First Look: AMD Threadripper 2000 Series (aka Threadripper 2) vs. Intel Core X

Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware
Paul Alcorn
Editor-in-Chief

Paul Alcorn is the Editor-in-Chief for Tom's Hardware US. He also writes news and reviews on CPUs, storage, and enterprise hardware.

  • therealduckofdeath
    64 threads? Should be just about enough to run Chrome with minimal stuttering... :P
    Reply
  • redgarl
    You forget to mention Intel Demo trip power breakers and the board was featuring a 32-phase power delivery subsystem.
    Reply
  • gigastrash
    Cinebench would be like the best case scenario for ryzen specially if it is 32 cores.

    What about other benchmarks ?! I don't think anyone buys CPU just to do 3d rendering/cinebench (and Ryzen seems to slightly better job in cinebench even compared to other 3d rendering benchmarks). What about video encoding, compression etc. Please do more benchmarks instead of one benchmark that AMD uses for Ryzen advertisement. One benchmark does not tell you the overall performance
    Reply
  • redgarl
    21208511 said:
    Cinebench would be like the best case scenario for ryzen specially if it is 32 cores.

    What about other benchmarks ?! I don't think anyone buys CPU just to do 3d rendering/cinebench (and Ryzen seems to slightly better job in cinebench even compared to other 3d rendering benchmarks). What about video encoding, compression etc. Please do more benchmarks instead of one benchmark that AMD uses for Ryzen advertisement. One benchmark does not tell you the overall performance

    And that 28 Cores demo was showing that? The only company using disruptive tactics lately is Intel.

    By the way, one of the slide show similar pattern on 4 different benchmarks.

    Reply
  • Brian28
    GIGASTRASH:
    I guess you missed this line: "We're hard at work testing as you read this, and will provide plenty of our own benchmarks that measure performance in a broader range of workloads when we can."
    Reply
  • shrapnel_indie
    Intel is stirring the pot recently now with a "leaked benchmark"
    Intel Core i9-9900K benchmarks show it easily outperforming Ryzen 7 2700X and i7-8700K
    Oddly enough this smells a bit like the ghost CPU announcement timing used to distract from AMD's announcement.. especially with i7-8700K results missing from those results.
    Reply
  • hotaru251
    i may be a intel person, but I gotta say AMD's packaging looks loads better.
    Reply
  • BaRoMeTrIc
    21208911 said:
    Intel is stirring the pot recently now with a "leaked benchmark"
    Intel Core i9-9900K benchmarks show it easily outperforming Ryzen 7 2700X and i7-8700K
    Oddly enough this smells a bit like the ghost CPU announcement timing used to distract from AMD's announcement.. especially with i7-8700K results missing from those results.

    We already knew Intel was releasing an 8 core i7 9900k so how is this a ghost announcement, the only surprising thing is supposedly making the i7 9700k an 8 core no hyperthreading part. I guess they couldnt get anything more out of 14nm+++++++++++++
    Reply
  • bit_user
    21208511 said:
    What about other benchmarks ?! I
    The article says they're under embargo until August 13th.
    Reply
  • bit_user
    21209374 said:
    21208911 said:
    Oddly enough this smells a bit like the ghost CPU announcement timing used to distract from AMD's announcement.. especially with i7-8700K results missing from those results.

    We already knew Intel was releasing an 8 core i7 9900k so how is this a ghost announcement,
    You already knew because it was rumored, or because Intel announced it?

    If they're leaking things about products that haven't been officially announced (and I didn't see any evidence that the linked leak was via them, rather than one of their partners), it could certainly be called it a ghost announcement.
    Reply