Intel Announces Sunny Cove Brings 18% IPC Improvement


[H]F Junkie
Mar 18, 2010
Intel has the performance per dollar crown? Clock to clock, how much of a difference are we talking?
Yeah you would have to go back several posts for that. My original comment was that AMD was strong and it was for reasons other than security, to which he responded performance, to which I said performance/$$$.


[H]F Junkie
Jun 13, 2003
So single core speed on Intel is 50% or more? How much?
I didn't say?

No games use the extra cores for running something else while they game? Streamers? Ventrilo? There are MANY reason even gamers could use more than 4/6.
I would say 8 since it's not much more. Single core? If the extra bit is worth it for competitions, then yes.
I didn't use absolutes for a reason, and in general, we agree here. Main point is that streamers are a tiny minority of gamers- most are watching the streams if they have anything to do with streaming at all. For most people, just being able to run a particular AAA game is an achievement, and we aren't most people here at the [H].


Nov 18, 2008
there are various "calculator" online to try to draw a almost 100% "convince yourself" that chip A is "faster" than chip B
unfortunately, a huge chunk of this info is likely "tainted" by not using hardware/software agnostic testing (not sure if saying this right)

meaning, finding benchmarks/testing to put all the BS out the door and compare apples to apples

not a 1/2 assed approach of run to the highest clocks and the one who ran fastest is "JUST DO IT"


if I recall, Ryzen 1xxx was ~15-30% slower (taking everything into account, mostly slower ram speed / clock speed able to get to, where Intel IPC lead AND clock higher just a hair more or less watts possibly)

Ryzen 1xxx had teething issues, no doubt though once OEM got a handle on the performance/smoothness has gotten better even if the "speed" has not increased.

AM4 / Ryzen /Vega /Radeon 7 soon Navi massive turn the tables for the "world" kicked Intel in the Ass [H]ard)
more cores, less price, faster "all around" performer.

hard enough kick in the nuts to make them crap out chips/motherboards that were glaringly obvious "spray and pray, rush out the door today" (very costly shit the bed mistake on Intel)

Ryzen 2xxx for the most part 5-17% slower (depending on the workload) vs all but the "top chip"
that 9900k something or other that 5Ghz crazy wattage/TDP/price for the admission chip

save a few hundred, go to 2700x be happy for years to come (possible even more as developers are NOW using Ryzen etc as well)
lose that ~12% "performance" (which most people not notice AT ALL) if compare side by side, they did blind tests like this for Ryzen 1xxx and 2xxx and soon 3xxx, support the little guy, especially when his stuff is AS GOOD, but made by a company taking the time to "give you the extras"

point is "nearly the same performance" "more value for the $ they asking" "better build quality
(solder instead of thermal glue, many layer PCB instead of minimal possible)

your $$$$, mine goes to AMD
I appreciate what they are doing and where they see where we should be at this point in time
(with the road of high tech coming to an end in some ways soon enough at least with the nm race of silicon hitting a wall very real they do not want to be hitting yet)

now is the right time.


take a specific generation Ryzen 1 vs core 7xxx "should not see much difference" unless you overclock or have need of "specific" Intel "maybe" better choice, for the rest AMD option "better choice" if $ was a bit tighter or were not an idiot and such.

Ryzen 2xxx vs core 8xxx/9xxx pretty much same thing, but they have got their performance levels, clock speed up to even closer, addded even more features etc, ramped ram speeds up.

Ryzen 3xxx will be taking on the best Intel has to offer (likely through 2019 3Q maybe untill early 2020?

I would be "shocked" if they are not within 5% "parity" in most things, gaming or otherwise, even if they are a "touch behind" the overall "system" has been given a serious Adrenaline boost, the CPU is and always has been "but a part" of what makes it "tick" and from what I read/seen of the "leaks" that is exactly what ryzen 3xxx is going to do

"get even closer and expand way beyond what others are doing"
not at record setting clock speeds or power use, but realistic and expected increase we all have need of, mostly, get that old shit put to pasture where it needs to be, so we can reduce global power use by many magnitudes, certainly slapping around the bullies to start doing "right" is a critical step ahead as well.


Thanks for reading, and have a wonderful summer all


Dec 15, 2016
Performance/$$$. Intel still holds the absolute performance crown at the moment. And the current exploits/security issues plays very little into affecting purchasing decisions in the grand scheme of things, for the moment.

How is it absurd? You pick the biggest target because it has the highest chance of payback. Simple logic, which you seem to have a very hard time comprehending.

Pot meet kettle...

Au contraire it is merely refreshing having choice and watching how bent out of shape people get to ensure the status quo is the same, like they have some allegiance to team blue.

If we are semantics then team blue may still hold a edge but the red option is as you say perf for buck and that is fantastic. AMDs revival story is amazing to, given how in 2016 bankruptcy was the likely outcome,now it seems AMD is making better decisions and the shareholders seem to reflect that. 32 dollars or so,if you told me that in 2016 I would have introduced you to my friends