Linus i9 7900X review... Opinions?

[othertomperson]

Just now, done12many2 said:

 

What do you want me to look at?  No need to suck in so much air bud.  

That green line with the latency around halfway between Ryzen (on different CCXs) and Broadwell-E. That's the 10 core 7900k we're talking about.

[done12many2]

Just now, othertomperson said:

That green line with the latency around halfway between Ryzen (on different CCXs) and Broadwell-E. That's the 10 core 7900k we're talking about.

 

I understand what the green line is.  Notice the blue line?  That's what happens when a current Ryzen 8 core goes outside of it's CCX to another.  Something similar (how bad, we don't know) will happen with Intel's 12 - 18c HCC parts, but it does not happen to 10 core or lower Intel parts.  

 

I'd hardly call what you are trying to draw attention to a large core to core latency increase when compared to what will happen with Intel's 12 - 18c HCC parts and current Ryzen parts.  

[othertomperson]

18 minutes ago, done12many2 said:

 

I understand what the green line is.  Notice the blue line?  That's what happens when a current Ryzen 8 core goes outside of it's CCX to another.  Something similar (how bad, we don't know) will happen with Intel's 12 - 18c HCC parts, but it does not happen to 10 core or lower Intel parts.  

 

I'd hardly call what you are trying to draw attention to a large core to core latency increase when compared to what will happen with Intel's 12 - 18c HCC parts and current Ryzen parts.  

I'm not talking about 12 - 18 core parts. I don't give a flying fuck about the gaming performance of CPUs approaching $2000, they couldn't be less relevant, and this is one of the only workloads that this inter-core latency has a huge impact. What I'm talking about here -- and I really don't understand why you're arguing because you posted the fucking graph backing up my point -- is that for all the shitstorm Ryzen gets when games use more than 4 cores (justifiably, I might add), this chip also suffers from however many cores the game is using. Even in something like GTA V which only uses 3-4 cores, this will suffer compared with a last generation Intel, even when that last gen part has lower IPC and lower clockspeed.

 

The optimisations these CPUs will need -- and I'm talking real optimisations, not the bolt on Rise of the Tomb Raider got which essentially stops half the CPU from being accessed (again, according to PCPer) -- are going to be very similar to the optimisations Ryzen will need.

 

That's my point, that's why I said it, now go and pick someone else to start an utterly tangential, and irrelevant argument with.

[done12many2]

Just now, othertomperson said:

I'm not talking about 12 - 18 core parts. I don't give a flying fuck about the gaming performance of CPUs approaching $2000, they couldn't be less relevant, and this is one of the only workloads that this inter-core latency has a huge impact. What I'm talking about here -- and I really don't understand why you're arguing because you posted the fucking graph backing up my point -- is that for all the shitstorm Ryzen gets when games use more than 4 cores (justifiably, I might add), this chip also suffers from however many cores the game is using. Even in something like GTA V which only uses 3-4 cores, this will suffer compared with a last generation Intel, even when that last gen part has lower IPC and lower clockspeed.

 

The optimisations these CPUs will need -- and I'm talking real optimisations, not the bolt on Rise of the Tomb Raider got which essentially stops half the CPU from being accessed (again, according to PCPer) -- are going to be very similar to the optimisations Ryzen will need.

 

That's my point, that's why I said it, now go and pick someone else to make an utterly tangential, and irrelevant argument with.

 

Yeah, after reading your first sentence I didn't go any further.  I can tell talking with you is pointless. 

[othertomperson]

Just now, done12many2 said:

 

Yeah, after reading your first sentence I didn't go any further.  I can tell talking with you is pointless. 

You made a post to tell me that you weren't talking to me, and you quoted me in it to make sure I got an alert. How fucking childish are you?

[done12many2]

1 minute ago, othertomperson said:

You made a post to tell me that you weren't talking to me. How fucking childish are you?

 

About as mature as you are when you're nice and safe behind your keyboard talking like a tough guy.  

[othertomperson]

Just now, done12many2 said:

 

About as mature as you are when you're nice and safe behind you're keyboard talking like a tough guy.  

Why, is punching someone for making a comment about a 10-core CPU generally your style?

[PCGuy_5960]

6 hours ago, TheNaitsyrk said:

Opinions?

You asked for opinions on the LTT review, right? Gamers Nexus made a better review

 

[done12many2]

3 minutes ago, othertomperson said:

Why, is punching someone for making a comment about a 10-core CPU generally your style?

 

Not at all.  

 

Does screaming louder make your point any more relevant?  Nope.  It's the way of this new snowflake movement though.  You guys have all the rights in the world, don't you?  

 

It's easy to tell who lives a protected life.  They talk loud because they haven't been punched.  

[othertomperson]

Just now, done12many2 said:

 

Not at all.  

 

Does screaming louder make your point any more relevant?  Nope.  It's the way of this new snowflake movement though.  You guys have all the rights in the world, don't you?  

 

It's easy to tell who lives a protected life.  They talk to talk loud because they haven't been punched.  

Mate, find yourself a therapist, you need help.

[PCGuy_5960]

Just now, othertomperson said:

Mate, find yourself a therapist, you need help.

Now that's what I call:

[done12many2]

Just now, othertomperson said:

Mate, find yourself a therapist, you need help.

 

I'm not the one throwing a tantrum on LTT.  You're actually hilarious.  

[othertomperson]

1 minute ago, done12many2 said:

 

I'm not the one throwing a tantrum on LTT.  You're actually hilarious.  

You called someone a "snowflake" because they made a comment about inter-core latency of a 10 core CPU that you didn't like. You are indeed "the one throwing a tantrum on LTT".

[done12many2]

Just now, othertomperson said:

You called someone a "snowflake" because they made a comment about inter-core latency of a 10 core CPU that you didn't like.

 

I think you jumped a few steps in between, but sure whatever makes you feel better bud.  We don't want to trigger the BEAST again.  

[PCGuy_5960]

Just now, othertomperson said:

You called someone a "snowflake" because they made a comment about a 10 core CPU that was incorrect.

FIFY

Now AMD and Intel both suffer from the same core-to-core latency problem. Game devs are going to have no choice but to optimise for it

[done12many2]

Just now, PCGuy_5960 said:

FIFY

 

See, when you're not personally caught up in it, you can see clearly.  Thanks for noticing what I was trying to point out. 

 

They are not the same latency problems in any way.  

[othertomperson]

Just now, PCGuy_5960 said:

FIFY

 

Just now, done12many2 said:

 

See, when you're not personally caught up in it, you can see clearly.  Thanks for noticing what I was trying to point out. 

 

They are not the same latency problems in any way.  

I've provided a source that was extremely clear (to anyone who can read a graph). Where is your source that this is incorrect?

[done12many2]

6 hours ago, TheNaitsyrk said:

The 1000$ chip with 10 cores obviously beats the current best offering from Ryzen. 2200 Cinebench on i9 VS 1750-1800 on Ryzen. Other benchmarks look slightly better too and gaming is basically same even though single core of i9 is around 200 and Ryzen is 165 if playing at 1440p+.

Ryzen 1800X with Asus Crosshair VI Hero is about $650 whereas the 7900X with a motherboard will cost hefty 1300$+.

 

Opinions?

 

Back on topic, I think it's going to boil down to what's more important to you.  If max performance at any cost is your thing, Intel is there to take your money.  If value is important, Ryzen remains the answer.

[PCGuy_5960]

Just now, othertomperson said:

I've provided a source that was extremely clear (to anyone who can read a graph). Where is your source that this is incorrect?

The graph, from PCPer:

Yes, the 7900X's latency is higher, but it is nowhere near 1800X levels.

[othertomperson]

1 minute ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

The graph, from PCPer:

Yes, the 7900X's latency is higher, but it is nowhere near 1800X levels.

It's 30ns less. It is much closer to worst-case-scenario Ryzen than it is to Kaby Lake. Seriously look at the 1080p gaming benchmarks. They are worse than the last generation 10 cores

[done12many2]

1 minute ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

The graph, from PCPer:

Yes, the 7900X's latency is higher, but it is nowhere near 1800X levels.

 

So you meant to say that just saying that AMD and Intel have the same core to core latency problems isn't actually very accurate?

 

Jumping from 40 to 140 ns is the same thing as a roughly flat lined latency?

[PCGuy_5960]

Just now, othertomperson said:

It's 30ns less. It is much closer to worst-case-scenario Ryzen than it is to Kaby Lake.

Yep, but this is what you said:

Now AMD and Intel both suffer from the same core-to-core latency problem. Game devs are going to have no choice but to optimise for it

So i'ts not the same

[othertomperson]

3 minutes ago, done12many2 said:

 

So you meant to say that just saying that AMD and Intel have the same core to core latency problems isn't actually very accurate?

 

Jumping from 40 to 140 ns is the same thing as a roughly flat lined latency?

It's much worse. Ryzen has the same latency as Kaby Lake when using the same number of cores as Kaby Lake. The new Intel has only 30ns less latency than Ryzen at its worst at all times.

 

1 minute ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

Yep, but this is what you said:

So i'ts not the same

It is the same problem -- the problem is high intercore latency.

[PCGuy_5960]

2 minutes ago, done12many2 said:

So you meant to say that just saying that AMD and Intel have the same core to core latency problems isn't actually very accurate?

 

Jumping from 40 to 140 ns is the same thing as a roughly flat lined latency?

Yep, even though the 7900X's latency is higher than other Intel CPUs it's better than Ryzen. So you cannot say that they are suffering from the same latency issues

[othertomperson]

6 minutes ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

Yep, even though the 7900X's latency is higher than other Intel CPUs it's better than Ryzen. So you cannot say that they are suffering from the same latency issues

If your game uses 4 cores or less, its latency is ~60ns more than Ryzen's. If the game uses more than 4 cores it is only 30ns better.

 

And yes, if both chips have high latency, then they both have the same problem --  high latency. Ryzen could be consistently worse than the 7900k and my original comment would still be true.

 

You're sitting here defending a CPU that does worse in games than the 6950X when clocked higher with higher IPC due to this issue, with your fingers in your ears saying it's not an issue and that it won't need optimisations. All because, what, you can't stand the thought of Ryzen gaming performance improving alongside it?