Intel's massive 18-core Core i9 chip

[AliG]

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.

IPC difference could actually be much larger for AVX applications - though AMD does tend to win a few brute int and float compute tests.

I think in the end it'll boil down to application needs. There are some where Skylake/Kabylake absolutely crush Ryzen, but for the rest AMD offers tremendous value.