• Hardware

  • PC CPU New Era - AMD dethroned Intel

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6x2BYNimNOU
Here is a real review that includes charts for all the newly released AMD processors compared to Intel CPUs, with and without OC.

To be clear, when all the reviewers in the world are saying similar opinions about the new AMD CPUs and you have a different opinion, this make you the only "fanboy" here.

Yes Intel has been dethroned and gone with the wind, it is not a matter of your or my opinion, it is the sales that speak the truth
https://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Computers-Accessories-Computer-CPU-Processors/zgbs/pc/229189

And funnily enough the real shame are those pluses after the 14nm, and the next Intel CPU is going to increase the pluses again, Intel can't even innovate anymore, they are failing to deliver 10nm since years, they fail to support a motherboard chipset/socket for more than 1 generation and they keep increasing the power limits to be able to compete.
anayman_k7 wrotehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6x2BYNimNOU
Here is a real review that includes charts for all the newly released AMD processors compared to Intel CPUs, with and without OC.

To be clear, when all the reviewers in the world are saying similar opinions about the new AMD CPUs and you have a different opinion, this make you the only "fanboy" here.

Yes Intel has been dethroned and gone with the wind, it is not a matter of your or my opinion, it is the sales that speak the truth
https://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Computers-Accessories-Computer-CPU-Processors/zgbs/pc/229189

And funnily enough the real shame are those pluses after the 14nm, and the next Intel CPU is going to increase the pluses again, Intel can't even innovate anymore, they are failing to deliver 10nm since years, they fail to support a motherboard chipset/socket for more than 1 generation and they keep increasing the power limits to be able to compete.
Yea that is true, I was waiting for this day to come it has been years and they haven't provided anything but cashing in money since the first generation core CPU its only because of AMD the i3 we have now is the I7 of the past and we must be grateful and support them to compete its only gunna benefit the consumers even with their radeon cards, AMD has come a log way and it is really pleasing to see this huge leap in both CPUs and GPUs
The i9 exists to compete with the Ryzen 7 since the Ryzen 5 was competing with the i7.

The Ryzen 9 exists just to be a league of its own, a budget Threadripper if you will.

No one here is being a fanboy the numbers are posted on all reputable websites who do non-bias reviews and all of them conclude and agree to the dominance of AMD CPUs.

Intel is known to be struggling with their Instructions Per Clock. (How many instructions per GHz)

They perform better in games due to faster clock speeds and the way they boost.

The benchmarks you posted are all gaming benchmarks that show the i5 and i9 performance difference is minuscule (Especially when you go even higher resolution where the CPU will matter less.) You did not even mention where you got these numbers for. Please post your references.


Thanks to the way Zen3 works, they obliterated Intel.

14nm vs 7nm simply means the die is smaller, it doesn't necessarily make it faster. (Even though in the case of AMD it is faster. The IPC of AMD is much higher, you can look up benchmarks on things other than gaming.


Also, your post does not show any 5600X benchmarks in the charts, the 5600X in some cases is performing much better.

The 5600X, a 6 core processor is beating the 10 Core i9 in gaming at almost all games.

The i9 is beating Ryzen 5 in only 1 or 2 games by 2 or 3 FPS, which you can spend the hundreds of dollars you saved buying the 5600X to get a better GPU and get higher FPS regardless, so the i9, in this case, is made irrelevant. Also again, pay attention to clock speeds.

I'm gonna post some credible websites below for people to check the numbers in gaming, rendering, compression, and whatever they like:

- AnandTech
- Guru3D
- TechJesus himself on Youtube at GamersNexus:
- Ryzen 5 5600X
-Ryzen 7 5800X
-Ryzen 9 5900X
-Ryzen 9 5950X

Some reviewers are claiming that the only reason they're even putting Intel in their benchmarks is so that people don't forget that Intel exists in the market because AMD is mostly competing with its own older-gen CPUs at this point.
anayman_k7 wrote funnily enough the real shame are those pluses after the 14nm, and the next Intel CPU is going to increase the pluses again, Intel can't even innovate anymore, they are failing to deliver 10nm since years, they fail to support a motherboard chipset/socket for more than 1 generation and they keep increasing the power limits to be able to compete.
Precisely
Shame on you AMD. You increased your prices thinking your 7nm+ will beat hard the aging 14nm Skylake based architecture. Only AMD blind fanboys proclaimed massive vactory and Intel being doomed.?

Testing Games
https://youtu.be/P1ZdlUCFRCo

Ryzen 7 5800X vs Core I7 10700K
in the video you provided the 5800X has better FPS in 9 games, i7 10700K in 1 game, that's in gaming, while in everything else Intel CPU was already back in the dust.
Speaking about the Shaming because of price increase, we did not hear you complain and shaming Intel when the i9 was 1000$ when it was launched with Skylake CPUs.

Anyway, I understand your pain and disappointment, 5600X for 300$ (65w with a cooler) just made the whole Intel i5-i7-i9 (K top of the line CPUs) obsolete
AMD increased its prices because of market demand and dominance.

The die size (being 7nm or 14nm) has NOTHING to do with performance, it is simply the size of the transistors used.

If I have a 1nm transistor in the quantity of 5 and I put it against another processor that has a 90nm transistor size in a quantity of 3 billion, the 90nm is gonna be faster.

What you're saying is absolute nonsense.

If you watched Intel's latest events on laptop processors, they were embarrassed to even do the event, all they did was talk nonsense using 2 different units to compare performance between Intel and AMD processors just to show bigger numbers. Everyone even talked about it on the news.

Furthermore, sharing a video from a channel called "testing games" and using that as your reference does not represent any credible information.
AvoK95 wroteAMD increased its prices because of market demand and dominance.

The die size (being 7nm or 14nm) has NOTHING to do with performance, it is simply the size of the transistors used.

.
Totally agree, if AMD made their current 5000 CPUs with 5nm transistors, it only might reduce the power consumption a little bit, they managed to gain 19% of IPC in their Zen 3 by changing the CCX design to allow all the CPUs in 1 CCX to use the whole cache memory which is the main change that gave them much better performance, they added other changes also but these are more refinements than an architectural changes.

AvoK95 wroteIf you watched Intel's latest events on laptop processors, they were embarrassed to even do the event, all they did was talk nonsense using 2 different units to compare performance between Intel and AMD processors just to show bigger numbers. Everyone even talked about it on the news..
It was a funny presentation where they named AMD processor (i believe 4800HS) more than they talked about their funky CPU product name, and at the end it was a lot battle for them
No one talking about mobile? A sub 400-500 USD Ryzen laptop is multitudes faster than any mobile/15W current Intel based laptop 900+, let alone the great onboard APU.
Beta0 wroteNo one talking about mobile? A sub 400-500 USD Ryzen laptop is multitudes faster than any mobile/15W current Intel based laptop 900+, let alone the great onboard APU.
I was watching a video on a laptop review on Youtube the other day, the AMD equivalent was cheaper, faster, produced less heat, and used less power, which resulted in better battery life, as well as it provided better gaming performance.

They are killing it!
Beta0 wroteNo one talking about mobile? A sub 400-500 USD Ryzen laptop is multitudes faster than any mobile/15W current Intel based laptop 900+, let alone the great onboard APU.
The new mobile CPU from Intel is out (Tiger Lake) and so far, reviews are pretty positive. Small victories I guess.

And Intel is coming out with its Rocket Lake processor first quarter of next year--supposed to be a 10% to 20% rise in clock speed (so they will regain that edge), but are limited to only 8 cores. Still puts them at a disadvantage to many multithreaded applications that are still dominated by AMD.

There is also supposed to be a synergy between the 5xxxx chips and their new Radeon cards (shared access memory). It is supposed to give 8 to 10% improvement.
Tech Guru wroteShame on you AMD. You increased your prices thinking your 7nm+ will beat hard the aging 14nm Skylake based architecture. Only AMD blind fanboys proclaimed massive vactory and Intel being doomed.?

Testing Games
https://youtu.be/P1ZdlUCFRCo

Ryzen 7 5800X vs Core I7 10700K
I feel embarrassed for them