ssdproI also don't see this Intel panicking narrative as even remotely researched. Intel released Skylake (6th-gen Core) in Fall 2015. Kaby Lake (7th gen) released in Fall 2016. Why is it even breaking news or thought of as a panic that 9th-gen may come out in Fall 2018? Seems right on track. You can bend the spoon if it makes you think Intel is in some panic but 16.96 billion vs 1.7 billion says otherwise. If you compare net income it is worse - 5 billion to 114 million. Intel was up from Q2 2017 net income of 2.7 to that 5.0 in Q2-18. AMD's resurgence has almost doubled Intel's net income. It would be a lot easier and more mature if people just just agree Intel went into a holding pattern while AMD fell apart. AMD showed a heartbeat and put out a great value product. Intel countered by moving ahead. Hopefully AMD's resurgence maintains and is good for progress.

This is a good example of a constructive, unbiased post. It quotes real facts and figures that anyone can verify, and acknowledges AMD's virtues, while noting why Intel has seemed to be less progressive than they could have been, and are now moving forward, not "panicking" as some like to say.

CaqdeI don't think you understand Intel's line of thought very much (at least the way their executives act). Intel from past experience was exactly like this. They don't want AMD to gain ANY market share. Intel is a company that PAID the OEM's to sell only their product to the point that the OEM's made more money from Intel's Payments than selling the chips. This is the kind of company Intel childish actions Intel has taken and their current actions are not much better. The unfortunate matter is that the post about them acting like that is probably not that far off. Remember last year Intel released the 8x00 series chips before they had enough to actually sell. Why did they do this? Because they were afraid the Ryzen 2x00 series would cannibalize their sales and here we are again Intel's 9x00 series this time paperlaunched in August 2018, 10 months after the semi paper-launch coffeelake launch in Oct, 2018. Are we again going to see Intel launch without proper stock of chips or are they going to actually have the chips needed to a decent amount of the demand this time around.

This one is an example of a biased post, claiming inside knowledge of the minds of Intel execs, calling them childish, and having nefarious or panic-driven reasons for everything they do. He doesn't give them any credit for anything, only pointing to the past as somehow proving the motives behind present actions.

hzlphbecause without it, our 8700K would probably still be 4C/8T.

Exactly!!! I have absolutely no doubt that if it weren't for AMD's resurgence the 8700K would still be a 4C/8T CPU. AMD's Ryzen chip woke the sleeping giant and actually forced Intel to do something, hence the fact that the 8700K is a 6C/12T processor. This is what people here do not understand, AMD woke Intel up and now Intel is in panic mode. To which I say... Good. Serves them right for sleeping at the wheel with the cruise control on for the last five to six years.

Oh... and is it any wonder that the PC industry has seen a semblance of growth for the first time in as many years. Hmm... could it be that there's actually a reason to upgrade? When all Intel had was just another re-warmed 4C/8T processor many people's response was "Meh". If you ask me, the reason why the PC industry hasn't seen much growth in the last couple of years is because no one saw a need to upgrade or get new systems. Why? Why should I upgrade when the new processor is just another 4C/8T, same as the old? Intel did it to themselves, they shot themselves in the foot.

Me, as someone who messes with hw and write about it for others, looking at the title:

trparkyExactly!!! I have absolutely no doubt that if it weren't for AMD's resurgence the 8700K would still be a 4C/8T CPU. AMD's Ryzen chip woke the sleeping giant and actually forced Intel to do something, hence the fact that the 8700K is a 6C/12T processor. This is what people here do not understand, AMD woke Intel up and now Intel is in panic mode. To which I say... Good. Serves them right for sleeping at the wheel with the cruise control on for the last five to six years.

Oh... and is it any wonder that the PC industry has seen a semblance of growth for the first time in as many years. Hmm... could it be that there's actually a reason to upgrade? When all Intel had was just another re-warmed 4C/8T processor many people's response was "Meh". If you ask me, the reason why the PC industry hasn't seen much growth in the last couple of years is because no one saw a need to upgrade or get new systems. Why? Why should I upgrade when the new processor is just another 4C/8T, same as the old? Intel did it to themselves, they shot themselves in the foot.

I wouldn't say it's panic mode when they can release those products a mere few months after Ryzen.

HoodThis is a good example of a constructive, unbiased post. It quotes real facts and figures that anyone can verify, and acknowledges AMD's virtues, while noting why Intel has seemed to be less progressive than they could have been, and are now moving forward, not "panicking" as some like to say.


This one is an example of a biased post, claiming inside knowledge of the minds of Intel execs, calling them childish, and having nefarious or panic-driven reasons for everything they do. He doesn't give them any credit for anything, only pointing to the past as somehow proving the motives behind present actions.

Ok. Well I didn't post all the facts I knew. Fair enough. If I did your understanding of my "bias" would be a bit better understood. In late 2016 it was reported that Coffeelake would be released to the desktop in early 2018. After more information on Zen got released leaked information started showing that Coffeelake was moved forward to late 2017. Another set of changes happened later that year after AMD surprised everyone with the announcement of Threadripper. Intel's diagram for the chips for their X299 platform all of a sudden had new chips added to the lineup. These actions show as being panic based reactions due to a few issues. 1) X299's VRM's weren't properly set up to handle the Highend chips and would at times overheat and cause drops in voltage this was fixed, but does show that the motherboards for that platform were not originally being designed with those chips in mind. Sure Intel had the design for the chips on hand for the Xeon market, but it wasn't their intention to sell them on the X299 platform. 2) X299 also had firmware issues not normally found on an Intel platform as they also pushed up the release timeframe. 3) Coffeelake although "released" in October 2017 was released in VERY low volumes and was essentially a paper launch until well into 2018. This gives the impression that as 2016 leaks were showing that Intel intended to release Coffeelake in 2018 not 2017. 4) For a childish action Intel did recently it should be seen how Intel made a powerpoint slide intended for the businesses to explain how AMD's EPYC chips are glued together and how Intel is better because of that among other faulty arguments and some decent ones.. www.techpowerup.com/235092/intel-says-amd-epyc-processors-glued-together-in-official-slide-deck?cp=4

If Intel was honest about the strengths of their architecture in their handling of the press I wouldn't be so biased against them. Xeon has it's strengths and quite of few of them. But instead of touting them their first action after seeing EPYC as a threat is to try and discredit their competitors product instead of reminding their customers of the strengths of their products. For the HEDT market their release of their X299 was a mess instead of making sure their platform was together and releasing a quality product that was well designed they released a mess of a platform. Even with it's strengths that reviewers mentioned the negative reviews and articles about he power issues and Kabylake-X issues were not a help for Intel, not to mention making a platform with 3 different PCI-E configuration's for any given motherboard. If they release the 9x00 series with decent stock in late 2018 then this will at least since Ryzen be the first time Intel recently followed through with a product release without issue, but as of 2017 Intel has been botching their product releases like AMD of the past not to mention having to delay releases (also something AMD was known for) while AMD on the other hand has been oddly following through with their product releases (CPU wise).

CaqdeOk. Well I didn't post all the facts I knew. Fair enough. If I did your understanding of my "bias" would be a bit better understood. In late 2016 it was reported that Coffeelake would be released to the desktop in early 2018. After more information on Zen got released leaked information started showing that Coffeelake was moved forward to late 2017. Another set of changes happened later that year after AMD surprised everyone with the announcement of Threadripper. Intel's diagram for the chips for their X299 platform all of a sudden had new chips added to the lineup. These actions show as being panic based reactions due to a few issues. 1) X299's VRM's weren't properly set up to handle the Highend chips and would at times overheat and cause drops in voltage this was fixed, but does show that the motherboards for that platform were not originally being designed with those chips in mind. Sure Intel had the design for the chips on hand for the Xeon market, but it wasn't their intention to sell them on the X299 platform. 2) X299 also had firmware issues not normally found on an Intel platform as they also pushed up the release timeframe. 3) Coffeelake although "released" in October 2017 was released in VERY low volumes and was essentially a paper launch until well into 2018. This gives the impression that as 2016 leaks were showing that Intel intended to release Coffeelake in 2018 not 2017. 4) For a childish action Intel did recently it should be seen how Intel made a powerpoint slide intended for the businesses to explain how AMD's EPYC chips are glued together and how Intel is better because of that among other faulty arguments and some decent ones.. www.techpowerup.com/235092/intel-says-amd-epyc-processors-glued-together-in-official-slide-deck?cp=4

If Intel was honest about the strengths of their architecture in their handling of the press I wouldn't be so biased against them. Xeon has it's strengths and quite of few of them. But instead of touting them their first action after seeing EPYC as a threat is to try and discredit their competitors product instead of reminding their customers of the strengths of their products. For the HEDT market their release of their X299 was a mess instead of making sure their platform was together and releasing a quality product that was well designed they released a mess of a platform. Even with it's strengths that reviewers mentioned the negative reviews and articles about he power issues and Kabylake-X issues were not a help for Intel, not to mention making a platform with 3 different PCI-E configuration's for any given motherboard. If they release the 9x00 series with decent stock in late 2018 then this will at least since Ryzen be the first time Intel recently followed through with a product release without issue, but as of 2017 Intel has been botching their product releases like AMD of the past not to mention having to delay releases (also something AMD was known for) while AMD on the other hand has been oddly following through with their product releases (CPU wise).

The fact that they can maneuver on their feet so well probably worries AMD. That's more of an asset than anything.

Luckily, I have one of the 300W TDP x299s though.

StrayKATI wouldn't say it's panic mode when they can release those products a mere few months after Ryzen.

The fact that Kaby Lake was a "paper launch" much like what this launch is, I would say that Intel was scared. The 9th generation Whiskey Lake processor launch is a "paper launch", in other words.. "Hey, we have this new processor to sell but... it's not ready yet. Trust us, it'll be available soon. You can trust us. *nods head* Right? You trust us." Kaby Lake was the same thing, a "paper launch" to make us hold off on buying AMD instead. Kaby Lake may have been in the production pipeline but AMD forced Intel's hand and made them release it way sooner than Intel had hoped.

HoodThis is a good example of a constructive, unbiased post. It quotes real facts and figures that anyone can verify, and acknowledges AMD's virtues, while noting why Intel has seemed to be less progressive than they could have been, and are now moving forward, not "panicking" as some like to say.


This one is an example of a biased post, claiming inside knowledge of the minds of Intel execs, calling them childish, and having nefarious or panic-driven reasons for everything they do. He doesn't give them any credit for anything, only pointing to the past as somehow proving the motives behind present actions.

so his post bias because it doesn't a line with your own bias views, the hypocrisy is real!!

Mr.Mopar392so his post bias because it doesn't line with your own bias views, the hypocrisy is real!!

I don't even know if "bias" is the right word for this. Some of these comments are turning veteran engineers into mere cartoon characters. Nobody lives up to that, on either side.

StrayKATI don't even know if "bias" is the right word for this. Some of these comments are turning veteran engineers into mere cartoon characters. Nobody lives up to that, on either side.

To be fair this thread really comes down to people are being quite defensive to their opinion.
But then as enthusiasts we are rather passionate about it, so it is understandable.

HoodThis is a good example of a constructive, unbiased post. It quotes real facts and figures that anyone can verify, and acknowledges AMD's virtues, while noting why Intel has seemed to be less progressive than they could have been, and are now moving forward, not "panicking" as some like to say.


This one is an example of a biased post, claiming inside knowledge of the minds of Intel execs, calling them childish, and having nefarious or panic-driven reasons for everything they do. He doesn't give them any credit for anything, only pointing to the past as somehow proving the motives behind present actions.

This is a fine example of playing tiddly-winks in the middle of the road trying to keep a foot on each side. Speculation is in both posts, one shows more facts than the other, and both offer an opinion from different sides of the same field. So whose post do you favor again?

There is a creeping advance that people are not considering. The technology limits of clock speeds on the current silicon Architectures mean AMD are catching up. Their increased market share and recent quarterly shows their business is up. Intel are undoubtedly in a good position, one they've been in for years. Problem is, the distance between them and AMD, on performance is decreasing.
That worries companies, always. If your competitor releases a new product that makes substantial performance gains on its own product stack, while your own has somewhat stagnated (arguably due to lack of competition), then you take notice.
I doubt Intel are panicking but AMD's Ryzen has visibly changed their product stack and schedule.

I can't wait to see Ryzen 2.

I just wish AMD could rattle Nvidia like they have Intel.

the54thvoidI just wish AMD could rattle Nvidia like they have Intel.

I blame that on AMD fans, funnily. Not AMD themselves as much.

Here I am an Intel CPU user, but I have a Vega.. I certainly like it. Why? Freesync. I don't look at it as just GPU vs GPU any longer.

StrayKATI blame that on AMD fans, funnily. Not AMD themselves as much.

Here I am an Intel CPU user, but I have a Vega.. I certainly like it. Why? Freesync. I don't look at it as just GPU vs GPU any longer.

How so? The fans didn't buy ATI, they didn't design GCN, and they certainly didn't ask AMD to keep pushing that architecture into oblivion. It has not been a profitable architecture even for one millisecond of its existence; the best it could do was break even, and only during its peak and the recent cryptocurrency demand, a workload it was never designed for... Quite similar to Bulldozer on the CPU side. AMD has played the brute force game in a time when its competitors (both CPU and GPU!) and the entire marketplace was pushing for efficiency and optimization. AMD really owes its position to itself and itself alone. And it only needs design wins to get back in the game, eg Ryzen.

HoodThis is a good example of a constructive, unbiased post. It quotes real facts and figures that anyone can verify, and acknowledges AMD's virtues, while noting why Intel has seemed to be less progressive than they could have been, and are now moving forward, not "panicking" as some like to say.


This one is an example of a biased post, claiming inside knowledge of the minds of Intel execs, calling them childish, and having nefarious or panic-driven reasons for everything they do. He doesn't give them any credit for anything, only pointing to the past as somehow proving the motives behind present actions.

Maybe I'm wrong but since when are you moderating? And even if you're not, your post history and your take on other people's style of posting really don't go together well. Just stop... please

I am happy for AMD, they have become relevant, again. Call me a fanboy, if you will, but I have an i5 laptop, 3 i3's an optiplex i5 (in the process, slowly, of upgrading it to an i7), just got an T3500 workstation with a Xeon x5670 and I have an A10 AMD build waiting for a GPU and some memory and an SSD. I have more builds than money, right now.

Anyway, I like Ryzen and ThreadRipper. In a couple years, I will probably buy a system used or build one w/ used parts. I can't afford the bleeding edge, even with the attractive prices AMD offers. Which is sad, but has made me find some decent deals on stuff to augment my crunching farm.

WCG, it seems is my only means to help improve this world, lacking millions of dollars to throw at worthy causes, running a small farm crunching gives me a form of satisfaction, that I AM doing something. TPU helped me get started and has helped me in many ways.

These debates can be entertaining, and sometimes petty, but also informative.
I like AMD, I started computing on a Duron, Socket A. I ran that thing for years, in one form or another, and loved it. I had a mobile chip in that system running 1GHz before Intel had anything that fast, on air, and not so hot. So, there's my bias, I was born, so to speak, on that side of the river, so to speak. I moved around seen the sights but always liked AMD, and I am happy for them now.
[/rant]
:lovetpu:

Vayra86How so? The fans didn't buy ATI, they didn't design GCN, and they certainly didn't ask AMD to keep pushing that architecture into oblivion.

Your very words answer my question. That they think it's in "oblivion" doesn't make them the best advocates. That and they seemingly don't realize how beneficial Freesync is themselves. They're just concerned about raw numbers and "winning". Not actually playing anything apparently.

Manu_PTIs so funny how ppl on tpu bash Intel so much and make it seem like Intel is failing big time right now. Then I go to amazon and the best seller is a 8700k and they still have the cpu with better performance on most applications, better ram compability, less bios problems etc etc

Is laughable really xD

And only the best selling CPU counts, right? Then you check the top20 CPUs and you see that 13/20 is AMD on German Amazon, 10/20 is AMD on US Amazon and 10/20 is AMD on UK Amazon. Next check TPUp's voting with 26000 votes: nearly the same % of CPU owners have the 1,5 generation of Zens as the last 3 generations of Intel CPUs (26-29%), and the rest is ones sticking with IB/SB/Haswell/other CPUs which means most of those owners will probably change CPUs in the upcoming 1-3 years and they can easily choose AMD next time.

It must also be accidental that Intel raises core count in their generation after the release of the Zen series. Maybe they knew what Zens are capable of in terms of nearly reaching gaming performance of Intel's and getting better performance/dollar ratio than Intel's? :)

So continue laughing, we laugh at you too.

RejZoRIt's a best seller because of idiots mostly who buy Intel no matter what. The same sort of people who asked me why I haven't bought Pentium 4 during AMD's Athlon XP golden era...

Yeah you changed so much: Once an idiot that bought intel products - now an enlightened person who buys AMD products. It's so clear i don't understand how people can't get this.
You're right, it the same old story after all, intel is bad, ugly and the steal money, AMD is good, nice, and do charity.

I'm a PC Gamer!

I built 8700K RIG November 2017

2017
The 8700K is the fast PC gaming CPU of 2017..... All reviews are available with 8700K vs 1800X. I was sold by all winning 8700K gaming scores.

2018
Same thing going to happen this year! ((Guaranteed)) the 9900K will be the best PC gaming CPU for 2018! 9700K is second then 2700X in 3rd place depending on if theirs an 2800X.

Why are people still arguing about performance?

2019
Same thing will happen again October 2019 with 10nm+ Icelake will woop 7nm Ryzen 3000 no problem. Intel had 4 years for new Icelake architecture.

Intel worth $200 Billion
AMD worth $4 Billion

Who has to try very hard?

Tomorrow14th? Not a coincidence when Threadripper 2 is launching 13th. Intel trying to steal some thunder even without real products on shelves. Weak.

Bad mouths are saying that AMD is also going to do a paper launch too, so this will be interesting ...

oxidizedYeah you changed so much: Once an idiot that bought intel products - now an enlightened person who buys AMD products. It's so clear i don't understand how people can't get this.
You're right, it the same old story after all, intel is bad, ugly and the steal money, AMD is good, nice, and do charity.

AMD for one is not playing dirty tactics, unlike Intel. So, yeah, that's kinda true.

ToxicTaZI'm a PC Gamer!

I built 8700K RIG November 2017

2017
The 8700K is the fast PC gaming CPU of 2017..... All reviews are available with 8700K vs 1800X. I was sold by all winning 8700K gaming scores.

2018
Same thing going to happen this year! ((Guaranteed)) the 9900K will be the best PC gaming CPU for 2018! 9700K is second then 2700X in 3rd place depending on if theirs an 2800X.

Why are people still arguing about performance?

2019
Same thing will happen again October 2019 with 10nm+ Icelake will woop 7nm Ryzen 3000 no problem. Intel had 4 years for new Icelake architecture.

Intel worth $200 Billion
AMD worth $4 Billion

Who has to try very hard?

If all you do is game and you game at 1080p (+144Hz or 240Hz) then yes 8700K is hands down the fastest.

The moment you go for 1440p or 4K and the gap pretty much vanishes between 8700K and Ryzen7 because you will be GPU bottlenecked at high resolutions.


9900K will be fastest but not for long. Maybe 6 months or so until AMD releases Zen 2 base 3700X or whatever they decide to call it. Likely it will be 12 or even 16 core CPU with IPC that's on par with Intel's.


10nm+ performance is currently anyone's guess. Considering the troubles Intel has had with it i have a hard time believing first gen 10nm part will outperform their 4th 14nm iteration. It will be a better architecture no doubt but lower clock speeds. I think it's better to prepare yourself for the eventuality that Core architecture is at the end of the road. It debuted in 2006 with Conroe and has reigned supreme for 12 years but all good things eventually come to and end. It is definitely showing it's age now that IPC improvements based on architecture have all but stopped and constant security issues pop up that affect it more than Zen.

Prima.VeraBad mouths are saying that AMD is also going to do a paper launch too, so this will be interesting ...

Unlikely. We already have retail packaging and results pop up every week now.

TomorrowIf all you do is game and you game at 1080p (+144Hz or 240Hz) then yes 8700K is hands down the fastest.

The moment you go for 1440p or 4K and the gap pretty much vanishes between 8700K and Ryzen7 because you will be GPU bottlenecked at high resolutions.


9900K will be fastest but not for long. Maybe 6 months or so until AMD releases Zen 2 base 3700X or whatever they decide to call it. Likely it will be 12 or even 16 core CPU with IPC that's on par with Intel's.


10nm+ performance is currently anyone's guess. Considering the troubles Intel has had with it i have a hard time believing first gen 10nm part will outperform their 4th 14nm iteration. It will be a better architecture no doubt but lower clock speeds. I think it's better to prepare yourself for the eventuality that Core architecture is at the end of the road. It debuted in 2006 with Conroe and has reigned supreme for 12 years but all good things eventually come to and end. It is definitely showing it's age now that IPC improvements based on architecture have all but stopped and constant security issues pop up that affect it more than Zen.

First I game @1440p and second no one is gaming @4K/60Hz because you need minimum 1080Ti 11GB SLI and doubt there is very many people running that configuration. Since one 1080Ti has a very hard time running 4K/60Hz ... Most games are only 50fps to 55fps slid show for first person gaming. FC5 Ultra mode perfect example.

The other error in your statement is you said "Intel first generation 10nm" If you know what Intel is doing you would have not said anything. October 2019 Intel is releasing new architecture called Icelake made on 10nm+ "Second Generation 10nm" as for Zen 2 on first generation 7nm!

As I said before the fastest CPUs year to year!

8700K the fastest 2017
9900K the fastest 2018
Icelake will out perform Zen 2 in 2019.

The way I look at it is Zen supposed to be brand new killer architecture? Yet like you said has a hard time dealing with "Intel older outdated architecture?"

At the end of the day old Intel has superior IPC with 1GHz+ o/c capabilities with all cores no problems.

ToxicTaZFirst I game @1440p and second no one is gaming @4K/60Hz because you need minimum 1080Ti 11GB SLI and doubt there is very many people running that configuration. Since one 1080Ti has a very hard time running 4K/60Hz ... Most games are only 50fps to 55fps slid show for first person gaming. FC5 Ultra mode perfect example.

You definitely don't need SLI. lol. One 1080Ti is fine. And one 1080 or Vega64 can do well too. It depends on the game. I can play many lighter (Cuphead, Ori) and/or two years and older type of titles (Tomb Raider, Arkham) at 4K/60Hz. Some exceptions like Forza 7 and DOOM are heavier games, but well optimized.

Then Freesync makes up for many games that drop under 60fps, but feel like 60fps.

ToxicTaZFirst I game @1440p and second no one is gaming @4K/60Hz because you need minimum 1080Ti 11GB SLI and doubt there is very many people running that configuration. Since one 1080Ti has a very hard time running 4K/60Hz ... Most games are only 50fps to 55fps slid show for first person gaming. FC5 Ultra mode perfect example.

The other error in your statement is you said "Intel first generation 10nm" If you know what Intel is doing you would have not said anything. October 2019 Intel is releasing new architecture called Icelake made on 10nm+ "Second Generation 10nm" as for Zen 2 on first generation 7nm!

As I said before the fastest CPUs year to year!

8700K the fastest 2017
9900K the fastest 2018
Icelake will out perform Zen 2 in 2019.

The way I look at it is Zen supposed to be brand new killer architecture? Yet like you said has a hard time dealing with "Intel older outdated architecture?"

At the end of the day old Intel has superior IPC with 1GHz+ o/c capabilities with all cores no problems.

At 1440p you are GPU bound. I fail to see how 8700K wouuld have any noticeable advantage over Ryzen 7 at those settings. I agree that for 4K/60 the only viable card is 1080Ti and in terms of graphics AMD is not in the same league as Nvidia.

We don't know yet if it's first or second gen 10nm. I bet it is first. I doubt Intel just threw away billions of dollars of R&D and skipped entire generation without releasing any products based on it. Well Zen has done very well considering it has been on the market for 18 months or so, while Intel has had 12 years to perfect Core. The reason Zen is killer archidecture is MCM design instead of monolitic. Going further Intel will also have to go MCM or risk being left behind. We can already see this in the HEDT market where Intel's chips are low yielding monolithic dies that cost thousands upon thousands of dollars and can't go beyond 28 cores where as AMD already had 32 core Zen (Epyc) right out of the gate and now 32 core Threadripper too for even cheaper. Plus Intel will have problems scaling their Ringbus interconnect past 10 cores. Hence why they went with Mesh interconnect for Skylake-X but because of it it's actually a slower gaming CPU.