Core i9-7980XE 18-core Benchmarks

#5474967 Posted on: 09/24/2017 12:46 AM

---

Do you even read what you type before hitting "post reply"? Every single thread about Intel is immediately flooded by AMD fanboys talking **** on Intel and anyone who buys their products instead of AMD, and not a word out of you about their trolling, fanboying, etc. Yet when one person fires back at AMD users... you cry foul. That is some of the most hypocritical nonsense i've seen in a while, and i've seen a lot. This site has gone from a great place to get information on PC hardware to a cesspool of **** talkers making it so you have to go through 2.5 pages of crap just to find one tidbit of information.

I really wish HH would crack down on this nonsense. Once your website's reputation takes a dive, its 10x harder to recover from it. I could name quite a few great examples but i've distracted from the topic at hand long enough.

Someone doesn't know how to read...

#5474971 Posted on: 09/24/2017 01:17 AM

---

http://www.zolkorn.com/en/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-vs-intel-core-i7-7700k-mhz-by-mhz-core-by-core-en/view-all/
we have seen RYZEN is behind Kaby Lake about 10-15%

For one, this website does not utilize Ryzen the best that it can be. It's already a pretty well known fact that Ryzen does rely on RAM to a pretty decent degree. I would say that not going above 2667Mhz for the sake of that's what all is supported could be logical, but it doesn't even do that, it runs in at 2400. Realistically, if both the Intel system can to 3200, and the AMD, it should be done at that. If you're going to gimp one system and not the other (since Intel does not rely so much in ram frequency) to state that the IPC is much different, that's pretty messed up.

But regardless;

From your own website you posted:

"SuperPi 1M results. Percentage wise, the difference between the two CPUs is approximately 11%." Win for Intel IPC wise

"Cinebench results. In single-threaded performance, the 1800X is around 6.8% slower compared to the i7-7700K"

"Geekbench results. Here we see the i7-7700K beating the R7 1800X in both single- and multi-threading performance by around 12% and 10% respectively." Personally, this is a bit screwed up test if somehow the 1800x loses out to the 7700k in multi-threaded performance by that much, let alone at all.

"RealBench 2.44 results. less than 1% difference favoring the i7-7700K." Very similar IPC

"FHD Benchmark results. expected the i7-7700K to win here, but the Ryzen chip performed 3.2% better." Better IPC then Intel

"Handbreak results. Kaby Lake architecture performs slightly better at around 5% to 6%"

3DMark Time Spy about 15% better for intel

Fire Strike Ultra both of systems can work out the level is very similar in every part

3DMark firestrike physics score puts AMDs processor about 6% faster then intel

3D mark Skydiver Intel performs about 8% faster

And i'm not going to get into the gaming aspect since that's not even what we're talking about here as well as has been shown that the memory speed greatly helps, which they did not do here, as well as it has been clearly shown that games that actually understand how to use a ryzen processor, get patched, etc. lowers the difference by a ton. Again, something they do not take into consideration.

So that means:

3 tests performed 10% or better for intel

2 tests performed between 6-8% in intels favor

1 test performed between 1-5% in intels favor

2 tests performed about equally

2 tests performed in AMDs favor.

Or in other words:

20% of the tests had AMDs performance beating Intels IPC

20% of tests had AMD and Intels performance at almost equal performance

50% of tests had AMDs performance at an IPC level of 5% or better when compared to Intel

and 70% of tests had AMDs performance at an IPC of 8% or better

Whereas only 30% of tests had AMDs performance at above 10%.

And somehow 30% of tests being above 10% somehow makes AMDs overall IPC difference between 10-15%? By that logic i could say that due to the results showing 40% of tests show that AMD is either equal or better then Intels IPC, then that means AMDs overall IPC difference is 3% faster then Intel. I'm sorry, but there's no logic in that. Let alone the fact that these numbers are based off of gimped ryzen results due to using a low frequency memory speed.

Either way, i'm done with this conversation since it clearly is about spreading misinformation for the sake of wanting something to be one way, rather then reality.

#5474973 Posted on: 09/24/2017 01:54 AM

---

LOL. I use enhanced turbo myself on my 4790K and it has a significant impact on TDP (100 watts vs the default 88 watts). Note that this is only a 200 MHz difference from the all-core turbo across four cores (4.4 GHz vs 4.2 GHz). With the 7980XE, we're talking about a whopping 800 MHz difference across 18 cores (3.4 GHz to 4.2 GHz)! Like I said before, this would blow the TDP completely out of the water (there's no other way it could be).

You have an Intel CPU as well, so you can test this out yourself (turn enhanced turbo off and on, and see what the difference in TDP is).

#5474985 Posted on: 09/24/2017 03:07 AM

---

And somehow 30% of tests being above 10% somehow makes AMDs overall IPC difference between 10-15%? By that logic i could say that due to the results showing 40% of tests show that AMD is either equal or better then Intels IPC, then that means AMDs overall IPC difference is 3% faster then Intel. I'm sorry, but there's no logic in that. Let alone the fact that these numbers are based off of gimped ryzen results due to using a low frequency memory speed.

Either way, i'm done with this conversation since it clearly is about spreading misinformation for the sake of wanting something to be one way, rather then reality.

I didn't say it averaged out across every test because every test isn't strictly IPC performance.

You're reading/believing what you want to believe.
There are several factors in benchmark results.

Other tests may be more dependent on L1/L2/L3 data size and latency. Cache can negatively impact performance if a data set is not able to fit inside.
Ryzen has significantly more cache for L1/L2 and L3.

7700k has deficit on cache and certain benchmark that benefits from increased cache sizes will see Ryzen catching up.
Cache is not directly related to IPC performance. IPC is correlated to pure integer performance which intel like i said before, is 10-15% faster.

You're arguing about cinebench and how the score doesn't seem realistic and I return with my first post showing cinebench both CPUs at 4ghz is over 10% difference.
Cinebench is strictly based on integer performance, that is why single core performance is much higher than ryzen in this test.

That's why you saw bulldozer beating the 2600k/3770k in cinebench due to having more integer cores; it did not matter that it had half the FPU.
In most real world tests, bulldozer wasnt even close.

and yes intel does benefit on memory, depending on the application.



LOL. I use enhanced turbo myself on my 4790K and it has a significant impact on TDP (100 watts vs the default 88 watts). Note that this is only a 200 MHz difference from the all-core turbo across four cores (4.4 GHz vs 4.2 GHz). With the 7980XE, we're talking about a whopping 800 MHz difference across 18 cores (3.4 GHz to 4.2 GHz)! Like I said before, this would blow the TDP completely out of the water (there's no other way it could be).

You have an Intel CPU as well, so you can test this out yourself (turn enhanced turbo off and on, and see what the difference in TDP is).

No different at the same voltage for my setup.
Depending on manufacturer auto voltage may scale up automatically based on core frequency