Such CPU design is pretty common on Arm-based mobile processors. This consists of high-performance ‘P’ cores and high-efficiency ‘E’ cores-based on a new “Golden Cove” and “Gracemont” microarchitecture, respectively. Unlike your typical processor with a single, homogenous CPU design, Alder Lake has a hybrid, heterogeneous core architecture. Let’s start with the belle of the ball-the hybrid architecture. Only time will tell but maybe AMD will get a better process tech in a few years and finally compete like the old days.There’s big.LITTLE hybrid architecture (or “Big-Bigger” as Intel calls it), a new “Intel 7” process node, something called “Thread Director”, and a lot of platform upgrades. While its still early the clock speed and overclocking advantage Intel has might make their CPUs last longer in gaming than Zen 2. The only thing a CPU matters gaming wise is how long it will last before it will bottleneck the GPU. I know its not quite as most 7nms out there are still less dense than Intels initial 10nm plans but still it goes to show that the nm part has become pointless and a marketing gimmick more than anything. We might see some drops but I doubt we will see enough to make it feel like Athlon 64 again.Īs much crap as people give Intel for getting stuck at 14nm I have to give them props for having a 5 year old process tech beat modern process tech, especially one that's supposed to be "half" the size. Intel still clearly has a clock speed advantage and that advantage will keep them priced higher. Its not silly to compare clock speeds as those can be advantages. The GPU still remains king when it comes to a quality gaming build. But it would be nice to see some tangible improvement regarding fps with CPUs. We know AMD is cheaper and comparing clockspeeds against different architectures between Intel and AMD is silly. We are in the back half of 2019 and we see the same gaming performance that we had in 2015 mainstream CPUs. It tied basically the same Intel CPUs that have been on the market since 2015 with Skylake. I always use Prime 95 and IBT for stability.įeelinfroggy777 said:It did tie Intel in gaming. Not as sure on AIDA 64 since I never used it. I know Prime 95 heavily uses AVX which is a power hog.
Civ 6 benchmark ai manual#
AnandTech was able to get it to 4.3GHz all core but with manual OCing it seems to disable boost clocking which in turn cuts 300MHz from single core performance.Īs for the power consumption, the differences are probably what they prioritize.
Ryzen has always been pushed to the limit in terms of clock speed and Zen 2 is no different it seems. I'd have assumed any of the Ryzen 3000 would OC to 4.6/4.7Ghz on all cores with decent air/water cooling. Given that the 3950x does a 4.7Ghz single core turbo boost and the 3900x does 4.6Hz single core turbo boost. Velocityg4 said:The overclocking results were disappointing.
The AMD Ryzen 2700x hit 104.7W in your old review. The Intel i9-9900K hit 204.6W in your old reviews stress test.
Civ 6 benchmark ai full#
I can't see how either is an accurate measure of a CPU under full load. I'd suggest using both in reviews or find another torture test that will fully punish both AMD and Intel for a max load test. While Prime95 gave AMD an unfair advantage. It seems the switch from Prime95 to AIDA 64 gives Intel an unfair advantage in the stress test power consumption test. When you were using Prime95 Intel was punished a lot more. Power consumption: AIDA 64 seems to punish AMD a lot more than Intel. The overclocking results were disappointing.
0 kommentar(er)
