Intel's massive 18-core Core i9 chip

[BeepBeep2]

multithreaded difference

12.5% more cores,
15% higher performance per clock


We're looking at a ~30% difference there assuming identical clocks. I suspect HT is a bit weaker than AMD's SMT but being a monolithic chip with a ringbus architecture will likely give the i9 an edge that nullifies HT being slightly weaker so that's a wash.


For lightly threaded applications it's clocked around 10% higher and has around 15-25% more performance per clock so it's in the order of 30-40% faster for single threaded applications as well.

Yes, it's priced 2x as high for a reason.

Performance per clock will depend on application - 5-15% most likely.
Forget the Turbo Max 3.0 speeds for multithreading performance, though 4.2-4.5 GHz boost on high core parts will set AMD back a good 20-30% in single thread performance, I think they will be competitive in highly threaded workloads.

Do not forget that AMD has better scaling with Ryzen's SMT than Intel's Broadwell-E HT, though Intel has claimed to improve this on Skylake-X with the new cache structure.

3.5 base clock on 16C ThreadRipper will probably be a great match for Intel's 18C. Why? The 7900X already drops to a 3.3 GHz base clock, and Zeppelin seems to scale better perf/watt than intel - ie. The 7900X is already at 140w TDP @ 3.3 GHz, Intel will hit a TDP limit with more cores and need to lower clocks further.


3.5 16C would go up against 3.0 18C just fine, with the 18C CPU probably just barely edging it out.

If intel keeps clocks up, they win performance no doubt, but at what perf/watt?

Also - if users need high single thread performance, then KBL-X is the right CPU to buy. Users buying high core counts are probably doing high core count things.

PS- You claim 15% higher performance per clock, then up to 25%, then claimed 10%+15-25% = 30-40% single thread...not quite buying the math.