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

AMD Ryzen 7 1800X Benchmarked – Giving Intel’s $1000 Chips A Run For It

wccftech.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 278 posts

Re: AMD Ryzen 7 1800X Benchmarked – Giving Intel’s $1000 Chips A Run For It

#211

Post by userbinator »

jdietrich wrote: post #127
hocuspocus wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 65W versions should be trivial to cool silently, a $40 heatsink with a single low speed 12cm fan (500~600 rpm) does the job well with my CPUs. For a 95W TDP you might need to spend a little more (like on those big Noctua heatsinks with 14cm fans), but silent air-cooling is definitely possible. (Water is always trickier, AIO kits will typically be a little noisier due to the pump).

At these TDPs, fully passive cooling is an option: http://www.silentpcreview.com/NoFan_CR-95C_Copper

It would be no longer fully passive, but I'm curious to see what the performance of that heatsink would be with a suitably-sized squirrel cage fan inserted into it. That is huge.

Re: AMD Ryzen 7 1800X Benchmarked – Giving Intel’s $1000 Chips A Run For It

#212

Post by tetraodonpuffer »

not wasting a lot of silicon space on an integrated graphics solution seems to be a big win in terms of increasing the effective power of the CPU without increasing the price as much since in the end the die will likely be smaller.

I am surprised Intel has never come up with some more gaming oriented i7s with more cores and no integrated graphics as pretty much no gamer would run without a discrete video card anyways, but then again without any competition from AMD it probably wasn't worth the engineering effort or the risk of cannibalizing their Xeon offerings.

Re: AMD Ryzen 7 1800X Benchmarked – Giving Intel’s $1000 Chips A Run For It

#213

Post by TazeTSchnitzel »

ndesaulniers wrote: post #73

Any thoughts on the huge discrepancy in SSE performance? Something seems wrong there.

As mentioned elsewhere, these chips only have a 128-bit SIMD unit (either for power or for space savings?) and so 256-bit SIMD executes half as fast as it would on Intel.

Re: AMD Ryzen 7 1800X Benchmarked – Giving Intel’s $1000 Chips A Run For It

#214

Post by vetinari »

floatboth wrote: post #203
vetinari wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

6900K has 40 PCIE lanes and that's raison d'etre of this chip. So it is not really fair to compare the more expensive chip and then ignore exactly that thing, that makes it expensive.

Many more people care about core count than PCI-E lanes… Core count is the probably the most important thing about a CPU.

If you want to keep these 8 cores busy, you need I/O to feed them.

Otherwise, your cores will be either waiting for something or just getting hot running synthetic benchmarks.

Re: AMD Ryzen 7 1800X Benchmarked – Giving Intel’s $1000 Chips A Run For It

#215

Post by kayoone »

nindalf wrote: post #79
kayoone wrote: post #64

Take everything WCCFTECH writes with a pinch of salt, all of this could still be fake. The Ryzen hype train is on full steam and i really hope they deliver, but i'll wait for official benchmarks. In the last few years, more often than not AMD hardware leaks have shown potential that in the end wasn't met. Things look good for Ryzen though, maybe they can finally make 6-8 Core CPUs mainstream.

Which website would you consider "official"? Anandtech?

this article is based on images some anonymous user posted on chinese forums, so by official i just mean placed like anandtech or techpowerup that do their own benchmarking in a professional environment.

Re: AMD Ryzen 7 1800X Benchmarked – Giving Intel’s $1000 Chips A Run For It

#216

Post by deepnotderp »

vegabook wrote: post #45
reitzensteinm wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a world where progress has slowed down, being two to three years behind Intel means you're practically interchangeable. This chip isn't an abnormality, it's a sign of things to come, and there's no way it isn't keeping Intel's execs up at night.

Amd is prepping a 32 core server beast. Considering Intel just launched a 24 core chip costing 9000 dollars , and considering the AMD IPC is looking good, Intel execs must be gnawing down to their elbows at the prospect of AMD walking in to that market at 50% pricing deltas. Over to GloFo though on process. That appears to be the a possible achilles heel here for AMD.

GloFo licenses 14nm from Samsung and there's rumors amd might be prepping to use tsmc.

Re: AMD Ryzen 7 1800X Benchmarked – Giving Intel’s $1000 Chips A Run For It

#217

Post by aidenn0 »

temac wrote: post #117
aidenn0 wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ECC RAM isn't that much more expensive despite being less common. It's a bigger premium to go from an i7 to Xeon than to equip the Xeon with ECC RAM. If ECC were manufactured in the volumes of non-ECC it would probably be almost exactly 12.5% more expensive (i.e. just the cost of the extra chip).

> It's a bigger premium to go from an i7 to Xeon than to equip the Xeon with ECC RAM. Not exactly. The prices between comparable i7 to Xeon are nearly the same.

Wow, I just priced skylake Xeon's vs i7 and prices are very comparable (in some cases the Xeon is even cheaper). Current Xeon v. i7 was significantly different last year when I purchased.

I did check and it is still true that with laptops you always pay a premium for Xeon v Core on an equal performance basis (even within the same model).

Re: AMD Ryzen 7 1800X Benchmarked – Giving Intel’s $1000 Chips A Run For It

#218

Post by wtallis »

lultimouomo wrote: post #144
yuhong wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look at Xeon E3, for example: https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E1681911...

Thanks. It looks there are reasonably priced mini-ITX boards that support Skylake Xeons (a note to this that are considering this: v5 E3 (Skylake) use the same socket as Cores, but need a different chipset). The 80W TDP worries me about though, cooling, noise and money/pollution wise (the extra 45W make around 400kWh/year). Considering the CPU will be idle most of the time, do you have figures about the actual idle c…

My home server with a Xeon E3 1240v5, 5 3.5" hard drives, one SSD, a SAS HBA and a small discrete GPU idles at 71W as reported by my UPS. I haven't made any special effort to optimize power consumption yet.

Re: AMD Ryzen 7 1800X Benchmarked – Giving Intel’s $1000 Chips A Run For It

#219

Post by agumonkey »

Nokinside wrote: post #178
tw04 wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Intel's response has always been the same. They cut their profit margins and start selling chips cheaper. They undercut AMD with volume and price and suddenly AMD is in the doghouse again struggling. AMD's best efforts can cut into Intel's profits, but Intel's response is to remove all profits from AMD until it's left behind. The last time Intel did that it was through illegal tactics - unlikely they'll get away wit…

Doing illegal is just optimization. Intel can undercut AMD lawfully if it wants. Instead of hidden rebates, Intel can openly cut prices.

The usual reason mentioned for Intel allowing AMD is to avoid being broken by monopoly laws.

If AMD still has energy and get loads of cache, they might be able to finish the APU idea, now that opencl, gpgpu, ml, cv has caught wind, it might give them a fresh market to strive.

Re: AMD Ryzen 7 1800X Benchmarked – Giving Intel’s $1000 Chips A Run For It

#220

Post by jandrese »

auxym wrote: post #133
Lev1a wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AFAIK the Ryzen 1700 (TDP 65W) is supposed to come with a "Wraith" cooler from AMD and those new ones are apparently better than their shitty older counterparts from the Vishera days (I had one and I'm glad I switched to a near silent Arctic cooler).

Same here, the Artic Cooler was 20$ and the difference is dramatic. Cooler temps all around and near silent at modest loads, where the stock cooler was annoyingly loud.

Worse, loud fans seem to fail the most. I've always been annoyed when a $75 CPU comes with a $.25 fan that is going to crap out in a year or two.
Post reply on HN