Has Intel lost its crown to AMD

novaburst

Senior Member
There seems to be a lot of noise about the AMD CPU, seems like they finally have taken another step and apparently have the fastest CPU in the world and seem to have left Intel way behind and i mean way way behind.

Have any noticed this big change of the crown being passed to AMD.


https://www.amd.com/en/products/processors-desktop


https://www.scan.co.uk/products/amd-ryzen-9-3900x-am4-zen-2-12-core-24-thread-38ghz-46ghz-turbo-64mb-l3-pcie-40-105w-cpupluswraith-p?gclid=CjwKCAiA3uDwBRBFEiwA1VsajAS_EY8AR0FexfSz7MtFR4nq3aL97EmwSJxwDC5b5cujnJm27QQHBBoC7kcQAvD_BwE

So what will your new build be or will you be sticking with Intel
 

Symfoniq

Senior Member
I do think AMD is better now for many workloads.

However, there is still some question as to whether AMD's resurgence translates into better real-time audio performance, because AMD's CCD/CCX design (like all designs) has certain trade-offs. And relatively speaking, software engineers haven't had a lot of time to optimize their codebases for Ryzen and Threadripper.

For myself, I "stuck with Intel" by buying a new Mac Pro. However, I do hope Apple is giving AMD a serious look for future systems.
 

Technostica

Active Member
In general AMD now have the better platforms for Desktop, Workstation, Server and possibly also soon for Laptops based on their announcement from earlier this week; need to wait to see what battery life is like.
Not just slightly better but by a massive margin in many cases; up to twice the performance.

Pete at Scan has tested some of the latest Ryzen chips in a DAW setting:

Intel is working on something to beat AMD
They are always working on new stuff so time will tell how their new stuff compares to whatever AMD have out at the time they release something new.

For now yes, Intel's 10nm should be much better.
I'm sure Intel appreciate your confidence, but considering how late it is, over 2 years and how low the clock speeds are on the current shipping 10nm parts, there is no guarantee that the first generation 10nm desktop parts will be significantly faster than current Intel stuff thus giving them no chance to catch up with even current AMD platforms.
Plus AMD have new platforms due this year which are seemingly on track and built on a 2nd generation 7nm TSMC process.
Intel's massive issues aren't just based on their major fabrication problems, but also that AMD have out thought them in terms of the design of their architectures.

I can't see Intel start to being competitive again until they release their 7nm parts which for desktop might not be until 2022 at the earliest.
By then AMD may well be at 5nm with yet another new architecture.

Note: Roughly speaking, an Intel fabrication node is roughly equivalent to the TSMC node that is one smaller. Therefore:
Intel 10nm = TSMC 7nm.
Intel 7nm = TSMC 5nm.
This can change as due to Intel's issues the design parameters of their 10nm and smaller nodes might change for the worse.

This is the weakest that Intel have been versus AMD for over a decade and maybe ever.
For non DAW content creators, AMD have totally embarrassed Intel this year.

 
Last edited:

Damarus

Active Member
No doubt AMD is doing amazing work. I hope Zen3 is great, and I hope Intel's next gens are great too.

But remember Intel still owns the market, so don't dismiss them quite yet. Desktop consumer CPU's are only a fraction of the pie. Intel dominates low power CPU's, laptop CPUs, Servers and they are about even with AMD on Desktop CPUs, despite being on 14nm still (obviously HEDT/high core counts are a different story)
 

pderbidge

Senior Member
For now, Intel seems behind. The first time AMD had the edge on Intel was when they released Opteron, many years ago. It wasn't long after, less than a year, that Intel came back and pounced on AMD. Since then AMD just hasn't been able to catch up until now and I'm happy to see some healthy competition again. I was about to purchase an 8700k and then Ryzen 3 came out and I decided to go 3700x. For Thunderbolt users, the only option from AMD are the new x570 Asrock boards, so take that into consideration. For some reason the other manufacturers did not add in support for Thunderbolt even though the new AMD chipset supports it.

From my own observations it seems that Intel has been more and more focused on developing a chip that can scale really well on a mobile platform and from a long term financial perspective I think they're probably right to pursue that, even if it means temporary lost sales against AMD for now. As much as we all want the most powerful machine we can get for our studios, even in our own industry we see musicians and mix engineers needing to be more mobile so I think that's the future and Intel knows it. I contracted with Intel back when Opteron was a threat so I have first hand knowledge as to how they handled things internally and these guys have 10+ year roadmaps they work off of so I guarantee they already have a solution to counter AMD but they are just weighing out the options that will benefit the company the most in the long run.
 

kitekrazy

Senior Member
Hopefully it will stop Intel from being pricey. My last CPUs I bought were AMD FX6300 - $100, Intel 4790 - $300. I've always look to AMD as a budget alternative. But if AMD gets pricey I will choose Intel because it just always works when building a DAW.
 

chimuelo

Star Of Stage & Screen
I think Zen 3 is gonna be where it's at. Should be a completely new design. They already reduced the latencies in Zen 2, but this is rumoured to be further improved (if not nigh eliminated) in Zen 3.
Sure seems like it.
They’re unifying the cache now too so it’s not two separate 16MB pools but a 32MB all access pass.
They didn’t really steal the CES show until this week.

Intel is not going to have anything to knock out Zen 3.
They are losing desktop gamers, server clients, mobile clients.
Stockholders had proxy votes on moving forward with AI and other more profitable sectors, selling cheaper CPUs doesn’t appeal to investors.

I hope not. I like competition.
Its why we saw Matisse.
 

tabulius

Active Member
If you are building a daw today I think both AMD and Intel are good options. Ever since Intel core2duo I’ve bought Intel and now I’m using i7 6700K and it is having a bad time keeping up with larger Vi-projects. It seems from the Scan Pro audio tests that Intel still have some edge over AMD with max polyphony at least. I might wait for Zen 3 before jumping in to Cascade Lake X or whatever was the latest ”generation”.
 
OP
novaburst

novaburst

Senior Member
I’ll hold off and see how the new AMD processors handle low latency workloads.
I think Zen 3 is gonna be where it's at. Should be a completely new design. They already reduced the latencies in Zen 2, but this is rumoured to be further improved (if not nigh eliminated) in Zen 3.
Is this one of the side effects of the AMDs great for gaming but not so much for audio i also find to get an ok MB is kind of pricey and the max ram is not always clear on some MB and CPUs
 

kitekrazy

Senior Member
No doubt AMD is doing amazing work. I hope Zen3 is great, and I hope Intel's next gens are great too.

But remember Intel still owns the market, so don't dismiss them quite yet. Desktop consumer CPU's are only a fraction of the pie. Intel dominates low power CPU's, laptop CPUs, Servers and they are about even with AMD on Desktop CPUs, despite being on 14nm still (obviously HEDT/high core counts are a different story)
Both have its share of fanboys.
 

kitekrazy

Senior Member
Is this one of the side effects of the AMDs great for gaming but not so much for audio i also find to get an ok MB is kind of pricey and the max ram is not always clear on some MB and CPUs
A lot of hardware is pricey. A lot of it is more about aesthetics than performance. Our cases need to glow and look great from a window.
 
OP
novaburst

novaburst

Senior Member
i also find to get an ok MB is kind of pricey and the max ram is not always clear on some MB and CPUs
This is generally the AMD set up i find that there pricey MB quote max ram size but the cheaper boards are not so clear so you may get stuck with a 32gib max, also the zen is not very clear with max ram size until you go for the very high speed Zens or high speed thread rippers
 

AllenConstantine

Active Member
This is generally the AMD set up i find that there pricey MB quote max ram size but the cheaper boards are not so clear so you may get stuck with a 32gib max, also the zen is not very clear with max ram size until you go for the very high speed Zens or high speed thread rippers

So, I guess that the 3900x would be a good deal? Don't really want to switch over to AMD but what options for Intel would I still have? The i9 9900k is just an eight core...
 

Quasar

Senior Member
I do think AMD is better now for many workloads.

However, there is still some question as to whether AMD's resurgence translates into better real-time audio performance, because AMD's CCD/CCX design (like all designs) has certain trade-offs. And relatively speaking, software engineers haven't had a lot of time to optimize their codebases for Ryzen and Threadripper.

For myself, I "stuck with Intel" by buying a new Mac Pro. However, I do hope Apple is giving AMD a serious look for future systems.
I plan to do another build this year to replace my aging i7 Sandy Bridge machine, and this is the specific question I've been unable to find a clear answer to. For parallel processing, AMD would seem to be the clear winner at the moment at any given enthusiast CPU price point, but for serial processing I'm not sure that, say, an i9 9900k wouldn't outperform a similarly priced (I get that the prices are jumping all the time) Ryzen 3900x.

It's confusing when trying to translate all of the specs into the scenario of a DAW loaded with VIs and effects processing smoothly in real time and low latency is a must.