Monday, October 21st 2019

AMD Ryzen 9 3950X Beats Intel Core i9-10980XE by 24% in 3DMark Physics

AMD's upcoming Ryzen 9 3950X socket AM4 processor beats Intel's flagship 18-core processor, the Core i9-10980XE, by a staggering 24 percent at 3DMark Physics, according to a PC Perspective report citing TUM_APISAK. The 3950X is a 16-core/32-thread processor that's drop-in compatible with any motherboard that can run the Ryzen 9 3900X. The i9-10980XE is an 18-core/36-thread HEDT chip that enjoys double the memory bus width as the AMD chip, and is based on Intel's "Cascade Lake-X" silicon. The AMD processor isn't at a tangible clock-speed advantage. The 3950X has a maximum boost frequency of 4.70 GHz, while the i9-10980XE isn't much behind, at 4.60 GHz, but things differ with all-core boost.

When paired with 16 GB of dual-channel DDR4-3200 memory, the Ryzen 9 3950X powered machine scores 32,082 points in the CPU-intensive physics tests of 3DMark. In comparison, the i9-10980XE, paired with 32 GB of quad-channel DDR4-2667 memory, scores just 25,838 points as mentioned by PC Perspective. Graphics card is irrelevant to this test. It's pertinent to note here that the 3DMark physics test scales across practically any number of CPU cores/threads, and the AMD processor could be benefiting from a higher all-core boost frequency than the Intel chip. Although AMD doesn't mention a number in its specifications, the 3950X is expected to have an all-core boost frequency that's north of 4.00 GHz, as its 12-core sibling, the 3900X, already offers 4.20 GHz all-core. In contrast, the i9-10980XE has an all-core boost frequency of 3.80 GHz. This difference in boost frequency, apparently, even negates the additional 2 cores and 4 threads that the Intel chip enjoys, in what is yet another example of AMD having caught up with Intel in the IPC game.
Sources: TUM_APISAK (Twitter), PC Perspective
Add your own comment

143 Comments on AMD Ryzen 9 3950X Beats Intel Core i9-10980XE by 24% in 3DMark Physics

#101
kapone32
EarthDog
Or, you know, just go by how it is defined in the dictionary... because, I'm not an enthusiast according to your list...



...which can mean anything... But there are a few in the list that would disqualify a lot of people from being an enthusiast. Hilarious convo... only on TPU. o_O
If you are talking about me I class an enthusiast as anyone who has any of those points and you did help me out when I posted about the Intel 660P and you responded with Crucial and Sabrent drives.
Posted on Reply
#102
dont whant to set it"'
All summed, regarding and not just electronics might be a subjective point of view , analogous to the "new toy" excitement.
Posted on Reply
#103
ratirt
kapone32
For me an enthusiast is anyone into a particular product or industry that does things like what we do here and I will list them.

1. Have theoretical conversations about products
2. Help the uninitiated with their problems
3. Have at least something from the current gen (NVME expansion card)
4. Take courses or read literature on technology
5. Get excited for new product releases (TR3, Comet Lake)
6. Be passionate about your purchases
7. Be informed before you buy anything
8. Do your own testing (if you can) on products instead of watching Youtube videos and taking that as gospel
9. Have more equipment than you will ever need
10. Be biased based on experience on what you recommend but not in a negative way.
Glad you have your own list of who can be an enthusiast but not all of it is true or valid. As a matter of fact I disagree with the list. I'm a Universe enthusiast. I'm interested in this but i don't go in space. (Not sure I'd go there if I could). Movie enthusiasts. I like horrors but it doesn't mean I'm making movies. Rocket enthusiast. I'm interested in rockets etc. but i don't have my own. Car enthusiast. i got few but it doesn't mean I fix them or build my own car. What you are listed is your idea maybe of what an enthusiast is or who can be an enthusiast but that doesn't go along with the book you know.

kapone32
3. Have at least something from the current gen (NVME expansion card)
I don't have anything from the current gen does this mean I'm not an enthusiast?
kapone32
6. Be passionate about your purchases
7. Be informed before you buy anything
Be informed about what you buy? What is that even mean?

I disagree with most of the stuff you wrote. An enthusiast of something, simply means you are interested in certain subject. Like computers.
Be informed about what you buy I'd rather say do your own research before you purchase stuff. Ask others for opinion about something to make sure you are correct or if you have doubts.
kapone32
9. Have more equipment than you will ever need
That's just stupid bro :)

kapone32
10. Be biased based on experience on what you recommend but not in a negative way.
I know this is based on a "now situation" about fanboys and which side you are on. You people say it doesn't matter if you're red or green or whatever and then you write something like that :)
Amazing how you want to divide the community into more groups with different point of view or preference. Honestly, I'm not sure how can you be biased based on experience an if i understand it correctly what you wanted to say.
Posted on Reply
#104
xtreemchaos
I allways thought a enthusiast is someone who persues a interest with joy and vigor but im quite quite mad :)
Posted on Reply
#105
kapone32
ratirt
Glad you have your own list of who can be an enthusiast but not all of it is true or valid. As a matter of fact I disagree with the list. I'm a Universe enthusiast. I'm interested in this but i don't go in space. (Not sure I'd go there if I could). Movie enthusiasts. I like horrors but it doesn't mean I'm making movies. Rocket enthusiast. I'm interested in rockets etc. but i don't have my own. Car enthusiast. i got few but it doesn't mean I fix them or build my own car. What you are listed is your idea maybe of what an enthusiast is or who can be an enthusiast but that doesn't go along with the book you know.


I don't have anything from the current gen does this mean I'm not an enthusiast?

And yet you have a Vega 64, 2700X and X470 and that is not current gen?

Be informed about what you buy? What is that even mean?

Did you just buy the first Vega 64 that you saw and why not a reference model?

I disagree with most of the stuff you wrote. An enthusiast of something, simply means you are interested in certain subject. Like computers.
Be informed about what you buy I'd rather say do your own research before you purchase stuff. Ask others for opinion about something to make sure you are correct or if you have doubts.



That's just stupid bro :)

What does being informed mean did you just buy Samsung drives on a whim? Does it not include gaining knowledge by doing the exact same things you mentioned?

I know this is based on a "now situation" about fanboys and which side you are on. You people say it doesn't matter if you're red or green or whatever and then you write something like that :)
Amazing how you want to divide the community into more groups with different point of view or preference. Honestly, I'm not sure how can you be biased based on experience an if i understand it correctly what you wanted to say.
I will give you 2 examples of my bias. Many people like to bash on the Bulldozer/Piledriver series of chips. Many of them did not even own Piledriver but yet (i"m sure someone will respond) as an owner of a FX8320 I was quite happy with the upgrade from the 1090T. The other bias I have is Gigabyte and the quality of their current offerings. I have not owned a GIgabyte board that has not given me the D0 postcode and refuse to boot. I will probably never buy another Gigabyte board and on the flipside As Rock are the most bullet proof boards you can buy (in my opinion) based on my own experience. So if someone posted a thread about which X470 board to buy I would recommend As Rock. I am not trying to divide anything I will always defend tech that I think is good based on my own experience with that tech and that is what I meant.
Posted on Reply
#106
xtreemchaos
I have a FX8350 and still love it, ive allways been one for the quirky. it did the job and has never let me down and kept me warm in winter.
Posted on Reply
#107
Redwoodz
notb
Intel was always more expensive. And they easily outselled AMD anyway. Because there's more to products than just performance and price. And there's more to business than just getting few years of sales and review praise.

Intel was more expensive back in Athlon days when AMD offered similar performance and occasionally more modern products.
Back then we also had people saying "there's no reason to buy Intel anymore" and "it's the end of Intel".
Less than a decade later most PC users forgot what AMD is or thought they went out of business.

For me this Zen situation isn't that much different.
They'll hit a wall at maybe 20% market share and then what?


No they don't.

They can ask more for many reasons: better positioning, better marketing, better OEM agreements, better brand. It doesn't matter.
People will rather pay $200 for an Intel CPU than $180 for identical AMD CPU.
That's it.

Intel still comfortably outsells AMD, so I don't know what you're talking about.

Because the gap was too large.

I mean... seriously... do I have to paste a supply-demand graph or what?
What exactly do you struggle to understand? I'll try to focus on that part.
You are in denial my friend. 10nm has failed miserably and now the hope is 7nm is going to work. Intel's supremecy was largely due to their manufacturing process was better than anyone elses,by far. No more. I dare you to buy Intel stock right now and sell AMD.
Posted on Reply
#108
notb
Redwoodz
You are in denial my friend. 10nm has failed miserably and now the hope is 7nm is going to work. Intel's supremecy was largely due to their manufacturing process was better than anyone elses,by far. No more.
People on PC forums like to use the word "denial", but there's really little substance behind most of the time. Just like here.

The basic thing I said: Intel doesn't have to match AMD on performance/price to sell more. That's it.
Stop thinking so much about manufacturing process. It's just a factor. It's not relevant for customers.

Intel sold more in the Athlon days.
They sell more now despite an obvious Zen2 7nm advantage.
You can keep mocking me or you can just check the facts.

Sure, AMD makes attractive products since 2017 and that definitely hit Intel on sales and margin. But it's nowhere near the catastrophic scenarios that AMD fanboys here talk about ("no reason to buy Intel", "AMD outsell Intel 2:1" etc).
I dare you to buy Intel stock right now and sell AMD.
Intel stock just went up because of very good Q3 results (both revenue and earnings). Not that I own any. It's not an interesting segment right now.
Posted on Reply
#109
warrior420
I remember when TPU posted legit articles. What the hell is this crap?
Posted on Reply
#110
ratirt
kapone32
I will give you 2 examples of my bias. Many people like to bash on the Bulldozer/Piledriver series of chips. Many of them did not even own Piledriver but yet (i"m sure someone will respond) as an owner of a FX8320 I was quite happy with the upgrade from the 1090T. The other bias I have is Gigabyte and the quality of their current offerings. I have not owned a GIgabyte board that has not given me the D0 postcode and refuse to boot. I will probably never buy another Gigabyte board and on the flipside As Rock are the most bullet proof boards you can buy (in my opinion) based on my own experience. So if someone posted a thread about which X470 board to buy I would recommend As Rock. I am not trying to divide anything I will always defend tech that I think is good based on my own experience with that tech and that is what I meant.
You know. People having opinion about something connected to computer industry doesn't make them enthusiasts and also not enthusiasts. You have the right to your opinion based on legit information, your own experience or other when you draw a conclusion. Bulldozer wasn't a good product and that is why they are bashing it. If they know this from their own experience because they won the CPU or collect information and draw conclusion it doesn't matter if they say tell the truth and their conclusions are supported with arguments. AsRock for me was always a bad product. However, one day I decided to buy a motherboard (Z77 extreme 4) with 3770k processor and I was amazed of the quality. AsRock wasn't always good but i gave it a shot after the company has developed some quality over time.

I understand what you are saying. I disagree with you that if somebody doesn’t own a CPU or a graphics card is not an enthusiast in any way and shouldn't say anything about the product itself. Being an enthusiast has nothing to do with owning any PC gear in this case. If they comment (bash on as you said) on a product, they should support this with arguments, which are true. Everyone has a right to have opinions on a certain subject but you need to have arguments to support your opinion, facts that will prove you are correct with your opinion. If, on the other hand, your arguments are dismissed, have the guts to admit a failure and move on.
Posted on Reply
#111
kapone32
ratirt
You know. People having opinion about something connected to computer industry doesn't make them enthusiasts and also not enthusiasts. You have the right to your opinion based on legit information, your own experience or other when you draw a conclusion. Bulldozer wasn't a good product and that is why they are bashing on it. If they know this from their own experience because they won the CPU or collect information and draw conclusion it doesn't matter if they say tell the truth and their conclusions are supported with arguments. AsRock for me was always a bad product. However, one day I decided to buy a motherboard (Z77 extreme 4) with 3770k processor and I was amazed of the quality. AsRock wasn't always good but i gave it a shot after the company has developed some quality over time.

I understand what you are saying. I disagree with you that if somebody doesn’t own a CPU or a graphics card is not an enthusiast in any way and shouldn't say anything about the product itself. Being an enthusiast has nothing to do with owning any PC gear in this case. If they comment (bash on as you said) on a product, they should support this with arguments, which are true. Everyone has a right to have opinions on a certain subject but you need to have arguments to support your opinion, facts that will prove you are correct with your opinion. If, on the other hand, your arguments are dismissed, have the guts to admit a failure and move on.
I think that at the end of the day we are on the same page but showing the exact side of each other's arguments. The reason I say that is your comment about As rock is exactly what I was saying in terms of being an enthusiast. You did not trust As rock because of experience but were pleasantly surprised by the improvement in quality when you decided to take a chance I did the exact same thing. The reason I referenced Gigabyte is that I used to trust them and now my trust has gone over to As rock. I see you as an enthusiast and not a user because of the adult way you are managing our conversation but also by the tech you have in your computer.

I am not stating that a person should not but again we are talking about the same things. If I made a comment like Ryzen processors are garbage because "Johnny who who" says so and you knew that all I have even owned is Intel would I be a fanboy or enthusiast? If I said Ryzen processors are not as good as Intel in some things and you saw that I owned both would I be a fanboy or enthusiast? I do want to comment that it is healthy to have an adult debate without it falling into a mud slinging contest.
Posted on Reply
#113
candle_86
notb
People on PC forums like to use the word "denial", but there's really little substance behind most of the time. Just like here.

The basic thing I said: Intel doesn't have to match AMD on performance/price to sell more. That's it.
Stop thinking so much about manufacturing process. It's just a factor. It's not relevant for customers.

Intel sold more in the Athlon days.
They sell more now despite an obvious Zen2 7nm advantage.
You can keep mocking me or you can just check the facts.

Sure, AMD makes attractive products since 2017 and that definitely hit Intel on sales and margin. But it's nowhere near the catastrophic scenarios that AMD fanboys here talk about ("no reason to buy Intel", "AMD outsell Intel 2:1" etc).

Intel stock just went up because of very good Q3 results (both revenue and earnings). Not that I own any. It's not an interesting segment right now.
Your aware of Intel being fined and paying and because of why they sold more than and during p4 I hope. If not here is a refresher. Intel offered oems under tray pricing or free for some chips to a company that refused to sell and computers or that only put out the extreme budget and towers with slow memory and hard drives.

This meant say your Pentium 4 might have a 7200rpm drive with 512mb dual channel while their 939 offering got a 5400rpm with 512mb single channel likely at ddr333 vs Intel getting ddr400 or later getting ddr2 667 vs and ddr2 533. HP, Compaq, emachines where famous for this tactic.

I've got a copaq with an a64 3500 originally it had 80gb 5400rpm drive and a single 512 stick of pc2700, when given a 7200 drive it got much faster but the average consumer didn't know.

Intel was forced to pay a billion dollars for this literal crime.
Posted on Reply
#114
notb
candle_86
Intel was forced to pay a billion dollars for this literal crime.
Nope. Intel hasn't paid the EU fine and they're likely to win in court.
Posted on Reply
#115
candle_86
notb
Nope. Intel hasn't paid the EU fine and they're likely to win in court.
Well boy someone tell and they never got that check from Intel
Posted on Reply
#116
notb
candle_86
Well boy someone tell and they never got that check from Intel
Fines are set by the executives (authorities that enforce law). That's what the EU commission did. An EU commission is made up of politicians and their job is to fine as many companies as they can.
And if a company thinks commission made a mistake (or the fine is too high), they can ask a court to rule.

Intel went to court with this case and from the start it wasn't obvious. After 10 years it's very probable that it'll be canceled or significantly lowered.

It's the same story as with traffic fines. Police' job is to fine people for traffic offenses. But they make mistakes. You can always ask a court to check.

So in short: as of today Intel isn't held responsible for anything and they don't have to pay anything.
Posted on Reply
#117
candle_86
notb
Fines are set by the executives (authorities that enforce law). That's what the EU commission did. An EU commission is made up of politicians and their job is to fine as many companies as they can.
And if a company thinks commission made a mistake (or the fine is too high), they can ask a court to rule.

Intel went to court with this case and from the start it wasn't obvious. After 10 years it's very probable that it'll be canceled or significantly lowered.

It's the same story as with traffic fines. Police' job is to fine people for traffic offenses. But they make mistakes. You can always ask a court to check.

So in short: as of today Intel isn't held responsible for anything and they don't have to pay anything.
They where in the American courts and paid heavily for it
Posted on Reply
#118
Manoa
you know you guys keep say RIP intel etc....but the true is AMD is failed: they only win becuase 7 nm > 14 nm, don't forget that is not fair to compare vs intel
just like they failed in video cards it just that they failed in video cards 2x more than in processors: 7 nm < 14 nm
you wanne say AMD is good ? compare 1:1 7 to 7 or 14 to 14 etc
remember AMD is barely winning using 7 nm vs a 14 nm, when intel make they 10 nm processor, only then you can compare it to AMD 7 nm one
only thing true about the compare is AMD more forward in creation technology, it doesn't meen that they are forward in chip architecture
Posted on Reply
#119
candle_86
Manoa
you know you guys keep say RIP intel etc....but the true is AMD is failed: they only win becuase 7 nm > 14 nm, don't forget that is not fair to compare vs intel
just like they failed in video cards it just that they failed in video cards 2x more than in processors: 7 nm < 14 nm
you wanne say AMD is good ? compare 1:1 7 to 7 or 14 to 14 etc
remember AMD is barely winning using 7 nm vs a 14 nm, when intel make they 10 nm processor, only then you can compare it to AMD 7 nm one
only thing true about the compare is AMD more forward in creation technology, it doesn't meen that they are forward in chip architecture
Really that's absolute non sense, the Intel 9k and 10k chips are the zen2 competitors,
Posted on Reply
#120
ratirt
Manoa
you know you guys keep say RIP intel etc....but the true is AMD is failed: they only win becuase 7 nm > 14 nm, don't forget that is not fair to compare vs intel
just like they failed in video cards it just that they failed in video cards 2x more than in processors: 7 nm < 14 nm
you wanne say AMD is good ? compare 1:1 7 to 7 or 14 to 14 etc
remember AMD is barely winning using 7 nm vs a 14 nm, when intel make they 10 nm processor, only then you can compare it to AMD 7 nm one
only thing true about the compare is AMD more forward in creation technology, it doesn't meen that they are forward in chip architecture
AMD failed with Ryzen? Ow that is a squeaker. Care to explain a bit more?
People compare CPU to CPU or performance to performance not node to node or cache mem to cache mem. What's not fair here and what's your point?
As I see it AMD didn't fail actually the opposite. AMD now is giving Intel a great deal of stimulus in terms of performance and pricing. You can see this with current price drops and Intels new 9000 series processors refreshes and new 10 gen release.
I'm surprised you said AMD has failed cause i simply can't see it. If you say that Intel has still bigger market share than AMD then dahhh. How can AMD get 50% in 2 years time when it took Intel 10 years to get where it is now? Don't expect miracles here. It will take a lot of time and effort for AMD to get back in the market and match sales with Intel. (if it ever happens that is) The fact that AMD has abetter product is obvious so get your head outta your ass please.
Posted on Reply
#121
candle_86
ratirt
AMD failed with Ryzen? Ow that is a squeaker. Care to explain a bit more?
People compare CPU to CPU or performance to performance not node to node or cache mem to cache mem. What's not fair here and what's your point?
As I see it AMD didn't fail actually the opposite. AMD now is giving Intel a great deal of stimulus in terms of performance and pricing. You can see this with current price drops and Intels new 9000 series processors refreshes and new 10 gen release.
I'm surprised you said AMD has failed cause i simply can't see it. If you say that Intel has still bigger market share than AMD then dahhh. How can AMD get 50% in 2 years time when it took Intel 10 years to get where it is now? Don't expect miracles here. It will take a lot of time and effort for AMD to get back in the market and match sales with Intel. (if it ever happens that is) The fact that AMD has abetter product is obvious so get your head outta your ass please.
Same argument heard back in 2004, i swear i've heard it before, the intel fanboys come out and demand fairness. My only other response to anyone claiming its not fair is, who said life is fair, they don't like a midget play in the NBA, and i don't hear anyone shouting that aint fair.
Posted on Reply
#122
ratirt
candle_86
Same argument heard back in 2004, i swear i've heard it before, the intel fanboys come out and demand fairness. My only other response to anyone claiming its not fair is, who said life is fair, they don't like a midget play in the NBA, and i don't hear anyone shouting that aint fair.
I get what you are saying but please don't say that life ain't fair and so as this ain't fair. This is fair since you compare oranges to oranges. Life is a bit different and can't be compared to any other life but you compare CPU to CPU. Because it is a machine not a human being and it doesn't live or is alive. Keep that in mind. Compare CPU to CPU not the nodes it is being manufactured at. Do not encourage people to twist words/phrases and use them especially with life in the sentence.
Posted on Reply
#123
notb
candle_86
They where in the American courts and paid heavily for it
Honestly, I don't track all court cases in US - not even the Intel ones (they must have dozens yearly).
Can you point such a case?

I know about just two billion-level situations:
One is the EU antitrust that's still going on.
And one was an agreement between Intel and AMD.
Neither of these was a result of a court judgement.
Posted on Reply
#124
Manoa
ratirt
People compare CPU to CPU or performance to performance not node to node or cache mem to cache mem. What's not fair here and what's your point?
As I see it AMD didn't fail actually the opposite. AMD now is giving Intel a great deal of stimulus in terms of performance and pricing. You can see this with current price drops and Intels new 9000 series processors refreshes and new 10 gen release.
I'm surprised you said AMD has failed cause i simply can't see it. If you say that Intel has still bigger market share than AMD then dahhh. How can AMD get 50% in 2 years time when it took Intel 10 years to get where it is now? Don't expect miracles here. It will take a lot of time and effort for AMD to get back in the market and match sales with Intel. (if it ever happens that is) The fact that AMD has abetter product is obvious so get your head outta your ass please.
CPU is made from silicon, performance also come from silicon, that is whay it's node to node
I don't care about fair or not and yhe sure AMD is winning even if only by a littel I don't say that it's bad
I don't realy care about market, but it's part of what I meen...
you have to understand something important: the reason that AMD is failed now is because intel is failed with 10 nm, which is they own fault
the problem of market as you say is important is this: if intel didn't failed with 10 nm, they skylake architecture would clean the florr with zen
that architecture is what ? 10 years old ? so explain to me how AMD is not a failure ?? zen is faighting (and berely winning) a 10 years old skylake cores made on a node that is twice as big

it mybe not entirely relevant but I wanne add something else to the explain, it might help understand what I meen: look at AMD video cards, failed right ?
but you say failed because the card is failed, but what if the card didn't failed and would clean the florr with 2080 ti ? that would still not be a good compare either, becuase the 14 nm is not compare to 7 nm, and the big problem of market ? is that when nvidea come out with a 7 nm version of they own - that can kill the AMD cards easy....

same CPU: right now AMD wins and I have no problem with that. the possible danger to that is when intel come up with 10 nm version of the skylake cores or whatever they have in design for 10 nm right now.... what my point ? the problem is that zen, as architecture is not superior to skylake (or haswell which is the same thing only DDR3 that's all), the diffrence is that I look at architecture not the whole CPU as you do, and in term of zen architecture, thare is nothing worth to mention: it just equal to skylake more or less in term of performance and skylake is a historic architecture
Posted on Reply
#125
ratirt
Manoa
CPU is made from silicon, performance also come from silicon, that is whay it's node to node
I don't care about fair or not and yhe sure AMD is winning even if only by a littel I don't say that it's bad
I don't realy care about market, but it's part of what I meen...
you have to understand something important: the reason that AMD is failed now is because intel is failed with 10 nm, which is they own fault
the problem of market as you say is important is this: if intel didn't failed with 10 nm, they skylake architecture would clean the florr with zen
that architecture is what ? 10 years old ? so explain to me how AMD is not a failure ?? zen is faighting (and berely winning) a 10 years old skylake cores made on a node that is twice as big

it mybe not entirely relevant but I wanne add something else to the explain, it might help understand what I meen: look at AMD video cards, failed right ?
but you say failed because the card is failed, but what if the card didn't failed and would clean the florr with 2080 ti ? that would still not be a good compare either, becuase the 14 nm is not compare to 7 nm, and the big problem of market ? is that when nvidea come out with a 7 nm version of they own - that can kill the AMD cards easy....

same CPU: right now AMD wins and I have no problem with that. the possible danger to that is when intel come up with 10 nm version of the skylake cores or whatever they have in design for 10 nm right now.... what my point ? the problem is that zen, as architecture is not superior to skylake (or haswell which is the same thing only DDR3 that's all), the diffrence is that I look at architecture not the whole CPU as you do, and in term of zen architecture, thare is nothing worth to mention: it just equal to skylake more or less in term of performance and skylake is a historic architecture
Dude I don't understand what you are saying really.
And this
Manoa
you have to understand something important: the reason that AMD is failed now is because intel is failed with 10 nm, which is they own fault
this statement is just crazy. AMD failed with Ryzen because Intel faild with 10nm? I have no idea what you are trying to say man.
You are delusional with what you are saying or you don't know how to express yourself correctly. AMD is far from failing and nodes has nothing to do with it. Besides 7nm is a fresh node and it is immature. It needs time to get better. Intel's 14nm+++++ (not sure how many +) can be be a bit better now but it is maxed out actually. 7nm still have room to improve and that's the difference with different node mainly.

BTW. It is not just the node it is also the architecture. You don't compare node to node for performance because the CPU as a complex design can't be compared only by one variable.
You can have the greatest node, the smallest and you can still fail if other aspects of the CPU design are not in place.
So again
No, you don't compare node to node to determine the performance advantage of a product. You compare CPU to CPU which is a complete product which uses a node, specific architecture, instructions sets. The node itself can give better future perspective for improvement when matured. I hope this makes sens.
This isn't about Video Cards and honestly I don't understand what you are trying to say. Maybe others do ??
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment