$499 AMD Ryzen 9 3900X Almost as Fast as $2000 Intel Core I9-9980XE • Hacker News Board

Re: $499 AMD Ryzen 9 3900X Almost as Fast as $2000 Intel Core I9-9980XE

#91

Post by MegaButts » Fri, Jun 28, 2019, 9:49 PM UTC

holy_city wrote: post #83

mrb wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Calling Geekbench a "single benchmark" is misleading because it runs 25 different types of workloads. So AMD doing well here means it does well compared to Intel in 25 different areas when they are all averaged: • Cryptography Workloads - AES • Integer Workloads - LZMA Compression - JPEG Compression - Canny - Lua - Dijkstra - SQLite - HTML 5 Parse - HTML 5 DOM - Histogram Equalization - PDF Rendering - LLVM - Camera…

Sorry for the confusion, I meant "single benchmark" as in "single run of Geekbench." As in comparing one measurement versus an aggregate of measurements isn't particularly meaningful, you need to compare aggregate to aggregate to get something valid. It's still a sample size of 1, even if the sample has 25 dimensions. (I don't know if Geekbench uses an average or what they're weighting is e.g. with memory speeds and…

I'm all for reproducing results, but given the relatively deterministic nature of computers (especially for new hardware) I feel this is an unwarranted criticism. How often do people get significantly different results when running identical tests on identical hardware?

Re: $499 AMD Ryzen 9 3900X Almost as Fast as $2000 Intel Core I9-9980XE

#92

Post by craftyguy » Fri, Jun 28, 2019, 9:50 PM UTC

zamadatix wrote: post #71

esmi wrote: post #66

This is comparing an unreleased CPU to a two year old one. But more importantly, it gives no information on how the Intel CPU was configured and we have no idea what kind of memory it was paired with. It's just comparing two random user submissions. Here's another i9-9980XE where Intel scored 7700 in single core. https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/12111208

> This is comparing an unreleased CPU It comes out in 10 days, does it really matter? > to a two year old one. The 9980XE launched Q4 2018, did you mean 2 quarter old? This also seems to imply Intel has something else better is due for release in the next year, there is nothing on the roadmap. > It's just comparing two random user submissions. Here's another i9-9980XE where Intel scored 7700 in single core. Because t…

> It comes out in 10 days, does it really matter?

Yea it does, because no one in the public can reproduce the results to verify them.

Re: $499 AMD Ryzen 9 3900X Almost as Fast as $2000 Intel Core I9-9980XE

#93

Post by noir_lord » Fri, Jun 28, 2019, 9:55 PM UTC

sureste wrote: post #36

MrMember wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I put a 2700X in my most recent desktop and a 2400G in my HTPC. For the price they can't be beat.

Are you gaming with the 2700X by chance? How is it?

I game with my 2700X/RTx2080 and it’s phenomenal, Battlefield 5 is gorgeous in 4K (though I have to drop to 1440 if I enable RT and ultra settings, that’s the GPU though not the cpu).

It’s so good I’m probably going to defer my upgrade for Zen 2 til Zen 2+ or whatever it’s called.

Re: $499 AMD Ryzen 9 3900X Almost as Fast as $2000 Intel Core I9-9980XE

#94

Post by vbezhenar » Fri, Jun 28, 2019, 9:55 PM UTC

petepete wrote: post #65

vbezhenar wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm considering Intel for my next workstation because I want to be able to run macOS at least in VirtualBox (or just run Hackintosh, did not decide yet). For some reason macOS does not like AMD CPUs.

There was a recent video on Linus Tech Tips where they set up a Threadripper workstation running macOS via KVM and it out-performed a top of the line iMac Pro.

Does it work with VirtualBox? I want to run Windows.

Re: $499 AMD Ryzen 9 3900X Almost as Fast as $2000 Intel Core I9-9980XE

#95

Post by toast0 » Fri, Jun 28, 2019, 9:56 PM UTC

ryacko wrote: post #52

theandrewbailey wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. I remember my 1800X making a "thunk" sound[0] when it dropped into the socket. It requires as much insertion force as water into a cup. [0] https://youtu.be/QdNISYm0w-U?t=756

If AMD advertised that their CPUs can be installed gingerly as opposed to Intel which felt like thirty pounds of pressure was required, then I would have opted for the older, but AMD chip. Had a false impression from all the PC part guides that somehow each were equal difficulty.

I've installed a couple of the Intel LGA CPUs, and I don't remember there being that much force required to put the lever down; although it's a bit less comfortable than the traditional ZIF. Speculation is that ZIF sockets are harder to ruin in manufacturing and shipping than all the pins in LGA sockets, allowing AMD to have more confidence in the supply chain.

For higher end chips, like ThreadRipper and Epyc, AMD uses LGA like Intel -- the pin count is too high not to.

Re: $499 AMD Ryzen 9 3900X Almost as Fast as $2000 Intel Core I9-9980XE

#96

Post by colechristensen » Fri, Jun 28, 2019, 9:56 PM UTC

molticrystal wrote: post #27

Out of curiosity, has anybody had anything in the AMD Ryzen instruction set missing that required you to purchase an Intel 9xxx instead? Any significant differences in regards to scientific applications or machine learning?

I have too frequently had problems with hardware support in OS outside Linux and Windows for non Intel chipsets.

One that sticks out is virtualization support in freebsd and others. I don't know if it's still true but the time risk isn't worth the cost benefit for me any more.

Re: $499 AMD Ryzen 9 3900X Almost as Fast as $2000 Intel Core I9-9980XE

#97

Post by ac29 » Fri, Jun 28, 2019, 9:58 PM UTC

polskibus wrote: post #12

How come techquila is publishing benchmark results while noone else is? Is this a controlled leak or a publisher that broke the rules?

More mainstream tech sites almost certainly already have Ryzen 2 CPU's under NDA. Publishing any results ahead of launch would mean they wouldnt get samples again in the future.

Re: $499 AMD Ryzen 9 3900X Almost as Fast as $2000 Intel Core I9-9980XE

#98

Post by noir_lord » Fri, Jun 28, 2019, 9:59 PM UTC

deforciant wrote: post #49

My ryzen 2700x was probably the best purchase I did last year :) it's just fantastic and I would really want to try out these new CPUs, just can't find an excuse to buy them :) Takes like a second to cross compile Go app for all architectures, many cores ftw!

Same boat, bought 2700X as stop gap because couldn’t wait for Zen 2 and it’s so damn good I can’t find a reason to upgrade to a 3900X or 3950

Re: $499 AMD Ryzen 9 3900X Almost as Fast as $2000 Intel Core I9-9980XE

#99

Post by Whinner » Fri, Jun 28, 2019, 9:59 PM UTC

rubyn00bie wrote: post #48

vbezhenar wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm considering Intel for my next workstation because I want to be able to run macOS at least in VirtualBox (or just run Hackintosh, did not decide yet). For some reason macOS does not like AMD CPUs.

Oh man, my suggestion buy a used dual socket Xeon V2 (or V3 if you can afford it) server with room for a GPU. The price for performance is pretty unbelievable since you get a whole system, which you can run ESXi or whatever flavor of hypervisor you want. V2/V3 Xeons are dirt cheap on ebay and if you don't mind a little risk the ES versions are mighty cheap for what you can get. I just got Dual 2667 V2, 96GB of ram, d…

I have a Dell Precision T7600. The only thing I hate is the almost full minute to boot with a perc controller and other servery type checks

Re: $499 AMD Ryzen 9 3900X Almost as Fast as $2000 Intel Core I9-9980XE

#100

Post by squarefoot » Fri, Jun 28, 2019, 10:01 PM UTC

devonkim wrote: post #75

travbrack wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had to double check your price on the SSD. When did SSDs get so cheap??

SSDs were held up in prices artificially for a while related to the memory price inflation that happened throughout 2018 and some of 2017. QLC was mentioned but prices are down across the board and everything in consumer land is down sharply YoY from that period (50%+ discount is fair). I’d expect some price increases coming up due to investor pressure for revenue.

What about SSD reliability? Did it improve in the last year or so?