Principled Technologies (PT) responds to i9-9900K test queries

[Iota]

Use of "Game Mode" on the AMD Ryzen 7 2700X: Some inquiries we have received concern the use of the Ryzen utility and the number of active cores in the AMD-based systems. Based on AMD's recommendations and our initial testing on the Threadripper processors, we found installing the AMD Ryzen Master utility and enabling the Game Mode increased most results. For consistency purposes, we did that for all AMD systems across Threadripper and Ryzen. We are now doing additional testing with the AMD systems in Creator Mode. We will update the report with the new results.

So for consistency purposes, they also turned off HT on Intel cpus, because halving the amount of threads available would be "consistent", correct?

Cooler choice: We chose Noctua for the CPU coolers, due to having almost identical systems in the NH-U14S (Intel) and NH-U14S TR4-SP3 (AMD), which allowed us to maintain a comparable thermal profile. Because we were not performing any overclocking on any configuration, and because AMD has said it was a good cooler, we stuck with the stock AMD Ryzen 7 2700X Wraith Prism cooler.

So Intel is implying their stock cooler isn't a good cooler by way of omission then? Consistency would mean running a Noctua cooler on all systems, or if thermal limitations can come into play, then they should all be using the stock shipped coolers. That way if it's going to throttle, that'll become apparent.

Memory speeds: To have complete parity across all systems, and to allow the Intel Core i9 X-series and AMD Ryzen Threadripper to fully utilize memory bandwidth, we used four 16 GB DDR4 DIMMs on all configurations.

Consistency would be using the same memory that the CPU is validated for. Using the same ICs etc.

[kalniel]

So Intel is implying their stock cooler isn't a good cooler by way of omission then? Consistency would mean running a Noctua cooler on all systems, or if thermal limitations can come into play, then they should all be using the stock shipped coolers. That way if it's going to throttle, that'll become apparent.

I think if you mandated shipped coolers the i9 would throttle very very quickly... it doesn't come with a cooler

[Corky34]

So one of their goals was to test CPU performance so they tested at 1080p because Steam shows that's used by 62.06% of gamers, fair enough i can't argue with that, however shouldn't that same logic also apply to how much RAM was used? Steam shows less than 4% of gamers use more than 16GB and that's ignoring the fact that 64GB (4x8GB) RAM would set a typical gamer back £500-600.

[azrael-]

So Intel is implying their stock cooler isn't a good cooler by way of omission then? Consistency would mean running a Noctua cooler on all systems, or if thermal limitations can come into play, then they should all be using the stock shipped coolers. That way if it's going to throttle, that'll become apparent.

I think if you mandated shipped coolers the i9 would throttle very very quickly... it doesn't come with a cooler

It's because it doesn't NEED a cooler... Sheeesh

[Smudger]

64GB (4x8GB) RAM would set a typical gamer back £500-600.

Erm... maths?

[Iota]

Erm... maths?

4 x 8 = 64. Well known fact.

[azrael-]

Erm... maths?

4 x 8 = 64. Well known fact.

Everyone knows that it's 4 x 8 + (HT) 4 x 8. Ergo 64!

[Corky34]

Erm... maths?

It's Intel maths.

[Iota]

Everyone knows that it's 4 x 8 + (HT) 4 x 8. Ergo 64!

You win the thread.

[ohmaheid]

So Intel (via PT tech...or should that be unPT?) blackens their already manky reputation for dishonesty, chicanery and borderline illegality. Hopefully this will only drive more customers away from them.

[philehidiot]

So Intel (via PT tech...or should that be unPT?) blackens their already manky reputation for dishonesty, chicanery and borderline illegality. Hopefully this will only drive more customers away from them.

What was the name of that dodgy company they used (or set up) to investigate all the "security issues" with AMD chips after Spectre / Meltdown? Intel are heading very rapidly into my no go zone. If they're willing to be this dishonest and treat me like this much of a moron, what are they gonna be like if I have a problem and need after sales help?

[azrael-]

Everyone knows that it's 4 x 8 + (HT) 4 x 8. Ergo 64!

You win the thread.

Just pointing out the obvious...

[eden188]

So Intel (via PT tech...or should that be unPT?) blackens their already manky reputation for dishonesty, chicanery and borderline illegality. Hopefully this will only drive more customers away from them.

What was the name of that dodgy company they used (or set up) to investigate all the "security issues" with AMD chips after Spectre / Meltdown? Intel are heading very rapidly into my no go zone. If they're willing to be this dishonest and treat me like this much of a moron, what are they gonna be like if I have a problem and need after sales help?

it's CTS-Labs.

I think Intel has done similar dirty tricks in the past, back in the days of the Athlon processors.

[mtyson]

I updated the story with the latest updated PT benchmarks PDF from Friday evening.