Dual AMD EPYC 7742 Crushes Quad Intel Xeon 8180M's in Geekbench 4

Post by smallbigfish » Mon, Sep 02, 2019, 6:59 PM UTC

gtirloni wrote: post #85

lurker458 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They came back fast by bribing OEMs to only sell Intel and were fined for it by the EU because it was an antitrust violation. It's unlikely they can repeat that.

Intel had seriously better more reliable hardware at that point. You couldn't pay me to buy AMD after all the hardware I lost to thermal issues. HN likes to believe that AMD is and was always the best if only Intel hadn't used monopoly tactics but the reality is that it's not as simple as that. That being said, I'm truly happy with what AMD is delivering now and I hope they can sustain it for years to come. My next w…

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Sep 02, 2019, 7:10 PM UTC

localhost wrote: post #46

"You're getting 24.83% more performance while costing 73.29% less." This is a terrible performance summary. Let's try to normalize it in terms of Geekbench points / $: Intel = 155050 / $52044 = 2.97 / $ AMD = 193554 / $13011 = 14.88 / $ AMD has a 5x advantage on the price of the CPU alone, not factoring in the price of the motherboard and other components (this is a 4 socket Intel motherboard vs. a dual socket AMD).…

Post by jsf01 » Mon, Sep 02, 2019, 7:25 PM UTC

brnt wrote: post #7

As much as I hate edgy 'Gamer' names, it seems AMD's new CPU does live up to its name.

Post by nextos » Mon, Sep 02, 2019, 7:46 PM UTC

zamadatix wrote: post #73

localhost wrote: post #46

"You're getting 24.83% more performance while costing 73.29% less." This is a terrible performance summary. Let's try to normalize it in terms of Geekbench points / $: Intel = 155050 / $52044 = 2.97 / $ AMD = 193554 / $13011 = 14.88 / $ AMD has a 5x advantage on the price of the CPU alone, not factoring in the price of the motherboard and other components (this is a 4 socket Intel motherboard vs. a dual socket AMD).…

I think it's best to say it the way they did. It's one thing to be faster per dollar but it's another thing for to win on performance as well. From single core to same number of cores to having more cores the 7742 wins in each case and still comes out on top. That's far more amazing than being 5x cheaper. Everyone has known Intel has charged an outrageous premium for a long time but it was also the best so people dea…

Post by kpozin » Mon, Sep 02, 2019, 8:09 PM UTC

morganvachon wrote: post #30

gambiting wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>My old gaming machine had a i5-7400, and in pretty much every game the CPU bottleneck has disappeared I'm not being funny - have you ever found any kind of bottleneck with that CPU? I'm still rocking an i7-4970K + 1080Ti and I have never ever seen the CPU being anywhere close to max load in any game, and I'm mostly playing in 1440p@60fps.

It was mostly with single-core-heavy (i.e. older) games. Newer multi-core games did very well on the i5, but better still on the six core Ryzen. I mostly play older games so my experience is likely different from most gamers. Edit: An example from memory, the very old game Crysis stuttered badly at 1440p with the i5, it was only playable at 1080p (both resolutions with all graphics settings on highest/ultra); this wa…