Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Sep 25, 2019.
Nope, Intel's 10nm is.
Kapow, right in the kisser
They are basically identical lol
My 3700X is doing fine, using the Asus ABBA bios 2801 on my Hero 7.
i'm quite happy with the 4ghz preset option in the UEFI Asus bios setup.
My brother just bought his First Amd pc 3600x last week and he is not happy with idle clock speed when he has compared with my i7 6700K.Windows automatic put default idle clock speed for AMD very high and if we lower it down the similar to Intel it became unstable.And its sad.
If one's 7nm Processor performing equal to 10nm then its a shame for 7nm technology.7nm should out perform 10nm.
Why? Even if you ignored the fact that "x" nm is just a marketing name for a variety of characteristics of a node (it would be like complaining that 5700XT is slower than a 2080Ti despite a bigger number) - the performance metric itself can be measured several different ways. 7nm might be better for density but worse for power or vice versa. It depends on the application.
How low are you trying to go with it? the Lowest Ryzens go is around 2200 for the 3k X models and 1500 for the non X
Pretty sure AMD gave it's reason already and thats to focus on getting more existing parts out the door to fulfil demand.
AMD doesn't have a 7nm process, but good job trying to spew out some more fake information as always.
And actually gain performance, not lose it, like with intel.
+100 MHz for max clock, so far..
Glad guru3d's (company) related decisions dont rely on what you think, should or shouldn't be published.
Then your doing it wrong in 2 ways.
1. Just because one product can get certain clocks, doesnt mean a different one can as well (disregarding thats even from a different BRAND),
the same reason i dont expect a V12 lambo to idle at 800 rpm like a vw golf or honda civic.
2. If you setup power profile(s) properly, this isnt a problem.
For Power savings i leave max at 65%, this keeps max clock at 2.2.
Balanced is min 20 to 100% max, so i get better response in games,
and it still down clocks to 2200-3600 MHz.
Make sure to turn off PBO, as it doesn't improve anything, but most of the time adds unneeded voltage.
Then Amd needs to change their marketing prints etc,
as i quote from a 3600 sales page (webshop):
Leading edge 7-nanometer technology
The real reason for the delay is more likely because of HYPE for the 3950x and slower sales of the lower end parts. The 12cores and 8cores parts are probably selling slower because people are ether waiting for the 3950x or waiting for the 3950x to come out to lower prices of lower end parts and the delay closer to christmas is probably going to force the lower end parts to sell especially if people wait for the 3950x and they sell out close to christmas people will be forced to buy the low end parts to make a christmas present happen.
This is more likely to be a sale strategy than a clock speed problem.
Can you show me a site in where they have 3900X in stock please? cause as far as i am aware in Europe/america a tleast you have to advance order and get in 1-2 months time as there are no stock. The 3700X and 3900X are very hard to come by. Some places are selling the 3900X for $700 because of the demand.
So because AMD is utilizing a "leading edge 7-nanomater technology" that somehow means AMD has a 7nm process?
It's TSMCs 7nm process. Not AMDs. Plain and simple.
you might wanna tell that amd and their marketing department, not me.
but nanomater sounds like a cool idea for another pixar short
I don't have to as nothing states AMD has any 7nm technology. A statement of "Leading edge 7-nanometer technology" only states what technology they are utilizing, not that it's theirs.
I feel like your entire point in replying to me is to arguing a pointless argument, as my original reply is correct. AMD does not have any 7nm technology. The guy i quoted stated they do. If he has a problem with the 7nm technology that AMD is utilizing, then he has a problem with TSMC, not AMD. If for example AMD had used Samsungs 7nm technology, and it was massively better (not saying it would be this is just an example), it would still not be AMDs 7nm technology that made it better, it would be Samsungs.
Well that remains to be seen, right? For you know, being in the oven longer will be better.
just quoted what the company amd says, right under their product.
nothing more, nothing less, did not even say if your correct or not.
the consumer doesnt care who makes it in a plant on the other side of the planet,
its amd that gets their money, and they read the same info i did.
Then i even more don't understand your purpose to your statement you made to me. Doesn't matter what the consumers know or care about, facts are facts.
"Logic assumes that AMD is facing the boost issues it had with the previous Ryzen processors"
Don't bring logic into your shitty assumptions.
Embarrassingly ignorant, I'm sure Apple are laughing also.