Question AMD

[pcslookout]

Do you think the future processors will be just as good as Intel's for productive or that will never happen ?

 

[gdansk]

Just as good would be a downgrade for some product lines.
Better to ask in one of the threads about future products to get a better idea of what chips you are comparing.

 

[tamz_msc]

First define what being "productive" means to you.

 

[SteinFG]

Do you think the future processors will be just as good as Intel's for productive or that will never happen ?

You're saying like intel's way ahead now. Which isn't even true. 7950X is on par with 14900K, 7900X is almost on par with i7 14700K, 7700X is almost on par with 14600K. Only 13500, 12600K stand out in its price category, but that's older alderlake silicon.

 

[pcslookout]

You're saying like intel's way ahead now. Which isn't even true. 7950X is on par with 14900K, 7900X is almost on par with i7 14700K, 7700X is almost on par with 14600K. Only 13500, 12600K stand out in its price category, but that's older alderlake silicon.

No.

I am saying Intel is a little better with programs. Not way ahead.

 

[SteinFG]

No.

I am saying Intel is a little better with programs. Not way ahead.

So you agree that there's just a little difference between amd and intel now.

 

[manly]

First define what being "productive" means to you.

Synthetic-ish benchmarks that scale with extra E cores. That's certainly what "productivity" is, amirite?

You're saying like intel's way ahead now. Which isn't even true. 7950X is on par with 14900K, 7900X is almost on par with i7 14700K, 7700X is almost on par with 14600K. Only 13500, 12600K stand out in its price category, but that's older alderlake silicon.

They are way ahead, consuming nearly double the power for more MT performance on popular benchmarks.

 

[tamz_msc]

Synthetic-ish benchmarks that scale with extra E cores. That's certainly what "productivity" is, amirite?

I'd argue that the Venn-diagram of "productive stuff on the CPU that requires maximum number of cores running at full-tilt" is only a vanishingly small subset of "productive stuff that is done on the CPU", as far as personal computers are concerned.

Some people would like to claim otherwise, and are often very vocal about it.

 

[gdansk]

And if that's all that mattered you'd be using an M3. 4 of the best cores on the market and 4 of the most efficient. Should be good enough for all that modern Electron productivity.

 

[DrMrLordX]

Do you think the future processors will be just as good as Intel's for productive or that will never happen ?

That implies that AMD has problems with "productivity", which they don't. It's a mixed bag.

AT had Intel mostly ahead in productivity applications (exceptions being two parts of Procyon office and both MariaDB tests):

Intel Core i9-14900K, Core i7-14700K and Core i5-14600K Review: Raptor Lake Refreshed

www.anandtech.com

Tom's Hardware had AMD winning productivity by 2% (but regrettably didn't bother to show a test-by-test breakdown of how they achieved that geometric mean):

Intel Core i9-14900K, i7-14700K and i5-14600K Review: Ryzen X3D Stays On Top

Mid-range gaming has a new champion.

www.tomshardware.com

It's kind of a wash, but Intel winds up using a lot more power to achieve that performance. If you de-tuned a 7950X and 14900k to 125W actual then the 7950X would only extend its lead.

 

[IEC]

The future is already here.

I expect any gaps to be more than filled in 2024-2025 as AMD continues to execute.

Where AMD doesn't compete (yet) is the lower end of the budget range with AM5. For that, there's AM4 and LGA1700 though. Recent fire sales on Alder Lake CPUs like the 12600K mean the value is pretty much impossible to beat. There's also plenty of AM4 deals to be had as people sell their AM4 parts after upgrading to AM5...

I'm currently building a 12600K/Z690 ACE (E-ATX, dual 2.5G LAN, 5x m.2) test box to play around with TrueNAS Scale. It's costing me about the same as a mini-PC option (e.g. Minisforum) but with way better performance and expandability... I will say idle power use doesn't seem to be so good when using XMP memory kits >DDR5-6000+, but that's pretty similar to AM5 which uses too much vSOC with EXPO. Can easily shave 5-10W idle power depending on where you're starting.

Since I'm tuning for efficiency I'm using 5600 @ 1.2V to scale back on the uncore power usage at idle. And setting more conservative PL1 and PL2 values for the 12600K which the Z690 ACE board basically uncaps at default if you have good cooling...

 

[SarahKerrigan]

Do you think the future processors will be just as good as Intel's for productive or that will never happen ?

The answer to your totally serious and not at all trolly question is that AMD will never catch up to Intel until they get an EPIC product lineup and run HP-UX on it. Until then, Itanium is ahead and there's nothing AMD can do about it. It scales gluelessly to eight sockets, while AMD only scales gluelessly to two. It has advanced chipsets allowing 32-socket scalability. And! It has single-cycle L1 latency.

Sorry.

 

[aigomorla]

This thread is closed after discussion with moderating staff, as it could lead to a bunch of potential mod reports for trolling as the topic itself will spark a lot of enthusiastic comments from both camps.

Moderator Aigo