Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

AMD’s $499 Ryzen 7 1800X Beats $1700 i7 6950X with 1-Click OC on Air Cooling

wccftech.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 209 posts

Re: AMD’s $499 Ryzen 7 1800X Beats $1700 i7 6950X with 1-Click OC on Air Cooling

#61

Post by dpark »

c2h5oh wrote: post #17
jeff_vader wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

64gb workstation ought to be enough for anybody. Jokes aside, what do you do if you are interested in >64gb workstations?

Some examples that can easily push you beyond 64 GB: - high resolution photo editing: when you start with a 80 mpix / 48 bit photo from a medium format camera pushing beyond 16 GB requires only a couple layers and a couple undo steps being available - high resolution video processing. 1 second of uncompressed 4k 60fps video is almost 1.4GB - very large application compilation: building Android requires 16GB of RAM/sw…

What camera is capturing 16GB photos? An IQ180 captures 80 megapixels but the images are something like 500 MB each.

All of your hypothetical examples are also for very niche high-resource usage professionals. It's absurd that these cases need extremely high memory support from consumer processors. Intel is not obligated to subsidize anyone, especially not people who can afford to pay for high end systems.

Re: AMD’s $499 Ryzen 7 1800X Beats $1700 i7 6950X with 1-Click OC on Air Cooling

#62

Post by dpark »

barrkel wrote: post #59
dpark wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nah, it's just artificial limits. Would totally just work if they flipped a bit in the processor. /s Less sarcastically, what do people need >64 gigs for on a consumer desktop? I'm a dev and work on a pretty memory intensive service and don't need 128 gigs. Holding an entire double layer blu-ray in memory would only require 50 gigs.

The other day, I was struggling to emulate a Hadoop cluster in a series of VMs on a 16G laptop with zero work being performed - just keeping all the services and Cloudera's management scripts and tools made everything swap everywhere. VMs are my biggest memory hog, particularly when they are running lots and lots of separate Java processes.

And the problem with your 16GB system was that it didn't support >64GB?

Re: AMD’s $499 Ryzen 7 1800X Beats $1700 i7 6950X with 1-Click OC on Air Cooling

#64

Post by smallnamespace »

semi-extrinsic wrote: post #50
emersonrsantos wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use a sound sampler (Hauptwerk) that loads tens of thousand of wavefiles and needs a polyphony (simultaneous samples being played) of thousands of voices to simulate a pipe organ. The minimum configuration for the smallest instrument (one voice) with natural acoustics (ie. original ambient reveberation recorded) is 4gb. The normal requirements for some good instruments are 64-128gb for 24-bit 6-channel uncompressed…

> 24-bit (...) uncompressed audio Do you really need this much headroom, e.g. for producing music professionally? (If so, why are you arguing over the $50-100 extra for a Xeon?) Because for listening, it's proven fact that even professional musicians and mixing engineers using equipment costing >$100k can't tell 24 bit from 16 bit in a proper double-blind A/B test. Presumably you use a high sample rate as well (maybe…

For editing, you want to use the highest possible starting bandwidth (sampling rate * bit width) because every intermediate edit and calculation leads to round-off and other errors. You also need them to be WAVs or some other raw format since you cause minor errors every time you compress + decompress something, not to mention the performance loss.

It's the same rationale for doing calculations in full 80-bit or 64-bit FP even if you don't need the full bits of precision -- if you start your calculations at your target precision, your result will have insufficient precision due to truncation, roundoff, overflow, underflow, clipping, etc. in intermediate calculations.

In theory, if you knew what your editing pipeline is, one could mathematically derive the starting headroom required to end up with acceptable error, but in practice that's probably a very risky proposition because 1) you don't know every intermediate calculation going on in every piece of software and 2) errors grow in highly non-linear ways, so even a small change in your pipeline might cause a large change in required headroom [1].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numerical_analysis#Generation_...

Re: AMD’s $499 Ryzen 7 1800X Beats $1700 i7 6950X with 1-Click OC on Air Cooling

#65

Post by dpark »

nextos wrote: post #58
dpark wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nah, it's just artificial limits. Would totally just work if they flipped a bit in the processor. /s Less sarcastically, what do people need >64 gigs for on a consumer desktop? I'm a dev and work on a pretty memory intensive service and don't need 128 gigs. Holding an entire double layer blu-ray in memory would only require 50 gigs.

They are not artificial, but Intel seems to have big margins. Competition reduces margins.

Sure. I don't personally care if Intel's margins drop. But I also don't care if professionals making six figures have to pony up a couple hundred for a Xeon system. The idea that Intel should make casual consumers subsidize professional needs so that professionals can save a hundred bucks is absurd.

Re: AMD’s $499 Ryzen 7 1800X Beats $1700 i7 6950X with 1-Click OC on Air Cooling

#66

Post by agumonkey »

seanp2k2 wrote: post #31
Zekio wrote: post #9

I can't wait to see the result this will have on the CPU market especially with the rest of their CPU line up coming later this year

Intel could just drop their prices, but it looks like Intel will [also] rush out their 8th-gen stuff this year, even though it's still on 14mm: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/02/intel-coffee-lake-14...

It will be a very interesting match to witness. Intel will have to act under pressure while saying goodbye to a huge sum of money.

Re: AMD’s $499 Ryzen 7 1800X Beats $1700 i7 6950X with 1-Click OC on Air Cooling

#67

Post by [deleted] »

haswell wrote: post #45
nextos wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. Ridiculous Intel pricing and artificial limitations were a consequence of de facto monopoly. I absolutely hate how they cap maximum RAM on consumer machines, so that you need to pony up for a Xeon workstation if you need more than 64 GB.

The recent generations can address 128GB as long as your motherboard supports it (my X99 board does).

[deleted]

Re: AMD’s $499 Ryzen 7 1800X Beats $1700 i7 6950X with 1-Click OC on Air Cooling

#69

Post by philipkglass »

jeff_vader wrote: post #12
nextos wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. Ridiculous Intel pricing and artificial limitations were a consequence of de facto monopoly. I absolutely hate how they cap maximum RAM on consumer machines, so that you need to pony up for a Xeon workstation if you need more than 64 GB.

64gb workstation ought to be enough for anybody. Jokes aside, what do you do if you are interested in >64gb workstations?

Quantum chemistry. There are a number of high accuracy wavefunction based methods that are compute-tractable on desktop machines but very demanding of storage. Even when there's a disk based alternative to RAM storage it's a lot slower when you can't just allocate huge arrays in memory. I could easily use 256 GB, maybe 512, on a machine with 8 physical cores.

You can get commercial software that is a bit better tuned for running on "ordinary" desktop hardware, but it's so expensive that you don't really come out ahead on total cost.

Re: AMD’s $499 Ryzen 7 1800X Beats $1700 i7 6950X with 1-Click OC on Air Cooling

#70

Post by onurozkan »

SG- wrote: post #5

This article doesn't actually list any benchmarks and the link/URL is totally broken for the "Ryzen offers even better single-threaded performance per clock than Intel’s Kaby Lake." - http://single-threaded/

in the video, they say they cant release any benchmark until march 2nd. not sure why.
Post reply on HN