AMD'S BIG DAY - CES Live Stream!

[strider1]

Fingers crossed!

https://www.youtube.com/c/AMD/live

[strider1]

Bummer, no specs on the new ryzen... The GPU is too expensive to compete with Nvidia!

[Greggy_D]

Total letdown.

[IAhawkeyeDDS]

[strider1]

In the cinebench demo, the 9900k was running at stock frequencies, correct me if I am wrong but isnt that 5GHZ?

[martin-w]

7 hours ago, strider1 said:

In the cinebench demo, the 9900k was running at stock frequencies, correct me if I am wrong but isnt that 5GHZ?

 

Nope... or more accurately no and yes. 🙂

Turbo for 9900K is 5 GHz, but that's only on two cores. And only if it's just those two cores active. As soon as other crores fire up the frequency of all cores drops. That's how Intel Turbo works. So in the Cinebench run with all cores active, the 9900K will have dropped to it's minimum Turbo frequency on all cores of 3.6 GHz.

Worth mentioning that the AMD CPU was an engineering sample not running at it's final frequency. So given that it was slightly ahead of the Intel 9900K in Cinebench, we can expect it to be further still ahead when it's up to the frequency it will ship at. How far ahead is impossible to know because AMD didn't tell us what frequency the engineering sample was running at. 

Same for the power consumption. 30% better than the Intel part, but when the AMD CPU it up at it's final frequency and voltage, we can expect power consumption to drop down from that 30% advantage. Should still be significantly better than the 9900K though.

 

[stans]

On 1/9/2019 at 6:58 PM, IAhawkeyeDDS said:

LOL!!!!!!

[strider1]

5 hours ago, martin-w said:

 

Nope... or more accurately no and yes. 🙂

Turbo for 9900K is 5 GHz, but that's only on two cores. And only if it's just those two cores active. As soon as other crores fire up the frequency of all cores drops. That's how Intel Turbo works. So in the Cinebench run with all cores active, the 9900K will have dropped to it's minimum Turbo frequency on all cores of 3.6 GHz.

Worth mentioning that the AMD CPU was an engineering sample not running at it's final frequency. So given that it was slightly ahead of the Intel 9900K in Cinebench, we can expect it to be further still ahead when it's up to the frequency it will ship at. How far ahead is impossible to know because AMD didn't tell us what frequency the engineering sample was running at. 

Same for the power consumption. 30% better than the Intel part, but when the AMD CPU it up at it's final frequency and voltage, we can expect power consumption to drop down from that 30% advantage. Should still be significantly better than the 9900K though.

 

Ok thanks!  I was just trying to interpolate!