Bofferbrauer2 said:
Unless the programm really makes use of the larger cache, like in games for instance, Zen 4 and Zen 4c should have the exact same IPC. As such, clock for clock and core for core, the 4c should beat Intel's e cores by a country mile. And that's before counting instructions that the e cores lack but Zen4c has, like AVX. What's more interesting is how much each of them consume at a given clock speed (like a fixed 3Ghz), and how 4 Zen4c cores would compare to 8 e cores in programs that take full use of them, since both would have 8 threads but a completely different way to reach them. |
Yea 1:1 Zen 4C should be way faster but how many e-cores can Intel give you vs how many Zen 4C cores can AMD give you in the same price range and the performance aspect of that too should be interesting. Like if an i5 comes with say 8 e-cores while a Zen 4 version comes with 4C cores, does that mean the i5 is faster or Zen 4C is faster?
Because we know that say a 13700K with it's 8 ecores can be competitive against a 7900X in multi-threaded application workloads despite 7900X having 4 extra Zen 4 cores. So 4 ZenC vs 4 E-cores = ZenC is the winner, but 4 ZenC cores vs 8 Ecores... That will be interesting to see.
PC Specs: CPU: 7800X3D || GPU: Strix 4090 || RAM: 32GB DDR5 6000 || Main SSD: WD 2TB SN850
