M76
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2012
- Messages
- 14,039
I wish it was 00, and I had a cpu that OC-ed 80% with air cooling.I bet Intel wishes it was still 2016
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I wish it was 00, and I had a cpu that OC-ed 80% with air cooling.I bet Intel wishes it was still 2016
The 9700k 8-core non-HT has several advantages that may translate into higher single thread performance in lightly multi-threaded environments: there's no sharing of the L1 and L2 caches between threads, and I believe that HT is the source of some of the side-channel security risks (Spectre/Meltdown), so you don't need some of the performance-damaging mitigations on a 9700K.
I wouldn't be surprised if, when OC'd to the same clocks, the 9700K doesn't beat the 9900K in some games, though not by much.
What this means is that Intel has given the testers some 'recommended settings' to replicate their in-house results. The blame appears to lie squarely with Intel here. The fact that Intel is claiming 50% better performance than the 2700X suggests that this is no mistake.
Surely blatant misrepresentation like this must be a sue-able offense.
Indeed. The PR rep probably thought he was giving a typical PR non-answer "we appreciate the reviewer community jadajadajada" but ended up damning their own company as the potential source of these questionable test methods anyway.
Cageymaru is all over it, I was just going to post this. We all know the 9900k is going to be faster the the 2700x, but do they really need to fudge the results??
I have never heard of them but PCgamesN seems to be a bunch of shills.
Looking forward to the epic ball busting that will be done by Gamers Nexus
I've gone team red for the first time since the Athlon64 days. I've had my fair share of both Intel and AMD. But this even more makes me realize I wasn't missing out on much by going with AMD for now. Drop the 9900k to within g $75 of the 2700k, and a decent Z390 withing $25 of a nice X470 Mobo, I'd be game.I think it's a mix of this and straight up hubris.
I've used my fair share of Intel processors so I am in no way an AMD fanboy (unless they buy me a steak dinner first), but Intel has a record of fighting dirty in the few instances where AMD has actually had a decent if not better part on their end.
Serious question, so don't flame me. I haven't used AMD in a bit and therefore don't know the software. If you install Ryzen Master and select game mode...does it default to 4/8? If so...why? I understand most games don't utilize more than 4 cores but does keeping them active decrease performance on AMD cpu's?
AMD does the same thing.
But did they gimp the other company's product to make it look bad?
People who use manufacturer benchmarks are silly.
Silly I say!
What, you don't remember AMD using compiler trickery to fucked Intel? Cheating was a family business. Let's not forget who's the real victim here.
View attachment 110533
Evident the answer is no. Welcome to 2018, the year of extremes and memory loss (or too young too remember)Anyone remember the first bulldozer benchmarks by AMD? Recall the "Massive Overclocking"?
Christ. These days if you build a 9900K system with a 2080Ti, you're basically building Hitler's PC.
This goes to show how far removed engineering gets from the sale of a product by the time it reaches market.
It's hard to even fathom that a processor design engineer never even looked over the marketing materials and benchmarks for a sanity check.
"Wait, we designed this thing. It's not physically possible for it to be 50% faster than the 2700X."
All the hands that data had to pass through and NO ONE was even a hardware enthusiast who has a firm understanding of the products and their generational performance?
Really?
What this needs to be is a wake up call to Intel management that they have once again strayed too far from their roots of design and engineering. Too heavy on the marketing and not heavy enough on knowledge.
Paid report says what the commissioning company wanted? That's pretty much the definition of a commissioned report. You can commission a report to say any damn thing you want...
ok its called "GAME MODE" i think thats fair then to use it for GAMING benchmarks just saying maybe AMD shouldnt call a mode that gimps the chip FUCKING GAME MODE
ok its called "GAME MODE" i think thats fair then to use it for GAMING benchmarks just saying maybe AMD shouldnt call a mode that gimps the chip FUCKING GAME MODE
It's for Threadripper not the normal Ryzen chips. Perhaps you should be more informed before insulting the company.