this post was submitted on 30 Oct 2024
54 points (98.2% liked)

Technology

59358 readers
4278 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
L3s@fry.gs
L4s@fry.gs
L4s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
54
Special Report: Inside Intel, CEO Pat Gelsinger fumbled the revival of an American icon [Reuters] (archive.fo)
submitted 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) by Rekall_Incorporated@lemm.ee to c/technology@lemmy.world
16 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Source Reuters article

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

When AMD came out with the Ryzen CPU, Intel still had a performance per core advantage, and decent PPW compared to Ryzen.

In gaming, maybe. In most workloads Ryzen was beating Intel. Shit, their $300-500 8 core models were matching or beating Intel's $1,700 10 core.

Comparing 8 core to 8 core, the 1700X/1800X were faster than the 6900K, and used a lot less power. The 1700 was a bit slower but used a huge amount less power.

[โ€“] Buffalox@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

In gaming, maybe.

No Intel had a per core performance advantage overall with Skylake, when Ryzen came out.

Comparing 8 core to 8 core, the 1700X/1800X were faster

True. But that was because Intel had failed to upgrade their Workstation CPU's from Broadwell to Skylake.