Intel Core i9 9900K

[porina]

7 hours ago, Swatson said:

 

  Hide contents

 

 

 

2 hours ago, Stefan Payne said:

Seriously now you are lying to yourself here. 

Be honest and stop downplaying/overplaying stuff..

 

And why use the Word "destroy" here?!

Doesn't seem reasonable.

Of course, I am cherry picking my use case here, which are in AVX2/FMA3 heavy workloads. Prime95 being the best example to compare with. It is not just a stress test, it is a real software tool. AMD's choice to not implement as much FP potential in Ryzen means it really sucks. In IPC, you do need two Ryzen cores to match a -lake core, where the Ryzen would then lose out due to clock. So my i3-8350k will comfortably beat any AM4 Ryzen currently on the market. As AVX-512 is introduced to mainstream, this gap could grow wider.

[Stefan Payne]

2 minutes ago, porina said:

 

Of course, I am cherry picking my use case here, which are in AVX2/FMA3 heavy workloads. Prime95 being the best example to compare with. It is not just a stress test, it is a real software tool. AMD's choice to not implement as much FP potential in Ryzen means it really sucks. In IPC, you do need two Ryzen cores to match a -lake core, where the Ryzen would then lose out due to clock. So my i3-8350k will comfortably beat any AM4 Ryzen currently on the market. As AVX-512 is introduced to mainstream, this gap could grow wider.

Yes and what do you not really need these days?
Its FP Power because most of that stuff is done on the graphics card or other things.

 

And also the thing you don't tell is that Intel violates the TDP by far while AMD does not in AVX Loads. One of the Reasons Ryzen is more efficient than the Intel chips right now.

And do you have any proof for that? Prime isn't a good benchmark, its for something else entirely and developed towards that goal. Not to be a benchmark tool.

[porina]

18 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

Yes and what do you not really need these days?
Its FP Power because most of that stuff is done on the graphics card or other things.

GPUs are especially weak when doing FP64 calculations, which is what FMA3 does. The last "fast" consumer GPUs in that respect was the AMD 280X, or whatever the top end nvidia 500 series was. Ever since then, they've been crippling FP64 performance, and in these compute cases, FP32 doesn't cut it. That's all gaming GPUs are good for, and of course, "pro" GPUs supporting FP64 are $$$.

 

18 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

And also the thing you don't tell is that Intel violates the TDP by far while AMD does not in AVX Loads. One of the Reasons Ryzen is more efficient than the Intel chips right now.

In like for like performance/workloads, they're really not that different. While Intel CPUs can burn more power when running FMA3 loads, they are doing a LOT more work, so performance per watt isn't that different.

 

18 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

And do you have any proof for that? Prime isn't a good benchmark, its for something else entirely and developed towards that goal. Not to be a benchmark tool.

Prime95 built in benchmark actually is a good representation of that type of compute use case. You can use it to examine how much work is done either as 1 task per core, or 1 task all cores. How does CPU cache fit into it? How does ram bandwidth fit into it? How does all that vary depending on the working data size?

 

 

 

This is a chart I created recently from my own test data when I got the 8086k and wanted to compare it again 7800X, as both are 6 cores but with very different cache structures and ram bandwidth. I didn't normalise for CPU clock here so the 8086k was at 4.3 GHz, and the 7800X and 8350k were both at 4.0 GHz. Results are presented as n cores m workers, where m = n or 1 depending if running separate single tasks or one task multi-threaded. Beyond 2MB/core you see a drop on the consumer CPUs as the dual channel ram cripple performance, but the Skylake-X with quad channel powers through that. The low performance region on the left is simple the inability for muilti-threading to cope with small work sizes. Tasks need to be big enough to split efficiently.

 

Note while Prime95 is probably the best known prime number finding software in that area, others like LLR and PFGW run off the same library, and performance scaling works similarly. An independent implementation is in genefer, which doesn't currently support multiple threads, but running multiple tasks at the same time shows similar scaling. And if you're not interested in prime number finding, that's ok too. The heavy lifting part of the code is doing a FFT at high precision so you don't get rounding errors. This is one of the methods used to convert between time and frequency domains and is widely used in science and engineering, although not normally to the sizes or precision required by prime number finding...

 

Again, I recognise these are specific use cases. The key point is, you need to pick the right CPU for the task. AMD by choosing not to implement as many FP units is targeting a different audience. 

[Peskanova]

I think next gen will be when amd takes the lead on performance (on games, because he already took on the rest). Now a low i5 or a i3 is not worth comparing with a 1500/1600?, I have a 4790k and I think next will be 7nm ryzen.

[Sauron]

6 hours ago, Stefan Payne said:

Oh, you think so?

I've found another number about the procssors and they state around 400-600 Million processors sold by Intel.

With 2 Dollars more per CPU that makes 800 to 1.200 Million Dollar cost or less revenue for Intel.

That is a hell of a lot. And since Intel sells you the cheapest thing for the most money...

You're still ignoring proportions and the fact that only the higher end chips need soldering. You're also ignoring the possibility of just charging 2$ more for those chips, literally nobody would complain.

6 hours ago, Stefan Payne said:

Only if the Market is working as intended...

But with Intel you see a very loyal Customer base that still buys the stuff Intel makes, despite all the disadvantages.

 

If the CPU isn't solder? No Problem, void the warranty and do it yourself.

Sidechannel Attacks? NO Problem, its Intel, can't be that bad, can it? Besides the others have to have the same issues, even if they don't...

 

And you've heard that BSD decided to disable SMT on Intel Processors because of the TLBleed thingy that isn't disclosed yet?
But Intel responded that they won't fix it...

Eventually people will get tired of it... there's nothing inherent to the "intel experience" that would push someone to buy their products if they weren't at least somewhat competitive in terms of performance and continued disinterest in their thermal performance will be affecting exactly that.

[Stefan Payne]

1 minute ago, Sauron said:

You're still ignoring proportions and the fact that only the higher end chips need soldering. You're also ignoring the possibility of just charging 2$ more for those chips, literally nobody would complain.

At least the K-Models do, if not all i5 and i7. So even then, we are talking about a couple of million.

And only if we are really talking about 2€ and not more...

Because another thing to keep in mind is that with soldering you have more trash as some perfectly fine Dies don't survive the soldering process.

Especially if the DIE is a bit larger (like on Skylake X for example)...

 

1 minute ago, Sauron said:

Eventually people will get tired of it...

People are defending the Spectre and Meltdown sidechannel attacks.

And it seems that the same will happen for the TLBleed issue wich makes SMT a security risk and better switch it off for that reason...

 

And even then, Intel has done so many bad things - like a new, incompatible socket for Coffeelake without any need for it whatsoever.

 

1 minute ago, Sauron said:

there's nothing inherent to the "intel experience" that would push someone to buy their products if they weren't at least somewhat competitive in terms of performance and continued disinterest in their thermal performance will be affecting exactly that.

It takes a lot of pain for some people to change their mind...

Even almost 10 years 4 Core with SMT and incremental, tiny increases in performance as well as rising prices while the CPU become more and more fragile - first the soldering of the Die and later the slimmer package so that the CPU dies with too much pressure. Again, something that wouldn't be possible with a PGA socket like in the olden days with the Pentium 4 S478 Socket.

 

AMD still uses a PGA Socket for desktop CPUs while they use LGA for Servers and HEDT...

[Brooksie359]

5 hours ago, porina said:

 

Of course, I am cherry picking my use case here, which are in AVX2/FMA3 heavy workloads. Prime95 being the best example to compare with. It is not just a stress test, it is a real software tool. AMD's choice to not implement as much FP potential in Ryzen means it really sucks. In IPC, you do need two Ryzen cores to match a -lake core, where the Ryzen would then lose out due to clock. So my i3-8350k will comfortably beat any AM4 Ryzen currently on the market. As AVX-512 is introduced to mainstream, this gap could grow wider.

It has about double the performance but if you take a 8 core 16 thread cpu then it has double the cores and quadruple the threads. I would actually be interested if what you say is true as it would seem the 2700x could overpower your cpu with the shear amount of cores and threads. 

[grimreeper132]

That naming scheme is obvious bullshit, considering the current intel 8 core is 7820X, I doubt they will put that name up to 900K limiting the names that they can use for their extreme processor lines. As the fact it's an 8 core CPU that is possible, as they intel is trying to compete with AMD and in a way struggling, cause they can't get to 10nm so are chucking all the core at AMD to try and save themselves. Although that being said I can see them doing this but I can also see them not doing this

[porina]

19 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

It has about double the performance but if you take a 8 core 16 thread cpu then it has double the cores and quadruple the threads. I would actually be interested if what you say is true as it would seem the 2700x could overpower your cpu with the shear amount of cores and threads. 

Threads don't increase the execution resource the CPU has, it only allows software to potentially make better use of what's there. Software like Prime95 is highly efficient at maximising usage of the CPU regardless of SMT. For such use cases, turning off SMT doesn't lose any performance.

[TOMPPIX]

meh, i can get a Threadripper 1950X for 650€ why should i buy an i9. https://www.mindfactory.de/product_info.php/AMD-Ryzen-Threadripper-1950X-16x-3-40GHz-So-TR4-WOF_1185415.html

[Coaxialgamer]

20 hours ago, Taf the Ghost said:

They're going to have to solder these. There's no way these can operate at the same frequencies as the 8700k, given this isn't a new node.

You can bet they are going to pull a 14nm +++ for this.

[AnonymousGuy]

4 hours ago, TOMPPIX said:

meh, i can get a Threadripper 1950X for 650€ why should i buy an i9. https://www.mindfactory.de/product_info.php/AMD-Ryzen-Threadripper-1950X-16x-3-40GHz-So-TR4-WOF_1185415.html

Because 8 fast cores is going to be better than 16 slow ones for the vast majority of workloads.

[IceCold008]

Was hoping for cannonlake this year. Got the money in piggybank waiting. 

[CTR640]

If the i9 9900K would be priced at HEDT, I would have bought the AMD instead of that overpriced Intel CPU.

 

Btw, it would be nice if there would be an i9 9600(K), so basically 8core i5 without HT.

[asus killer]

why not:

 

core i3 - 2 cores

core i5 - 4 cores

core i7 - 6 cores

core i9 - 8 cores

 

all with hypertreading. You're welcome Intel 

[Andreas Lilja]

Not worth upgrading from a gaming standpoint I'm guessing?

[Christophe Corazza]

7 minutes ago, Raskolnikov said:

Not worth upgrading from a gaming standpoint I'm guessing?

 

Depends on where you are coming from, but in general... no. The 8700K is sufficient for gaming.

[Andreas Lilja]

1 minute ago, Christophe Corazza said:

 

Depends on where you are coming from, but in general... no. The 8700K is sufficient for gaming.

7700k thermonuclear reactor. 

 

Hopefully the new ones have better thermals.

[Stefan Payne]

On 29.6.2018 at 4:03 PM, TOMPPIX said:

meh, i can get a Threadripper 1950X for 650€ why should i buy an i9. https://www.mindfactory.de/product_info.php/AMD-Ryzen-Threadripper-1950X-16x-3-40GHz-So-TR4-WOF_1185415.html

On 29.6.2018 at 8:50 PM, AnonymousGuy said:

Because 8 fast cores is going to be better than 16 slow ones for the vast majority of workloads.

Because it has to be Intel because you want to believe.

And that's why you have to lie to yourself that the Intel has to be better because its more expensive and has higher power consumption. 

 

With the Skylake-X Intel has the worse architecture with the higher Power Consumption and lower power....

It got even worse "IPC" You love so much than its predecessor...

 

And the Lid isn't soldered....

 

 

You show that the CPU Market is broken and people ignore the facts and buy the shittier, more expensive product...

[mr moose]

Benchmarks talk and Bullshit walks.  I don;t care about architecture, opinions, feelings, looks, or even power consumption.  If it performs better and I can afford it it's mine.

[Stefan Payne]

49 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Benchmarks talk and Bullshit walks.  I don;t care about architecture, opinions, feelings, looks, or even power consumption.  If it performs better and I can afford it it's mine.

...as long as its Intel/nVidia??

Or what do you mean?

 

[mr moose]

35 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

...as long as its Intel/nVidia??

Or what do you mean?

 

pretty self explanatory, if a product performs better than others in the market and it's in my price range then I'll buy it.  No need to look at brand names.  If I need performance per core I'll buy Intel, if I need more cores I'll buy AMD if I need both I'll go with the feature that is slightly more important as the other feature is usually not a deal breaker (i.e Intel can still render and AMD can still game). 

[Dylanc1500]

42 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

...as long as its Intel/nVidia??

Or what do you mean?

 

No what @mr moose means is that he doesn't care if it's IBM or VIA, if it does the best at what he needs, within his budget, he is going to buy it.

 

As someone whom owns two dual socket systems one being Skylake-SP and one being Power9, they each have there strengths and weaknesses. That said, they have two different targets. It's the same with AMD and Intel. Intel is pushing for denser stronger cores and more efficient instructions. AMD is trying to bring more cores at a lower cost, again different targets.

 

Just a quick correction by the way. You stated that the IPC decreased compared to its predecessor, in which instruction did Skylake-SP decrease? I ask because IPC performance is going to be directly related to the specific instructions being performed.

[SupremeGOAT]

On 6/28/2018 at 4:15 PM, Sierra Fox said:

I love AMD fans for their hours of ranting anytime Intel come out with literally anything. Makes me happy to buy stuff that benefits me in the things I need it for and not because of some dumb brand loyality or moral high ground. Otherwise I would only have one choice to go with...I thought you AMD people loved competition and choice?

I can't speak for anyone else but myself. My objective is not to get RAMMED by these companies when i chose to buy something like a processor. Your complaint is that whatever intel does AMD fans rant about it? It seems no matter what intel does Intel fans just take it. Example, the 7700k and the 1800x were released in the same year... a year later the 1800x dropped by $100 and counting. The 7700k is competing with the 6700k and 8700k in pricing... wtf... brand loyalty? If the roles were switched I'd jump on that intel wagon in a heartbeat. Intel fans however... they just keep taking it and smiling... gritting their teeth and smiling... smiling through the pain... Not my money though so ill just watch...

[Arika]

11 minutes ago, SupremeGOAT said:

I can't speak for anyone else but myself. My objective is not to get RAMMED by these companies when i chose to buy something like a processor. Your complaint is that whatever intel does AMD fans rant about it?

because they do, at least on this forum.

 

They don't seem to realize that you can judge a product for what it is, It doesnt have to be cut and dry simply because it's made by a particular company. I have an Intel processor, it fits my needs. does that mean that all intel processors are amazing? fuck no, they have made some stupid ass decision in recent times the i9 9900k this thread is about for example, i think it's a stupid product that has no right to exist. AMD hit the mark with ryzen, i strongly considered getting one, but when it came to gaming (my use case) it fell behind the intel, but this also doesnt mean that everything AMD does is flawless, they too have made some fucked up decisions in the past and had failed products.