Jump to content

i9-9900k vs new AMD CPU's

17 hours ago, nick name said:

If latency is still higher with AMD than it might not be the best gaming solution for something like an FPS.  

There are other mechanisms to minimize that effect. The branch prediction, speculative load/store and other things as well as the cache that can (or will?) hide the memory latency.

 

We just have to wait and see what it really does. The AMD Slides look pretty impressive.

Ryzen 3800X vs 2700X, according to AMD:
+34% in CSGO

+30% in LoL

+22% in PUBG

+21% in Overwatch

+15% in DOTA2

+11% in GTA 5

 

That is pretty impressive...

Especially since the clockrate didn't change that much.

"Hell is full of good meanings, but Heaven is full of good works"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Plutosaurus said:

You already have a 1600?

 

Is it doing anything too slow for you?

 

My wife has a 1600. It's just fine. I see no reason at all to upgrade her to a 3000 series chip (except possibly to make a whole new system and make the 1600 my tv gamer, but not straight upgrade)

 

Unless you need to, you're just falling for AMD's "upgrade path" marketing trick to get you to buy more CPUs.

my main setup and first pc i have buy

single monitor 1600 + 1060 6gb that normal

but after using pc 3 years now have secondary both 1080p and i learned photoshop and video editing i feel not worth yet dk why need faster cpu and better gpu

I do not know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everyone

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

No, AMD might just have phased out 95W TDP Class. Meaning its just over 65W. It might also have a different boost mechanism and hold the higher frequency for more cores.

 

Something like this:

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_7_2700/16.html

 

The 2700X boosts a fair bit higher than the 2700...

 

Also, as said earlier, AMD TDP means it, that the TDP won't be violated much.

With Intel, the TDP means at BASE CLOCK, so the Turbo can do whatever it wants to. ANd if it consumes 500W, so be it.

i will upgrade from 1600 to gen 3 after benchmark if worth i will upgrade

I do not know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everyone

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

There are other mechanisms to minimize that effect. The branch prediction, speculative load/store and other things as well as the cache that can (or will?) hide the memory latency.

 

We just have to wait and see what it really does. The AMD Slides look pretty impressive.

Ryzen 3800X vs 2700X, according to AMD:
+34% in CSGO

+30% in LoL

+22% in PUBG

+21% in Overwatch

+15% in DOTA2

+11% in GTA 5

 

That is pretty impressive...

Especially since the clockrate didn't change that much.

I'm hopeful that the new larger cache is going to elevate the performance when compared to Intel and that CS:GO number is very promising.  

 

And ASUS claims to have a new trick up its sleeve for improving memory performance on their new boards.  So if that also pans out then it could very very promising.  

AMD Ryzen 5800XFractal Design S36 360 AIO w/6 Corsair SP120L fans  |  Asus Crosshair VII WiFi X470  |  G.SKILL TridentZ 4400CL19 2x8GB @ 3800MHz 14-14-14-14-30  |  EVGA 3080 FTW3 Hybrid  |  Samsung 970 EVO M.2 NVMe 500GB - Boot Drive  |  Samsung 850 EVO SSD 1TB - Game Drive  |  Seagate 1TB HDD - Media Drive  |  EVGA 650 G3 PSU | Thermaltake Core P3 Case 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, nick name said:

Memory latency.  Intel can get into the 30ns range and AMD is double that.  

Alright, so I researched this a bit.

 

Found a Reddit thread from a couple years ago:

 

One of the comments talks about how thread roaming between both caches for each CCX on the CPU runs through the memory controller and Infinity Fabric, which is why Ryzen benefits from higher speed memory(faster memory = faster Infinity Fabric = faster thread roaming).

 

I also heard that Zen 2 changes the way the Infinity Fabric works a little bit, so you can manually change the speed via BIOS(correct me if I'm wrong), reducing the "need" for higher speed memory on Ryzen CPUs.

 

It looks like if AMD either changed the cache design from a victim cache to a whole cache that all the chiplets accessed or increased the throughput of the inter-CCX bus, either one of those would solve that problem while eliminating the memory controller from the equation.

 

Bear in mind this Reddit thread is 2 years old and from the Zen 1 launch.

EDIT: I also have not yet looked up anything about Zen 2 yet.

Quote or tag me( @Crunchy Dragon) if you want me to see your reply

If a post solved your problem/answered your question, please consider marking it as "solved"

Community Standards // Join Floatplane!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Crunchy Dragon said:

-snip-

 

I also heard that Zen 2 changes the way the Infinity Fabric works a little bit, so you can manually change the speed via BIOS(correct me if I'm wrong), reducing the "need" for higher speed memory on Ryzen CPUs.

 

-snip-

From what I've seen that change in speed is for when RAM speed outpaces that internal speed (can't remember what it is called).  So if anything -- you're reducing the speed to allow for the faster RAM and it would be a reduction of half.  So I can't imagine it's an ideal solution.  You're gonna wanna find fast RAM, but not faster than what the CPU can operate at.  It's up around 4000+MHz though so it shouldn't be something any regular user runs into.  Or maybe it's 5000.  I have to look it up.  

 

But the cache increase will hopefully help out as was mentioned earlier.  

AMD Ryzen 5800XFractal Design S36 360 AIO w/6 Corsair SP120L fans  |  Asus Crosshair VII WiFi X470  |  G.SKILL TridentZ 4400CL19 2x8GB @ 3800MHz 14-14-14-14-30  |  EVGA 3080 FTW3 Hybrid  |  Samsung 970 EVO M.2 NVMe 500GB - Boot Drive  |  Samsung 850 EVO SSD 1TB - Game Drive  |  Seagate 1TB HDD - Media Drive  |  EVGA 650 G3 PSU | Thermaltake Core P3 Case 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Crunchy Dragon said:

 One of the comments talks about how thread roaming between both caches for each CCX on the CPU runs through the memory controller and Infinity Fabric, which is why Ryzen benefits from higher speed memory(faster memory = faster Infinity Fabric = faster thread roaming).

Correct

That's the reason for the increased performance with Memory as IF = Memory Frequency.

 

4 hours ago, Crunchy Dragon said:

I also heard that Zen 2 changes the way the Infinity Fabric works a little bit, so you can manually change the speed via BIOS(correct me if I'm wrong), reducing the "need" for higher speed memory on Ryzen CPUs.

CPU are connected to the I/O Die via IF.

IIRC its also a higher frequency version and it might not be synchroneous to the memory and either be asynchroneous or have a Multiplier. Either way it increases the performance and it might even decrease the latency...

 

The quesiton remaining is: 1 IF Link per CPU or 2?

 

4 hours ago, Crunchy Dragon said:

It looks like if AMD either changed the cache design from a victim cache to a whole cache that all the chiplets accessed or increased the throughput of the inter-CCX bus, either one of those would solve that problem while eliminating the memory controller from the equation.

I've not (yet) heard that they changed the Cache Architecture from Exclusive to Inclusive (yet). It might be possible, but unlikely.

AMD uses Victim Cache for more than 20 Years. And both have their Pro/Con.

 

4 hours ago, Crunchy Dragon said:

Bear in mind this Reddit thread is 2 years old and from the Zen 1 launch.

EDIT: I also have not yet looked up anything about Zen 2 yet.

IIRC they still use Victim Caches...

"Hell is full of good meanings, but Heaven is full of good works"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Stefan Payne said:

At 5GHz we're more talking about 200-250W Power Consumption rather than 95W. The AMD 105W TDP might actuall be honest and inside what you'd expect...

I wouldn't be so sure of that. In Linus' video today he states that the new 570 boards are equipped to handle power draw of up to 300 watts (or more) to the CPU socket alone. He also stated that MSI will NOT support third gen Ryzen on first gen boards, and that use on the second generation boards is not recommended as well, all because of the much higher power draw with Zen2 overclocked. All of those quotes can be found here:

 

 

See 6:45 to 7:50.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, jerubedo said:

I wouldn't be so sure of that.

How about we wait and see before judging it?!

17 minutes ago, jerubedo said:

In Linus' video today he states that the new 570 boards are equipped to handle power draw of up to 300 watts to the CPU socket alone.

Fist, that is total BS because most higher end CPU VRM are able to do 300W or more.

The Question is:
at what Voltage?

Because VRM are limited by current, NOT Power par se.

 

That the VRM can do "up to 300W" or more is to be expected at that price point!

The Cheapest X570 Boards are starting at ~220€...

 

And go all the way up to 777€.

 

Scroll all the way down, there you see the prices:

https://www.computerbase.de/2019-05/msi-x570-mainboards-uebersicht-preise/

 

219, 239, 299, 429, 539, 777€....

 

And there is also this:

 

How about ~1000W on a Sandy/Ivy Bridge LGA1155 Board?? Yeah, makes sense.

 

What we do know however is that Ryzen 3000 will be the first CPU in generations, that lowers the VCore! From around 1,3-1,4V to 1,2V.

So at 1,2V instead of 1,4V at 100W, we're talking about 83A instead of 71A.

Wich might also be the reason why the 3800X has the 105W TDP specification and not 95W. Not because of the actual Power Consumption but the Current.

 

Also, at this price point, a 150W or 200W VRM would be rediculous and total nonsense - we're talking about Highest End or Ultra High End Boards!

 

And there are also a ton of those Boards for previous Intel CPUs, such as the Z77X-UP7 such as the ASUS Maximus 7:

https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/MAXIMUS_VII_HERO/

 

Does it do 300W? I don't doubt it.

Will it ever get to 300W? Probably not.

 

And at 300Wm, it would only be ~170A anyway vs 250A at 1,2V...

17 minutes ago, jerubedo said:

He also stated that MSI will NOT support third gen Ryzen on first gen boards

And?
Did he state why they didn't do that?

In the eye of the manufacturer those Boards are old, they don't want to support new CPUs on old Boards, they want you to sell a new Board.

 

So yeah, of course some Manufacturer don't want to support new CPUs on old Boards or tell you "use at your own risk"!

There can be just liability reasons and that the Board Manufacturer doesn't want to have you calling them for an ancient Board.

So they just say: do at your own risk.

And if something doesn't work, they can say if they want to, that they don't officially support that.

 

Doesn't have to be technical reasons at all. There is a ton of other stuff going on.

The most likely is that the Boards didn't sell all that well because YOU didn't buy one...

 

17 minutes ago, jerubedo said:

and that use on the second generation boards is not recommended as well,

Well, d'uh...

Because of PCIe 4.0, some changes on the memory controller that might not work that well with some older Boards or other stuff.

 

If Intel had decided to allow 8 and 9th generation on 100 and 200 Series Boards it would be different.

But since we're talking about AMD, it has to be a disadvantage that they allow new Chips on older Boards...

 

They should have done the same as the other side and just telll people: No, Zen2 only works on 500 Series Boards. Deal with it. As Inel does it. Is that what you're saying?!

 

17 minutes ago, jerubedo said:

all because of the much higher power draw with Zen2 overclocked.

I really don't know what to say.


How about: CAPTAIN OBVIOUS IS CALLING!!1111

 

 

How about you wait and see how the Chip behaves and what AMD does, before you claim something you can't know, that's only been claimed by some random people on the Interwebs??

 

 

"Hell is full of good meanings, but Heaven is full of good works"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

How about we wait and see before judging it?!

That's what I'm essentially saying to YOU. You're saying "Hey look, it's going to definitely be within 105w TDP." And I'm saying, "Well, we don't know. We do have some info contrary to that from Motherboard manufacturers today."

 

27 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

Because VRM are limited by current, NOT Power par se.

Assuming a fixed voltage, the higher the wattage, the higher the current, so yeah. 300 watts at 1.2v would be 250A. 300 watts at 1.4v would be ~214A. So having a lower vCore and a higher TDP is worse.

 

27 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

And?
Did he state why they didn't do that?

In the eye of the manufacturer those Boards are old, they don't want to support new CPUs on old Boards, they want you to sell a new Board.

Yes, he did state why. He specifically said that older boards "were not designed to handle the increased power draw of these new chips." That's at 6:42.  So that's what MSI is saying.

 

27 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

So yeah, of course some Manufacturer don't want to support new CPUs on old Boards or tell you "use at your own risk"!

But they are supposed to! AM4 was supposed to guarantee the ability to upgrade until 2020 regardless of which board you got (except for A320 boards).

 

27 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

Doesn't have to be technical reasons at all. There is a ton of other stuff going on.

Except they are saying it is technical reasons...

 

27 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

Well, d'uh... 

Because of PCIe 4.0, some changes on the memory controller that might not work that well with some older Boards or other stuff.

Really!? YOU were the one who argued with me over this exact point in a thread a few months ago!!! I said what you're saying now, that changes to PCIe and the memory controller would make older boards obsolete and you were like: "NO, they are using chiplets which allow them to do whatever they want." So now you've completely flip-flopped.

 

27 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

They should have done the same as the other side and just telll people: No, Zen2 only works on 500 Series Boards. Deal with it. As Inel does it. Is that what you're saying?!

That's what MSI is saying essentially! And yes, both companies should be doing it in my opinion. It prevents the common user from putting a 16 core chip in a gen 2 board and then review bombing because it isn't performing well.

 

27 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

How about: CAPTAIN OBVIOUS IS CALLING!!1111

It's not so obvious when it's been stated to death that gen 1 and 2 boards should fully support 3rd gen Ryzen. Now we're learning that at least from MSI gen 1 is not supported, and it's because of the higher power draw. So, yeah, no, it's not so obvious.

 

27 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

How about you wait and see how the Chip behaves and what AMD does, before you claim something you can't know, that's only been claimed by some random people on the Interwebs??

I say the same to you! You are doing the same thing!! Wait and see before you go and claim that it will always stay within TDP.  And no, it was not random people on the internet. It was Linus and MSI representatives!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Queen Chrysallis said:

@Ankerson What are your thoughts on this?

 

I would say wait until July and after some legit reviews come out by reliable sources. ;)

 

I will be comparing the results to my systems for those who compare to the 8700K and 9900K etc.

 

 

 

i9 9900K @ 5.0 GHz, NH D15, 32 GB DDR4 3200 GSKILL Trident Z RGB, AORUS Z390 MASTER, EVGA RTX 3080 FTW3 Ultra, Samsung 970 EVO Plus 500GB, Samsung 860 EVO 1TB, Samsung 860 EVO 500GB, ASUS ROG Swift PG279Q 27", Steel Series APEX PRO, Logitech Gaming Pro Mouse, CM Master Case 5, Corsair AXI 1600W Titanium. 

 

i7 8086K, AORUS Z370 Gaming 5, 16GB GSKILL RJV DDR4 3200, EVGA 2080TI FTW3 Ultra, Samsung 970 EVO 250GB, (2)SAMSUNG 860 EVO 500 GB, Acer Predator XB1 XB271HU, Corsair HXI 850W.

 

i7 8700K, AORUS Z370 Ultra Gaming, 16GB DDR4 3000, EVGA 1080Ti FTW3 Ultra, Samsung 960 EVO 250GB, Corsair HX 850W.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, jerubedo said:

That's what I'm essentially saying to YOU. You're saying "Hey look, it's going to definitely be within 105w TDP." And I'm saying, "Well, we don't know. We do have some info contrary to that from Motherboard manufacturers today."

So you're saying that because Intel does something, AMD has to do the same thing, so that in the end both are equal and AMD not better?

We know that AMD Ryzen 7 3700X or 3800X consumes a fraction of 9900K. That was already demonstrated on CES, if you remember:

https://www.anandtech.com/show/13829/amd-ryzen-3rd-generation-zen-2-pcie-4-eight-core

 

50W difference between the 9900K at 180W and the Zen2 based one at only 130W.

27 minutes ago, jerubedo said:

Assuming a fixed voltage, the higher the wattage, the higher the current, so yeah. 300 watts at 1.2v would be 250A. 300 watts at 1.4v would be ~214A. So having a lower vCore and a higher TDP is worse.

...only because the Boards are more expensive and need to deliver more current. But not really...

 

27 minutes ago, jerubedo said:

Yes, he did state why. He specifically said that older boards "were not designed to handle the increased power draw of these new chips." That's at 6:42.  So that's what MSI is saying.

No, because MSI is crap and doesn't do BIOS Updates for older Boards. There are even people saying that about Intel Boards.

They tell you whatever to not say "ah, we didn't feel like it and we are used to the 2 Gen per Socket from Intel"...

 

27 minutes ago, jerubedo said:

Except they are saying it is technical reasons...

yeah and some other Companys tell you you're holding their phone wrong and that there are no issues with the Keyboard...

 

What else should they say?! "oh, we don't feel like it"? RLY?

 

27 minutes ago, jerubedo said:

Really!? YOU were the one who argued with me over this exact point in a thread a few months ago!!! I said what you're saying now, that changes to PCIe and the memory controller would make older boards obsolete and you were like: "NO, they are using chiplets which allow them to do whatever they want." So now you've completely flip-flopped.

No, I didn't, as most Boards are supported.

They might just not be officially supported!

 

For example lets take the X370 Gaming Pro Carbon:

https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/support/X370-GAMING-PRO-CARBON

 

There is an AMD ComboPI1.0.0.1 wich allegedly supports Matisse.

And also MSI officially stated that at least some of their 300 Series Boards work with "upcoming AMD CPUs":
https://www.forbes.com/sites/antonyleather/2019/04/17/msi-confirms-300-series-chipset-motherboards-will-actually-support-3rd-gen-ryzen-zen-2-processors/#1549faca34e2


I haven't changed my mind, MSI said that the CPU works, they might also say that they don't recommend it or that there might/will be some restrictions...

Yeah, that's to be expected...

 

27 minutes ago, jerubedo said:

That's what MSI is saying essentially! And yes, both companies should be doing it in my opinion. It prevents the common user from putting a 16 core chip in a gen 2 board and then review bombing because it isn't performing well.

No, they are not saying that.

They said that:

Quote

At this point, we are still performing extensive testing on our existing lineup of 300- and 400-series AM4 motherboards to verify potential compatibility for the next-gen AMD Ryzen CPUs. To be clear: Our intention is to offer maximum compatibility for as many MSI products as possible. Towards the launch of the next-gen AMD CPUs, we will release a compatibility list of MSI AM4 motherboards.

 

27 minutes ago, jerubedo said:

It's not so obvious when it's been stated to death that gen 1 and 2 boards should fully support 3rd gen Ryzen. Now we're learning that at least from MSI gen 1 is not supported, and it's because of the higher power draw. So, yeah, no, it's not so obvious.

...although we do not know anything about the Power draw, besides the CES presentation, yet you claim it has high power draw...

 

27 minutes ago, jerubedo said:

I say the same to you! You are doing the same thing!! Wait and see before you go and claim that it will always stay within TDP.  And no, it was not random people on the internet. It was Linus and MSI representatives!!

And Gamers Nexus claimed that Zen2 won't be presented with Specs on Computex, yet it was presented.

They were wrong then, now they should be right?

 

There is no reason to assume they are right.

 

Why not just wait and see what happens when they are released??

"Hell is full of good meanings, but Heaven is full of good works"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

So you're saying that because Intel does something, AMD has to do the same thing, so that in the end both are equal and AMD not better?

We know that AMD Ryzen 7 3700X or 3800X consumes a fraction of 9900K. That was already demonstrated on CES, if you remember:

https://www.anandtech.com/show/13829/amd-ryzen-3rd-generation-zen-2-pcie-4-eight-core

 

50W difference between the 9900K at 180W and the Zen2 based one at only 130W.

You're off on a tangent again. I never said that AMD has to copy Intel, or vice versa. We were talking about TDP. Stay on topic. No one is arguing that AMD is drawing less power on 7nm. To quote you: Captain obvious. However 130w is not equal to 105w, now is it? So your claim that the 105w TDP is kept is wrong already. That's all we're talking about here.

 

20 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

...only because the Boards are more expensive and need to deliver more current. But not really...

Except according to Linus and board manufacturers, it DOES need to deliver more current.

 

20 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

No, because MSI is crap and doesn't do BIOS Updates for older Boards. There are even people saying that about Intel Boards.

They tell you whatever to not say "ah, we didn't feel like it and we are used to the 2 Gen per Socket from Intel"... 

 

Well that's a bold claim. MSI is partnered with AMD as well. They should in theory be doing everything they can to back up AMD's promise of support through 2020. The fact that they are saying they can't now more than likely points to a technological issue rather than, "no, because I want more money like I get from Intel boards." 

 

20 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

yeah and some other Companys tell you you're holding their phone wrong and that there are no issues with the Keyboard...

 

What else should they say?! "oh, we don't feel like it"? RLY?

It's in their best interest to continue support, yes. If all the other manufactures are doing it and they aren't, then they'll lose face with consumers and in turn will lose money. They wouldn't do that unless they really couldn't.

 

20 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

No, I didn't, as most Boards are supported.

They might just not be officially supported!

Now you're just splitting hairs. You know damned well that unofficial support is as good as dead. when AMD says support through 2020, they mean OFFICIAL support and you know it!

 

20 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

For example lets take the X370 Gaming Pro Carbon:

https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/support/X370-GAMING-PRO-CARBON

 

There is an AMD ComboPI1.0.0.1 wich allegedly supports Matisse.

And also MSI officially stated that at least some of their 300 Series Boards work with "upcoming AMD CPUs":
https://www.forbes.com/sites/antonyleather/2019/04/17/msi-confirms-300-series-chipset-motherboards-will-actually-support-3rd-gen-ryzen-zen-2-processors/#1549faca34e2

This is old news. The news Linus got was from TODAY, from MSI directly. 

 

20 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

No, they are not saying that.

They said that:

Again, old news. Linus' was from TODAY.

 

20 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

...although we do not know anything about the Power draw, besides the CES presentation, yet you claim it has high power draw...

Not me. MSI, and ASUS, as reported in that video.

 

20 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

And Gamers Nexus claimed that Zen2 won't be presented with Specs on Computex, yet it was presented. 

They were wrong then, now they should be right?

Steve did NOT say that. He said that we wouldn't get all the details like overclocking and power consumption for each SKU, etc. He said we'd get a few SKUs and details but that the rest would be at E3. He was correct. We did not get details on Ryzen 3, nor power consumption numbers for each SKU, nor overclocking numbers. For reference here's that video. Listen again:

 

 

20 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

 

Why not just wait and see what happens when they are released??

That's MY point, man! You're the one going around saying that Ryzen 3000 is going to do this and that without anything to back it up. We will see on July 7th!! That's been my whole point here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, jerubedo said:

No one is arguing that AMD is drawing less power on 7nm. To quote you: Captain obvious. However 130w is not equal to 105w, now is it? So your claim that the 105w TDP is kept is wrong already. That's all we're talking about here.

So why did you start this then? 
We know that AMD is better than Intel, even 130W to 105W is way better than 250W to 95W.

A bit of tolerance is there. But 250W is NOWHERE in Tolerance.

14 minutes ago, jerubedo said:

Except according to Linus and board manufacturers, it DOES need to deliver more current.

And they were wrong when speculating about AMD

They were wrong about claiming that there won't be specs about Ryzen 7.

 

Heck they were even wrong about the TDP of the X570. They claimed 15W, when its only 11W...

 

"it needs more Current"?? Where? How? Under what Circumstances.


YOU are hyping a claim from someone that heard it from someone under the table without _ANY_ context. And without Context the Claim is useless.

 

14 minutes ago, jerubedo said:

Well that's a bold claim. MSI is partnered with AMD as well. They should in theory be doing everything they can to back up AMD's promise of support through 2020. The fact that they are saying they can't now more than likely points to a technological issue rather than, "no, because I want more money like I get from Intel boards." 

Yeah, that's why they do so many Desktop PCs and Notebooks with AMD CPU, right?

Here source:

https://www.pcgameshardware.de/Hardware-Thema-130320/News/MSI-CEO-verraet-warum-man-keine-Desktops-und-Notebooks-mit-AMD-CPU-anbietet-1274592/

We will see what 300 series Boards are supporting Zen2...

 

Why are you speculating about BIOS Support??
Especially when there might be a couple of people a bit angry at a manufacturer, that might change quickly...

14 minutes ago, jerubedo said:

This is old news. The news Linus got was from TODAY, from MSI directly. 

And that might also be old news and MSI might change their point again.

Or release BETA BIOS for the Boards.

14 minutes ago, jerubedo said:

Again, old news. Linus' was from TODAY.

yeah, a friend from a friend that has a brother who's Papa knows a guy, that knows a guy, who heard something about it...

Like GN's claim that there won't be any specs about Zen2 on Computex...

 

14 minutes ago, jerubedo said:

Not me. MSI, and ASUS, as reported in that video.

You are really claiming something as fact that isn't much more than hearsay??

 

14 minutes ago, jerubedo said:

That's MY point, man!

Then why did you quote me with the FACT that Intel at 5GHz consumes around 250W??

YOU are just claiming something that isn't more than hearsay.


We do know that Zen2 is far more efficient than 9900K. So why quote me at all??
Especially with Hearsay...

14 minutes ago, jerubedo said:

You're the one going around saying that Ryzen 3000 is going to do this and that without anything to back it up. We will see on July 7th!! That's been my whole point here.

Yes, I was right about it worth to wait for Zen2 and that it might be able to keep up with the 9900K or beat it.

You were wrong. 


You still recommended pretty bad configuration with 9400 and Z390 Boards for no reason, even when Computex with Infos was a week or two away.

 

Now you again claim something that isn't more than Hearsay. We don't even know any Context. 

 

What if the "Current" thing is the Uncore aka Northbridge? And what if that only affects PCIe gen4 on older Boards?
And what if that can be fixed by limiting it to PCie gen3?


The Current stuff seems like total bullshit for the Cores. We do know that Zen2 consumes way less than Zen1. How can the current be a Problem? Makes no sense. And it wasn't more than Hearsay...


Why not wait until its proven?


But what is proven is the higher efficiency of Zen2. And that its cheaper than Intel, so it makes little sense to get Intel right now.

"Hell is full of good meanings, but Heaven is full of good works"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

So why did you start this then? 
We know that AMD is better than Intel, even 130W to 105W is way better than 250W to 95W.

A bit of tolerance is there. But 250W is NOWHERE in Tolerance.

Because of your blatant disregard for facts. You claimed that the new Ryzen chips WILL stay within TDP. That is a bold claim that I was pointing out may not be correct because there is current data that says otherwise. Yes 130w is within tolerance, but for all we know that's at stock. OCed might be as bad as the 9900K for all we know. Also, this was never about AMD vs Intel. You're the only one who ever turns EVER SINGLE CONVERSATION into that. And I don't understand why. It's like you have an internet need to shove AMD down everyone's throat. Yes, it's a good product, and the numbers will speak for themselves. It's not the messiah of tech products that you make it sound like, though. 

 

36 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

And they were wrong when speculating about AMD

They were wrong about claiming that there won't be specs about Ryzen 7. 

 

Heck they were even wrong about the TDP of the X570. They claimed 15W, when its only 11W...

 

"it needs more Current"?? Where? How? Under what Circumstances.


YOU are hyping a claim from someone that heard it from someone under the table without _ANY_ context. And without Context the Claim is useless.

These claims have weight because they were made from the motherboard MANUFACTURURES. These aren't just rumors from some random tech people. The manufacturers certainly have the details on what the power draw will be like and what it requires.

 

36 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

YOU are hyping a claim from someone that heard it from someone under the table without _ANY_ context. And without Context the Claim is useless. 

Linus spoke with MSI reps directly at Computex. Nothing under the table. Not hushed whispers. 

 

36 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

Why are you speculating about BIOS Support??
Especially when there might be a couple of people a bit angry at a manufacturer, that might change quickly...

I'm not speculating. I'm quoting a source who says so.

 

36 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

Like GN's claim that there won't be any specs about Zen2 on Computex…

Again, this is inaccurate, steve never said the words "we're not getting any specs." He said that at best we'd get a limited number of specs and not the entire lineup. This was true.

 

36 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

You are really claiming something as fact that isn't much more than hearsay?? 

How is it hearsay when this is what these manufacturers have said directly to Linus? You're literally just putting on blinders and saying "NOPE, that's not true!"

 

36 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

Then why did you quote me with the FACT that Intel at 5GHz consumes around 250W??

YOU are just claiming something that isn't more than hearsay.


We do know that Zen2 is far more efficient than 9900K. So why quote me at all??
Especially with Hearsay...

Again, this was never about the 9900K. This was about YOUR claim that Ryzen 3000 would never violate TDP, as if YOU know. You don't! I was just calling you out on it! The essence of what you said was, "Look guys! AMD is absolutely perfect. They are the golden child of all time. They'd never break TDP, unlike the monsterous devils at Intel." 

 

36 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

Yes, I was right about it worth to wait for Zen2 and that it might be able to keep up with the 9900K or beat it.

You were wrong. 

I never claimed, EVER, that people shouldn't wait for Zen2. I've always said that if waiting is an option, then to do it. So I was not wrong. I remember you arguing that Zen2 would be RELEASED at computex, where I said early July. That was wrong on your part. Then there was the bit where I said that it could be the case that Gen 1 and 2 motherboards would struggle or not be supported at all for Gen 3, which again, you argued tooth and nail and were wrong, and now you try to justify it with "well, I meant it would be supported but not officially." Yeah, ok. Now you're arguing about TDP when for all we know the STOCK CPU drew 130w and OCed might be 200w+.

 

34 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

You still recommended pretty bad configuration with 9400 and Z390 Boards for no reason

It's a very good configuration for gaming rigs (non-productivity and non-streaming). Now that we know that at best Ryzen 3000 has achieved gaming parity, those who got the 9400F still have performance that matches Ryzen 3000 in gaming and that mostly matches performance of the 9600K/9700K/9900K. So no, it wasn't a bad choice. Plus if some 300 series boards are straight up not supporting Zen2, and 400 series boards are being considered "use with caution" then those who were following everyone else's advice on getting a B450 board for the upgrade path will want to grab a new motherboard anyway, meaning whichever choice they made they'd be in it for a motherboard change anyway in the future!

 

36 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

The Current stuff seems like total bullshit for the Cores. We do know that Zen2 consumes way less than Zen1. How can the current be a Problem? Makes no sense. And it wasn't more than Hearsay...

Because they pushed IPC up by 15% and pushed up clocks by a lot. Even on the 7nm fabrication process, they've really pushed the envelope in order to achieve single core parity and multi core dominance. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, jerubedo said:

Because of your blatant disregard for facts.

What are you talking about?!

5GHz Intel are at around 250W.

Here Proof:

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i9-9900k-9th-gen-cpu,5847-11.html

 

So its a true statement to say that an i9-9900K is around 250W at 5GHz.

 

Just now, jerubedo said:

You claimed that the new Ryzen chips WILL stay within TDP.

Yes and you have no way to prove otherwise.

We do know that Ryzen 1k and 2k usually stays within the TDP.

You see that in the Link above. 2700X is at exactly 105W.

The 2600X is a bit above it but I 10% are OK. 

 

Just now, jerubedo said:

That is a bold claim that I was pointing out may not be correct because there is current data that says otherwise.

Then show the data!!
Oh you don't have them? Who would have guessed.

 

But lets assume the CPU shown at CES was the 3700X. 

It beat the 9900K.

It was somewhat around 65W, don't you agree??

 

Just now, jerubedo said:

Yes 130w is within tolerance, but for all we know that's at stock. OCed might be as bad as the 9900K for all we know.

...

Are you serious?!

Obviously the Spec is inside the spec. If you do something outside the spec the spec is useless.

However, Intel out of the box doesn't stay in spec all that well.

 

Obviously the Spec is for out of the Box, total stock. NOT OC! Obviously.

How can you think that the CPU stays in spec when operating outside of the Spec? That makes no sense.

 

Just now, jerubedo said:

Also, this was never about AMD vs Intel. You're the only one who ever turns EVER SINGLE CONVERSATION into that.

Wrong, that's you.

You started this whole thing.

 

I stated a fact.

You quoted me on that.

And I also didn't state it as a fact. I said that it MIGHT. Not that it will be.

So I allowed myself to be wrong in that...

 

Just now, jerubedo said:

And I don't understand why. It's like you have an internet need to shove AMD down everyone's throat. Yes, it's a good product, and the numbers will speak for itself. It's not the messiah of tech products that you make it sound like, though. 

Öhm, you are the one fighting every time someone recommends a Ryzen 2600x and recommends an Intel 9400F with a Z390 Board.

You are the one claiming that an i3-8x00 is better than a Ryzen 2600(x), not me...

 

So how about you calm down and wait for benchmarks?!

But it looks like there might be no reason no more to buy Intel at the higher end as well. Not just lower end.


And all the People who didn't listen to you and bought the Ryzen 3000 instead of the 9400F could theoretically upgrade to a Ryzen 3700X.

 

Just now, jerubedo said:

These claims have weight because they were made form the motherboard MANUFACTURURES.

but they were out of context!

Without Context those claims are worthless.

 

Like Steve Burkes claim about 15W TDP for the X570. Yeah and?

We now know its a 20 way PCIe Switch and there are reports that up to 12 S-ATAs are supported (some/many shared with PCIe). For that, the 15W (wich is more in the 11W range it seems as there are, rumored, 2 Versions of the X570) doesn't seem to bad...

 

Just now, jerubedo said:

These aren't just rumors from some random tech people. The manufacturers certainly have the details on what the power draw will be like and what it requires.

And under what Circumstances is Current a Problem?
Is it at Stock?
Is it Overclocked?

Is it CPU VRM?

Is it SOC VRM?

 

We don't know. It is just something said somewhere and presented out of context.

Hell, even Bullzoid says that many Boards are probably fine at Stock...

 

 

To me that reads like Zen2 might be a good overclocker!

Just now, jerubedo said:

Linus spoke with MSI reps directly at Computex. Nothing under the table. Not hushed whispers. 

Context!

That Matters. He didn't present the Context!
He only threw something against the Wall. Without Context its useless information.

 

Just now, jerubedo said:

I'm not speculating. I'm quoting a source who says so.

You are speculating, as you have no Proof because there are no Reviews.

You don't know the Circumstances or the Context that was mentioned.

 

But now tell me:
How can the Current be a Problem on a Board with a VRM that's designed for more than 105W, when putting a 65W TDP CPU inside?

It might even be that AMD sees the TDP as spec for the VRM of the Board and the 105W TDP means that it works with Boards that are specified to work with 105W Zen Processors?

 

Just now, jerubedo said:

Again, this is inaccurate, steve never said the words "we're not getting any specs." He said that at best we'd get a limited number of specs and not the entire lineup. This was true.

No, he was wrong. We were getting _ALL_ the specs, the entire Lineup, though 2 were presented after the Keynote, including prices. 

Even the "Limited Number of Specs" is false. We even got Pricing!

 

Just now, jerubedo said:

How is it hearsay when this is what these manufacturers have said directly to Linus? You're literally just putting on blinders and saying "NOPE, that's not true!"

Because Context is missing.

Or what Current for wich VRM!

 

I see CPU VCore

CPU NB/SoC

CPU 1P8 


So what Current? Under what Circumstances?

 

Just now, jerubedo said:

Again, this was never about the 9900K.

It was as that was what you initially quoted.

 

Just now, jerubedo said:

This was about YOUR claim that Ryzen 3000 would never violate TDP, as if YOU know.

No, that's YOUR claim what I said. Wich I didn't.

I said:

Quote

At 5GHz we're more talking about 200-250W Power Consumption rather than 95W. The AMD 105W TDP might actuall be honest and inside what you'd expect...

And the Discussion was about the Intel TDP at that point...

 

Just now, jerubedo said:

You don't! I was just calling you out on it! The essence of what you said was, "Look guys! AMD is absolutely perfect. They are the golden child of all time. They'd never break TDP, unlike the monsterous devils at Intel." 

Show where I said that.

I said that Intel totally violates their TDP with their Boost.

That seemed to have triggered you.

 

And now you're trying to prove that I was wrong, when I wasn't. The Link above showed that my statement is correct, that Intel totally violates the TDP and if they had a 2GHz 28 Core on LGA1151v2 with a 5GHz Boost and 95W TDP, that would technically be in spec while they also violate it if the 5GHz would be on all cores.

 

 

But now AMD has a big advantage, including a better manufacturing process, a very good architecture, where they could improve the IPC by 15% and double the FPU performance. 

Just now, jerubedo said:

Yeah, ok. Now you're arguing about TDP when for all we know the STOCK CPU drew 130w and OCed might be 200w+.

...whole System...

See Anandtech.


You only seem to be on a vendetta against me for whatever reason.

Just now, jerubedo said:

Because they pushed IPC up by 15% and pushed up clocks by a lot. Even on the 7nm fabrication process, they've really pushed the envelope in order to achieve single core parity and multi core dominance. 

How did they "push the Envelope"??

Did they introduce a new, 150W TDP Class?

Do they spec the TDP at Base Clock and let the Boost do whatever it wants?

 

What if they don't violate the TDP? And they have hard limits implemented, in the CPU??

What if the CPU asks the Motherboard "Hey, Board, how much Current can you do" and limits itself to that?

 

You've ever looked at a Threadripper Review?? You know that they have a hard 180W TDP Limit and throttle at exactly 180W and don't allow 185W without manipulating the BIOS or using PBO...

Also AMD has "cTDP" implemented, wich also limits the max. TDP of the CPU and that somehow works...

 

 

But "pushing the Envelope" is a far strech. Especially without knowing what the Motherboard Manufacturers were talking about with him...


And knowing Linus I kinda doubt they were talking about "put it in, switch on" and Overclocking was the thing they were talking about...

"Hell is full of good meanings, but Heaven is full of good works"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

What are you talking about?!

5GHz Intel are at around 250W.

Here Proof:

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i9-9900k-9th-gen-cpu,5847-11.html

 

So its a true statement to say that an i9-9900K is around 250W at 5GHz.

NO ONE IS TALKING ABOUT INTEL!!! What don't you get!! You're blatant disregard for facts is concerning your proposed fact that Ryzen 3000 WILL keep to TDP.

 

20 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

Yes and you have no way to prove otherwise.

Correct, I can't prove otherwise and you can't prove so. That comment you made in which you stated that it WOULD was the reason I posted. This is a baseless fact, and already we see 130w being drawn most likely at stock, which is a 20% increase! And we have motherboard manufacturers saying that power draw will be so high that gen 2 boards are not recommended...

 

20 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

Then show the data!!
Oh you don't have them? Who would have guessed.

The data being what manufactures have said. Why can't you follow the conversation?

 

20 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

Obviously the Spec is for out of the Box, total stock. NOT OC! Obviously.

You're talking out of both ends now. You quoted before that the 9900K pulls 250w. That's OCed, not stock. Now when I compare to OC you go and say, "The spec is for out of the box." Well of course. And the 9900K sticks to its TDP mostly out of the box as well.

 

20 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

How can you think that the CPU stays in spec when operating outside of the Spec? That makes no sense.

130w is out of spec for 105w as well... At stock. Again, you are talking out of both ends.

 

20 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

...whole System...

See Anandtech.

There's no GPU load. The other parts we can assume maybe 10-15 watts. Still out of spec.

 

19 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

Öhm, you are the one fighting every time someone recommends a Ryzen 2600x and recommends an Intel 9400F with a Z390 Board.

No, I only point out that it does do better in gaming loads, something that has been true. And those who got the 9400F can now enjoy excellent gaming performance that still matches Ryzen 3000 and comes close to the 9600K/9700K/9900K. I've shown plenty of data on that matter.

 

20 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

No, he was wrong. We were getting _ALL_ the specs, the entire Lineup, though 2 were presented after the Keynote, including prices. 

Even the "Limited Number of Specs" is false. We even got Pricing!

He was not wrong. You just love to call people wrong. We did NOT get data on Ryzen 3, we did not get overclocking specs, we did not get power conspumtion numbers for all SKUs (only 1). That's what steve said. We'd have to wait for E3 for the rest. He was correct. I posted the video. Actually watch it. He never says we'll get no SKUs. He says that his sources say that we will only get a handful of SKUs and no data on deep specs like overclocking and power consumption. He specifically said to expect a handful of SKUs.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, jerubedo said:

NO ONE IS TALKING ABOUT INTEL!!! What don't you get!! You're blatant disregard for facts is concerning your proposed fact that Ryzen 3000 WILL keep to TDP.

Not True, we were talking about Intel, here the full post you quoted out of context:

15 hours ago, Stefan Payne said:
On 5/27/2019 at 6:33 AM, Fahad ALme said:

intel i9-9900K 14nm they have max boost 5ghz \ 95 W here 8 

https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/processors/core/i9-processors/i9-9900k.html

 

AMD 7nm best cpu 9 3900X 4.6 105w ( but 12 core )

 

i go with intel or i wait new intel cpu

You do know that Intel violates the TDP by a mile, that AMD consumed a fair bit less in the CES Presentation?

 

But yeah, obviously there are people who want to pay ~200€ more for a worse overall product because of Name on the Box...

 

At 5GHz we're more talking about 200-250W Power Consumption rather than 95W. The AMD 105W TDP might actuall be honest and inside what you'd expect...

 

Well, it isn't the first time that AMD was better than Intel...

THAT was the Context.

You quoted the "at 5GHz..." part, where I was talking about Intel, specifically had the 9900K in mind.

And now you claim that we didn't.

Ähh....

 

2 minutes ago, jerubedo said:

Correct, I can't prove otherwise and you can't prove so. That comment you made in which you stated that it WOULD was the reason I posted. This is a baseless fact, and already 

Then if you can't prove it, why mention it at all? 

You heard something about something and can't say what the context was. That is useless information.

 

I didn't say it would, I said it might. And also with the Information we have right now, it looks like its rather probable that AMD means TDP the Hard way, without Exception, while Intel specified it in a way they can violate it with their Boost...

 

I don't get why you'd contest that.

 

Also your claim:

4 hours ago, jerubedo said:
15 hours ago, Stefan Payne said:

At 5GHz we're more talking about 200-250W Power Consumption rather than 95W. The AMD 105W TDP might actuall be honest and inside what you'd expect...

I wouldn't be so sure of that. In Linus' video today he states that the new 570 boards are equipped to handle power draw of up to 300 watts (or more) to the CPU socket alone.

...is something that is to be expected for (Ultra) High End Boards. It has NOTHING to do with the CPU...

As I have proven with the PCB Breakdown of the Z77X-UP7. There are also other examples.

What relation has that to the CPU? None.

Except that they expect there to be a market for such Boards.

 

While I got the most expensive A88X Board at the time for my Kaveri  - the most expensive X470 Board right now is ~2,8 times the price of the Board I got.

And the, to this day, most expensive X570 is in turn ~2,8 times the price of that X470 Board.

And with those Boards, 300A VRM is to be expected - at a minimum!

You don't pay 250€ or more and get some cheap VRM that blow up at 250W CPU Consumption. Again, has NOTHING to do with the CPU but that the Manufacturers expect to sell such Highest End/ultra Expensive 500€+ Boards...

4 hours ago, jerubedo said:

He also stated that MSI will NOT support third gen Ryzen on first gen boards,

...wich is subject to change, especially when enough people on Reddit and Twitter bash MSI for not doing a BIOS Update, when other Manufacturers do...

But we should wait and see how it develops and not state something that can't be proven at this time as fact.

 

MSI has no intent to do a Zen2 compatible BIOS. OK, but can they be persuaded to change their mind? Sure...

Happened a couple of time. And also what forced them to release the Statement in the first place.

 

4 hours ago, jerubedo said:

and that use on the second generation boards is not recommended as well,

...because lack of Features or worse memory clocks...

Its possible that Zen2 might be a bit bitchy with Memory on older Boards.

 

4 hours ago, jerubedo said:

all because of the much higher power draw with Zen2 overclocked.

...
We're arguing about the usage of a CPU far outside their spec???

But then again, that implies that Zen2 is a good overclocker and people might want to overclock their CPUs.

 

Then that would mean that the 5GHz AMD Parts are true, just not out of the Box...

 

So one reason less to buy Intel it seems :D

"Hell is full of good meanings, but Heaven is full of good works"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Stefan Payne said:

THAT was the Context.

You quoted the "at 5GHz..." part, where I was talking about Intel, specifically had the 9900K in mind.

And now you claim that we didn't.

Ähh....

The context wasn't important. I was ONLY talking about the line where you said that Ryzen would stay within TDP. That's why I quoted that line. I was arguing about Ryzen TDP, I wasn't talking about Intel, or AMD vs Intel or anything else. That's why nowhere within my initial argument did I mention Intel at all...

 

1 hour ago, Stefan Payne said:

Then if you can't prove it, why mention it at all?  

Do you not understand how a debate works? You said something possibly incorrect and then I said, "no, that might not be correct because the manufacturers are stating otherwise." I countered your baseless point with my own baseless point (although mine has more base than yours since it was stated by manufacturers).

 

1 hour ago, Stefan Payne said:

 And also with the Information we have right now, it looks like its rather probable that AMD means TDP the Hard way, without Exception

THIS is exactly what I'm debating. This is a baseless claim. 

 

1 hour ago, Stefan Payne said:

..is something that is to be expected for (Ultra) High End Boards. It has NOTHING to do with the CPU...

As I have proven with the PCB Breakdown of the Z77X-UP7. There are also other examples.

What relation has that to the CPU? None.

Except that they expect there to be a market for such Boards.

It's not about the fact that it allows for 300+ watts. It's the fact that they are saying that's needed for Zen2. Linus says that even on the 3rd gen motherboard front, MSI was only willing to say that the ones allowing 300w+ would be the only ones they recommend for higher core Zen2. They were reluctant to recommend even the lower end X570 boards.

 

2 hours ago, Stefan Payne said:

Do they spec the TDP at Base Clock and let the Boost do whatever it wants?

I think that could very well be the case.

 

1 hour ago, Stefan Payne said:

...wich is subject to change, especially when enough people on Reddit and Twitter bash MSI for not doing a BIOS Update, when other Manufacturers do...

But we should wait and see how it develops and not state something that can't be proven at this time as fact.

 

MSI has no intent to do a Zen2 compatible BIOS. OK, but can they be persuaded to change their mind? Sure...

Happened a couple of time. And also what forced them to release the Statement in the first place.

 

Again, they are claiming it's a tech limitation. 

 

1 hour ago, Stefan Payne said:

...because lack of Features or worse memory clocks...

Its possible that Zen2 might be a bit bitchy with Memory on older Boards.

Says you. This is ANOTHER baseless claim. This is the reason I quote you to begin with. You say just these off the wall things without any base for the claim. You have no idea that that's why they've said that gen 2 is not recommended.

 

1 hour ago, Stefan Payne said:

Then that would mean that the 5GHz AMD Parts are true, just not out of the Box...

Probably. The point is that these chips, while they are awesome, they might NOT keep to their TDP. They might go just outside of it sometimes at stock just like the 9900K. And it might go WAY outside of it overclocked, again, just like the 9900K. You say they might, I say they might not. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

-= Locked =- 

 

I believe this has run its course and off rail. 

COMMUNITY STANDARDS   |   TECH NEWS POSTING GUIDELINES   |   FORUM STAFF

LTT Folding Users Tips, Tricks and FAQ   |   F@H & BOINC Badge Request   |   F@H Contribution    My Rig   |   Project Steamroller

I am a Moderator, but I am fallible. Discuss or debate with me as you will but please do not argue with me as that will get us nowhere.

 

Spoiler

  

 

Character is like a Tree and Reputation like its Shadow. The Shadow is what we think of it; The Tree is the Real thing.  ~ Abraham Lincoln

Reputation is a Lifetime to create but seconds to destroy.

You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life.  ~ Winston Churchill

Docendo discimus - "to teach is to learn"

 

 CHRISTIAN MEMBER 

 

 
 
 
 
 
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×