No it's not, reviewers just do this for ...reasons.
Right . . they're ALL IN on this plot against Intel, and have been ever since AMD managed to surpass them (but not really, because it's part of the conspiracy) on power efficiency.... 🙄
No it's not, reviewers just do this for ...reasons.
That article doesn't say anything about MCE though.
But you can also go B550 and it's cheaper. Intel does not have that option.If you go with DDR4 for the intel build, the platform cost for a 12600KF (plus decent air cooler) is about the same or lower than a 5800X + X570, based on current prices.
Took AMD nearly a year to launch B550 after X570. B660 and the other chipsets will launch in a few months if you want something cheaper.But you can also go B550 and it's cheaper. Intel does not have that option.
Took AMD nearly a year to launch B550 after X570. B660 and the other chipsets will launch in a few months if you want something cheaper.
While B450 may be an option, B450 are generally of much lower quality than B550 ones since motherboard manufacturers still weren't comfortable throwing their full support behind AMD yet. You also need to keep in mind that B450 means no PCIe 4.0, which is becoming an issue with AMD crippling its lower-end cards with x8 interfaces.
Some people stagger their upgrades, especially in this age of stupidly expensive GPUs where it makes more sense to buy something lower-end (or just reuse what you already have) and wait it out if you aren't one of the many people obsessed with running everything at 16k300 Ultra. I have a GTX1050 and plan to stretch it either until it breaks or I can get a sizable upgrade new for under $200.Then again, if you own one of those low-end cards theres no point on getting any of the new Alder Lake 12600K, 12700K or 12900K, nor the old Ryzen 5 5600X, 5800X or 5900X. Better save the money to get a better GPU lol
Some people stagger their upgrades, especially in this age of stupidly expensive GPUs where it makes more sense to buy something lower-end (or just reuse what you already have) and wait it out if you aren't one of the many people obsessed with running everything at 16k300 Ultra. I have a GTX1050 and plan to stretch it either until it breaks or I can get a sizable upgrade new for under $200.
Based on the one review I saw comparing the two, the 12600K seems like it might be the better value. Since both the 12600K and the 12700K get the same number of E-cores, multithreaded performance can end up a bit closer than usual between the 6 and 8-core parts, as the E-cores boost multithreaded performance to a similar degree for both. And of course, there isn't all that much difference in light to moderately-threaded performance between the two, as they operate at fairly similar clocks. Unless one specifically requires as much heavily multithreaded performance as they can get for more niche tasks like CPU-based video encoding and rendering, they are unlikely to notice any significant difference in performance between the two. And compared to the prior-gen 8-cores, the 12600K ends up beating the previous i7s by a decent margin at most light and heavily threaded tasks, and roughly matches or in some cases exceeds the performance of the 5800X as well. Had AMD priced the 5000-series more like the previous generation of Ryzen processors, the 12600K wouldn't have looked all that impressive at launch, but since those CPUs were offering industry-leading performance, the shortages would have lasted a lot longer while also not making AMD as much money.In any case If I was able to build a new system (either for gaming or working) I would avoid the 12600K and get the 12700K instead. Or just wait and get a core i5 12400 for even less money than all the CPU named soo far.
DDR5 is terrible value right now, and is poorly suited to the 12600K. You could pay less to move up to a 12700K with 32gb of DDR4-3600 and get better performance all-around than what you would get from pairing a 12600K with entry-level DDR5. And that DDR5 will "gimp performance" in things like games, that will see worse performance than DDR4 due to its much higher latency.5800X is also gimped to DDR4. At least 12600KF provides DDR5 option if you need it.
AMD's been making huge profits off the 5000-series processors given their relatively high price points, and the fact that they shouldn't really cost more to manufacture than the 3000-series parts. The 3000-series itself was profitable at much lower prices, and at prices similar to what those were selling for, these processors can once again become competitive with Alder Lake.Sure, but if AMD has to reduce prices now then they are going to make less money for a whole year and they aren't making that much to begin with.
Also the next year all of the shortages will continue meaning that making a CPU will become more expensive and more difficult and time consuming because they will have to find all the components first.
And if they come out with these features in a year they will be one year late to the party, everybody that needs the features will already have them.
Yeah, that seems a bit questionable. You can't directly compare how much the DDR5 is making a difference compared to DDR4 when the DDR5 gets the benefit of a dual rank memory setup, which has been shown to often make more of a difference to performance than tighter timings and higher clocks. So it's not really an apples-to-apples comparison here, even for comparing how much of a potential difference DDR5 makes for Alder Lake, and it's possible that some of the DDR5 wins might be reversed if the DDR4 were configured similarly. Tom's should really do an updated memory scaling article, including DDR4 and DDR5 in both dual and single-rank configurations, and it would probably be good to include Rocket Lake and Zen 3 in the results as well.I don't think anyone suggested THG to custom tune sub timings and such for AMD.
However using 16GBX2 Dual Rank DIMMS instead of 8GBX2 Single Rank DIMMS on all systems including Intel would not have cost any additional testing time.
I think it was a poor choice to use the 8GBx2 SR DIMMs when I'm sure several 16GBX2 Dual Rank kits would not be to hard to find in the THG testing lab.
Sure, some might want to upgrade to faster RAM, but those people probably won't care so much about the lack of value in doing so. The price difference for a DDR5 setup is currently about as much as a motherboard itself. If they are willing to spend hundreds of dollars to replace their existing RAM with other RAM that gets them maybe a few percent more performance in typical CPU-limited workloads, then they probably won't be too bothered about having to replace their motherboard either. It seems unlikely that DDR5 will provide a major advantage for these processors down the line, and it provides mixed results currently, so it doesn't really seem like something anyone should feel they are missing out on with this generation of processors. I believe the mainstream B-series boards will only come in DDR4 variants, and the same goes for many Z-series boards, so it's more of an enthusiast feature for very high-end builds, for those willing to pay a lot more for something that can improve performance slightly at some tasks, while offering similar or in some cases slightly worse performance in others.I say to that, don't give people the benefit of the doubt. Some will/would do it. It's not going to be everyone, of course.
Based on the one review I saw comparing the two, the 12600K seems like it might be the better value. Since both the 12600K and the 12700K get the same number of E-cores, multithreaded performance can end up a bit closer than usual between the 6 and 8-core parts, as the E-cores boost multithreaded performance to a similar degree for both. And of course, there isn't all that much difference in light to moderately-threaded performance between the two, as they operate at fairly similar clocks. Unless one specifically requires as much heavily multithreaded performance as they can get for more niche tasks like CPU-based video encoding and rendering, they are unlikely to notice any significant difference in performance between the two. And compared to the prior-gen 8-cores, the 12600K ends up beating the previous i7s by a decent margin at most light and heavily threaded tasks, and roughly matches or in some cases exceeds the performance of the 5800X as well. Had AMD priced the 5000-series more like the previous generation of Ryzen processors, the 12600K wouldn't have looked all that impressive at launch, but since those CPUs were offering industry-leading performance, the shortages would have lasted a lot longer while also not making AMD as much money.
As for the 12400, it will probably be a decent value, but lacking E-Cores, it won't see the same kind of improvement to multithreaded performance. It's also possible that by the time that processor launches early next year, the 5600X (or possibly a relaunched non-X part with similar performance) might be available for around $200.
........
I didn't take it personally, just cited myself as an example of person who carries stuff over, though 4.0 vs 3.0 is irrelevant in my case since my existing GPU only does 3.0x16. The 3.0 vs 4.0 dilemma only affects people carrying over an RX5500/6500/6600 - the only modern desktop GPUs that have a 4.0x8 interface instead of an x16 one.Yeah sorry my bad, I didnt meant to write "you", but more like anyone owning one of those cards. I will fix it.
Yeah, but in a few months Zen3D will launch too and then you will have an even better reason to still buy AMD.Took AMD nearly a year to launch B550 after X570. B660 and the other chipsets will launch in a few months if you want something cheaper.
While B450 may be an option, B450 are generally of much lower quality than B550 ones since motherboard manufacturers still weren't comfortable throwing their full support behind AMD yet. You also need to keep in mind that B450 means no PCIe 4.0, which is becoming an issue with AMD crippling its lower-end cards with x8 interfaces.
Also, while true about many B450 MBs, the ones from MSI, B450 Tomahawk and Mortar, especially the MAX series that I have are some of the best MB ever. Amazing price/perf/quality.
I can even run a 5950x OC on my MB, that's how good the VRMs are.
Yeah, that seems a bit questionable. You can't directly compare how much the DDR5 is making a difference compared to DDR4 when the DDR5 gets the benefit of a dual rank memory setup, which has been shown to often make more of a difference to performance than tighter timings and higher clocks. So it's not really an apples-to-apples comparison here, even for comparing how much of a potential difference DDR5 makes for Alder Lake, and it's possible that some of the DDR5 wins might be reversed if the DDR4 were configured similarly. Tom's should really do an updated memory scaling article, including DDR4 and DDR5 in both dual and single-rank configurations, and it would probably be good to include Rocket Lake and Zen 3 in the results as well.
AMD Socket AM4 (X570) | AMD Ryzen 9 5950X, Ryzen 9 5900X, Ryzen 7 5800X, Ryzen 5 5600X |
MSI MEG X570 Godlike | |
2x 8GB Trident Z Royal DDR4-3600 - Stock: DDR4-3200 14-14-14-36 |
Intel renamed Pl2 into max turbo power because it's exactly that, the potential infinite turbo power.MTP may be PL2, I'll grant you that. MCE essentially offers a potential infinite turbo- it's not overclocking which was the original point that I was replying to.
Depends on how much extra AMD is going to charge for that 0-20% bump from reduced L3$ misses and trips over the IOD.Yeah, but in a few months Zen3D will launch too and then you will have an even better reason to still buy AMD.
Funny.Depends on how much extra AMD is going to charge for that 0-20% bump from reduced L3$ misses and trips over the IOD.
Intel renamed Pl2 into max turbo power because it's exactly that, the potential infinite turbo power.
MCE clocks all cores to the max single core clocks which was ok when we had only a few cores, although I don't know if it was considered OC even back then.
NOW MCE is not standard or allowed, turbo clocks per amount of cores is controlled by the CPU itself, which is why intel doesn't publish turbo tables anymore, bypassing the CPUs decisions by enabling MCE is overclocking.
I wouldn't be so optimistic on pricing: Zen 2 was going at fire sale prices in the months prior to Zen 3's launch, then supply of Zen 2 chips dried up from AMD shifting most prodction to Zen 3/PS5/XB-SX and prices bounced back almost to parity with Zen 3. Since Zen 3D is based on the same process as Zen 3, AMD will likely reduce or stop production of old SKUs that get a 3D refresh ahead of launch to eliminate overlap and raise prices.Funny.
Same price as Zen3 now, but Zen3 will drop in price. Perf will be +15% on average. You're in for a surprise (and all the intel fanbois).
Funny.
Same price as Zen3 now, but Zen3 will drop in price. Perf will be +15% on average. You're in for a surprise (and all the intel fanbois).
Just setting TAU or long duration power maintained will do that.Not quite. MCE removes boost duration limits if your hardware allows,
Well you're an exception, and the exceptions are the minority.Why do we have to be "Intel fanboys", why not just performance fanboys? I'm not a budget fanboy. I've built and owned a 5900X rig, and had a 5950X as well. I also have an 11900K, and soon a 12900K. Intel is the AAA gaming champ, has been. I mainly focus on Flight Sim 2020 and Cyberpunk 2077 because they're good representatives of current near term performance, and that's what I build these for. All with a 3090, and all with Intel/AMD warrantied settings-
Flight Simulator 2020 4K minimum frames
Cyberpunk 2077 4K minimum frames
Cyberpunk 2077 1080P minimum frames
That all important minimum framerate says it all. My Ryzen rigs were ok, although buggy compared to my Intel rigs, but Ryzen is what it is. It's a great value if you want a lot of cores. If you want max gaming performance, you buy Intel. Both work fine though. There's nothing else to this story.
If I'm making recommendations to people without any personal criteria, I'm telling everyone to buy a 12600K. Fantastic chip.
Just setting TAU or long duration power maintained will do that.
(here 16 seconds if not auto)
Just because MCE does this as well doesn't mean that it's the only thing MCE does.
TAU should always be available as a separate setting in your bios, even if you prefer MCE.
Even the article you link to says that:
"There will be some users who are already familiar with Multi-Core Enhancement / Multi-Core Turbo. This is a feature from some motherboard vendors have, and often enable at default, which lets a processor reach an all-core turbo equal to the single core turbo. That is somewhat similar to ABT, but that was more of a fixed frequency, whereas ABT is a floating turbo design. That being said, some motherboard vendors might still have Multi-Core Enhancement as part of their design anyway, bypassing ABT. "
1. I'm a fanboy of price/perf and integrity (as much as it can exist in corporate world).My links are from Digital Foundry.
Like it or not, even AMD is planning to go big.LITTLE within the next two years. As with anything else, someone has to be first to go and figure it out eventually.2. I'm not hurt at all, it's a +7% on average increase in perf for Alder Lake (12900k) over Zen3, after 1 year, being a more expensive platform, more power hungry, hotter and needing the user to be beta tester to Win11, DDR5 and the big.little experiment with all the drawbacks and issues.
My issue is not with big.Little itself (although AMD's version will be a little different), it's with being a beta tester of... anything. I never do that, or like that. I let others be beta testers and I join only after all or most of the issues are gone and the prices are less ridiculous too, by that time.Like it or not, even AMD is planning to go big.LITTLE within the next two years. As with anything else, someone has to be first to go and figure it out eventually.
I didn't want to take chances with the amount of new stuff in Alder Lake and on-going component shortages that seemed poised to get worse before getting better, so I got an i5-11400 back in May.
...while Alder Lake is barely starting to walk and is still shaking and farting along...