1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Single-core performance of Intel's Sunny Cove chips Surface - Shows Big IPC Increase

Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Jun 17, 2019.

  1. TLD LARS

    TLD LARS Member Guru

    Messages:
    107
    Likes Received:
    30
    GPU:
    Vega 64
    I hope they found the magic button and pushed it but i am skeptical.
    If they fixed the specter meltdown things with hardware, that alone is 20-30% boost on some read and write SSD speed.
    If they upped the fairly slow rated memory speed Intel CPU´es have to something like 4000, that could be another 5% speed boost, but people already use faster mem then rated, so no real world boost.
    Together with the 1GHz lower clocks, the 18-40% IPC boost could fade away to no real world performance boost.
    One could hope that the lower clocks at least gave a lower power usage.
     
  2. -Tj-

    -Tj- Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    16,331
    Likes Received:
    1,444
    GPU:
    Zotac GTX980Ti OC
    Seeing is beliving.. dont trust intel anymore at this point.
     
  3. Mesab67

    Mesab67 Member Guru

    Messages:
    120
    Likes Received:
    41
    GPU:
    GTX 1080
    "Competitor next gen shows IPC Increase"

    Utterly unbelievable how quickly this piece of junk is being reported on in so many apparently reputable sites. We're clearly far away from having intel's 'next gen' / fake news factory ramblings validated.
    Whether it's true or not, there's both a credibility issue a timing issue.
    Kindly, don't feed into this. Poor show.
     
    Last edited: Jun 17, 2019
    fantaskarsef likes this.
  4. GREGIX

    GREGIX Master Guru

    Messages:
    532
    Likes Received:
    44
    GPU:
    MSI 1080 /AMD v7
    Spectre& other shiet mitigated?
    ^^
     

  5. MonstroMart

    MonstroMart Master Guru

    Messages:
    534
    Likes Received:
    159
    GPU:
    ASUS GTX 1070 Strix
    And also why 4 cores? By the time this is out the support for 6 and 8 cores will be even better that it is now. HU just made a revisit video of the 7600k versus the 1600. The 7600k seamed to hit a wall in some of the newer games optimized for multi-threads. I'm not sure 4 cores will still cut it in newer apps and games by the time this is released (certainly not in productivity apps). It will work wonderfully with software not optimized for multi-threads but likely hit a wall for anything multi-threads friendly.

    With the XBox Two 720 Live and the PS5 around the corner both likely having custom made Zen 2 APU with many cores i would not invest in any 4 cores CPUs if i was building a new system.
     
    Backstabak likes this.
  6. abula

    abula Master Guru

    Messages:
    820
    Likes Received:
    10
    GPU:
    Asus GTX1080Ti
    I think intel is going to net the usual 5-10% gen to gen, but at the same time could be better OCing, if start going reliable above 5ghz without needing exoctic coolering then it will win, i expect AMD Ryzen to be bad ocer as the past gens were, not much you can get out of them on air/water. I even doubt we will be able to get 4.7ghz on all cores on the 3950x, it would be great though, but i somewhat doubt it, it would be extremely hard to cool down, i expect 4.4-4.5ghz on all cores.
     
  7. Venix

    Venix Master Guru

    Messages:
    902
    Likes Received:
    309
    GPU:
    Palit 1060 6gb
    are those the cpus that the Jim "hitman" Keller working on ? this guy is like a precision architecture hitman ...when ever he works to design a chip .... he never fails :p he was behind ryzen too!
     
  8. D3M1G0D

    D3M1G0D Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,857
    Likes Received:
    1,190
    GPU:
    2 x GeForce 1080 Ti
    Well, after the last stunt they pulled with the 9900K - showing supposedly objective third-party benchmarks where the 2700X was severely crippled - I'd take anything they release with a huge grain of salt. Let's also not forget the demo they showed of a 28-core consumer Xeon running at 5 GHz on all cores (with a hidden chiller) which was complete vaporware - the eventual CPU that was released runs nowhere near that (even for a single core).
     
    Aura89 and Fox2232 like this.
  9. Junglist724

    Junglist724 New Member

    Messages:
    7
    Likes Received:
    2
    GPU:
    2080ti
    It was rumored that last year their 10nm yield rates were in the single digits. The first 10nm parts to ship had such bad yields they had to disable the integrated graphics. If they try to double the die size with more cores the yield rate goes down exponentially. They're probably not capable of making anything more than 4 cores right now.
     
    Evildead666 likes this.
  10. Reddoguk

    Reddoguk Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,716
    Likes Received:
    130
    GPU:
    Guru3d GTX 980 G1 Gaming
    If 3700X can match a 9900k for half the price then AMD has a big seller on their hands full stop.

    I believe the 9900k won't be beat by the 3700X, i think 3800X will match it but the 3700X will be a few % slower and still be worth it because it's gonna be a £300 chip vs the i9 which is £520.

    For £520 you could get a 3700X, mobo and 16gbs of ram all while being a close match to the 9900k.

    Intel will have to drop it's price for 8/16 core because AMD are about to flood the market with 7nm 16cores for the masses and no one will care if Intel keeps making 4/8cores even with faster IPC.
     
    Last edited: Jun 17, 2019

  11. waltc3

    waltc3 Master Guru

    Messages:
    997
    Likes Received:
    294
    GPU:
    AMD 50th Ann 5700XT
    Intel is great at putting out competitive-sounding press releases on products it has no firm release/shipping dates for. Or running ads comparing against 1st gen Ryzen, or comparing against Ryzen iGPUs running their shared memory @ 2.4GHz while Intel's iGPU is running its @ 3.733GHz, etc. Or comparing a $400-$500 Ryzen with an Intel cpu costing $2k +, as if it was a meaningful comparison. Intel's PR department is keeping busy, though, there's no doubt about that.

    It's fairly interesting how many people apparently believe that the $600-$1300 GPU cost "bracket" *cough* is where the volume discrete GPU sales take place, apparently.

    At 7nm, even, it's still possible to put on so many transistors that yields drop into the bucket and prices skyrocket! But as you say, it's nVidia's traditional approach. The post-render sharpening effect I agree is AMD's answer to DLSS. What's so awful about calling RTX "real-time ray tracing" is that it really presents a warped picture of what ray tracing actually is--the imagery is very subpar compared with what's possible in actual ray-traced frames.
     
    Fox2232 likes this.
  12. Denial

    Denial Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    12,312
    Likes Received:
    1,496
    GPU:
    EVGA 1080Ti
    What kind of mental gymnastics did you need to go through to pull that from my post?

    The only thing that's warped here is your infatuation to connect ray tracing with final image quality. I can raytrace a giant pile of crap with 1 bounce and shadows disabled it's still ray tracing. There is no line you cross for image quality that makes it "actual" ray tracing. If you want to call current RT implementations bad just call them bad - stop trying to redefine raytracing to fit your nonsense narrative.
     
  13. Arbie

    Arbie Member Guru

    Messages:
    169
    Likes Received:
    58
    GPU:
    GTX 1060 6GB
    Intel 14nm already has more lakes than Wisconsin, and they used up all the names. Time for new tech - or at least new marketing.
     
    Strange Times and schmidtbag like this.
  14. yeeeeman

    yeeeeman Member

    Messages:
    20
    Likes Received:
    12
    GPU:
    Geforce 9600GT 512MB
    Sorry to say but this news is just to bring more views to the site. It is below your standards HH, so please avoid these kind of fake news in the future.
    I mean, I can easily make a spreadsheet, write some numbers and pretend they represent the actual performance of Sunny Cove. Is that worth a place on this site?
     
  15. Kool64

    Kool64 Master Guru

    Messages:
    288
    Likes Received:
    96
    GPU:
    Gigabyte GTX 1070
    HH is reporting on a leak. He makes every attempt to indicate that something probably isn't right. so feel free to make a spreadsheet and post it somewhere and perhaps you'll get your day in the sun too.
     
    fantaskarsef and Aura89 like this.

  16. vbetts

    vbetts Don Vincenzo Staff Member

    Messages:
    14,607
    Likes Received:
    1,184
    GPU:
    RTX 2070FE
    Hey you, constructive criticism is fine and all but this is kind of going a step further.
     
    Aura89 and airbud7 like this.
  17. Aura89

    Aura89 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    7,575
    Likes Received:
    841
    GPU:
    -
    Delete
     
  18. oxidized

    oxidized Member Guru

    Messages:
    198
    Likes Received:
    29
    GPU:
    GTX 1060 6G
    If you refer to me, i was being sarcastic...
     
  19. user1

    user1 Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,358
    Likes Received:
    430
    GPU:
    hd 6870
    why would they use cpuz, its the least consistent benchmark you could use.
    Cpuid's methodology it highly flawed, the fact that they "fixed" ryzen's performance, supposedly inorder to correct the "inaccuracy" of the score, yet broke the accuracy of scores for many other older processors at the same time should be enough to avoid using it for crossplaform benchmarking
     
  20. coth

    coth Master Guru

    Messages:
    406
    Likes Received:
    35
    GPU:
    MSI GTX 970 Gaming 4G
    CPUZ is pretty good on measuring IPC. Geekbench isn't.
     

Share This Page