Intel Talks About CPU overclocking software and is to release new Core X CPUs

Yes, but even more people buy Pentium and I3 or Ryzen 3... Also the main sold GPU aren't RTX2080(Ti) and Vega 2 but more around 200 Euro max (more below 200)...

 

@karma777police
lol, i guess your also leaving the main door of you place unlocked and open because you have a webcam monitoring the entrance.
at least thats what i would assume seeing how a major flaw in a product is of no concern to you.

you know how likely it is to have a nuclear meltdown? ONE in 1B years.
yet we had only been using nuclear power for not even 40y before chernobyl happened.

 

A lot of people just don't seem to grasp how security and exploits work. I at least have the self-awareness to know that I'm an idiot and that it's totally possible an exploit could be far more impactful than I realize. I think people also tend to forget that, while they might not seem like a worthy target, there are huge corporations with troves our their data that are worth exploiting. That's not even factoring automation, it's unlikely anyone is furiously typing away trying to hack into your computer like in a movie.

 

Zen 2 worst case will very likely match Intel in gaming. It is not about beating Intel when AMD now has performance per core parity thanks to the IPC bump and on top of that they have lower power consumption, very likely lower thermals, newer chipset that can support faster M.2 drives (PCIe 4.0), lower price, and less security issues. Intel really is in hot water. The only CPU that stands a chance against Zen 2 is the 9900K and it cost more, pulls more power, requires more significant cooling and so on. Everything below the 9900K from Intel is screwed and those parts are even more important as they will be the bulk of consumer purchase at $200-$400. Been an Intel fan for awhile now but there is no denying AMD has more to offer for the money. Can't wait to compare a 3700x/3800x to my 9900K and 2700X.

 

I guess you just aren't paying attention. Intel will never drop the price anywhere close to Zen 2 AM4 socket. Intel processors are expensive to make and the 2066 HEDT platform is expensive overall. You really think that Intel is going to slash the price of their 12 core part to be even remotely close to the 3900X? Threadripper has brought 12 and 16 core parts to the market already and Intel has shown us they are not price adjusting HEDT to be anywhere near multi-threaded performance parity. The real answer from Intel will come on 10 nm. Don't expect huge price cuts from existing products. 9700K needs to be a $300 or less CPU and I highly doubt Intel will even do that.

 

@karma777police @Jayp

I am with jayp on that one since ryzen came out intel did not dropped prices to fight it at all ! Even back when athlon 64 came out and was spanking the p4 left right and center also the pentium d was getting the same beating from athlon x2 .....intel had much much much higher prices for slower cpus they never really cut prices, and as is right now they sell as much they can produce will see, i hope intel slash prices and have an intel vs amd all out war!

 

Apparently you haven't had your bank account drained by someone and had to spend a dozen hours working with companies to get the money back. Once you do (and you will, with your attitude), you may learn that this stuff DOES matter. Or not. You know the risks, it's up to you to live with the consequences, not the rest of us.

 

I can currently get a 9700k for $379. Not far from that mark already. (microcenter ftw)

 

I would not say it will "beat" it in. But Zen2 $330 vs 9900K $500 will win on any reasonable resolution (1080p+) by enabling gamer to get better GPU.
Someone with very high budget can still get 9900K + 2x 2080Ti and have it all as good as software allows. But for people on the ground, Zen 2 will provide almost equal fps potential while enabling them to realize higher portion of that potential through better GPU.

 

Yea Microcenter is a special case. You have to live near one to get that pricing. Everyone else not living near the few Microcenters that exist are paying $400+. Additionally, the 3700X beats the 9700K quite badly in workloads using up to 16 threads. Even at $300 the 9700K is a questionable buy once Zen 2 8 core hits shelves. Will be interesting to see how they stack up in gaming. I don't think Intel's gaming advantage will be strong enough to warrant passing up on a 3700X personally. We will have to wait for the real benchmarks to know for sure. If you bought a 8700K, 9700K or 9900K already like I did it's whatever but if you're a CPU shopper this summer it's looking quite clear what the best purchase is.

Just some side conversation \/

I have been on Intel systems for good reason awhile now. It is nice to see AMD back on the map. All the way up to 2009 I used AMD systems over Intel. It's great that AMD is back to being the IPC leader and challenging Intel again. This is a great time for consumers. 2016 I had bought a new 6700K 4 core, 8 thread CPU for like $350-$400. Today only 3 years later I have an "expensive" 8 core 9900K that even clocks higher and a cheaper 8 core, 2700X that can be found now for sub $300. These types of CPUs were found only in the HEDT space for tremendously more money. Intel kept us on 4 cores in the mainstream for way too long. Thanks to this shift in core counts we are also seeing games and other software finally, more commonly, utilizing higher thread counts.

 

1.5gb for an overclocking suite. Hard pass.

 

A lot of talk here but none on the subject.
I am curios: did anyone here tried the software - how does it behave???
I know that for a lot of people here intel is the worst thing that happened to this planet while amd is the white knight coming to rescue but again on topic: did anyone tried it?

And off topic: I still remember the days when amd was the king (athlon64/x2) and intel down (prescott anyone???) and the reviews then were like this: "another overpriced cpu from amd". I want AMD to succeed but I don't want Intel to be in disarray because guess what: AMD is also a capitalist corporation interested in profit and they will have no hesitation in increasing the prices for their cpu's if intel is weak.

 

This had me grinning from ear to ear and chuckling whilst typing this

 

Yes, trying the software now. 1.5 GB download. Then, you have to allocate 16gb of Disk Space in a separate partition during the install (software does it for you) then reboot.

Then you start the softeware, it tells you that it will need to reboot to perform the tests.

I am about 20mins into the Test (Does this in a UEFI enviroment/pre windows mode) and its on 48x ratio, tests 2 of 15...

At this rate, it will be done in about 6 hours. So far, no way to customize the actual testing or the time it is taking. Already starting to feel its not worth it at all.

 

I almost didn't believe you when you said it wanted to create a seperate 16GB partition, I thought you were joking! But then I checked the Release Notes here, and yes that's true! https://downloadmirror.intel.com/28772/eng/Intel(R)_Performance_Maximizer_1.0.1_Release_Notes.pdf

God knows why it needs that much space to run some overclocking tests, and also why it needs to be a 1.5GB download - all very excessive, better produce some good results!

 

Yes, its odd because all the testing is in a UEFI mode. No GUI or anything. Just your basic Black and White DOS Style screen

 

So in 22mins, I went from Test 3 of 15 to Test 7 of 15. Still at the 48 Ratio.

 

Let us know how it goes. One of the interesting things about this software is that in the Guru3d article it says the software is "able to auto-overclock individual cores" - to me that sounds like each individual CPU core is gonna be allocated it's own max stable overclock, so different cores are gonna be running with different overclocks. I may have misinterpreted this, because that's very different to the capabilities I know of these CPUs, in terms of how they're overclocked and how they run - so I'm thinking I've misinterpreted this or there's an error in the article. Ha, if your overclocking process ever finishes, let us know if it's overclocked your individual cores to different max frequencies, which would clear up what I was talking about in the last 2 sentences?

 

Sure! Will Do! Maybe this is why its talking so long on the testing. Tested each core, one by one, at X ratio and X voltage per test.

Update - 1 hour later - Testing Ratio 50 (5ghz) , test 3 of 15