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

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

tomshardware.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 151 posts

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

#121

Post by Thorrez »

penagwin wrote: post #10
hunta2097 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only thing holding up Intel at the moment is their gaming IPC. Should AMD crack that then it'll be brutal for them (if it isn't already).

According to Linus techtips the 3xxx ryzen series is already neck/neck with Intel at CSGO (which is known to normally heavily favor Intel - as a csgo player this is really impressive), and appears to otherwise be competitive in other games. Intel should be very scared. Not to mention the way Intel has crippled different models of their line up just to try to push people to use a more expensive CPU - and seems to have…

You're talking about this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3aEv3EzMyQ ?

On CSGO, AMD wins on average FPS, ties on 95%, and loses on 99%.

On Rainbow Six: Seige, AMD wins on average FPS, but loses on 95% and 99%.

On the other 3 games (Shadow of the Tomb Raider, Metro: Exodus, and Battlefield V), Intel wins all 3 categories. So overall, Intel still wins.

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

#122

Post by merb »

sirn wrote: post #60
cwyers wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that people still play it. But looking at the system requirements: https://store.steampowered.com/app/730/CounterStrike_Global_... I am hard-pressed to say that it looks like a suitable benchmark. It's hard to find a desktop CPU released in the past five years that can't provide good performance for a game like that.

People still benchmark CS:GO because it is one of the few games that is CPU bound that still actively being played today. It's one of the few games where a single core performance and memory latency has a big impact on overall performance. Intel always had a huge lead on CS:GO until Zen 2 where the gap finally closes up, which is why a lot of people is referring to CS:GO benchmark when talking about Zen 2 in context…

actually a lot of pro players are streamers, so they at least need a good cpu for game+stream. some even have a setup with two computers. actually streaming games (especially new ones) still needs at least the i7's.

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

#123

Post by rodgerd »

antisthenes wrote: post #119
philjohn wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For bulldozer, maybe, but pre core uarch they were faster and more energy efficient.

Phenom, Phenom II, Bulldozer & Piledriver, all had worse performance/power. Basically all of their CPUs from 2007 until 2014, a full 7 years.

Are you factoring in the Spectre losses?

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

#124

Post by genkimind »

nextos wrote: post #107
zamadatix wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

The single core performance is remarkable given that Intel has always been very strong there. How is Linux compatibility in case of AMD these days? Intel is really good, if we ignore the need for blobs for their wireless cards. Everything just works, and it is energy efficient.

I can only speak for the first gen zen. There's a bug with most motherboards that cause a hard lockup every day or so. Changing the power state fixes the problem with an updated bios but disables boost. Thread: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=196683

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

#125

Post by klingonopera »

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…

> You couldn't pay me to buy AMD after all the hardware I lost to thermal issues.

Early 2000s? AMD? Which architecture exactly?

Intel OTOH was infamous during this time for "PressHot"...

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

#126

Post by klingonopera »

yread wrote: post #110
gtirloni wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Like in this 2001 video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BSGcnRanYMM

Actually, that's proof that the Athlon will still do the correct thing all the way to its death, whereas the Pentium crashed and thus also saved itself. Also, the P4 has more thermal mass due to its heatspreader, and therefore can sustain non-HSF operation longer.

Motherboards/CPUs in those days didn't really have thermal shutdown failsafes, in fact, we had to rely on the motherboard to report CPU temperatures, there weren't any built into the CPU itself. What we did have was shutdown on CPU-fan fail.

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

#127

Post by The_rationalist »

martamoreno2 wrote: post #115
sunstone wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "'weaker substitute' perception" aspect might happen in consumer goods but unlikely to happen when Google, Amazon and Microsoft consider provisioning a new data center.

I think you are wrong. Consumers use to save money, the masses at least. They won't give a shit about these details, most of them don't even know what it means. They pick the cheaper option, across the board. There might be some Intel fanboys with 5000$ machines, but those are the minority. With businesses it is quite different. Money comes cheap. You can not get fired for buying IBM... To convince companies like Goo…

I don't see how they could risk it

What non existent risk are you talking about?

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

#128

Post by klingonopera »

cwyers wrote: post #43
IlGrigiore wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CS:GO is still played internationally and there are also professional tournaments. So I would say that it is still a relevant benchmark.

I agree that people still play it. But looking at the system requirements: https://store.steampowered.com/app/730/CounterStrike_Global_... I am hard-pressed to say that it looks like a suitable benchmark. It's hard to find a desktop CPU released in the past five years that can't provide good performance for a game like that.

I'm not sure whether they update the minimum system requirements alongside the game. Keep in mind, CSGO is from 2012 and has received numerous updates, and looks, feels and sounds completely different today.

When I first bought my main laptop in 2017, I could play somewhat smoothly at 1080p, now I have to use 720p.

It's an interesting side-effect, before Steam and other content-platforms, games titles iterated much faster.

EDIT: Then again, when I think about CoD, I'll retract my last sentence.

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

#129

Post by The_rationalist »

penagwin wrote: post #89
sabas123 wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For people wondering why, it has mainly to with the fact that mouse polling rates are tied to FPS meaning that you still have heavy incentive to go above the FPS your monitor could handle.

What? I've never heard this reasoning before. The real reason is, I only really play csgo and pubg, I have X$ to spend on a CPU. Previously if you looked at them market, tier-to-tier amd vs intel - intel always was the stronger performer at the CSGO. Why spend X$ and get 250fps when you can spend the same and get 300fps?

You have a 300hz screen? Hint: it doesn't exist (for consumers at least) Current max is 270hz I believe, but a few years ago it was sub 250 hz

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

#130

Post by elorant »

Tomminn wrote: post #102

Amateur in this space. What are the barriers to AMD taking Intel's market share?

Availability is one problem. I live in Greece and wanted to build a medium workstation back in April. There were only two available Epyc processors in the market and only two mobos. I ended up building a rig with two Xeons in which case there were hundreds of available models/motherboards. It was either that or the option of buying from a German shop.
Post reply on HN