Poll: A few questions regarding Threadripper vs i9

[Skanky Sylveon]

I just wanted to know everyone's thoughts on the matter, maybe start a discussion.

[Sir Asvald]

Take a look at this video:

 

 

[Dash Lambda]

I think Threadripper will absolutely thermal throttle if you run it with these:

Spoiler

Which is to say, that's a tad oversimplified.

[Enderman]

If any CPU is thermal throttling that means you have insufficient cooling.

[Guest]

So I'm kind of anoutlier in a few questions so I'll say my answer and why I think it.

1. I think AMD doesn't have better single core performance. With the FX series and now ry zen having worse single core performance says they won't have better than Intel single core performance but I think amd is getting there. It'll definitely be closer to Intel but not as good. AMD seems to design around prioritizing multiple cores to run better than every core doing something different. Yes they're great for doing different things but more so engineered to work together. In my opinion and observation. 

 

2. I think theeadripper as any component will thermal throttle if they get hot enough. I thought it was a safety feature built into most if not all modern components. 

 

3. Ivalue more cores because I think it's more efficient than clock speed alone. I may be wrong scientifically but for multi tasking and heavy workloads I think it's better. (I'm American... we drive pickup trucks everywhere! We're not hauling anything. We just went to mcdonalds cuz we were hungry.) although I do only have a 4 core i5. It's good enough for me, but I really want more cores. Oh well. Maybe when the i5 isn't good enough anymore. 

 

4. I value Pcie expandability because I think it's better than having a bunch of USB plugs in the back of the computer. Also: it's faster. 

 

5. I would choose threadripper because it USB cheaper, and has wayyyy more cores than I need. I9 may have more less or the same.. but I don't have endless money. If i9 was cheaper or more competitively priced I'd consider it but I cannot afford either. 

[Skanky Sylveon]

40 minutes ago, Enderman said:

If any CPU is thermal throttling that means you have insufficient cooling.

Do you believe that Intel not using Solder as their TIM between their die and heat spreader could cause more insufficient cooling?

If so, then outside of delidding the CPU there is not much that the consumer can do.

36 minutes ago, fpo said:

1. I think AMD doesn't have better single core performance. With the FX series and now ry zen having worse single core performance says they won't have better than Intel single core performance but I think amd is getting there. It'll definitely be closer to Intel but not as good. AMD seems to design around prioritizing multiple cores to run better than every core doing something different. Yes they're great for doing different things but more so engineered to work together. In my opinion and observation. 

That's why I said if the i9 thermal throttles.  If it doesn't, the i9 has both an IPC and clock speed advantage.

The only advantage that the i9 looses if it thermal throttles, would be clock speed.

36 minutes ago, fpo said:

2. I think theeadripper as any component will thermal throttle if they get hot enough. I thought it was a safety feature built into most if not all modern components.

I may not have been clear in my questions, Skylake x, in particular, has a hard time keeping cool.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i9-7900x-skylake-x,5092-11.html

[Enderman]

3 minutes ago, Cinnabar Sonar said:

That's why I said if the i9 thermal throttles.  If it doesn't, it has both an IPC and clock speed advantage.

Why would you ever compare a throttling CPU to a non-throttling one??

It should never throttle unless you make very bad buying decisions.

 

"hmm i wonder if my honda goes faster than ferrari with no wheels..."

[Skanky Sylveon]

6 minutes ago, Enderman said:

Why would you ever compare a throttling CPU to a non-throttling one??

It should never throttle unless you make very bad buying decisions.

 

"hmm i wonder if my honda goes faster than ferrari with no wheels..."

I asked you a direct question regarding this, i'll ask it again.

 

Do you believe that Intel not using Solder as their TIM between their die and heat spreader could cause more insufficient cooling?

 

Unless you consider Intel's Skylake x lineup, a bad buying decision, there is not much that the consumer can do outside of buying a very expensive cooling solution, or delidding.

[Enderman]

3 minutes ago, Cinnabar Sonar said:

I asked you a direct question regarding this, ill ask it again.

 

Do you believe that Intel not using Solder as their TIM between their die and heat spreader could cause more insufficient cooling?

 

Unless you consider Intel's Skylake x lineup, a bad buying decision, there is not much that the consumer can do outside of buying a very expensive cooling solution, or delidding.

What do you mean "insufficient cooling"??

Does "I need an AIO instead of an air cooler to cool this CPU" meant it is insufficient cooling?

Do you consider a 9590 to have "insufficient cooling" because it needs a high end cooler?

 

Maybe you don't understand, but the cooling is provided by a cooler OUTSIDE of the CPU.

Whether it is soldered or not just determines if it will run a few degrees hotter or not.

There is always going to be a cooler that can cool a CPU enough for it to run normally.

These are consumer CPUs after all.

[Skanky Sylveon]

 

11 minutes ago, Enderman said:

What do you mean "insufficient cooling"??

Does "I need an AIO instead of an air cooler to cool this CPU" meant it is insufficient cooling?

Do you consider a 9590 to have "insufficient cooling" because it needs a high end cooler?

 

Maybe you don't understand, but the cooling is provided by a cooler OUTSIDE of the CPU.

Whether it is soldered or not just determines if it will run a few degrees hotter or not.

There is always going to be a cooler that can cool a CPU enough for it to run normally.

These are consumer CPUs after all.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i9-7900x-skylake-x,5092-11.html

 

Tomshardware seems to be having difficulty even with AIOs, and while you stated that "Why would you ever compare a throttling CPU to a non-throttling one??"  I would have to disagree.

If threadripper can maintain it's temperatures more than Intel, on the same cooler.   It's definitely worth discussing, and should be a factor when buying a new CPU.

[Enderman]

7 minutes ago, Cinnabar Sonar said:

 

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i9-7900x-skylake-x,5092-11.html

 

Tomshardware seems to be having difficulty even with AIOs, and while you stated that "Why would you ever compare a throttling CPU to a non-throttling one??"  I would have to disagree.

If threadripper can maintain it's temperatures more than Intel, on the same cooler.   It's definitely worth discussing, and should be a factor when buying a new CPU.

That's for overclocking.

Obviously if you take a 140W CPU and overclock it it's gonna use way more power and create way more heat.

 

It's completely illogical to overclock your CPU to a point where it throttles, because it's completely counterproductive.

You would get better performance at stock or with a lower OC than forcing it to throttle.

 

You can take any CPU and overclock it to the point where it throttles.

There is no point in comparing a throttling CPU to a normally functioning one.

There IS a point however to compare an overclocked CPU to a stock one, if for some magical reason Threadripper is so efficient that you can OC multiple times better than Skylake X.

 

If you take a certain cooler and compare both CPUs with the highest overclock you can get on that cooler then sure, that's fair.

Asking if one CPU throttling will be worse than another CPU not throttling is not the correct way to ask that question at all.

[Skanky Sylveon]

5 minutes ago, Enderman said:

That's for overclocking.

Obviously if you take a 140W CPU and overclock it it's gonna use way more power and create way more heat.

 

It's completely illogical to overclock your CPU to a point where it throttles, because it's completely counterproductive.

You would get better performance at stock or with a lower OC than forcing it to throttle.

 

You can take any CPU and overclock it to the point where it throttles.

There is no point in comparing a throttling CPU to a normally functioning one.

There IS a point however to compare a an overclocked CPU to a stock one, if for some magical reason Threadripper is so efficient that you can OC multiple times better than Skylake X.

 

If you take a certain cooler and compare both CPUs with the highest overclocked you can get on that cooler then sure, that's fair.

Asking if one CPU throttling will be worse than another CPU not throttling is not the correct way to ask that question at all.

Ok, we seem to be somewhat on the same page here.  Another question for you.

Do you think that the higher core i9s coming out will be able to match threadrippers clock speed without throttling?

No overclocking.

[Enderman]

7 minutes ago, Cinnabar Sonar said:

Ok, we seem to be somewhat on the same page here.  Another question for you.

Do you think that the higher core i9s coming out will be able to match threadrippers clock speed without throttling?

No overclocking.

So stock i9 vs stock threadripper?

From what I've found online, Threadripper is 3.5GHz base 4GHz boost, and the 7900X is 3.3GHz base 4.3GHz boost.

So yes, both have very similar clock speeds without throtting.

IPC however will still be higher on intel almost certainly.

 

How much Threadripper can OC compared to i9s will need to be tested when Threadripper gets reviewed.

If it can OC much higher on the same cooling, then it's always possible it could match the IPC of an i9 with a small OC or stock.

[Skanky Sylveon]

4 minutes ago, Enderman said:

So stock i9 vs stock threadripper?

From what I've found online, Threadripper is 3.5GHz base 4GHz boost, and the 7900X is 3.3GHz base 4.3GHz boost.

So yes, both have very similar clock speeds without throtting.

IPC however will still be higher on intel almost certainly.

 

How much Threadripper can OC compared to i9s will need to be tested when Threadripper gets reviewed.

If it can OC much higher on the same cooling, then it's always possible it could match the IPC of an i9 with a small OC or stock.

I seriously doubt that threadripper will overclock well.  Ryzen didn't and Threadripper is basically two Ryzen chips hooked together through AMDs infinity fabric.

 

I was mainly talking about Intel's 7920x and up, while we really don't know much about them other than price, if Intel's CPUs are having thermal issues(even if its only limited to those that overclock) then I don't know how Intel will be able to have 12, 14, 16, and 18 core chips that match Ryzen's clock speed.

The 12 and 14 core CPUs might.

 

https://www.extremetech.com/computing/252354-investigations-sheds-fresh-light-intels-x299-overheating-problem-implicates-skylake-xs-design-well

Another article, I believe that this issue may become worse with Intel's higher core CPUs.

[Enderman]

Just now, Cinnabar Sonar said:

I seriously doubt that threadripper will overclock well.  Ryzen didn't and Threadripper is basically two Ryzen chips hooked together through AMDs infinity fabric.

 

I was mainly talking about Intel's 7920x and up, while we really don't know much about them other than price, if Intel's CPUs are having thermal issues(even if its only limited to those that overclock) then I don't know how Intel will be able to have 12, 14, 16, and 18 core chips that match Ryzen's clock speed.

The 12 and 14 core CPUs might.

 

https://www.extremetech.com/computing/252354-investigations-sheds-fresh-light-intels-x299-overheating-problem-implicates-skylake-xs-design-well

Another article, I believe that this issue may become worse with Intel's higher core CPUs.

Ok so then like most xeon CPUs, you don't overclock them, or you OC them very little, (unless you have phase change cooling or a massive custom loop).

Boom, no thermal problems.

 

Clock speed is not the only thing that matters for IPC so it's useless to compare clock for clock.

You need to wait for benchmarks to know if Threadripper will be better or worse than a slow clocked i9.

 

If you compare the low clocked 6950X to Ryzen, it still has better single core performance.

TBH everyone should just stop comparing unreleased CPUs until real tests are done on them to know actual performance.

[NoMercy]

@Enderman @Cinnabar Sonar

 

You guys should not have the word "throttling" in your discussion. It doesn't make sense?

[He_162]

X299:
-Contrary to popular belief, it runs really well, and of course it produces heat when overclocked, people are just shitting on it for no reason.

-Get a decent motherboard, and a high end CPU, or just stick to mainstream i7-7700k.
-Decent motherboards have no VRM problems (they cost more though, and the cheaper boards aren't "crappy VRMs", it's just that their best most high end VRM's before they had to put better ones on there just aren't capable of handling so much.

Threadripper:
-Less IPC, obviously, it's not a debate, it's ZEN based, and can't clock higher than intel's chips, so they opted for more cores to keep up with the better price / performance ratio while making a profit.

-It is suitable for those who want more PCIE lanes for less than 1000+$$$

-If you want pure performance for streaming, etc, Get a Ryzen 8 core, or a i7-7700k, that's all you need

Neither platform is bad, Threadripper offers more PCIE lanes, and X299 offers more single core performance (maybe 20% if you overclock, 11 - 13% if you don't)
Those numbers are off the top of my head, they are probably highly inaccurate for IPC%, but it's really not too noticeable.

Anyway, the cheaper option is threadripper, and the "better" option is Core i9, X299.
Look at it the way you look at Ryzen, and it's the exact same, Ryzen offers more cores for the same price, or simply the same amount for less.

[Skanky Sylveon]

3 minutes ago, Enderman said:

Clock speed is not the only thing that matters for IPC so it's useless to compare clock for clock.

You need to wait for benchmarks to know if Threadripper will be better or worse than a slow clocked i9.

You are right, however clock speed is a factor.

4 minutes ago, Enderman said:

 

If you compare the low clocked 6950X to Ryzen, it still has better single core performance.

Can you link me the website that says this?  That would be very informative.

5 minutes ago, Enderman said:

TBH everyone should just stop comparing unreleased CPUs until real tests are done on them to know actual performance.

It's going to happen, I don't think that speculation is necessarily a bad thing, as long as people don't state things as fact, I'm OK with it.

5 minutes ago, NoMercy said:

You guys should not have the word "throttling" in your discussion. It doesn't make sense?

Care to give me a better word to use?

[Enderman]

5 minutes ago, Cinnabar Sonar said:

You are right, however clock speed is a factor.

Can you link me the website that says this?  That would be very informative.

It's going to happen, I don't think that speculation is necessarily a bad thing, as long as people don't state things as fact, I'm OK with it.

Nvm I remembered wrong, it's the 6900k that has better single core.

Still, it has lower base and boost clock speeds than the 1700/1700X.

[Skanky Sylveon]

4 minutes ago, Enderman said:

Nvm I remembered wrong, it's the 6900k that has better single core.

Still, it has lower base and boost clock speeds than the 1700/1700X.

Informative nevertheless, thank you.

16 minutes ago, He_162 said:

X299:
-Contrary to popular belief, it runs really well, and of course it produces heat when overclocked, people are just shitting on it for no reason.

I am assuming that you are talking from personal experience?  I do have interest in the 7820x, and I would love to know your experiences with the platform.

Also, my intention was not to "shit" on the platform.  I am sorry if you got that impression.

[He_162]

12 minutes ago, Enderman said:

Ok so then like most xeon CPUs, you don't overclock them, or you OC them very little, (unless you have phase change cooling or a massive custom loop).

Boom, no thermal problems.

 

Clock speed is not the only thing that matters for IPC so it's useless to compare clock for clock.

You need to wait for benchmarks to know if Threadripper will be better or worse than a slow clocked i9.

 

If you compare the low clocked 6950X to Ryzen, it still has better single core performance.

TBH everyone should just stop comparing unreleased CPUs until real tests are done on them to know actual performance.

If you put both CPU's at the same clock speed and measure single core performance, you're getting the IPC. That's benchmarks.

Now if you take the overall score and divide it by the cores, you can get a similar metric for IPC, although not as accurate.
i9-7900x = 2167 in cinebench. / 10 = 216.7 (@3.3ghz)

TR1920x= 2431 in cinebench. / 12 = 202.6 (@3.5ghz)

 

Threadripper was clocked slightly higher across all cores, but it seems like it's within 11% of X299 / Skylake-X's IPC if it's anything close to accurate.

And you're literally telling people not to compare products when one is clearly better price to performance, and you can figure out things like relative IPC, overall IPC, and how well it does in the cherry picked benchmarks, which is silly, conversations should be had period, and it's not something we should just "stop and accept whatever the reviewers say".

I was told Ryzen sucks at gaming until I bought it, and found out not only was it smoother, but no one mentioned the fact that it doesn't matter what the max framerate is if you don't have a GTX 1080 Ti, or 240hz monitor.

[HKZeroFive]

To the good chunk of people who think Threadripper will have better single-threaded performance than Skylake-X; just why?

[He_162]

8 minutes ago, Cinnabar Sonar said:

Informative nevertheless, thank you.

I am assuming that you are talking from personal experience?  I do have interest in the 7820x, and I would love to know your experiences with the platform.

Also, my intention was not to "shit" on the platform.  I am sorry if you got that impression.

I do not have X299 on hand, I am referencing reviewers, and overclockers, such as Der8auer, and videos such as this:

I should also mention that he is an AMD fanboy for the most part, and he doesn't give much praise to the stock settings for this CPU much.

[He_162]

Just now, HKZeroFive said:

To the good chunk of people who think Threadripper will have better single-threaded performance than Skylake-X; just why?

No clue, optimism I guess?

It clearly doesn't.

[Skanky Sylveon]

7 minutes ago, HKZeroFive said:

To the good chunk of people who think Threadripper will have better single-threaded performance than Skylake-X; just why?

Better single threaded performance if and after Skylake x thermal throttles.  

While this is an issue already, the higher core Skylake x chips that are coming out may have this problem even more.

Skylake x has better single threaded performance when running at full speed, that is clear.