AMD Ryzen vs. Intel Kaby Lake benchmark preview - thomasbuiribithe1999

AMD's Ryzen is out to prove that roughly things aren't too best to be true. At to the lowest degree that's what the latest round of benchmarks released from the company appear to prove. At this point, the numbers indicate the underdog accompany's hot bit will be every number as impressive Eastern Samoa the hoopla says it is.

At a briefing on Tuesday in advance of its Wednesday launch, AMD again showed how its Ryzen chip matches or outperforms Intel's best and brightest, this time in the popular Maxon CineBench benchmark.

CineBench measures a CPU's power to render a 3D scene, loves multi-threading, and is loosely well-well-thought-of as a validated direction to measure pure CPU performance. In AMD's demonstrations, an eight-core AMD Ryzen 7 1700X twin Intel's eight-core Center i7-6900K. The kicker is just how much that Ryzen 7 1700X costs: $399 vs. Intel's $1,089 Core i7-6900K. Mic cliff.

IDG

AMD's Ryzen 7 lineup compared to Intel's CPUs.

The Ryzen 7 1700X isn't even AMD's fastest CPU. That's the Ryzen 7 1800X, which the company showed outscoring Intel's eight-core Central processor with a CineBench rack up of 1,601. In Handbrake tests Ryzen outpaced Intel's chips and ran slightly faster in gaming. Add the ii latest demonstrations to the previous Liquidiser tests, and all evidence indicates Ryzen will disrupt Intel's game—at least on multi-rib tests.

We recently updated our own benchmarks happening an Intel Core i7-6900K, Core i7-7700K and an aged AMD FX-8370 chip. Present's how the numbers from the three Ryzen CPUs compare in CineBench to our own numbers game. You should as wel peek at the price, which we've included with the CPUs description.

PCWorld

AMD's Ryzen matches or outperforms Intel's best at multi-rib tests for far less.

"I can say today that the Ryzen 7 1800X is the fastest eight-core desktop processor in the market," AMD's CEO Lisa Su said following the latest demonstrations.

Gordon Mah Ung

AMD CEO Lisa Su shows off the company's newest Ryzen CPU, which promises to be as fast as Intel's best for half the price.

CineBench baggage

Cinebench carries significance as a benchmark because it's long been considered an Intel-friendly mental testing. In 2009, the FTC aforementioned CineBench exploited Intel compiling program optimizations that hobbled competing CPUs along programs that were created with it. The FTC said of Cinebench: "In truth and in fact, the benchmark did not reliably measure the speed of digital content creation." Intel settled the FTC case in 2010.

Maxon, the maker of Cinema4D and Cinebench, has long maintained there was no rum business. "MAXON does employment the Intel compiler on Windows. Nonetheless, they use a circumstantial (and fixed) instruction set for the compiler which is supported by AMD and Intel. Additionally, they do not practice any compiler options that employ Mainframe identifiers at runtime," Maxon told PCWorld through and through a spokeswoman. "This is where Intel could gain several advantage (support for newer features that are not available for AMD CPUs). This was part of the FTC investigating but has never been an progeny with CineBench."

IDG

AMD's CineBench R15 tests are noteworthy because the FTC formerly titled the benchmark unfair to AMD.

Maxon says the Intel compiler is simply quicker—for both companies' CPUs. "Comparing the pelt along Intel or AMD CPUs accomplish with code created aside the Microsoft compiling program, the Intel compiler not only achieves higher absolute speed on those CPUs, but AMD CPUs actually show a larger comparative gain than Intel CPUs."

"The fact that the pre-Ryzen AMD CPUs are not benchmarking too is not a software package or encyclopedist problem," Maxon said. "MAXON has a good relationship with some AMD and Intel. They regularly work with them along new processors and prototypes. AMD actually met with the MAXON developers at the end of last twelvemonth. Unmatched of the changes to CineBench 15.038 was a upshot of this coming together."

Maxon declined to say what exactly the changes were with the newly version, only the spokeswoman did say performance is comparable. Interestingly, demonstrations by AMD ill-used a slimly older version of CineBench, which would non contain the fixes in the program.

Gordon Mah Ung

AMD's Ryzen CPU leave feature engraving with the logo on it.

AMD didn't cheat, simply there is a catch

Spell the latest performance demonstration is promising, one snag could make Intel fans cry foul: AMD configured the two quad-core Intel CPUs in dual-channel mode. Intel's Core i7-6900K and Core i7-6800K some have quad-channel memory indorse, which would require four memory modules. AMD's configurations, nonetheless, faced both Intel CPUs configured in dual-channel mode with two pieces of RAM.

My ain testing of quad-channel vs. dual-channel indicates it probably ready-made no difference on the two tests AMD showed. Still, information technology would probably make Intel fans find better if the Broadwell-E CPUs had been configured to in attendance their superfine performance.

Correction: The clock speeds of the Ryzen models were transposed in our original chart. PCWorld regrets the mistake.

Source: https://www.pcworld.com/article/412121/amd-ryzen-benchmark-preview-ryzen-7-outperforms-intels-best.html

Posted by: thomasbuiribithe1999.blogspot.com

Share this post