What's new
  • Please do not post any links until you have 3 posts as they will automatically be rejected to prevent SPAM. Many words are also blocked due to being used in SPAM Messages. Thanks!

Ryzen vs Intel clock for clock shootout?

Dzzope

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 15, 2010
Messages
3,299
Location
Irishman in Kiev, wOOoo, I'm an alien...
I'm more interested in safe 24/7 oc vs safe 24/7 oc. 4.0 Ryzen vs 7700k @4.8 or something.. That'll be more telling.

Clock for clock is all well and good but that's not real world, stock vs stock is better.
 

Valkyrie

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 3, 2012
Messages
750
Location
Chilliwack...Time Is Just A Rubber Band....
I'm more interested in safe 24/7 oc vs safe 24/7 oc. 4.0 Ryzen vs 7700k @4.8 or something.. That'll be more telling.

Clock for clock is all well and good but that's not real world, stock vs stock is better.

Well I'm going to disagree. AMD has for some time been behind on IPC. If there is a significant improvement in that state of affairs, it would be nice to see it laid out plain and simple. The benches I've looked at show the Ryzen quite competitive in highly multi-threaded stuff, but lagging behind Intel in less multi-threaded tasks against higher clocked chips.

If they have indeed closed the gap and can open the throttle on clock speed, things could get interesting.
 

Dzzope

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 15, 2010
Messages
3,299
Location
Irishman in Kiev, wOOoo, I'm an alien...
Well it's obvious that their IPC has improved but if the core doesn't run at the same clocks it's a pointless synthetic test.
If a chip runs at 4.4ghz and has the same or even slightly worse IPC than a chip that runs at 3.8 or 4.0, it's going to be faster.. if you cripple it, of course it will perform relatively worse.

I agree it would be slightly interesting to see clock for clock comparisons but what you're asking for is a test which cripples 1 product and makes another look illegitimately better.
 

Johan45

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 9, 2015
Messages
204
Location
South of Woodstock Ontario.
Well it's obvious that their IPC has improved but if the core doesn't run at the same clocks it's a pointless synthetic test.
If a chip runs at 4.4ghz and has the same or even slightly worse IPC than a chip that runs at 3.8 or 4.0, it's going to be faster.. if you cripple it, of course it will perform relatively worse.

I agree it would be slightly interesting to see clock for clock comparisons but what you're asking for is a test which cripples 1 product and makes another look illegitimately better.
You have a point when it comes to overclocking but overclockers aren't the majority and most users never overclock their systems. Out of the box the 1800x is clocked higher than it's Intel equivalent so in those cases the end user actually gets a CPU with higher performance.
 

Valkyrie

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 3, 2012
Messages
750
Location
Chilliwack...Time Is Just A Rubber Band....
Well it's obvious that their IPC has improved but if the core doesn't run at the same clocks it's a pointless synthetic test.
If a chip runs at 4.4ghz and has the same or even slightly worse IPC than a chip that runs at 3.8 or 4.0, it's going to be faster.. if you cripple it, of course it will perform relatively worse.

I agree it would be slightly interesting to see clock for clock comparisons but what you're asking for is a test which cripples 1 product and makes another look illegitimately better.
It would be more than slightly interesting to me. I think comparing competing architectures at equal clock speeds is absolutely legitimate, especially when we don't have comparable current gen chips.

Saint Patrick's Cheers!
 

sswilson

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 9, 2006
Messages
18,020
Location
Moncton NB
It would be more than slightly interesting to me. I think comparing competing architectures at equal clock speeds is absolutely legitimate, especially when we don't have comparable current gen chips.

Saint Patrick's Cheers!
It depends.... there was a comparison out there of ryzen @ 4G w/ a downclocked 4G 7700K which to my mind is an absolutely useless comparison since the whole point of the 7700K comparison in the first place is that it's a freakishly high clocked part and there isn't a hope in hell of seeing a comparable ryzen part anytime in the near future.

If the ryzen part can be OC'd to the stock levels of a competing processor I'd see that as a viable comparison, but not if the competing processor is being purposefully crippled. If you want that kind of comparison then pick a competing processor that already has those particular clock speeds and compare that, otherwise it's just an attempt to create a false equivalency.
 

Valkyrie

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 3, 2012
Messages
750
Location
Chilliwack...Time Is Just A Rubber Band....
It depends.... there was a comparison out there of ryzen @ 4G w/ a downclocked 4G 7700K which to my mind is an absolutely useless comparison since the whole point of the 7700K comparison in the first place is that it's a freakishly high clocked part and there isn't a hope in hell of seeing a comparable ryzen part anytime in the near future.



If the ryzen part can be OC'd to the stock levels of a competing processor I'd see that as a viable comparison, but not if the competing processor is being purposefully crippled. If you want that kind of comparison then pick a competing processor that already has those particular clock speeds and compare that, otherwise it's just an attempt to create a false equivalency.
Well that's great, in my OP I stated that I couldn't find that, please post a link.

If AMD is in the same ballpark on IPC now and they are able to ramp up the clocks............it could be good.

I'm not an AMD fanboy, the only AMD I have is a 486, but I would sure like them to stay in the game.
 

sswilson

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 9, 2006
Messages
18,020
Location
Moncton NB
Well that's great, in my OP I stated that I couldn't find that, please post a link.

If AMD is in the same ballpark on IPC now and they are able to ramp up the clocks............it could be good.

I'm not an AMD fanboy, the only AMD I have is a 486, but I would sure like them to stay in the game.
Well.... I typically avoid posting links to things I consider either clickbait or questionable testing practices, but here's a google link that should point you in the right direction. :)

https://www.google.ca/search?q=ryzen+benchmarked+against+downclocked+7700K&oq=ryzen+benchmarked+against+downclocked+7700K&aqs=chrome..69i57.21069j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

edit: Oh and they went even further by disabling cores on the Ryzen to simulate a quad core, but of course that says nothing about how the true quad ryzens will communicate core to core.
 

Coach

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 10, 2007
Messages
1,155
Location
Morden MB
Valkyrie I too would like to see IPC compared. IMO it is one of the first tests I would do. IPC is integral to understanding the core strength of an architecture.
 

Latest posts

Twitter

Top