Slashdot Mirror

Until you wrote "over an Intel CPU", you were being borderline rational.

Intel's normal desktop chips also support virtualization in most cases (I have an old core2duo laptop that happened to be one of the few that did NOT support VT-x, but even most of those did).

The Ryzen chips do support virtualization. I couldn't find a spec sheet off hand that lists it, but there's plenty of reference to it out there.

One of the big differences between Intel and AMD consumer chips is that Intel frequently disables ECC support, but AMD leaves it enabled and up to the motherboard manufacturer to expose or not. Here's some detailed info on ECC support on Ryzen: http://www.hardwarecanucks.com...

I also ran into anandtech's review here: http://www.anandtech.com/show/...
IMO, it has some very useful comparisons right on the first page of that review. Someone else in this thread had mentioned upgrading to the low end Ryzen 5 for an extra $40 to make the upgrade more meaningful from his current platform... but that doesn't seem to add all that much IMHO. Wish I could just paste in the table from that review...

Ryzen 5 1400 and 1500x are both 4 core, 8 thread, but, otherwise, they nearly mirror the specs of Ryzen 3 1200 and 1300x (which have 4 cores / 4 threads). Personally, I'd want to jump up to the 6 core / 12 threads versions, or just stick with the 1300x.

That review also has a nice comparison with Intel's comparatively priced cpus. The Ryzen's have twice the L2 cache (256kb intel, 512kb ryzen), more than twice the L3 cache (3mb intel, 8mb ryzen). and twice the cores (2 core 4 thread intel, 4 core ryzen), all with a similar TDP (51-54w intel, 65w ryzen). They seem like a pretty good option, at least on paper.

Maybe you should stop living in a shack out there somewhere.
4 month after launch 480 pulled ahead of 1060:
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com...

470 trounced 1050Ti (30% faster) from the very beginning;

Oh, and 480 just took over 1060, 4 months after release:
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com...

470 wiped the floor with 1050Ti (+30%-ish perf) upfront.

The article uses a bone stock FX-9590 against very heavily overclocked (around 150% of factory maximum specs) and water-cooled Intel setups, plus saddles the AMD chip with high RAM latencies even compared to the Intel chips using the same frequency of DDR3 RAM. I'm aware that the 9590 is essentially an FX-8370 that binned very well and got a clock boost from the factory because of it, but AMD has had these chips up to 8.7 GHz and HardOCP tested it at bone stock with poorly configured RAM. They could have at least given the AMD chip some overclocking, fancy cooling, and the same RAM latency figures. That would have been more apples-to-apples.

Here's a review that tested all the chips at stock settings with more typical RAM configurations. It's also the article from which the price-to-performance bar chart was derived (compared against Newegg retail prices) and is representative of what a typical system builder who is not taking the risks involved in overclocking can expect from the hardware. Here are a few more benchmarks of x264 which is what I cared about when buying a desktop CPU.

Until the stock performance numbers divided by the price come out higher on the Intel side, the AMD is the better value if you don't want to heavily overclock your chip and void your warranty. Intel has always had faster CPUs available than AMD, but they have always carried a significantly higher price tag. I'd prefer to have that money to buy something else like an SSD or more RAM. For other people, low power consumption or higher maximum performance may matter far more to them than the price tag, and I don't begrudge their choice to get Intel chips because that's what meets their needs.

Where are the other review links?

http://www.overclockers.com/amd-radeon-hd-7970-graphics-card-review/
http://www.madshrimps.be/articles/article/1000250/#axzz1hFPj6oTt
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/HD_7970/
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/49646-amd-radeon-hd-7970-3gb-review-25.html

• Overclockers
• pcperspective
• Hardware canucks
• hardocp
• neoseeker
• tweaktown
• hexus

There's no evidence to indicate that AMD's "mainline" $200 CPU will be much better than the existing "mainline" $200 2500K that's out right now

There is some, depending on your application of course. If computer chess analysis is your thing, you would see benchmarks results like these, where the $189 Phenom II X6 1100T beats the $219 Intel 2500k.

So AMD already has CPUs which are price-performance competitive, surely Bulldozer shouldn't be worse in terms of price-performance.

In the last few weeks I bought an Asus P868-V Pro motherboard which utilizes Intel's Smart Response Technology (SRT). SRT promises to be a hybrid technology which affords the best of both worlds. Essentially a 20gb or 40gb SSD acts as a sort of high-speed cache, via RAID technology, alongside its associated SATA magnetic disk drive. Intel is promising the speed of an SSD with the storage capacity of a regular magentic drive, at low cost.
It all sounds really cool and I hope to use it one day, but I don't know when. The only OS that supports SRT is Windows 7 so far as I can tell, and I'm a web developer that uses Ubuntu.

In the last few weeks I bought an Asus P868-V Pro motherboard which utilizes Intel's Smart Response Technology (SRT). SRT promises to be a hybrid technology which affords the best of both worlds. Essentially a 20gb or 40gb SSD acts as a sort of high-speed cache, via RAID technology, alongside its associated SATA magnetic disk drive. Intel is promising the speed of an SSD with the storage capacity of a regular magentic drive, at low cost.
It all sounds really cool and I hope to use it one day, but I don't know when. The only OS that supports SRT is Windows 7 so far as I can tell, and I'm a web developer that uses Ubuntu.

From your link; http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/news/cpu/intel-chipset-driver-brings-trim-support-raid-setups/ [hardwarecanucks.com] I am not sure which person the quote supports. Tim S.

*** Correction: It should be noted that Intel’s announcement about TRIM support only applies to single SSD’s that are present in a system with a RAID array, and not to a RAID array of SSD’s. ***

I found this in about two seconds with Google from last year. I'm guessing it exists.

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/news/cpu/intel-chipset-driver-brings-trim-support-raid-setups/

Man somedays I wonder what is wrong with the internet....

The i7 is not even 30% faster then the core 2 E8400 in UT3, and Sandybridge is barely faster then the i7 at the same clockspeed. Everyone benching using nothing less then the latest apps is fudging the data purposely.

http://www.techspot.com/review/353-intel-sandy-bridge-corei5-2500k-corei7-2600k/page13.html

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/11390-intel-core-i7-nehalem-920-940-965-xe-processor-review-17.html

Using the latest stuff with the higher to highest settings the performance gaps are unimpressive to say the least.

Can i get turbo with this one: http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/wp-content/uploads/newegg-sells-fake-core-i7-cpus-9.jpg ???

I'm(perhaps optimistically) assuming that that means all the RAM in an up to 8 socket system wouldn't be more than one hop away from any core.
These only have 4 QPI links so in a system with more than 4 sockets (remember you have to hook up the IO hubs somewhere) 8-socket system some processors will be two hops away from each other.

there is a diagram of an example 8-core setup at http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/wp-content/uploads/intel_nehalem-ex-8-core.jpg

There is NO way it is a customer snowjob, as according to this even Newegg admits it was done by a supplier, but they are claiming it was "demo models" that were sent out. Of course we all know this is bullshit, as Intel would have no need to fake their own boxes for a demo model, nor would they use modeled plastic for a HSF, they would just put a bad binned chip in the box and be done with it.

My guess is either the supplier is trying to save face as someone on the factory floor swapped out a load of the real ones for these premade fakes, or someone on the docks had cooked up a shipment of fakes and loaded them in place of the real chips. Considering how much this supplier has to lose by burning Newegg I really doubt the supplier themselves did this, as Newegg has never struck me as the type that would deal with "fly by night" businesses in their supply chain. From the looks of it Newegg as always is being good about treating their customers right, so as long as they make good on the chips it will only make me shop there even more.

After all, anybody can have a problem in their supply chain, things can go wrong, there are always thieves or shippers that will treat a delicate item like a tire chuck. To me it all comes down to how they treat you when something like this happens. It is easy to do business with someone when everything goes right, it is how they treat you when something goes wrong that matters. The few times I've had to deal with Newegg when something went wrong they have always been top notch about it, and I'm sure these folks with have their new Intel chips express mailed right out.

Lots and lots of tests and bechmarks. Looking good.

Intel 'Lynnfield' Core i5 750 and Core i7 870 Performance Testing Introduction :: TweakTown
Intel Core i5 and Core i7: Lynnfield CPUs reviewed - Intel, Core i5, Core i-750, Core i7, Core i7-860, Core i7-870, Lynnfield, Bloomfield, AMD Phenom II X4 - PC Games Hardware
Core i5 750 - Core i7 860 and 870 processor review
HEXUS.net - Review :: Intel Lynnfield Core i5 750, Core i7 860 and Core i7 870 CPU review: bombarding the mid-range : Page - 1/12
Legion Hardware
Intel Core i5 750 & i7 870 Review - Page 1 - The Next Nehalem-based CPU lineup
PC Perspective - Intel Lynnfield Core i7-870 and Core i5-750 Processor Review
Introduction - Intel Lynnfield Core i5 and Core i7 Processors | [H]ard|OCP
In Theory: How Does Lynnfield's On-Die PCI Express Affect Gaming? : Introduction - Review Tom's Hardware
AnandTech: Intel's Core i7 870 & i5 750, Lynnfield: Harder, Better, Faster Stronger[/QUOTE]
Intel Core i5 750 Core i7 870 Review - Overclockers Club
Techgage - Intel Core i7-870 & i5-750 - Nehalem for the Mainstream
Core i5-750 and Core i7-870 Processors Review | Hardware Secrets
Intel Core i5 750 Processor Review - TechSpot News
Intel Core i5 And Core i7: Intel?s Mainstream Magnum Opus : Introduction - Review Tom's Hardware
Intel Lynnfield Core i5-750 & Core i7-870 Processor Review
Intel's Core i5-750 and Core i7-870 processors - The Tech Report - Page 1
bit-tech.net | Review - Intel Core i5 and Core i7 Lynnfield review
bit-tech.net | Feature - Intel Lynnfield: Details and Architecture
Intel Core i5, Core i7 800 Processors and P55 Express - HotHardware
Intel Core i5-750 Processor BX80605I5750 | Intel Core i5-750,BX80605I5750,Lynnfield,LGA1156,CPU,Proocessor, Intel Core i5-750 Lynnfield LGA1156 CPU Benchmark Performance Test Processor Review | Benchmark Reviews Performance Tests
Intel Core i7 870/Core i5 750/P55 Express chipset Review :: Introduction :: Motherboards.org

Before AMD bought ATI, ATI was doing a crappy job in a lot of areas. ATI cards have generally always had the better hardware, but for whatever reason, generally had some awful driver support. I still don't think their driver support is there yet. I believe their cards can do a whole lot more than what their drivers allow them to do. I'm only basing this off of what NVidia has historically had with their hardware, where they can do more with less.

But that's just driver support alone. I honestly can't express much opinion about the portability; I haven't tried it yet. It's just what I've read so far in new stories. Price and Performance, without owning the card yourself, the only thing you can rely on are benchmarks, and there's a lot to show that Radeon 4870 can keep its pace with NVidia's GTX 280.

Looking at Newegg, an HD4870 (not a HD4870X2 - not really worth it in price vs performance IMO), is around $280. The GTX280 is on average, $440. Now that you have the prices, you have the benchmarks, you can decide if what you've read about the portability is enough of a factor for you.