Ryzen vs i7 (Mainstream); Threadripper vs i9 (HEDT); X299 vs X399/TRX40; Xeon vs Epyc

Maybe get rid of all of your (Lenovo IdeaPad 110S) Subnotebook's (J/K)

 

Wait, when did they start calling them subnotebooks instead of netbooks? I've been a little out of the loop on lower performance laptops.

 

Ask @tilleroftheearth

 

Looking it up, I don't know why I bothered, I can't find a consensus, looks like they're either the same thing, or they're a little bigger than netbooks, or they're the result of a split of netbook into subnotebook and chromebook, or it's supposed to be a blanket term for things like Chromebooks but somehow actually isnt...I'm just going to call them all "wee computer" with a terrible fake Scottish accent.

 

ive got a few of them telling me they already received 900p under review but in NDA so can't show anything yet. but just like tilleroftheearth mentioned i want optane m.2 module in notebook and looks like intel can't be bothered to make more m.2 type.

if samsung comes out with znand SSD with similar low QD performance then i'll go for that instead.

vega a bit different, its got HBM and thats expensive! also because of that heatsink in laptop will need a rework, so likely wont happen for awhile until nvidia also uses HBM on their mobile GPU.

i like the idea of ODD, so i can mod it and put more SSD in there LOL.

 

Only reason to still have an internal bay.

Though it is a much slower connection. What I think would be interesting is a slot you could put an M.2 into from outside the system. Like those old PC card sockets.

 

most ODD nowadays are probably sata 6gbps though, imo even if its 3gbps its still good for storage! assuming one can afford storing files on SSD rather than HDD, for example:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Micron-5100...DAK7T6TBY-2-5-Solid-State-Drive-/112570043452

 

They take up so much space, you could fit a lot of other hardware in there. Maybe an ODD bay module with a few SSDs in it.

 

thats why do self mods. problem with it though is that theres not enough data connector to fit more than 1 SSD.

 

This is true, but it's so big that it seems like a waste of space to use the same amount of space an ODD takes up to add a single drive that's 22mm wide. I say either get rid of the bay entirely to make room for other stuff or find a way to make it compatible with multiple drives.

 

Today's laptops comes with Kaby... But almost all laptop models come with 2x M.2 slots. Crazy!!

 

From my perspective, AMD is still behind Intel where it is most capable (the processor) for my workflows.

Hoping to see an Optane killer from AMD - today, in my lifetime - is truly believing in fairy tales. Here's to hoping I see fairies before I go.



Clarification; when I say DT platforms are superior to mobile offerings; I'm talking about (mostly) when the mobile platforms are on battery. Can't hold a candle to a platform that doesn't need to throttle, just to stay alive for a few more minutes...

A current DT with 64GB+ RAM and left on 24/7/356 (my 'normal') - even equipped with a HDD - is still superior to a notebook with the fastest (theoretical) PCIe storage subsystem and identical RAM. Put that notebook on battery power and the need to shut it on and off and the word 'performance' - or, more appropriately 'productivity' seems misused in that situation.

See:
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare.php?cmp[]=2874&cmp[]=3098&cmp[]=3007

The i7-7920HQ is a great option for a mobile system, yet:

Even the i7-7700K (Q4 2016) is over 20% faster in multithreaded loads and almost 22% faster in single threaded 'responsiveness'.

(Compared to the i7-8700K with a commanding ~70% lead in multithreaded and ~31% lead in single threaded 'responsiveness').

What is most annoying to me (even while it increases battery life which is also important...) is that the cores need to rev up/down in the mobile platform to balance battery and performance aspects. This is what feels like molasses to me in certain (mine) workloads/workflows.

With a mere 40W more TDP and unlimited wall power. A desktop platform is as removed from a top of the line mobile offering as an F150 is from a true sports car when the course is a racetrack.

With an Optane based mobile platform - we would eliminate most of the need for the processor to rev up/down while doing work (because it would be constantly fed with data to work on and therefore it will be effectively 'locked' at the higher clocks - just like it's DT cousin already is - even with a HDD).

Of course, a DT with Optane will distance itself just as easily once again. But the jump for mobile computing won't be subtle; at least that's what I'm hoping for.

 

ASUS ROG Strix GL702ZC 8-Core AMD Ryzen Gaming Laptop Unboxing and Review

ASUS ROG Strix GL702ZC Notebook ★ Review Hardware ★ [HD] ★ German | Deutsch

 

Interesting developments in the 8700k reviews with reviewers caught accidentally OC'ing the CPU at stock because the motherboard BIOS defaults enabled Multi-Core OC + All Core Sync, running all the cores at 4.7ghz instead of stock boost.

Dropping the boost clocks down to stock changes the results dramatically, and Ryzen 7 1700x jumps ahead of the 8700K, with Ryzen 5 1600x much closer than original benchmarked.

This appears to be done to pump up the "stock" scores of the 8700k because the "real stock" 8700k scores are below the Ryzen 7 1700x without the OC boost.

AdoredTV video explaining the issue
http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...coffee-lake-z370.809268/page-17#post-10614718

Jayz2cents explaining the mistake, and retesting the 8700k at "real stock" boost speeds.
http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...coffee-lake-z370.809268/page-17#post-10614749

 

I mean all by now should know what the CBR-15 score should be for [email protected]. +- scores depending on what ram(speed+timings) you have.

 

I was kind of joking, but it does seem like Intel and NVidia don't really do anything new except if they think AMD has a chance of dropping something competitive. If they could seem like a threat in storage that would be awesome.

 

Problem with market dominance in capitalism. If research was done for the purity of research, you wouldn't have the bs cutting down or holding back.

 

They still might, you know, incrementally release upgrades to make it look like the advancement curve is shallower than it really is.

 

Purity of research?

Can't slice that up and feed your family with it.

If it can't be marketed, at a profit, there is no corporation that will proceed in such a fashion.

This isn't a problem. It is simply reality.

 

AMD vs. Intel at 16 cores: We test Ryzen Threadripper 1950X against Core i9-7960X

Conclusion;
Looked at in a core-vs.-core battle without considering price, Intel's Core i9-7960X leads the way. It gives you great performance at light-duty applications and generally can't be touched by the Threadripper 1950X in heavy-duty applications, either. In a lot of the tests we ran, we were actually surprised Core i9 ran away from Threadripper so easily.

That said, it's pretty hard to ignore price when you're spending your own money on a build. Our opinion hasn't changed for Threadripper: It is absolutely the best $1,000 CPU you can get, a spectacular deal. But price aside, in a 16-vs.-16 battle, Core i9 is the winner.

"The $700 probably seems excessive—unless you're looking at an uber-expensive box such as either of the Falcon Northwest Talon PCs."

Aka nothing new in the sun. And Pcworld.com haven't talked about how they will perform (compare) with maxed or decent OC.

 

********. Polio vaccine. Or Farnsworth with the creation of the TV. Researchers don't care about the money, so long as they get enough. Corporations care about profit only. So, public funding of research, including competing technologies, which the government does, accomplishes development of the tech. The patent still goes to the winner. But in the case of TV, RCA, a large corporation, purposely tied his hands in court to prevent his ability to capitalize on the invention. Capitalism is NOT about innovation nor the driver of innovation. It is about monetizing after the fact. This is why marketing budgets show such disparity with R&D!

 

Can't beat it on bang for buck, so I generally say TR for end users and i9 for if corporate's paying for it and not asking questions.

 

Depends on the End users
New Review of AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X Planet 3DNow! (de)

 

I mean, there are end users who will pay for it and not ask questions too.

 

Yeah, Some also look only on performance + overclocking Different people, different needs

 

As well as corporations that will fire you for spending money unnecessarily, or at least give your spending budget to someone that will invest it more wisely.

Intel isn't the only viable corporate choice, once again AMD is a viable alternative.

Spending 2x the $ for Intel won't make you any friends in your company.

 

I was mostly referring to those places with "use it or lose it" budgets. You always see them show up around the end of the fiscal year (or month depending on how it's calculated) ready to spend.

Also, from the other side of that (I've been on both) you'd be surprised with what can get approved by administrators or elected officials who don't understand what they're buying and don't look at specs. At a previous developer job I saw a client take our recommend specs and get more than triple that approved with no friction at all.

 

For performance, for a lot of workflows, it is. As this post from our friend Papusan shows.

Spending isn't the important metric (when the funds are there...).

What you can (and do) make ($$$$$) from that spending is.

 

You're living in denial.

See:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philo_Farnsworth

You can try to spin it all you want. $$$$=Progress=$$$$ in a never ending loop.

An idea may be 'cheap' to materialize in someone's brain. But to get that vision into a usable form for many/millions of people doesn't come cheap, nor easy, nor can a single devoted individual do it alone.

All those mouths need to be fed... again; simple reality. No conspiracy theories required.

 

To be fair, the degree to which my (and your) statements are true can vary greatly between industries and applications. But when there are really big things being done and time is a factor, every bit of extra performance you can squeeze out of a (stock, not OC'd usually) CPU/GPU is worth the price.

 

You are mistaking everything in what I said. I think a 7 letter word beginning with "d" and ending with a "t" applies!

My point was actual innovation and the genius behind it comes NOT from chasing money, but the love of research. The polio patent, for that reason, was given to the world free to use! Where did I say the funding would come from? The government. The point was we still must invest in some form to create the product. But, those engineers and scientists don't get to capitalize on their inventions, businesses do. The people actually innovating get meager salaries by comparison. It doesn't matter who pays that salary, they will innovate for that amount. They don't get bonuses for breakthroughs. In VC finding, they unlock different amounts of funding achieving milestones. But none of this, unless privately owned startups, benefits the innovator to any great degree.

So what you are cheering is the benefit of the wealthy on the backs of the innovators. Sad you can't understand such a simple concept. This also incentives perversions to manipulate the market, something else you refuse to acknowledge!

 

Can you not have a single conversation where you don't swear and insult another?

We both agree that the love of research and a stroke of genius is needed to further anything in this world.

We disagree that the government would fund this - I don't need them dipping into my pockets anymore than they're already used to...

Not everyone agrees to a 'meager salary' to innovate for the better of all. I would even say not even 'most' would agree with this point of view.

To me; you're cheering the gov't on the backs of the innovators. Huh?

This concept is simple and trying to make it seem complicated and convoluted isn't helping anyone.

Whoever (an individual or a company) is bright enough to invent, recognize the potential of their invention and has the means - or even possible means - to bring it to fruition doesn't do it to for the love of their fellow humans. They do it to pad their pockets with cash.

Always.

 

I only insult those that are indoctrinated into one form of thought. You are one of those people. Swearing has been shown to be a sign of expression, including that it can even be a sign of intelligence. Regardless, it is a personality trait.

As to government funded research, what do you think MOST of the innovation currently comes from? The government funds the research, which studies have proven costs pennies on the dollar compared to the private sector with unparalleled efficiency, which then the government further sales the patents for pennies on the dollar to private interests because of the perversions of money in politics, rather than licensing out the tech to the market, thereby generating revenue with the government acting as a market participant, not as the government itself. Further, with the costs being lower on research, you then would have more developed with less cost, followed by a cheaper licensing, lowering the costs of goods, saving you money on purchases. Just you cannot fathom such a system, even though the information is there in black and white! Also, you sound like an idiot on tax policy with that statement, furthering that you don't understand the purpose of governance, social contracts, and society.

Also, who the F said meager. You do realize that private contractors researching for the government or scientists hired for specific research actually get paid about the same (maybe slightly less) than their private sector counterparts? I guess not! If you did, then you would understand that the primary difference is in the eventual owner of the IP. Yes, private sector development would continue, but by increasing government funding of research, you can place more pressure on the private sector to both speed deployment and prevent the holdback of tech to bilk the market.

Meanwhile, considering the majority of innovators are salary workers at MNCs, yes, it is clear they are not doing it to get rich. They want a good paycheck and their research funded with a good lab. That is it. There is something to say on company culture and work conditions, but there is a reason we have many scientists in many fields employed by the gov't, we have funding of research at universities across our country, we fund national labs to do incredible research, like Las Alamos, etc. This is public sector funded research.

This conception is a simplified version of the market so even the feeble minded, not to name names, can understand the concept.

And you underestimate what drives people. They are driven by incentives, but money is not the only incentive. It is the perversion of conditioned states of mentality fostered through indoctrination to further our perverse system of inequality.
http://www.govexec.com/pay-benefits...ompensation-gap-has-widened-cbo-finds/137324/
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/moneytips/federal-employees-earn-50_b_8855508.html
https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/mar/27/public-private-sector-pay

 

Guys, it's Friday. Enhance your calm.

 

oh boy that escalated quickly! @ajc9988 the universe is around 14billion yrs old, and it'll go on for much longer. where as I am only here for less than maybe 80 yrs, i'll be sticking out for myself only and i'll be stuck with that thought, further indoctrinate myself with that same thought until my body degenerate into a mummy.

shorter version, lifes too short, have to enjoy it! at the cost of others (numbering in 10s to 100s of millions)..

 

Evidently you are too selfish to realize there is more than just you! In fact, I already explained that the average person benefits more, while receiving better pay, under what I proposed. This means, considering you are likely in the average category, as many are, that if you were truly looking out for yourself, you would rationally accept my proposal.

Instead, you are an idealist, believing the bull of a carrot that you will be the exception and magically become rich. That is a fundamental irrational thought based in not understanding the statistics involved.

Further, it is exactly what has fueled climate and foreign affairs calamities globally.

 

apparently not, because im replying to you so theres at least more than just me surely u do realize that

 

And now we're brushing on solipsism?

 

@ajc9988 @tilleroftheearth @ole!!! Please be nice

«Tuppen and Lillemor» is the Norwegian title of the American song I Do not Want To Play In Your Yard, also called Playmate and Two Little Maids, from 1894. In Norwegian. You're welcome

 

i wonder how much of this is real, the CB ST increase is massive and at only 4ghz.


if AMD is very successful in increasing yet another huge IPC just like ryzen1 did vs Excavator, then this will be another 40% ish. no way in hell company would stay quiet about it.

 

Thank you for a clearer and more anger-free conversation.

We agree on many things you touch on below, but you are missing the big picture, imo.

Yeah; I do think unions and minimum wage along with many other nanny state ideals is destructive to an individuals' basic freedoms. The herd mentality is great for controlling some/most people. I am not part of that herd (as much as I legally can be away/apart from it...).

And paying more for the same work while selling the fruits of that labour for 'pennies on the dollar' isn't how I want my tax dollars used. Even if you think this is somehow beneficial for 'humanity', overall.

How do I want them used? Left untouched; in my pocket. Where they do the most good to me/my family on my very short, unpredictable and non-guaranteed lifetime.

Yeah; true, actually creative people, are few and far between. Just look at the fruity company's downward spiral since the death of a single person...

I don't need a history lesson on things that have no pertinence to me today. What affects me, here/now, is what I need to know. History lessons are great for 2am tv for the zombie masses. I have more pressing matters to attend to each day - including tuning out all the 'noise' that the world has turned into - i.e. vacations of my choosing.

You are concerned with the mechanics of 'inventions'. I'm concerned with living life fully as I want/see fit.

Your way may seem great on paper. Nothing works like that in real life. And nobody can direct 'humanity' without oppressing all.

I'd rather wake up from my grass hut, go swimming as I want (for fish) - to feed my family - and do that as many days as possible as this spinning rock revolves around the sun...

Rather than need to work 7+ months for the gov't, with 14+ hour days, to be 1-4 hours in traffic breathing exhaust fumes by myself in a vehicle that has more tech than it took to send men to the moon a mere 48 years ago.

You can have your opinion. I have mine too. They can both be valid at the same time.

What we choose only needs to be right for us.

We can all exchange our viewpoints with each other, but there is no need to shove it down each other's throat.

When I reply; that is not what I'm doing. I am merely stating the (to me; obvious) option that should also be considered too.

To bring this back on topic; true open competition, including a market that rewards true progress, is what has driven tech to today's level. And I'm not minimizing contributions made by 'employees' both private and public - and to me; they're all effectively 'private'.

But an idea/thought is just merely potential.

Cubic $$, sweat and at least one person believing in something (for a long time) that they can't see is what it takes to bring those ideas to the devices we use daily.

In my view, given the quick/brief points above; gov't need not apply.

Take care.

 

News regarding the shortage of Coffee chips
Intel Helps Retailers Digest Old Core K-series Inventory with Game Bundles-Techpowerup.com

"With the rather fast introduction of the Intel Core i7-8700K (just 9 months following the January 3rd launch of the i7-7700K), retailers are finding themselves with quite a bit of unsold i7-7700K (and even i7-6700K) inventory. Consumers are drawn to either the i7-8700K, or the competing AMD Ryzen processors. To help the market digest these unsold chips, Intel started a new game-bundle dubbed "Game Without Compromise." Yeah, the main reason we have a BIG shortage of Coffee (K) chips!!

 

Another totally messed up situation from Intel

Intel: "Hey Everybody, buy one of our crappy last generation CPU's at list price, and we'll throw in 2 crappy games for free!!"

...right after Intel shows new CPU's with 50% more compute power, but you can't buy them for weeks, or months.

Everybody: "What is this "AMD Ryzen" I hear so much about?"

 

Why I'm not terribly happy when one company dominates, but at the same time not wanting to see any dominant entity crash and burn. Healthy competition should be the goal, not replacing the company doing things we don't like with one that currently is doing things we do like.

 

Actually, replacing the company doing things we don't like with one we do like, by way of voting with our money as consumers, is the essence of capitalism. Although you just read me rant about problems with capitalism, it is more "late stage", crony, libertarian (in the Koch brothers, Laissez Faire) capitalism that I have an issue with. This is what defeats competition, resulting in oligopolies in different industries, thereby allowing the strangling of capitalism. As neo-liberal policies have given way to multi-national corporations (MNCs), we find ourselves including beneficial language for MNCs in trade agreements, including allowing foreign corporations to arbitrate or drag our government before the WTO for violations and seeking damages on lost business opportunities because we didn't approve their proposal due to a regulatory matter. These damages are often in the billions! In other words, it takes away autonomy of governance and replaces it with the will of the largest corporations. Does that make you comfortable?

Now, what I'm discussing is actually just socializing certain aspects of society, like health insurance and research, for the benefit of society. How tiller said he didn't want his money to go for the government selling patents off pennies on the dollar for the cost of research to private companies, his real problem is that so much money is in politics, as well as lobbying, that allows for these non-competitive sweetheart deals to exist. Government research gave us both everyday little things that we use to rockets, satellites, different research into nuclear power, etc.

My point was that the very policies that tiller pushes for actually helps to concentrate industries, destroying competition, and hurting all of society in the long-run.

I'm all for real competition. Unfortunately, it is mostly illusory in many ways today.

 

Didn't mean to go that deep, I just meant if for example AMD replaces Intel with massive market share like people seem to want and Intel pretty much doesn't show up to the game for a while, I absolutely guarantee AMD will turn into everything they don't like about Intel. If the two end up sharing approximately equal market shares they have to stay competitive.

 

It's hard to say if AMD would actually "pull an Intel" in any specific ways - Intel pulled some seriously illegal crap - and then just a bunch of douche baggy moves, holding back technology is the least of their offenses.

Intel needs to have a time out and know consumers are serious about them cleaning up their act, otherwise Intel will just "modify" their behavior temporarily and go back to their bad ways as soon as they can get away with it again.

I'm not looking to shutdown or shut out Intel, but a few years of 30%-40% market share should be about right.

 

problem with voting by consumer is an issue as majority of consumers donno anything, they believe if they have money they dont need to improve or learn. sadly it is the world we live in and have to deal with it. i guess the term would be similar to something called tragedy of the commons, but not to that extent.

intel does need to be shutdown even for a year or 2 but sadly that probably won't happen at all. shut them down for 1yr by amd ryzen and who knows what kind of new cpu arch they'll come up with next time instead of just 1-2% IPC increase per generation.

 

You know what they say, power corrupts. But if there's any driving incentive to be good to consumers, it's a threat to your market share by a company that is better to them than you are.

 

And to build on that, without economic freedom, "voting" with your money cannot occur. The foundation of this thought is that you require enough personal capital that you have a choice in what you purchase. Unfortunately, the majority of purchasers do not have that freedom. They must purchase what is in their price range, which results in a race to the bottom rather than a truly efficient economy based on consumer choice. It is one thing to choose an item due to wanting or needing a feature, it is another to purchase an inferior item because of financial circumstances not allowing for a choice in the product. This is without dealing with oligopoly industries, collusion, etc.

So we are pretty close on that!