tamusc said:
Most of the single thread performance difference can be chalked up to a pure speed difference (the 7600k is 400Mhz faster than the 1600x) that can mostly, if not entirely, be offset by enabling the auto-overclocking features of the Ryzen CPUs.
And what happens when the Intel chip is overclocked as well? You really have to compare base clock to base clock, and then overclocked performance to overclocked performance.
The multi threaded performance difference can be expected, but I don't think you're going to see a ridiculous amount of gain in single thread performance because there are even more cores/threads. There is just a finite amount of stuff to offload from the processor working the primary process. If that were the case, way more people would recommend i7 for gaming than they do.
I get that its good for there to actually be competition in the CPU market, but I'm not sure why people are flipping out about AMD finally coming out with a processor that is comparable in IPC, when Intel has admittedly been focused on almost everything except performance for years. It looks like AMD has caught up with where Intel has been for years and added more cores.
That said, I'm interested to see what this will make Intel do. Do they push 6-core into the consumer realm? Do they unleash some crazy architecture upgrades that they've been sitting on for a while? Overall I think it is great that AMD is back in the game. Competition is always good, but an underdog needs to substantially jump ahead of the incumbent to really break things up.
