![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Looks like Instructions Per CLOCK of Ryzen is right at Skylake levels. In reality at some instructions it will blow away Skylake and others the opposite. Still very good standings there in the end. If AMD can get their clock speed up - Intel will have problemsYour so full of it. Threadripper and Ryzen are the same IPC the difference is larger cache sizes and Quad channel memory. Threadripper runs slower and has more latency then a Ryzen chip and why it's not as good at games, except when a game can leverage all those cores like Assassins Creed Origins. No the I5 is faster due to the better IPC on Intel and the massive clock speed difference and to be honest it's right there with it despite that massive clock speed difference. You should admit you were wrong before no one pays attention to what you post and oh have a look at that massive IPC difference between Threadripper and Ryzen. Clock speed is still very important in games and the main reason Intel is ahead in that area, but as games leverage more and more cores it will become less important.
Cinebench uses the same rendering engine that is used in Cinema 4D which is highly used for Production/Broadcast work. Also other rendering type engines AMD shows strong standings a.k.a Blender in which was as fast/faster than Intel Broadwell. If you are talking about AES 512 (which really is loading multiple instructions), yes your right since Ryzen cannot do that. Now what do you mean by modern instructions?
I think that is a very good assessment and I do believe as well some will be better off with Intel over AMD and also visa versa. If one knows what kind of work loads and which ones are more significant then a little research may point to the best solution. For example a scientist doing research and using high precision custom Floating point programs for the results - Intel is so far ahead of AMD in this, it would be unwise to get AMD. Rendering - both do this well but one maybe get more bang per $ with AMD here. For me either Intel or AMD would work just fine (have both Intel and AMD machines, 2 Intel's, 3 AMD's).
Your so full of it. Threadripper and Ryzen are the same IPC the difference is larger cache sizes and Quad channel memory. Threadripper runs slower and has more latency then a Ryzen chip and why it's not as good at games, except when a game can leverage all those cores like Assassins Creed Origins. No the I5 is faster due to the better IPC on Intel and the massive clock speed difference and to be honest it's right there with it despite that massive clock speed difference. You should admit you were wrong before no one pays attention to what you post and oh have a look at that massive IPC difference between Threadripper and Ryzen. Clock speed is still very important in games and the main reason Intel is ahead in that area, but as games leverage more and more cores it will become less important.
Dude seriously? It has been discussed by writers and reviewers alike and it is agreed Intel RUSHED the launch of everything. Coffee Lake was not ready in number for mass sales. X299 was not ready for release to handle the power and heat of the core counts Intel was releasing. Absolutely nothing about Intels launches the latter half of this year scream planned or dispute ones argument of a paper launch.
Looks like Instructions Per CLOCK of Ryzen is right at Skylake levels. In reality at some instructions it will blow away Skylake and others the opposite. Still very good standings there in the end. If AMD can get their clock speed up - Intel will have problems
That review is incorrect and disagrees with rest of reviews. RyZen IPC is a good 10% behind in Cinebench, which is a favorable case for the Zen muarch
In the other extreme Zen IPC is 25% behind
Overall the IPC gap is about 15--20%. That IPC gap combined with the clock gap is the reason why 6C CoffeeLake is able to beat 8C Zen in multithread scenarios such as Blender, Handbrake,...
Look who it's coming from. Of course it will show Intel being better. I bet he has a graph that shows the I3 Intel beating the 1950x in cinebench multi.
PR uses the same Zen muarch than SR. So there is no IPC bump. Only clock bump, because PR is a Richland.-like refresh of SR. 10% higher clocks? Maybe.
Games aren't thoughput workloads, so there is a master thread and single core performance is relevant, because if the master thread is bottlenecked then any slave thread will be bottlenecked no matter how many core you give to the engine.
CFL i3 (~KBL i5) is so fast like R7 1800X on AC origins. That "tragic death" claim is so incorrect as the dozens of similar claims made since Bulldozer about the death of i5s...
Your so full of it. Threadripper and Ryzen are the same IPC the difference is larger cache sizes and Quad channel memory. Threadripper runs slower and has more latency then a Ryzen chip and why it's not as good at games, except when a game can leverage all those cores like Assassins Creed Origins. No the I5 is faster due to the better IPC on Intel and the massive clock speed difference and to be honest it's right there with it despite that massive clock speed difference. You should admit you were wrong before no one pays attention to what you post and oh have a look at that massive IPC difference between Threadripper and Ryzen. Clock speed is still very important in games and the main reason Intel is ahead in that area, but as games leverage more and more cores it will become less important.
https://www.pccomponentes.com/intel-core-i7-8700k-37ghz-box
Are you aware that Kabylake models are still among best-sellers in many stores? At time of writing this Kabylake i7 and i5 are #1 and #2 in Amazon best-selling list. No bad for being "obsolete".
And are you aware the several CoffeeLake models have already been named best gaming CPUs ever?
Intel Coffee Lake Core i7-8700K review: The best gaming CPU you can buy
Fastest gaming processor
Intel i5-8400 review - the best new gaming CPU in years
ThreadRipper has higher single-core performance than 1800X. So ThreadRipper is faster than 1800X because it has more cores and each core is faster. But the i5 is faster than ThreadRipper because throwing 2.6x moar cores to the game engine cannot do the master thread to run 2.6x faster.
So a 16C Zen running behind than 6C i5 just proves what I said about how single-core performance matter for games. And that with OrangeKrush cherry picking the game.
The i9-7900x did very well because it has similar single-core performance than CoffeLake.
So that is why it's doing worse in all these games then a Ryzen chip. So like usual your full of crap, if Threadripper had higher "single core performance" then it would not be losing to Ryzen. I can include Toms Hardware as well but they only did a few including the 1800X and I felt the point was made. Insulting me wont change the fact that you are quite wrong.
thank you for the qualifier ie: Intel for 144hz. Not sure why some find that hard to do. I really hate blanket statements.
Only if you need the high frame rates, otherwise just pick whatever tickles your fancy.
I kinda look forward to putting it on LN2 down the road they are basically top binned 7700k's with more power delivery made for someone like me into overclocking 
- good grief.
Most people play dota and CSGO so don't think they are bothered. Most haven't made it beyond 1080 60hz to give many cares and those with higher refresh rates are still buying Ryzen parts because the off set on price to frames is worth it and at 1440 up the GPu is the bottleneck