined: 2012-11-10
Senior Member
Posts: 7163
Joined: 2012-11-10
#5583103 Posted on: 09/10/2018 06:04 PM
I wonder if it would be possible to run the third CCX on only two cores in such a was as to gain more single thread performance? It would probably be a core affinity nightmare, but it would be nice to see a single core performance boost on and AMD processor.
Just a thought . . .
I've wondered the same thing, though in a more generalized sense:
Why does each CCX need to have the same amount of cores as the other?
must have at least 11 cores before i get one
So, why don't you get one of the existing 12 core models?
I wonder if it would be possible to run the third CCX on only two cores in such a was as to gain more single thread performance? It would probably be a core affinity nightmare, but it would be nice to see a single core performance boost on and AMD processor.
Just a thought . . .
I've wondered the same thing, though in a more generalized sense:
Why does each CCX need to have the same amount of cores as the other?
must have at least 11 cores before i get one
So, why don't you get one of the existing 12 core models?
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 3566
Joined: 2007-05-31
in single CPU no, it's 6T/12T... but most bench consider that is single CPU even if you have many (i haven't got a 16C/32T either despite it show this way).