|
Inept posted:that processor is 15 years old, $8 seems excessive the heart wants what the heart wants
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2021 22:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 20:26 |
|
|
Cygni posted:the heart wants what the heart wants An equivalent Atom is going to be more than that, a good deal IMO
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2021 22:20
|
|
|
Inept posted:that processor is 15 years old, $8 seems excessive now i feel loving old as gently caress thanks man
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2021 23:55
|
|
|
Cygni posted:the heart wants what the heart wants Do you have Supreme Commander installed on that beast?
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2021 00:50
|
|
|
LLCoolJD posted:Do you have Supreme Commander installed on that beast? i legit bought it to benchmark vs all the other weird stuff ive collected, so yeah that might happen soon!
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2021 02:55
|
|
|
Isn't Q6600 the one where you could OC with tape?
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2021 03:47
|
|
|
Inept posted:that processor is 15 years old, $8 seems excessive Not that bad for an electric heater.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2021 03:55
|
|
|
TDP is only 105W, it's not any more of a heater than a modern CPU.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2021 05:09
|
|
|
Hughmoris posted:Isn't Q6600 the one where you could OC with tape? tape or a #2 pencil, which is your favourite overclocking tool
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2021 15:38
|
|
|
~Coxy posted:TDP is only 105W, it's not any more of a heater than a modern CPU. At $8 the total cost of ownership math gets complicated so maybe it's fine, but it's still burning lots of excess power compared to something like a modern laptop cpu where they have 2x the cores, ~2x-2.5x per-core performance, and consume a fraction of the power. Khorne fucked around with this message at 16:07 on Nov 3, 2021 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2021 15:53
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/TweakPC/status/1455951263737303052 I get 645 in R20 and 1660 in R23 in single core with a fully stock 5950X. Cygni fucked around with this message at 20:06 on Nov 3, 2021 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2021 19:39
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/TweakPC/status/1455961649282752525 Apparently out of box behavior goes to 218w, but 150w is the sweet spot. Even out of the box, thats less power draw than a 10900k or 11900k out of the box on any board but ASUS. About equal to a 9900k. Cmon price war.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2021 20:46
|
|
|
Cygni posted:Celeron 300A set to 450, never forget
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2021 23:33
|
|
|
when do we expect Alder Lake reviews to go live? I assume reviewers already have videos and articles done and are just waiting to publish
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 08:26
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:when do we expect Alder Lake reviews to go live? I assume reviewers already have videos and articles done and are just waiting to publish I would assume sometime between 9am and 12am eastern, with a few dum-dums accidentally breaking embargo, as is customary
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 08:29
|
|
|
LTT accidentally published their video early and someone grabbed the charts. https://m.imgur.com/a/r9lOl2L Gaming looking good at sensible power 5950x still mostly the MT king. Intel power much higher here. A bit of a price drop will keep the 5900x looking attractive but the 12600k kills the 5600x.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 08:38
|
|
|
Dum-dum #1 right on time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 08:49
|
|
|
That blender power consumption and temp, god drat
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 08:58
|
|
|
3D cache will probably shore-up 5900x/5950x as valid options next year, it's going to have to be amazing to save the 5600x (and the talk seemed to be that it'll just be the high end parts refreshed). It feels like they need to be selling 5800x+3d cache at 5600x prices. It looks like those 4 economy cores still add real performance gains in MT workloads and aren't just laptop battery savers. How far we've come Intel selling 4c CPUs for $terrible and everyone having to loving lump it!
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 09:11
|
|
|
Pablo Bluth posted:LTT accidentally published their video early and someone grabbed the charts. Whoa the 12600 looks like a great deal unless they decide to sell the 12900 for peanuts too. The power consumption in Blender is pretty wild (is that the AVX or something?) but I'm not going to have it rendering 24/7 so 
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 09:21
|
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:Whoa the 12600 looks like a great deal unless they decide to sell the 12900 for peanuts too. The power consumption in Blender is pretty wild (is that the AVX or something?) but I'm not going to have it rendering 24/7 so They cut AVX support. That's just how the 12900K reacts to any intense workload.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 09:27
|
|
|
so the i5, relative to the 5600X, is: 20% faster in Far Cry 6 10.14% faster in Forza Horizon 4 9.30% faster in F1 2021 1.80% faster in CS: GO dead-even in FS2020 56.08% faster in Cinebench R23 multi-threaded... ... but probably also consumes ~50% more power based on its behavior under the Blender Gooseberry load (75w for the 5600X versus ~115w for the i5) 23.08% faster in CB R23 single-threaded and the power consumption during the F1 2021 benchmark is just marginally higher seems good for gaming?
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 09:36
|
|
|
Hmm I guess it's just this then, it's pushed to the maximum way past the point of diminishing returns for minimal gainsCygni posted:https://twitter.com/TweakPC/status/1455961649282752525 Also it'd be interesting to see idle and low power usage like browsing, if those little cores do anything. But we'll probably get that from Tech Jesus soon enough
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 09:37
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:seems good for gaming? The money question is still how much ddr4 affects performance - because with DDR5 you’re spending $400 on memory with your $200 processor. But yeah if the ddr4 results aren’t too bad, 12600K just killed the 5600X. To be fair though the 5600X was a blatant rip-off from day 1, by far the worst product in the entire Zen3 lineup, arguably a price decoy to push you upwards to the 5800X or 5900X. Yeah AMD will be forced to back down a bit from their 50% price increase gen-on-gen over the 3600, they’ll live.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 10:06
|
|
|
I thought the 5800x was always the worst one in the line-up? Far closer to the 5900x in price than performance, plus as a single CCX, harder to cool.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 10:10
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:The money question is still how much ddr4 affects performance - because with DDR5 you’re spending $400 on memory with your $200 processor. yeah I was thinking its gonna be important for reviewers to say whether they're testing with DDR4 or DDR5 because if it's still good even with the former, it'd be nice to be able to carry-over my four 8 GB sticks into a DDR4 Z690
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 10:18
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:The money question is still how much ddr4 affects performance - because with DDR5 you’re spending $400 on memory with your $200 processor. What. The 5600X was and still is the no brainer best choice in the Zen 3 lineup for most people. It had killer performance for the price and the 5800X launched at an MSRP that was $150 higher for barely any gain in most real-world applications (including gaming).
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 10:21
|
|
|
Speaking as a guy who bought a 5600X two weeks ago, I'm glad Alder Lake is very good. Competition is essential. It keeps performance high and prices low. The faster Alder Lake is, the better it is for everyone, I know it drinks a lot of power but that's not going to matter to a sizeable number of people who just want the highest framerates Strongly disagree that 5600X was a 'ripoff' I felt it was very cheap and blazing fast. It's faster than 11th gen i9 in gaming for goodness' sake. I feel like now that AL is out, there's going to be a lot of goons with weird revisionist takes on the 5600X, and it's unnecessary
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 10:23
|
|
|
Zedsdeadbaby posted:Speaking as a guy who bought a 5600X two weeks ago, I'm glad Alder Lake is very good. Well I'm glad I held off, if only to see if there's a price drop.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 10:25
|
|
|
https://pcpartpicker.com/products/memory/#t=16&sort=price&page=1 I guess it’s $116 for a 2x8 and $212 for a 2x16 but of course that’s dogshit tier ram and it’s preorder only. So it’s like a $50 premium over a midrange DDR4 kit at 2x8 I guess. Plus motherboard (you’ll want to wait for B660).
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 10:27
|
|
|
Pablo Bluth posted:I thought the 5800x was always the worst one in the line-up? Far closer to the 5900x in price than performance, plus as a single CCX, harder to cool. I thought it was the 5600 since it wasn't significantly cheaper than the 5800 but lacked two cores but I never looked into it too much
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 10:38
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:What. The 5600X was and still is the no brainer best choice in the Zen 3 lineup for most people. It had killer performance for the price and the 5800X launched at an MSRP that was $150 higher for barely any gain in most real-world applications (including gaming). 5600X was an objectively bad choice in multiple dimensions - significantly worse perf/$ than the 3600 (price increased by far more than the performance - 3600 was $160 for a long time so street price is nearly 2x ) while the longevity is significantly worse than the 8700K (you got 3 extra years of lifespan with the 8700K for $75 extra MSRP vs MSRP) for relatively minimal performance increases. Even with the 12600K… are you really going to pay $300 for a hexacore in 2022? I guess it’s got efficiency cores but man that’s putting a lot of faith in the design. The 5600X was not a good buy for $300 in 2021 either, 6 core is a “compromise” choice as we move into later gens and it’s just too late in the game to be paying literally 8700K money for the same core count 4 years after it launched, you could get a 8700K for $300 in 2018 too, and unlike previous gens the 5600X never had those price drops like 8700K or 3600 either. That is Intel level milking it on prices. 4 years with basically minimal value increase over 8700K, with a price that is still objectively quite high, as chips are moving towards higher core counts. Yeah the 5800X was not a good deal either, but the thing the 5600X had going for it was the fact that it was the cheapest thing AMD deigned to launch this generation. If they had released 5300X or whatever, that would have undercut the value argument for the 5600X as a “not that many cores but super fast” chip. In an abstract sense, in the total picture of a build, the only Zen3 chip that made sense for the price was 5900X. Spending $1200 instead of $1000 on your build for twice the cores is an objectively better deal, especially considering the years of extra lifespan it will probably bring. Save your pennies for another few months.
Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 10:52 on Nov 4, 2021 |
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 10:38
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:5600X was an objectively bad choice in multiple dimensions - significantly worse perf/$ than the 3600 (price increased by far more than the performance) while the longevity is significantly worse than the 8700K (you got 3 extra years of lifespan with the 8700K for $75 extra MSRP vs MSRP) for relatively minimal performance increases. I have to say, I don't think I've seen a post on this forum this out of touch with reality in a very long time. The 5600X was over 30% better than the 3600X in gaming benchmarks and even better in productivity benchmarks. The lack of cores doesn't hold it back in the slightest, and its longevity is looking like it'll be pretty good. I plan on holding onto mine for a few more years.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 10:52
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:I have to say, I don't think I've seen a post on this forum this out of touch with reality in a very long time. The 5600X was over 30% better than the 3600X in gaming benchmarks and even better in productivity benchmarks. The lack of cores doesn't hold it back in the slightest, and its longevity is looking like it'll be pretty good. I plan on holding onto mine for a few more years. OK but would you have paid $0-75 extra to get it 3 years earlier? Because that’s what the 8700K offered. If the 5600X had come out in 2018 it would have been a fantastic chip. The 3600 made a niche for itself as a value chip in 2019 - as you note, gaming performance on Zen2 wasn’t fantastic, gaming benefited a lot from the cache increases and CCX changes on Zen3, and it was still a little later - but the 3600 was half the street price of the 8700K ($160 vs $300). Same street price as 8700K, but 3 years later, and only marginally faster? That’s actually a terrible deal, that’s what I mean by Intel level perf/$ improvements, actually that would be insulting to Intel, that would be like if they took 3 years to go from ivy bridge to haswell. People just didn’t have an appreciation for how far behind AMD was even with Zen2, but especially with Zen1 and zen+. AMD made huge progress with Zen2, they made huge progress with Zen3, and the combination of 2 giant generational leaps was barely sufficient to beat a 3 year old Intel processor on a 4.5 year old architecture, and AMD cranked the street price to the same levels as soon as they marginally edged it out. That’s a terrible deal, sorry for your loss. If AMD had released a 5600 non-X for $250, ok not awful. If they had held the line and released a 5600 for actually $200 (that’s still $40 more than a 3600 street price) that would have been amazing. But $300 for basically 8700K performance 3 years after the 8700K released is terrible. The objectively correct decisions were buy 8700K as a “performance early adopter” product, buy 3600 if you wanted a value tier product a bit later, or buy 5900X for a later-gen performance tier build. It was still a better deal than a 5800X, yeah, but neither 5600X nor 5800X were, in the grand scheme of things, very good purchases compared to other things you could have bought at various times/prices. They did have the misfortune of launching into a pandemic but like… Intel didn’t raise prices, they actually dropped them, a lot, at the same time AMD raised theirs, a lot, and gutted the lower end of their lineup. Good for AMD, but as a consumer the pricing just wasn’t attractive on anything lower than the 5900X. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 11:56 on Nov 4, 2021 |
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 10:59
|
|
|
Like I said.... Very strange goon revisionism.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 11:11
|
|
|
Yeah I dunno, I definitely remember the 5600 being the red-headed step child of the cpu workd back in the day for the exact reasons Paul lists. Not that it's relevant for much longer 
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 11:21
|
|
|
You think AMD might respond immediately with a price cut?
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 11:23
|
|
|
I was using a Xeon 2430v2 when I built this desktop in July 2019, then I moved to a Ryzen 2400G about a year later because I needed AVX compatibility now that we were working from home and Zoom needed it for virtual backgrounds I bought a Ryzen 3 3100 in March of this year because I was getting CPU bottlenecked after moving from an RX 580 to an RTX 3060Ti and then an i5-10400 just a month later because my local dealer gave me a really good price could very well just keep this for a while longer, but its nice that competition is heating up - maybe if the "i5-12400" is priced below 200 and does well against the i5-11400 / 5600X that'd be a nice budget pick-up despite the lack of small cores
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 11:32
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:The money question is still how much ddr4 affects performance - because with DDR5 you’re spending $400 on memory with your $200 processor.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 13:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 20:26 |
|
|
Intel vs reported AMD avx512 support. https://twitter.com/HansDeVriesNL/status/1456183755610144769?s=20
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 13:23
|
|