AMD can come out with a CPU that is 10 times faster and 10 times cheaper and they will still be no danger to intel.None of this makes any difference for a few reasons.
Even with Intel having the fastest gaming CPU, AMD is gaining 1% market share per month according to Steam's survey (of gamers) and has passed 25% already. That's a ~5% jump in the world's largest group of PC gamers since Q2 2018.
- Consumers are tired of Intel's BS
- Intel will no longer have the fastest gaming CPU
- Intel refuses to bring their pricing down to Earth no matter what
Intel was holding on with their single-thread performance and high clock speeds for gaming but it was clear that consumers wanted little part of what they were offering despite AMD not quite matching Intel's gaming performance.
Now that people have owned and used AMD-based systems, they're realising that the differences between AMD and Intel's gaming performance is irrelevant for everyone who isn't a competitive FPS gamer (probably over 98% of people). They're also realising that their actual PC experience comes from software they use with hardware only offering performance that they often cannot gauge.
Speaking of competitive gamers, the ones who stream while gaming have come to see that their net fps rate is better with Intel when just gaming but better with AMD when gaming and streaming concurrently. More market share for AMD again.
What is Intel going to do when Zen 3 makes AMD superior in gaming as well? This will make AMD CPUs superior to Intel CPUs in every possible way PLUS they'll be cheaper and AMD CPUs still come with CPU coolers while Intel doesn't even include that $2 stock Intel cooler that they used to.
Here's what the PC landscape will look like after tomorrow:
Cheapest CPU/APU overall: Athlon 3000G (APU)
Best budget APU: R3-3200G
Best gaming APU: R5-3400G
Best budget gaming CPU: R3-3300X
Best mainstream gaming CPU: R5-5600X
Best all-around value CPU: R7-3700X
Best high-end gaming CPU: R7-5800X
Best mainstream Prosumer CPU: R9-5900X
Best HEDT CPU: TR-3990X
Best value mobile APU: R5-4500U
Best all-around mobile APU: R7-4800U
Best performance mobile APU: R7-4800H
Best server CPU: EPYC 7702
Left out in the cold: Everything made by Intel
This is assuming that only R5 through R9 parts are revealed in the beginning with EPYC, Threadripper, R3 and all APUs to be announced at a later date.
Well, in my case I do a lot of VR gaming. I have an Index and pushing 144hz mode is really difficult for my 1080. For my workload in VR, a 3080 would be quite an upgrade. The problem is finding one.It looks like I will have to build a new gaming PC within the next 6 months, as my 9 yo oc'd Xeon W3690 CPU can only just barely muster playing Doom@4K60Hz using the GTX 1060 6GB I added several years ago.
Hold on, this is insane... its probably still good for Diablo II: Resurrected, which is the only thing I am looking forward to (if it gets released).
Actually, I really do need a new gaming PC, since my 14 yo office PC is getting flaky so I will swap it out with the old gaming PC.
I'll just have to force myself to like Flight Sim, Cyberpunk 2077, etc. to justify putting a 3080, or similar in the new one.
Take-away: Sometimes a new PC is just about being shiny new, mostly about having a new GPU (if you already had enough CPU cores), and then trying to get many years of use out of it.
My current rig just barely passes VR certification... not a good place to be for the future, but I can wait up to 6 months for these new GPU (and likely CPU) supply chain issues to shake out. My server needs are hurting me even more, but the costs of that combined with gaming needs are going to kill me (~$6000 USD total for two systems).Well, in my case I do a lot of VR gaming. I have an Index and pushing 144hz mode is really difficult for my 1080. For my workload in VR, a 3080 would be quite an upgrade. The problem is finding one.
Plus, and most importantly, most PC buyers aren't people who visit tech sites 10x per day. They go to the store and get what the store has. Intel just has to convince the system makers, not the buyers, to buy the chip. AMD is great and I love how we have an option, but if I walk into a store today it's still 90% Intel or I have to special order in that AMD system most of the time.AMD can come out with a CPU that is 10 times faster and 10 times cheaper and they will still be no danger to intel.
AMD just doesn't have the capacity to make enough CPUs to make any kind of difference.
A customer that wants a PC now is not going to wait for months for new supply, they are going to make a PC with whatever they can get.
(Which is why AMD has increased sales in the last months... )
You say that to a company that makes billions a year even with stiff competition from AMD.What an embarrassment.
PCIe 4.0 will bring little to no benefit to gaming. PCIe 3.0 is still not saturated. PCIe 2.0 even isn't.This is just dumb...you can barely even find a 10900k...luckily a 10850K is the same thing. But I feel bad for anyone that purchased any of these CPUs at this point. I know plenty people will say "Well PCIE 4.0 won't bring much benefit." Ehhh I'm not so sure about that once software catchup to it's features.
Its actually not a new uArch its Willow Cove which is in Tiger Lake so its actually the second iteration to be used.14nm and new inevitably buggy architecture. The worst of both worlds!
Oops, good eye. I meant "first desktop PC chip." Thanks, corrected."They also mark Intel's first chip to support PCIe 4.0..."
Intel's Tiger Lake laptop chip has pcie4. Their eyeq5 ADAS chip and one of their FPGAs also has PCIE4. Their Ice Lake Server chip also has pcie4, and will likely be launched before this Rocket Lake-S chip. One of their new Habana chips also has pcie4.
Willow Cove is an update to sunny cove which is an update to palm cove,so it's the third.Its actually not a new uArch its Willow Cove which is in Tiger Lake so its actually the second iteration to be used.
Intel is not going to release 10nm to desktop until they have to.Rocket lake is 14nm, yes?
Is this announcement technically another delay to 10nm? Because it feels like another stealth delay to 10nm.
Even if it supports USB4, you're probably going to have a hard time finding a motherboard with all USB4 ports. Pretty much every motherboard is likely to include a mix of generations, just like what we see today, with maybe one or two USB4 ports initially. It doesn't make much sense to waste PCIe lanes for ultra-fast ports if only a mouse or keyboard is going to be plugged into them.My 12 year old PC is ready for replacement. I have been waiting for:
4x power over my current Intel 3770K CPU
4k 10-bit at 120Hz video
I thought I was waiting for SATA IV - but, obviously that is now irrelevant
So, it looks like I will be building a new PC in 2021
I don't want any legacy (i.e. non-USB4) ports on my new PC or monitor.
PCIe 3.0 x16 might only limit performance by up to a few percent compared to 4.0 with today's high-end cards, but PCIe 2.0 (or 3.0 x8) definitely has more of a performance impact, in some cases reducing performance by more than 10% when using something like an RTX 3080 at 1440p resolution. Of course, you'll probably be more affected by CPU limitations on any processor using PCIe 2.0 with a high-end card like that. The same goes for PCIe 3.0 x8 though, and cards like the 4GB 5500XT show that in cases where VRAM isn't sufficient, 3.0 x8 can cause a significant impact on performance in some games even with lower-end hardware. And that will apply to lower-end x16 cards running on PCIe 2.0 as well, as that offers similar bandwidth.PCIe 4.0 will bring little to no benefit to gaming. PCIe 3.0 is still not saturated. PCIe 2.0 even isn't.