Is i9 9900KS 5GHz the Ryzen killer?

>stock i9 999999999k pulls over 200w under full load
>push all cores to 5ghz
>power draw over 300w
>competing against 65w and 105w offerings from AMD

Only thing intel is killing is VRM phases.

9900k will still beat Ryzen 3000 single threaded by 5%-10%. Ryzen 9 will be the only SKU that will beat the 9900k. Also 9900k is more efficient, most retard on this board don't understand the relationship between frequency and power. If a Ryzen 3700x could even hit 5GHz it would be pulling 1.5x the power of a 9900k at 5GHz

Ice lake supposedly has 18% better IPC than all of the Skylake refreshes but it clocks so low that it doesn't matter, the Ice Lake mobile parts, which are the only 10nm out right now, only run at like 1.4ghz or something stupidly slow like that

>Or are they literally just trying to take their current arch and print it on 10nm? Because if the latter, they're are fucked.
Current Ice Lake slides released by Intel are stating 18% improvement over Broadwell, in other words maybe like 3% improvement over the 8th generation. And this is before security holes are patched too.

Attached: Intel-Performance-Slide.jpg (1566x902, 360K)

>18% higher IPC*
>* in obscure FPU shift/div operations literally not used by anything other than intel test workloads for benchmark purposes, subject to change, not conducted with all available security patches

Adding on to this, 10nm's low clocks are the reason Intel hasn't even mentioned any 10nm desktop parts despite the process being ready, even if only for really limited quantities. Despite the architectural improvements the clock speed regressions mean that 10nm desktop parts would be slower than 14nm++++++++++, which is why they're sticking with it for the next few years

kek this cope

Intel's only hope in the desktop space is having 7nm ready by 2021-2022, otherwise AMD is going to keep running all over them. If Intel lets AMD get the lead by even a year they'll be behind in IPC by 10-20% almost permanently short of some miraculous ~40% IPC increase in one year

Don't compare the v/f curve of a HPC process to one on a SoC process, idiot.
When someone pumps enough voltage into Icelake to get over 4.2GHz, it'll experience the same problem current Ryzens do, for obvious reasons.

>If a Ryzen 3700x could even hit 5GHz it would be pulling 1.5x the power of a 9900k at 5GHz
Why would it need to clock to 5GHz when it can beat the 9900k at 4.5GHz while using less power?

You're not far off from the truth, because that chart shows performance against Broadwell, but in real world use Broadwell could usually match or beat Skylake when comparing two CPU with the same core / thread number and clockspeed

When a company is in despair, they fucking overclock everything to insane levels.
4 years from now will be AMD turn to make ovens.

what a fucking shit show.

AMD GloFo chip when?
IBM's 14nm GloFo chips pull 5.2 Ghz out of the box.
Did GloFo give up on HPC 7nm or is it just delayed?

There won't be any ovens because you will never get silicon in mass production over 5.2-5.4GHz at stock, because it's silicon.
In 4 years both companies will hit the (sane) clock wall

Ryzen DOA. Wait for 64 core Threadripper 3 in August/September.

idk about that user. AMD has tasted what it means to be right on the edge of failure. Look at FX and all its garbage. So they changed their entire architecture and took a huge risk. Intel has been sitting on their asses raping the market with no backup plan. I don't see AMD falling down that pit again anytime soon.

> I don't see AMD falling down that pit again anytime soon.

At least as long as Mama Su is at the helmet.

Intel Core i9 9900KS: 8 Cores at 5GHz (8 x 5 = 40)
AMD Ryzen 9 3900X [base clock]: 12 Cores at up to 4.6GHz (12 x 3.8 = 45.6)
AMD Ryzen 9 3900X [max boost clock]: 12 Cores at up to 4.6GHz (12 x 4.6 = 55.2)

You decide.

Global Foundries didn't have enough 7nm FinFET customers for them to justify the ramp up costs which would have been a few billion more. The bulk of their customers were only interested in staying on 14/12 FinFET or utilizing their FDX advanced SOI processes which they've continued to develop.
Current 12 FDX can offer performance competitive with 7nm FinFET, comparable low power, but at drastically lower costs. They will likely introduce 7nm FDX in the near future which will aim for 5nm FinFET tier performance and power figures.

AMD hasn't disclosed any plans to utilize SOI processes in the coming years, so I wouldn't count on it. Though the price perspective is incredibly compelling.

Attached: 1506672330199655.jpg (1826x1014, 133K)

How long will these threads go on?

Need to see how good is the IPC in practice.
Certain tasks like video encoding will get quite a boost given AMD literally doubled the floating point power of the thing.
But i think the truth will be only known when people benchmark the damn thing.

Lmao this

Its been going on nonstop for decades. It aint ending any time soon.

Please let this be true.

I can't wait until next year.

first post best post

Which has better single thread performance?

a $500+ enthusiast cpu that 99% of pc users will never obtain isn't the killer of anything.

Too bad nothing uses 12 cores

The ways shills talk about and post their 9900k cpus you'd think they were all already at 5ghz. I mean it's really easy to clock to 5.1ghz and any one who's not poor has good enough cooling to make 5.2ghz a cinch.

this lol

>video encoding
>video/photo editing
>VM usage
>Games commonly loading up to 8 cores
It's OK user, we get it, you can't afford it.

>make -j 12
or fuck it
>make -j 24

>he only has one program running in the background

>using consumer cpus and chipsets for rendering

Attached: 1522338450153.jpg (320x320, 28K)

I also have a server with ECC if needed. Let's not pretend you have anything worth a fuck. Oh and lastly, Ryzen fully supports ECC AND Asus is releasing a WS board with full ECC buffered RAM support.

Stay mad

>amd
>servers
I will give it to AMD for at least giving ECC support with the x570 chipset on some mobos.

With the number of intel shills no longer taking the bate so hard, maybe a month after the 10th it'll calm down.

AMD is the way to go for cloudshit, but mostly if you go full EPYC.

They didn't increase its single core boost over the 9900k, which is slower than the 3800x. So no, its shit.

>5ghz 9900KYS
>180watt
>$899

intel doesn t even care about desktop market. as long as their datacenter is profitable they are fine with this situation. that s my guess anyway.
?? it will boost all cores to 5 ghz. it s a heavy binned 9900k that s all.

fact that intel has to release "amd killers" makes me stupidly happy

Attached: 1553722691891.gif (400x360, 1.3M)

Chainsaw a shit

שחררו את פלסטין Free Palestine תקרית_ליברטי The USS Liberty Incident of 1967 עברית Zionism קבאל של בנקאים יהודים Cabal of Jewish Bankers כיבוש המזרח התיכון Occupation of the Middle East ארסנל גרעיני ישראלי Israeli Nuclear Arsenal השדולה הפרו-ישראלית בארה"ב Pro-Israel Lobby in the USA זכויות אדם גוי Gentile Rights פשעי מלחמה של הצבא הישראלי Israeli Army War crimes שואה מזויפת Fake Holocaust חתרנות של האירופים Subversion of Europeans סוחר שמח Happy Merchant

>switched positions.
agree. Now AMD also went ahead to screw their consumers over by blocking PCIe 4.0 on X370/X470, even those high end ones

This is pottery

fpbp + kek = /thread

Attached: 1541140137124.jpg (618x679, 30K)

>support Zen+ and Zen2 processors as promised
Hell no. They are milking in the sense that they have a 16 core part that's all but officially revealed, but they're still bringing the best performance at all prices points with Zen 2. If they go Zen2+ or some shit like that to delay Zen 3, then yeah, they would be in Intel's position.

Epic cope, user.

Attached: 1542467023854.png (549x413, 90K)

who cares what the all core is, if you want all core buy a 3900x