Does Intel WANT people to hate them??

[Guest]

On 7/19/2020 at 8:55 AM, smiffer said:

so did LTT took the ROG Strix H470-I Gaming with a 10gen cpu and test it wen you put 3600mhz ram in there? 
pll say they still be able to get 3600mhz on it. im defending LTT at the moment but they just say linus is lying his ass off.
regards 

It will automatically downclock to whatever the maximum supported speed for the specific CPU in use is, just like every H-series board ever. Note the "run speed" column in the memory QVL for that board. Nothing higher than 2933mhz (when using an i7 or i9) or 2666mhz (when using an i3 or i5).

[Yaerox]

I really need some clarification of AMD products and how you're supposed to save so much money.

I've no idea how people are comparing, but whenever I compare AMD vs. Intel I can save up max 170€ in Germany. What are people comparing? I compare: i9-10900 vs. Ryzen 9 3900X, i7-10700 vs. Ryzen 7 3800X, i5-10600 vs. Ryzen 7 3700X. Mainboards and RAM are at the same price.

 

I'm no Intel/AMD Fanboy. I wanna buy whatever is the best for me, but my history currently is: Intel Pentium > AMD (dunno the model anymore) > Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 > Intel Core 2 Quad (gifted by a friend, otherwise E8400 would have stayed) > Core i7-4790k and the only PC which didn't lasted 3-5 years was the AMD one. It was impossible to play latest games (even with low settings) after 2 years. I still have this bad experiences in my mind.

 

I'd love to get convinced instead of persuaded to go for AMD with the next build coming in September.

Btw. does AMD have issues with RAM/USB Support? Hearing about it still sometimes.

[spartaman64]

20 minutes ago, Yaerox said:

I really need some clarification of AMD products and how you're supposed to save so much money.

I've no idea how people are comparing, but whenever I compare AMD vs. Intel I can save up max 170€ in Germany. What are people comparing? I compare: i9-10900 vs. Ryzen 9 3900X, i7-10700 vs. Ryzen 7 3800X, i5-10600 vs. Ryzen 7 3700X. Mainboards and RAM are at the same price.

 

I'm no Intel/AMD Fanboy. I wanna buy whatever is the best for me, but my history currently is: Intel Pentium > AMD (dunno the model anymore) > Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 > Intel Core 2 Quad (gifted by a friend, otherwise E8400 would have stayed) > Core i7-4790k and the only PC which didn't lasted 3-5 years was the AMD one. It was impossible to play latest games (even with low settings) after 2 years. I still have this bad experiences in my mind.

 

I'd love to get convinced instead of persuaded to go for AMD with the next build coming in September.

Btw. does AMD have issues with RAM/USB Support? Hearing about it still sometimes.

not since first gen ryzen they havent had trouble with support. and the i5 10600 is more on the tier of the r5 3600

[Yaerox]

33 minutes ago, spartaman64 said:

not since first gen ryzen they havent had trouble with support. and the i5 10600 is more on the tier of the r5 3600

good to know with the support. but even the r5 3600 is only 120€ cheaper?

[spartaman64]

2 minutes ago, Yaerox said:

good to know with the support. but even the r5 3600 is only 120€ cheaper?

wow intel cpu prices are really inflated for you guys its only 92 dollars more expensive in the us and wym thats a 43% price difference from 279 euros

[Guest]

2 hours ago, spartaman64 said:

not since first gen ryzen they havent had trouble with support. and the i5 10600 is more on the tier of the r5 3600

I'd argue it's the i5-10400 that's the obvious 3600 equivalent.

[spartaman64]

4 minutes ago, Akira13645 said:

I'd argue it's the i5-10400 that's the obvious 3600 equivalent.

ok maybe and the 10600 is the 3600x equivalent 

edit:

https://www.techspot.com/review/2032-intel-core-i5-10400/

but idk it gets smoked in productivity tasks

[SpaceGhostC2C]

On 7/19/2020 at 3:40 AM, Furyaan said:

I just made an account to open the debate on this topic, as I'm very confused after watching the video. I'm by no means an Intel expert, so I may be missing something, but I have developed motherboards for the telecom industry for several years. Why does Linus act like the motherboard has no role to play in the memory speed, and claims that the differentiation is 'entirely artificial'? It's not because the memory controller is on the CPU, that the motherboard will not play a limiting role on the maximum reachable memory speed. 

I don't think Linus said the motherboard doesn't matter, and I think he mentioned the memory traces.

What he did say, though, is that the chipset doesn't matter, as the memory controller is no longer there. And other than the CPU, that's the only thing Intel controls in these motherboards (there may be Intel NICs or whatever, but that's up to the board manufacturers). Motherboard manufacturers can vary the quality of their boards, and you will fine motherboards within a lineup that claim higher supported speeds than others, sometimes even putting the "OC" disclaimer limit at higher speeds in some boards than others. But they can do so with any combination of chipsets and PCB quality (I''m sure not all Z- boards are equally stable at all speeds anyway).

Hence, while different motherboards may hit different physical limitations to memory speed, the limitation on Intel's side is indeed entirely artificial. Just like linking overclocking to a specific chipset was entirely artificial - again, the motherboard quality does matter for your overclocking results, but there's nothing in the chipset itself that is required for overclocking.

 

 

[SpaceGhostC2C]

7 hours ago, Akira13645 said:

Linus is flat-out, hands-down, no-other-way-to-put it wrong about this being a "new" thing that Intel is doing in any way. It's not. They haven't changed anything at all about how RAM works on B and H series boards.

That is not 100% accurate. Intel has put this restriction in the past, but it hasn't continuously maintained it. H77 had XMP support, then H87 and H97 were locked at 1600MHz. As far as I've seen, H170 had XMP support again. It would seem that H370 was already locked, though. Although I guess if last gen was locked then your statement was accurate after all, as it is not new for this generation  

[Kisai]

4 hours ago, Yaerox said:

I'm no Intel/AMD Fanboy. I wanna buy whatever is the best for me, but my history currently is: Intel Pentium > AMD (dunno the model anymore) > Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 > Intel Core 2 Quad (gifted by a friend, otherwise E8400 would have stayed) > Core i7-4790k and the only PC which didn't lasted 3-5 years was the AMD one. It was impossible to play latest games (even with low settings) after 2 years. I still have this bad experiences in my mind.

 

I went from 8088->80286->80386 (Intel) ->80386 (AMD) - 80486SX (killed it) - Cyrix 5x86 (basically still a 486)-> Pentium 120->Pentium II 450 (really a 300)-Pentium III (CPU replaced)->Pentium 4->Quadcore-(CPU replaced with dual core)-> i7-4770

During the PII time, the parents also had an Athlon K700.

 

Between all these machines usually some of the parts were kept for the next machine, From the 286 to the 486, the video card, i/o card, floppy drives were all kept, from the 386 to the 486 the drives were kept. The Cyrix was a new machine, and I was still playing new-in-1997 games on the 386 when we got that. That was also the most short-lived alternative. The Pentium 120 was basically the next machine that had parts go from one model to another, to the PII. The P4 was an OEM, and I switched to a P4 laptop at that time, and the P4 desktop went with my sister across the country and back.

 

So the next system wound up being a new build and thus the Quadcore and then Dual core, and most cursed build of all time. The hard drives and the replacement PSU from that system wound up in the i7, thus the most stable build of all time.

 

My only hesitance to buy AMD CPU's is because historically everyone I knew with them pre-Athlon had a fight with it. The K6's were utter trashfire. The Athlon was not, it was like an entirely different quality, and that machine was used until my parents decided to offload it to me when they bought a new desktop. Both the PIII and the Athlon I still have but they're basically just there in case I need to access things on CD-ROM's or 3.5"/5.25" floppies. The P120 I still have as well, technically. Though I threw out the chassis a few years back because it was the one with the razor-sharp frame and swapped it with one I found in the recycling in the building. I also inherited a former roommate's P4 as well.

 

Between everything, my experience has basically pointed to:

- Don't buy trash parts.

- Don't buy pre-owned parts except as replacements for dead parts

- Replace your PC between 5 and 8 years, even if you don't think you should. You can certainly keep a machine for a full 8 years, but that requires paying more up front at the end of a cycle rather than paying more up front at the beginning of a hardware cycle

 

So the hardware cycle that is ending is the DDR4 and PCIe3 cycle. If you have DDR4/PCIe3 equipment, just hold onto it until DDR5 AND/OR PCIe4/PCIe5 cycle. If you have DDR3 equipment, still (meaning you bought it near the end of the DDR3 cycle,) then you may want to pick up DDR4 equipment at the end of the cycle again while it's cheaper than new DDR5 kit.

 

[Guest]

6 hours ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

That is not 100% accurate. Intel has put this restriction in the past, but it hasn't continuously maintained it. H77 had XMP support, then H87 and H97 were locked at 1600MHz. As far as I've seen, H170 had XMP support again. It would seem that H370 was already locked, though. Although I guess if last gen was locked then your statement was accurate after all, as it is not new for this generation  

"Having XMP support" isn't the issue. All B and H series boards "have XMP support" and always did, because you literally need it to run any RAM at above the bone-stock JEDEC 2133mhz (or lower in previous generations) speeds.

 

It's the way XMP specifically works on B and H series boards that is different, and always has been different. Any XMP profile you enable on them will always get automatically downclocked by the motherboard to the maximum officially supported speed for the CPU you're using, if the speed of the profile is higher than that supported speed.

 

For example, enabling a DDR3-2400 CL10 profile on a H77 board did not actually run at 2400mhz / CL10 the way it would have on a Z77 board. It would / did run at 1600mhz / CL10. That's how it's been for every generation. Look at the "memory" section in the overview of this ASRock H77 board, for example. Note how it explicitly says: 

Quote

The highest supported DRAM frequency depends on the CPU you've installed. For detailed CPU specifications, please refer to Intel^® official website.

 

"Supporting XMP" or "not supporting XMP" has nothing to do with anything and isn't a thing. It's support for unrestricted XMP that differentiates Z-series boards from B and H series ones.

[SpaceGhostC2C]

3 minutes ago, Akira13645 said:

"Having XMP support" isn't the issue. All B and H series boards "have XMP support" and always did, because you literally need it to run any RAM at above the bone-stock 2133mhz (or lower in previous generations) speeds.

 

It's the way XMP specifically works on B and H series boards that is different, and always has been different. Any XMP profile you enable on them will always get automatically downclocked by the motherboard to the maximum official speed for the CPU you're using, if the speed of the profile is higher than the supported speed.

 

 

Yeah, I used it as a shorthand. What I mean with "XMP enabled" is that they have a "RAM max speed depends on the CPU installed" disclaimer, as opposed to "RAM will run at XXXX MHz if XMP is higher than XXXX" disclaimer the others have.

 

3 minutes ago, Akira13645 said:

For example, enabling a DDR3-2400 CL10 profile on a H77 board did not actually run at 2400mhz / CL10 the way it would have on a Z77 board. It would / did run at 1600mhz / CL10. That's how it's been for every generation. 

Well, if you get for example Asus and go through the specs for different H generations that is not what they say. But I haven't tried running such memory on an H motherboard of any generation, so if you have and that was the outcome, then I'll take your word for it.

 

[Yaerox]

14 hours ago, Kisai said:

So the hardware cycle that is ending is the DDR4 and PCIe3 cycle. If you have DDR4/PCIe3 equipment, just hold onto it until DDR5 AND/OR PCIe4/PCIe5 cycle. If you have DDR3 equipment, still (meaning you bought it near the end of the DDR3 cycle,) then you may want to pick up DDR4 equipment at the end of the cycle again while it's cheaper than new DDR5 kit.

 

Good to know. My Specs are in my signature. Since I'm can't running the games the way I'd like I'll wait for RTX3000 Series and maybe for Ryzen 4th gen. I think this pretty much hit's the hardware cycle good enough since DDR4 isn't to expensive anymore and i think DDR5 will take some time.

Like I said, for CPU I'm totally unsure what to do. At the end of the day I probably go for whatever does better on streaming benchmarks.

 

Edit: Since I don't like selling stuff on eBay and I can't keep any of my Hardware parts I'm probably try to sell it to a family member/friend for office work. Exceptions will be SSDs, I'm gonna carry them with me for sure. I'm more then good enough with them.

[Yaerox]

18 hours ago, spartaman64 said:

wow intel cpu prices are really inflated for you guys its only 92 dollars more expensive in the us and wym thats a 43% price difference from 279 euros

Ohh wow, maybe that's one point why I don't get all of this "get AMD it's much cheaper" hype then. I'll defenitely look on the US market prices just for interests.

[Yaerox]

On 7/20/2020 at 8:09 PM, Yaerox said:

I've no idea how people are comparing, but whenever I compare AMD vs. Intel I can save up max 170€ in Germany. What are people comparing? I compare: i9-10900 vs. Ryzen 9 3900X, i7-10700 vs. Ryzen 7 3800X, i5-10600 vs. Ryzen 7 3700X. Mainboards and RAM are at the same price.

 

On 7/20/2020 at 9:11 PM, spartaman64 said:

wow intel cpu prices are really inflated for you guys its only 92 dollars more expensive in the us and wym thats a 43% price difference from 279 euros

Since I found this interesting I compared prices in Germany (geizhals.de) / US (pcpartpicker.com). So now I don't get the "cheapness" at all?

amd-intel-pricing-us-de.pdf