Quote from: piranha on April 12, 2020, 15:28:29
you do realize its not even fully optimized yet, so i bet it can go up in performance, and add overclocking.. dunno if id upgrade from a 9900kf though.. depending on the price

as for upgrading it's not worth it but if you want a new first time build it's excellent. You'd have to change your motherboard if you want to upgrade

This is a bullshit article.. Intel beats at single but loses at multi-core. Well no s*** jeebus..

And is running 2 more cores. I'll fuckn die when this chip is optimized and a new refreshed motherboard comes into play.  10900k will be 18% higher then the 3900k. Sure it will spend more energy, but I don't give a s***. I wantore speeeeeeeeeeed. I wish Intel naked their voltage upto 250watts..

Oh c'mon that is absolute AMDestruction

A 10 core 14nm part ... Touching AMDs 7nm 12 core processors is just too good
Intel is killing it

Intel wins gaming once again. That MSI motherboard isn't even top-notch, and it still goes 4.8 on all cores. AMD is better for those who run programs that take advantage of AMD's threads. I do wish Intel would switch to 7nm processing for efficiency, though. They've mastered 14nm. :(

you do realize its not even fully optimized yet, so i bet it can go up in performance, and add overclocking.. dunno if id upgrade from a 9900kf though.. depending on the price

Even if they do squeak out single core by a bit, with the Ryzen 4000 desktop chips we can probably expect another 15%-20% IPC uplift. That basically makes their faster boost clocks insignificant imo, but only time will tell. You can root for the underdog(Intel) if you want, competition is good for everyone.

With smaller processor nodes, maximum freq will likely keep decreasing. The future is more cores, higher IPC, and improving architecture.

Quote from: fdsofldmos on April 10, 2020, 12:32:27
Yeah, because they keep adding cores and increasing frequency on the same node...

no. efficiency is about performance divided by consumption or vice versa. take the same number of cores at the same frequency and earlier lake versions will consume less.

10 cores @ 165W vs 12 cores @ 105W
16.5W/core (intel) vs 8.75W/core (amd)
Yeah, no question asked. They definitely bury them,...

Quote from: william blake on April 10, 2020, 11:22:19
each of iterations after kabylake is less and less efficient, prepare to be demolished by reviewers, intel.

Yeah, because they keep adding cores and increasing frequency on the same node...

2 cores less than 3900x.

each of iterations after kabylake is less and less efficient, prepare to be demolished by reviewers, intel.

DOA GEN10.