Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 16 of 31

Thread: Intel Core i5-10400 vs i5-9400F benchmark comparison leaked

  1. #1
    HEXUS.admin
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    29,803
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    1,936 times in 678 posts

    Intel Core i5-10400 vs i5-9400F benchmark comparison leaked

    Comet Lake-S model has hyperthreading for 6C/12T - much better for some tasks.
    Read more.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,647
    Thanks
    99
    Thanked
    215 times in 156 posts

    Re: Intel Core i5-10400 vs i5-9400F benchmark comparison leaked

    All those figures can be explained away with the addition of hyper threading and an extended boost to sustain clocks.

    Alas.

  3. #3
    Long member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,745
    Thanks
    61
    Thanked
    303 times in 215 posts
    • philehidiot's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Father's bored
      • CPU:
      • Cockroach brain V0.1
      • Memory:
      • Innebriated, unwritten
      • Storage:
      • Big Yellow Self Storage
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Semi chewed Crayola Mega Pack
      • PSU:
      • 20KW single phase direct grid supply
      • Case:
      • Closed, Open, Cold
      • Operating System:
      • Cockroach
      • Monitor(s):
      • The mental health nurses
      • Internet:
      • Please.

    Re: Intel Core i5-10400 vs i5-9400F benchmark comparison leaked

    Quote Originally Posted by Tabbykatze View Post
    All those figures can be explained away with the addition of hyper threading and an extended boost to sustain clocks.

    Alas.
    You mean they've had to stop sandbagging the mid range? Diddums. At least I suppose they had something left in the tank to give. I wonder if it's actually less effort / expense to leave hyperthreading on?

    What we need now is Intel to keep AMD honest. Of all maddening things. Sounds like the tech press were almost entirely informed about the mobo backwards compatibility issues two weeks prior to the announcement that X4xx series and below wouldn't support newer AM4 chips. I thoroughly expect that when my CPU is EOL, it'll be worth upgrading the mobo and so I see it all as a one off expense. However, if I'd bought an X4 series mobo and a cheap AM4 CPU to get me going, with the intention of upgrading based off AMD's marketing, I'd be utterly furious. B series, not so much as part of the price of an expensive mobo is the support but AMD near enough promised ongoing support with the AM4 socket and even called Intel "evil" for redoing the socket every time. Buying X series boards is expensive partly to guarantee that kind of support from the mobo manufacturer.

    Sounds like Intel's argument about "we want it to just work" and guaranteeing mobo compatibility, without sending out loaner CPUs and so on, has some merit to it.

  4. Received thanks from:

    CAT-THE-FIFTH (13-05-2020)

  5. #4
    Moosekateer CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Not here
    Posts
    29,376
    Thanks
    3,303
    Thanked
    4,611 times in 3,557 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: Intel Core i5-10400 vs i5-9400F benchmark comparison leaked

    Quote Originally Posted by philehidiot View Post
    You mean they've had to stop sandbagging the mid range? Diddums. At least I suppose they had something left in the tank to give. I wonder if it's actually less effort / expense to leave hyperthreading on?

    What we need now is Intel to keep AMD honest. Of all maddening things. Sounds like the tech press were almost entirely informed about the mobo backwards compatibility issues two weeks prior to the announcement that X4xx series and below wouldn't support newer AM4 chips. I thoroughly expect that when my CPU is EOL, it'll be worth upgrading the mobo and so I see it all as a one off expense. However, if I'd bought an X4 series mobo and a cheap AM4 CPU to get me going, with the intention of upgrading based off AMD's marketing, I'd be utterly furious. B series, not so much as part of the price of an expensive mobo is the support but AMD near enough promised ongoing support with the AM4 socket and even called Intel "evil" for redoing the socket every time. Buying X series boards is expensive partly to guarantee that kind of support from the mobo manufacturer.

    Sounds like Intel's argument about "we want it to just work" and guaranteeing mobo compatibility, without sending out loaner CPUs and so on, has some merit to it.
    AMD probably were trying to pad out it's worse gaming performance,by promoting its longer socket lifespan and chance to slot in a faster future CPU,etc over Intel by using cheaper B450 motherboards. If people knew you needed an X570 motherboard for this,then it would have increased the cost of an AMD setup,and put Intel on a more equal footing.


    Those despicable Elk,stealing the pond weed!

  6. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Location
    Northants
    Posts
    141
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked
    7 times in 6 posts
    • KultiVator's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Aorus x570 Ultra
      • CPU:
      • Ryzen 3900x
      • Memory:
      • G.Skill 32GB (2x16gb) 3600Mhz
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Sabrent Rocket PCIe 4 NVMe SSD + Various SATA SSDs & HDDs
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Aorus RTX 2080 Super OC 8GB
      • PSU:
      • Corsair RM750x
      • Case:
      • Phanteks Eclipse P600s (Black & White Edition)
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Pro
      • Monitor(s):
      • AOC 32" 4K IPS Monitor / ASUS 24" ProArt IPS Monitor

    Re: Intel Core i5-10400 vs i5-9400F benchmark comparison leaked

    I take the point about customers sort of expecting AMD CPUs to work on previous gen motherboards, but comparing AMD to Intel's "redoing the socket every time" is a big leap.

    AMD offer pretty great upgrade potential across the generations of Ryzen/ThreadRipper CPUs so far launched. But there was always going to come a point where that continuity would have to give way as the CPUs continue to evolve and motherboard chipsets/circuitry have to leap forward so as not to hamstring AMD's progress and the B-Series chipsets are exactly where you'd expect that to be felt first.

  7. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    1,393
    Thanks
    21
    Thanked
    72 times in 60 posts
    • Percy1983's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte x570 Aorus Pro
      • CPU:
      • AMD 3700x + Cooler Master Nepton 140XL
      • Memory:
      • 64GB (4x16GB ) Corsair Vengence 3200mhz @ 3600mhz CL16
      • Storage:
      • 500GB Silicon Power NVME + 2x 4tb Raid 0 (2tbx2) arrays with 250gb Silicon Power NVME cache
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Vega 56 Red Dragon
      • PSU:
      • 875w Thermaltake Toughpower XT
      • Case:
      • Thermaltake Level 10 GT Snow Edition
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Pro 64bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • 24" Acer UHD x2
      • Internet:
      • Talk Talk!

    Re: Intel Core i5-10400 vs i5-9400F benchmark comparison leaked

    Seems AMDs chipsets support 2 generations, this is twice the support of intel.

    Seem AMD have done wonders for everybody, intel have had to stop hobbling the budget chips now, happy days.

  8. #7
    Long member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,745
    Thanks
    61
    Thanked
    303 times in 215 posts
    • philehidiot's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Father's bored
      • CPU:
      • Cockroach brain V0.1
      • Memory:
      • Innebriated, unwritten
      • Storage:
      • Big Yellow Self Storage
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Semi chewed Crayola Mega Pack
      • PSU:
      • 20KW single phase direct grid supply
      • Case:
      • Closed, Open, Cold
      • Operating System:
      • Cockroach
      • Monitor(s):
      • The mental health nurses
      • Internet:
      • Please.

    Re: Intel Core i5-10400 vs i5-9400F benchmark comparison leaked

    I'd not say I'm comparing, I'm saying that there's something to the argument when you look at the problems AMD has had over the years in trying to maintain compatibility. Culminating in a near promise that is being broken. The way they've screwed up for me is in not saying as soon as they knew "look, we've tried and tried but we simply can not guarantee that mobos before X5xx will work with the next gen CPUs, we'll release the microcode to the mobo manufacturers so they can try and get some unofficial support going but we simply can not guarantee it due to technical changes we've had to make which could not have been foreseen". People would have understood that but in hiding it (and getting the tech press to hide it, too) there will be people who have invested in the wrong hardware who didn't need to do so.

    Personally, it doesn't bother me. But it's a hard lesson in promising too much into the future without being Mystic Meg.

    And I agree, logically there is a point where they can not continue to offer support. Their marketing needs to reflect this because there's a difference between a near promise that you'll have compatibility into the future and a more realistic "we'll pledge to continue support for future CPUs on older chipsets as long as it's technically possible and financially viable. This will usually encompass at least the last two generations of chipset, but may be more or less depending on technical requirements".

    I also think they were warned by their engineers that this was coming and the marketing department continued to push the "holier than thou" narrative.

    If they hadn't promised, been so hard on Intel and then covered it up, the backlash wouldn't have been nearly so bad. It would probably have been a little bit of bad press but nothing major. Now it's a broken promise that has cost money. And THAT is a problem for trust in a company. Also, if AMD are going to show that they're not trustworthy (despite playing the "holier than thou" marketing card) people in this situation may go "well, I'm stuck buying a new motherboard, I'll go Intel JUST to spite AMD".

    That is exactly what I did with Nvidia - they annoyed me with their treatment of customers, so I waited for the Vega64 to go on offer and be good bang for buck and bought that instead.

  9. #8
    Moosekateer CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Not here
    Posts
    29,376
    Thanks
    3,303
    Thanked
    4,611 times in 3,557 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: Intel Core i5-10400 vs i5-9400F benchmark comparison leaked

    Lots of X570 motherboards also have 16MB BIOS chips too - if poor AMD was being bullied by those evil OEMs,they certainly knew by July 2019,their promise would fall to pieces due to BIOS problems. They then dug even in deeper and starting attacking Intel directly over it.

    Quote Originally Posted by AMD in July 2019
    "The alternative to this BIOS 'problem,' which we find truly repugnant, is simply breaking socket compatibility with every new generation of CPU. Nobody can keep their old motherboard and upgrade, anymore. Nobody would ever have to worry about a BIOS update again... but they would also never get to keep their investment ever again. To us, that is not the right thing to do. It seems hostile and abusive to arbitrarily prevent users from keeping the same motherboard, which may cost a few hundred dollars, just to make the upgrade process a little 'neater' on paper. So we do what we can to support in-socket upgrades as we have with Socket AM4."

    They didn't release a mainstream chipset for Zen2,meaning they just pushed B450 along,which is a one generation upgrade like Intel,and they have the audacity to make statements like I quoted before. It took them less than a year to go back on it for "reasons".


    Those despicable Elk,stealing the pond weed!

  10. #9
    Long member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,745
    Thanks
    61
    Thanked
    303 times in 215 posts
    • philehidiot's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Father's bored
      • CPU:
      • Cockroach brain V0.1
      • Memory:
      • Innebriated, unwritten
      • Storage:
      • Big Yellow Self Storage
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Semi chewed Crayola Mega Pack
      • PSU:
      • 20KW single phase direct grid supply
      • Case:
      • Closed, Open, Cold
      • Operating System:
      • Cockroach
      • Monitor(s):
      • The mental health nurses
      • Internet:
      • Please.

    Re: Intel Core i5-10400 vs i5-9400F benchmark comparison leaked

    Quote Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH View Post
    Lots of X570 motherboards also have 16MB BIOS chips too - if poor AMD was being bullied by those evil OEMs,they certainly knew by July 2019,their promise would fall to pieces due to BIOS problems. They then dug even in deeper and starting attacking Intel directly over it.




    They didn't release a mainstream chipset for Zen2,meaning they just pushed B450 along,which is a one generation upgrade like Intel,and they have the audacity to make statements like I quoted before. It took them less than a year to go back on it for "reasons".
    A little more honesty from the start and not being so abusive to Intel would have gone down a lot better. It's true that arbitrarily changing sockets is just being prickish but so is saying "think different" when you're ripping off everyone else's ideas and then repackaging them as your own...

    ... how'd I get onto Apple? Is it beer o'clock already? Oh wait, all tech companies are alike. When they get on top and have no longer the need to be customer orientated, they won't be.

  11. #10
    Moosekateer CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Not here
    Posts
    29,376
    Thanks
    3,303
    Thanked
    4,611 times in 3,557 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: Intel Core i5-10400 vs i5-9400F benchmark comparison leaked

    Quote Originally Posted by philehidiot View Post
    A little more honesty from the start and not being so abusive to Intel would have gone down a lot better. It's true that arbitrarily changing sockets is just being prickish but so is saying "think different" when you're ripping off everyone else's ideas and then repackaging them as your own...

    ... how'd I get onto Apple? Is it beer o'clock already? Oh wait, all tech companies are alike. When they get on top and have no longer the need to be customer orientated, they won't be.
    The hypocracy of AMD is the worst aspect of this. Then the way they treat their own partners,and it makes me wonder,if this is the real reason Intel and Nvidia seem to get better quality OEM system,in general. If companies can't determine whether what AMD is saying is going to change at the drop of hat,they will invest more funds into Intel and Nvidia based products,if they know where they stand.

    The worst aspect,not only are their fans actively defending this on the internet,they are the same people who AMD rallied to attack Intel and Nvidia over doing these kinds of things - they are now rushing out to reward AMD(apparently) by buying up X570 motherboards. Looks like a winning formula,the customer has spoken again.


    Those despicable Elk,stealing the pond weed!

  12. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Location
    Northants
    Posts
    141
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked
    7 times in 6 posts
    • KultiVator's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Aorus x570 Ultra
      • CPU:
      • Ryzen 3900x
      • Memory:
      • G.Skill 32GB (2x16gb) 3600Mhz
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Sabrent Rocket PCIe 4 NVMe SSD + Various SATA SSDs & HDDs
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Aorus RTX 2080 Super OC 8GB
      • PSU:
      • Corsair RM750x
      • Case:
      • Phanteks Eclipse P600s (Black & White Edition)
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Pro
      • Monitor(s):
      • AOC 32" 4K IPS Monitor / ASUS 24" ProArt IPS Monitor

    Re: Intel Core i5-10400 vs i5-9400F benchmark comparison leaked

    Maybe I'm missing something subtle, but I recall AM3 sockets being around for absolutely ages... and AM4 has already served multiple generations of CPU (ok, with some caveats to factor in).

    Some of the biggest caveats are not directly down to AMD, but other areas of progress in the industry, like the move to PCIe 4.0 (and the upcoming PCIe 5.0) occurring during the lifetime of AM4.

    The newer PCIe specs call for special circuitry / redrivers / retimers to overcome the attenuation of signals sent at such high frequencies over the PCI bus.

    But up until now, if you can live without PCIe 4.0 GPUs and PCIe 4.0 M.2 SSDs, AMD has been able to offer up options to allow *many* earlier AM4 motherboards - with their older PCIe 3.0 buses - to offer forwards-compatibility for the newer Ryzen CPUs.

    So it's not a perfect situation, but I prefer AMD's approach to that of Intel, who I'm certain are just out to gouge whatever profits they can, with no apologies offered.

  13. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,647
    Thanks
    99
    Thanked
    215 times in 156 posts

    Re: Intel Core i5-10400 vs i5-9400F benchmark comparison leaked

    Quote Originally Posted by KultiVator View Post
    Maybe I'm missing something subtle, but I recall AM3 sockets being around for absolutely ages... and AM4 has already served multiple generations of CPU (ok, with some caveats to factor in).

    Some of the biggest caveats are not directly down to AMD, but other areas of progress in the industry, like the move to PCIe 4.0 (and the upcoming PCIe 5.0) occurring during the lifetime of AM4.

    The newer PCIe specs call for special circuitry / redrivers / retimers to overcome the attenuation of signals sent at such high frequencies over the PCI bus.

    But up until now, if you can live without PCIe 4.0 GPUs and PCIe 4.0 M.2 SSDs, AMD has been able to offer up options to allow *many* earlier AM4 motherboards - with their older PCIe 3.0 buses - to offer forwards-compatibility for the newer Ryzen CPUs.

    So it's not a perfect situation, but I prefer AMD's approach to that of Intel, who I'm certain are just out to gouge whatever profits they can, with no apologies offered.
    Can I have your measurements for the undertaker?

    Cat is on a crusade and you about to get it

  14. Received thanks from:

    afiretruck (13-05-2020)

  15. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    278
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    7 times in 7 posts

    Re: Intel Core i5-10400 vs i5-9400F benchmark comparison leaked

    Quote Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by philehidiot View Post
    A little more honesty from the start and not being so abusive to Intel would have gone down a lot better. It's true that arbitrarily changing sockets is just being prickish but so is saying "think different" when you're ripping off everyone else's ideas and then repackaging them as your own...

    ... how'd I get onto Apple? Is it beer o'clock already? Oh wait, all tech companies are alike. When they get on top and have no longer the need to be customer orientated, they won't be.
    The hypocracy of AMD is the worst aspect of this. Then the way they treat their own partners,and it makes me wonder,if this is the real reason Intel and Nvidia seem to get better quality OEM system,in general. If companies can't determine whether what AMD is saying is going to change at the drop of hat,they will invest more funds into Intel and Nvidia based products,if they know where they stand.

    The worst aspect,not only are their fans actively defending this on the internet,they are the same people who AMD rallied to attack Intel and Nvidia over doing these kinds of things - they are now rushing out to reward AMD(apparently) by buying up X570 motherboards. Looks like a winning formula,the customer has spoken again.
    I remember a time when first generation of Ryzen was introduced, the roadmap at that time was indicating that the 3rd generation of ZEN will not be compatible with the AM4 socket. So actually they did better than anticipated...

  16. #14
    Moosekateer CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Not here
    Posts
    29,376
    Thanks
    3,303
    Thanked
    4,611 times in 3,557 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: Intel Core i5-10400 vs i5-9400F benchmark comparison leaked

    Quote Originally Posted by KultiVator View Post
    Maybe I'm missing something subtle, but I recall AM3 sockets being around for absolutely ages... and AM4 has already served multiple generations of CPU (ok, with some caveats to factor in).

    Some of the biggest caveats are not directly down to AMD, but other areas of progress in the industry, like the move to PCIe 4.0 (and the upcoming PCIe 5.0) occurring during the lifetime of AM4.

    The newer PCIe specs call for special circuitry / redrivers / retimers to overcome the attenuation of signals sent at such high frequencies over the PCI bus.

    But up until now, if you can live without PCIe 4.0 GPUs and PCIe 4.0 M.2 SSDs, AMD has been able to offer up options to allow *many* earlier AM4 motherboards - with their older PCIe 3.0 buses - to offer forwards-compatibility for the newer Ryzen CPUs.

    So it's not a perfect situation, but I prefer AMD's approach to that of Intel, who I'm certain are just out to gouge whatever profits they can, with no apologies offered.
    AM3 is a poor example,as there was another controversy over the whole AM3+ move,and why certain motherboards were arbitarily excluded. These had hacked support put back in.

    Also,it's utterly down to AMD. Who makes the reference platform,and informs OEMs?? AMD. Who determines the quality of motherboards?? AMD.

    Who made the choice about the socket being compatible - AMD?? Who then should make sure the socket works - AMD.

    AMD by 2019,knew very well even many of their X570 motherboards had small BIOSes. The B550 mainstream chipset,is only releasing next month.

    So until then they re-used the B450 Zen+ chipset as the mainstream AM4 chipset,and at launch X570 was £180+ for motherboards.

    So why didn't AMD say back then B450 wouldn't work??

    Because B450 does work with PCI-E 4.0,ie,they made an OEM rebadge of the B450 called B550A which is compatible. ASRock made a B550A for the US system integrator Cyberpower PC who sells PCs through Walmart of all places.

    https://i.imgur.com/eY8ztiV.jpg

    So if that happened,why not launch a new series of improved B450 motherboards with PCI-E 4.0 and Zen3 compatability?? They didn't and sat on their arses.

    They then at the Zen2 launch wrote a piece attacking Intel:

    It seems hostile and abusive to arbitrarily prevent users from keeping the same motherboard, which may cost a few hundred dollars, just to make the upgrade process a little 'neater' on paper. So we do what we can to support in-socket upgrades as we have with Socket AM4
    So the majority of Zen2 owners are on B450 and the worst problem is how many keep track of all of this? AMD implied Zen3 would work and never said anything - there is probably going to be a whole lot of people,come Zen3 release who wonder why their B450 won't work.

    Gamersnexus quoted the following things which they heard from people close to AMD:

    "AMD knew lack of compatability would cause issues".

    "AMD wanted to announce the 500 chipset news around Zen3 support and the lack of 450 and 470 Zen3 support before the Zen3 CPU launch because AMD wanted to pre-empt that launch and AMD did not want all of this to overshadow a new CPU launch and wanted to give a chance for people to sit and simmer or sit and stew depending on the news".

    "After talking to people familar with the matter, AMD didn't expect the backlash to be this bad".

    They knew about this for a while it appears.


    Quote Originally Posted by DevDrake View Post
    I remember a time when first generation of Ryzen was introduced, the roadmap at that time was indicating that the 3rd generation of ZEN will not be compatible with the AM4 socket. So actually they did better than anticipated...
    The problem is just after Zen2 was launched,they wrote a piece targetting Intel and calling them evil for pushing unnecessary motherboard upgrades. Also the problem,is the mainstream Zen2 chipset was B450,which means a one generation upgrade cycle for them. AMD is launching B550 next month,and they also excluded PCI-E 4.0 from B450 motherboards,but rebadged OEM B450 motherboards,ie,B550A have it.

    Also the BIOS excuse is flimsy as many X570 motherboards have similar sized 16MB BIOSes,and AMD told system integrators B450 would work. Yes,they told system integrators,who only found out when we all found out.

    It almost smacks of them scared of loosing sales to Intel,if they told people X570 was the only "futureproof" chipset of the two.
    Last edited by CAT-THE-FIFTH; 13-05-2020 at 04:21 PM.


    Those despicable Elk,stealing the pond weed!

  17. #15
    Moosekateer CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Not here
    Posts
    29,376
    Thanks
    3,303
    Thanked
    4,611 times in 3,557 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: Intel Core i5-10400 vs i5-9400F benchmark comparison leaked

    Quote Originally Posted by Tabbykatze View Post
    Can I have your measurements for the undertaker?

    Cat is on a crusade and you about to get it
    Not a crusade,it's all AMD slamming Intel for being evil for pushing these kind of stunts. Then the same people saying because AMD did this,it's fine. If AMD do it then,by extension their own marketing is calling them evil too.

    This is what HUB/Techspot said:

    In the past few days we’ve had industry contacts confirm that the AMD BIOS excuse is rubbish and that simple workarounds are possible, just like the one discussed here. One good example: there could be a single large BIOS file that you download, then upon flashing you would select the CPU series you want to support, and it'd flash the appropriate code.

    It’s now up to the community to pressure AMD into changing this decision and to open up support for 400-series boards. You better believe that if you give them an inch, they’ll take a mile, and we’ll be back to where we were just a few years ago.
    I saw what Intel and Nvidia did years ago,when they started pulling those stunts. Remember Intel allowed you to overclock all CPUs on all chipsets,and they started locking it down. I told people this was not a good sign - people even on here said it was acceptable,and now we have what we have. The same with Titan class and Titan priced GPUs - people argued it was acceptable and we had the market we have now.

    Then OEMs showed some of the Intel limitations were a load of bunk - the Skylake "bug" which allowing overclocking on locked CPUs.

    It always starts like this,and soon a mm,becomes an inch and then a mile. Companies only do things their customers accept,or can't fight back against. If people want AMD to start locking down socket upgrades,etc and other features then accept it.

    Because AMD was just as bad as Intel back in the day.

    Socket 754,AM2,AM2+,QuadFX,AM3,AM3+,FM1 and FM2.Before then AMD too had very long socket lifespans.

    Some of these sockets were EOL in barely a year or so,and a single generation of upgrades. There were some times,where Intel offered better socket upgradability over AMD!

    AM3+ only lasted so long,as AMD gave up after Piledriver,and had nothing to offer.

    AMD is now doing the same and just testing the waters -you will only see what happens in a few years.They will probably eventually go back to like what Intel is doing,ie, one generation per chipset,maybe two if you are lucky. People suddenly will be less annoyed by what Intel is doing then,because AMD is better or something. You wait and see.

    Last edited by CAT-THE-FIFTH; 13-05-2020 at 04:59 PM.


    Those despicable Elk,stealing the pond weed!

  18. #16
    Long member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,745
    Thanks
    61
    Thanked
    303 times in 215 posts
    • philehidiot's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Father's bored
      • CPU:
      • Cockroach brain V0.1
      • Memory:
      • Innebriated, unwritten
      • Storage:
      • Big Yellow Self Storage
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Semi chewed Crayola Mega Pack
      • PSU:
      • 20KW single phase direct grid supply
      • Case:
      • Closed, Open, Cold
      • Operating System:
      • Cockroach
      • Monitor(s):
      • The mental health nurses
      • Internet:
      • Please.

    Re: Intel Core i5-10400 vs i5-9400F benchmark comparison leaked

    The backlash is so bad, in my view, not because people expect or even want better from tech companies (look at mobiles costing over a grand and expected to be replaced after 2-3 years). It's because AMD tried to put themselves across as being better. People trusted them on this. And then they weren't better. The underdog can always point at the moral problems of the larger player, knowing their own are smaller and less obvious as a result of the market share disparity.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •