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

High End CPUs – Intel vs. AMD

cpubenchmark.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 98 posts

Re: High End CPUs – Intel vs. AMD

#71

Post by bigbugbag »

xmichael99 wrote: post #4

Wow! Hard to believe I would ever, ever, ever see AMD on the top of that list! Amazing! Forget about the price, just amazing to see AMD at the top, now factor in the price and wow Intel is screwed. Not because of this one release, but because they are getting pounded from all angles. Intel's strategy of limiting the PCI throughput to hold GPU manufactures back is over, and these AMD cpu's are going to be paired super…

How is Intel screwed by this ? They just have to cut on their overexcessive margins due to lack of competition for a while.

If they are screwed it's by their own choice to abandon desktop and server CPUs to bet all on mobile.

Re: High End CPUs – Intel vs. AMD

#72

Post by geezerjay »

axaxs wrote: post #5

I don't mean to diminish the efforts of anyone involved, but I truly feel one man more or less moves the direction of the CPU industry: Jim Keller. He, among others, invented x86_64 at AMD during its previous glory days. AMD dominated the competition. He led the Apple chips at A4, and Apple chips then and now dominate the mobile competition. He came back to AMD and helped create Zen, to obvious results. Apparently he…

> one man more or less moves the direction of the CPU industry: Jim Keller.

I never heard of him, and now I'm glad I did. Thank you for posting that.

Here's a link to wikipedia's article on Jim Keller:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Keller_(engineer)

Re: High End CPUs – Intel vs. AMD

#73

Post by rbanffy »

AlphaSite wrote: post #66
syshum wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jobs was a Marketer of other peoples ideas... I love how you leave out Woz, and the Team of people that made the iPod/iPhone/iPad Edison is renowned for taking credit for other peoples work, notably some of the work of Nikola Tesla who you also leave off your list and was one of the rare singular geniuses on the level of a Einstein Elon Musk has a vision of his idealized world and the money to hire people that will a…

Wiz was never involved with a lot of the more interesting bits of Apple, he gets a lot of deserved credit for his early work but also plenty of credit for things he never worked on.

Woz is the Mozart of 8-bit computer design. His design is surprising, even breathtaking at times, but the kind of magic he did then cannot be done these days of billions of transistors per chip.

Re: High End CPUs – Intel vs. AMD

#74

Post by Brockenstein »

fulafel wrote: post #18

What makes PassMark a representative CPU benchmark? These one-company CPU benchmarks tend to be quite problematic (cf. GeekBench). SPEC just came out with CPU2017. In SPEC there's at least a bunch of peer review, transparency and attention from academics. Here are Anandtech's AMD vs Intel CPU2006 numbers: http://www.anandtech.com/show/11544/intel-skylake-ep-vs-amd-... http://www.anandtech.com/show/11544/intel-skylake…

It's not authoritative. But in order to get a truly complete picture of CPU performance you've got to do all sorts of different workloads and between the benchmarks and real world performance you get kind of a muddle of:

"In highly threaded apps, AMD's high core CPU's stomp everything, especially for the price. Single core performance still belongs to Intel."

And then from there individual users need to figure out which CPU's are best for their use case. And a lot of users kind of want it summed up instead of sorting that out.

That aside AMD has a really good product this generation, compared to Bulldozer and it does hark back the previous decade where AMD's CPUs were truly viable competition to Intel's.

I'm not sure how Passmark derives their scores exactly. But based on what I'm seeing for all sorts of reviews is that Threadripper is a formidable chip and between an extremely high number of cores and low price I can't help but believe that spot is earned. Even if it is ultimately meaningless. It won't last forever either, but it will force Intel to respond. And that's what we've all wanted for the last 10 years.

Re: High End CPUs – Intel vs. AMD

#75

Post by dagaci »

rbanffy wrote: post #70
syshum wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jobs was a Marketer of other peoples ideas... I love how you leave out Woz, and the Team of people that made the iPod/iPhone/iPad Edison is renowned for taking credit for other peoples work, notably some of the work of Nikola Tesla who you also leave off your list and was one of the rare singular geniuses on the level of a Einstein Elon Musk has a vision of his idealized world and the money to hire people that will a…

> Jobs was a Marketer of other peoples ideas That's an oversimplification. He was a marketer, true, but he also was fanatically pushing people towards standards higher than anyone else in the industry. If there was nothing special about Jobs, how can it be Apple came up with the Mac (a somewhat just-right version of the Lisa ideas), with the iPod, the iPhone, computers that actually look good (starting with the bondi…

I don't think Marketeer is as a name should be diminished. Truly and brilliant excellent Marketeers are very rare and amazing to watch.

Re: High End CPUs – Intel vs. AMD

#76

Post by rxhernandez »

rbanffy wrote: post #70
syshum wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jobs was a Marketer of other peoples ideas... I love how you leave out Woz, and the Team of people that made the iPod/iPhone/iPad Edison is renowned for taking credit for other peoples work, notably some of the work of Nikola Tesla who you also leave off your list and was one of the rare singular geniuses on the level of a Einstein Elon Musk has a vision of his idealized world and the money to hire people that will a…

> Jobs was a Marketer of other peoples ideas That's an oversimplification. He was a marketer, true, but he also was fanatically pushing people towards standards higher than anyone else in the industry. If there was nothing special about Jobs, how can it be Apple came up with the Mac (a somewhat just-right version of the Lisa ideas), with the iPod, the iPhone, computers that actually look good (starting with the bondi…

If I invent a fantastic new algorithm in a space people are hamfistedly competing in, does my manager get the credit for inventing the algorithm because he pushed me, or do I?

This type of thinking makes great engineers move into other non-engineering ventures.

Re: High End CPUs – Intel vs. AMD

#77

Post by mtgx »

fulafel wrote: post #18

What makes PassMark a representative CPU benchmark? These one-company CPU benchmarks tend to be quite problematic (cf. GeekBench). SPEC just came out with CPU2017. In SPEC there's at least a bunch of peer review, transparency and attention from academics. Here are Anandtech's AMD vs Intel CPU2006 numbers: http://www.anandtech.com/show/11544/intel-skylake-ep-vs-amd-... http://www.anandtech.com/show/11544/intel-skylake…

It seems to have been representative enough during the time when Intel's CPUs were wiping the floor with the AMD CPUs on the very same benchmarks.

Re: High End CPUs – Intel vs. AMD

#79

Post by Brockenstein »

rocky1138 wrote: post #10

The top CPU is almost 4 times faster than my CPU (i5 6600K). Is it just down to the GHz and number of cores? Besides those two elements, what makes this processor so much faster?

It would really depend on the work you're doing.

Programs that use single cores, or only a handful of threads won't run four times faster on the 1950X or the i9 compared to your i5. Workloads that can use as many cores as you can throw at it, will naturally benefit from extra cores.

Your i5 has 4 cores, and 1950x has 16 cores, and can execute 32 threads. Unless the architecture was truly inferior (which it's not) that's quite a disparity for your i5 to compete with in highly threaded workloads.

Ryzen's architecture is solid. It can reach competitive clock speeds. The number of cores just add a lot more raw computing power. That's going to be far and away the biggest difference when looking at benchmarks that can use all the cores.

Re: High End CPUs – Intel vs. AMD

#80

Post by sebow »

randallsquared wrote: post #69
0xbear wrote: post #42

In case someone from AMD is reading this: guys, you need to fix stability issues on Linux, or your Epyc is DOA. People are having some serious lock-up trouble with Ryzen, even with the latest AGESA updates and kernels. This is the only issue preventing me from recommending to purchase threadripper workstations at work. We do need that pcie bandwidth for GPU, but we absolutely can't tolerate instability.

I had a lot of issues: obviously Ubuntu 17.04 doesn't boot, but Fedora 26 crashed a lot seemingly no matter what I changed. Windows 10 also crashed fairly often. I was about say that it wasn't as bad as F26, but given the automatic restart on crash that I kept seeing, it might have been as bad. Currently using Arch/4.12-zen/nvidia with Gigabyte Gaming K5/Ryzen 7 1700X/GTX1060 and since kicking nouveau out, I have had…

The nouveau drivers are so bad,might only be about nvidia or nvidia & ryzen combo on linux, i know for sure that with an antique AMD card i never had these problems.

On my 1800x and GTX 760(waiting for vega™) i got similar results, upgrading your kernel also makes you re-install the video driver.(or at least it did for me).

I'm not sure about why your w10 crashed, i never had problems on windows besides undervolting while also increasing the CPU freq.(Which was expected)

Post reply on HN