New CPU Performance Testing Concludes AMD Beats Intel

erek

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 19, 2005
Messages
6,947
Substantiated or unsubstantiated claims? Opinion?

"An anonymous reader quote Hot Hardware:If you're looking for the best gaming CPU or the best CPU for desktop applications, there are only two choices to pick from: AMD and Intel. That fact has spawned an almost religious following for both camps, and the resulting flamewars, that make it tricky to get unbiased advice about the best choice for your next processor.

But in many cases, the answer is actually very clear. In fact, for most users, it's a blowout win in AMD's favor. That's an amazing reversal of fortunes for the chipmaker after it teetered on the edge of bankruptcy a mere three years ago, making its turnaround all the more impressive as it continues to upset the entrenched Intel that enjoyed a decade of dominance... Pricing is the most important consideration for almost everyone, and AMD is hard to beat in the value department. The company offers a plethora of advantages, like bundled coolers and full overclockability on all models, not to mention complimentary software that includes the innovative Precision Boost Overdrive auto-overclocking feature.

You also benefit from the broad compatibility of Socket AM4 motherboards that support both forward and backward compatibility, ensuring that not only do you get the most bang for your processor buck, but also your motherboard investment. AMD also allows overclocking on all but its A-Series motherboards (see our article on how to overclock AMD Ryzen), which is another boon for users. And, in this battle of AMD vs Intel CPUs, we haven't even discussed the actual silicon yet. AMD's modern processors tend to offer either more cores or threads and faster PCIe 4.0 connectivity at every single price point.
"We're not covering laptop or server chips," the article notes, adding "There's a clear winner overall, but which brand of CPU you should buy depends most on what kind of features, price and performance are important to you."

Still, it's noteworthy that AMD beats Intel in 7 out of 10 comparisons. The three in which Intel won were gaming performance ("only because we measure strictly by the absolute top performance possible"), drivers and software ("the company has an army of software developers [and] a decade of dominance also finds most software developers optimizing almost exclusively for Intel architectures"), and overclocking, where Intel "has far more headroom and much higher attainable frequencies."


https://slashdot.org/story/20/04/26/1622236/new-cpu-performance-testing-concludes-amd-beats-intel
 

Gorankar

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 19, 2000
Messages
10,653
I see you couldn't be bothered to read the quote or the article.
Tribalism is a real thing. Evidence matters not at all in the face of it's power. That said, I think there would be a lot more fuss among a lot more tech journos if it was really that shocking a difference. But then again, trusting journos to not be a member of one tribe or another is asking a bit much these days, whether it be NV vs AMD or Intel vs AMD.
 

nthexwn

Weaksauce
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Messages
81
I see you couldn't be bothered to read the quote or the article.

I did. The headline makes a claim about performance. Then the article conflates performance with value and declares AMD the winner despite benchmarks in the article which show otherwise.

Tribalism is a real thing.

Don't get me wrong, I bought an FX-60 back in the day when AMD actually took the performance crown away from Intel. The hype around this second coming just seems a bit premature.

AMD has been focusing on producing more cores for cheaper. However, until they win in single-core performance they'll always be worse for gaming. People seem to be waiting for game developers to "take advantage of all the extra cores", but it doesn't work like that. Games tend to be serial simulations (IE: one thing happens, which affects the next thing, which affects the next thing, etc.). These types of applications are terrible for multi-threading since all of the threads have to re-sync after each event. In most cases the act of copying the simulation data into the registers of parallel CPUs, managing mutex locks for shared resources, and re-syncing once sub-tasks have completed ends up costing the main thread more clock cycles than offloading the work actually saves. It's like training a new co-worker who's only going to be on the job with you for a few minutes. Why bother?

Articles like this usually lack any discussion of that concept.
 

1_rick

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Feb 7, 2017
Messages
1,460
I did. The headline makes a claim about performance. Then the article conflates performance with value and declares AMD the winner despite benchmarks in the article which show otherwise.

Ah, I see. So, did you spot this part "till, it's noteworthy that AMD beats Intel in 7 out of 10 comparisons. The three in which Intel won were gaming performance ("only because we measure strictly by the absolute top performance possible")" or did you just ignore it? I mean, because I don't see any mythical AMD processor mentioned that beats the 9900K in gaming except the one you are asking about.
 
Joined
Oct 11, 2018
Messages
532
considering how much ryzen trounces on intel on nearly everything but "gaming" ...it would be interesting to know if that's really due to some significant difference in hardware performance or simply because most gaming studios will build with intel supplied math libraries or use gaming engines that do similar in the way that they will tend to favor nvidia supplied support/libraries.

As there are some games that seem to flip the coin on the performance difference between cpu's like the 3900x and 9900k ....like monster hunter: world.

But whatever, if your goal was to build a 1000+ dollar console and dont care about using it for anything else...then your priorities dont align with most of the computer enthusiast's anyway.
 

Comixbooks

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 7, 2008
Messages
15,804
Just build a AMD system and a Intel system. Best of both worlds you can fight it out running benchmarks on both systems.
 

Dopamin3

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 3, 2009
Messages
166
If AMD could get another 500MHz out of their CPU's we wouldn't even be having this conversation anymore. If Intel had another 500MHz to work with, AMD would still be winning the battle in many cases just due to cores and value alone.

Can't wait to see how Zen 3 compares against Ice Lake. I think the jump in IPC from Zen 2 to Zen 3 will be even better than Zen+ to Zen 2, so we'll see :) Intel is already in huge trouble in all sectors: laptop/mobile, consumer desktop, HEDT (Threadripper vs X299), and server (Eypc vs Xeon) so I hope that pushes them hard to actually release a good product.
 

sharknice

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 12, 2012
Messages
2,202
As a [H]ardcore gamer all I care about is top end gaming performance. Wake me up when AMD takes that crown back. There's a new article every day about how AMD beats Intel in some stupid way that I don't care.
 

nthexwn

Weaksauce
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Messages
81
Ah, I see. So, did you spot this part "till, it's noteworthy that AMD beats Intel in 7 out of 10 comparisons. The three in which Intel won were gaming performance ("only because we measure strictly by the absolute top performance possible")" or did you just ignore it? I mean, because I don't see any mythical AMD processor mentioned that beats the 9900K in gaming except the one you are asking about.

My point is that the headline is misleading: "New CPU Performance Testing Concludes AMD Beats Intel"

For this claim to be true, AMD would need to have a processor with faster cores than Intel. I read the article, and it didn't talk about anything like that. It just diverged into a holistic consumer-reports style review of various CPUs at various price points with various features. The focus was not entirely on performance as the headline indicated. I asked about this mythical faster processor sarcastically (sorry if that wasn't clear) in order to point out the gap in focus between the headline and the actual contents/conclusion of the article.
 

blackmomba

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 5, 2018
Messages
423
Me with my shitty 60hz monitor and my shitty GPU bound gaming. I think I'll turn down the settings and res, get 400 fps at 720p, see what all the fuss is about
 

Furious_Styles

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 16, 2013
Messages
1,948
Me with my shitty 60hz monitor and my shitty GPU bound gaming. I think I'll turn down the settings and res, get 400 fps at 720p, see what all the fuss is about

1440p 144hz was the best upgrade I made in the past 5 years. You definitely want to have enough GPU to power it though. Gsync is great but you don't want to be in that 30fps and below bracket.
 

1_rick

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Feb 7, 2017
Messages
1,460
My point is that the headline is misleading: "New CPU Performance Testing Concludes AMD Beats Intel"

Your point is as incomplete as the article's. A better headline would've been "AMD wins overall in a variety of tests." Just because you only care about gaming doesn't mean the other ways AMD is clearly better than Intel don't exist. I do a lot of moderately parallel tasks, so "more cores for fewer $" is better for me, but you don't see me saying "single-core performance is stupid and nobody cares about it."

to point out the gap in focus between the headline and the actual contents/conclusion of the article.

Fair enough.
 

Trimlock

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Sep 23, 2005
Messages
15,225
My point is that the headline is misleading: "New CPU Performance Testing Concludes AMD Beats Intel"

For this claim to be true, AMD would need to have a processor with faster cores than Intel. I read the article, and it didn't talk about anything like that. It just diverged into a holistic consumer-reports style review of various CPUs at various price points with various features. The focus was not entirely on performance as the headline indicated. I asked about this mythical faster processor sarcastically (sorry if that wasn't clear) in order to point out the gap in focus between the headline and the actual contents/conclusion of the article.
I agree.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fleat
like this
Top