Hacker News Reader

Looks quite different when you use a benchmark that scales more effectively with additional cores:

http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph11170/85882.png

yeah this is the one! A $1100 chip for $500, by Intel's math anyway.

There's something screwy with how that benchmark is done on an 8 core processor. Comparing a quad core Ryzen 5 1500X at 3.5Ghz to a quad core i7 7700 at 3.6Ghz, the difference is 10423/10843, or a difference of 4%. The biggest difference comes down to AMD seems very conservative about their base clock speeds for Ryzen. Against each other at similar clocks, the single core performance is near identical.

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+Ryzen+5+1500X&id...

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-7700+%...

The score you linked to showed the Ryzen as 26% faster than the i7. The Ryzen 1800x has a CPU mark of 15403 vs 12242 for the i7. I do remember reading that the Ryzen IPC is about 5% lower vs an i7, so I'm assuming whatever metric CPU mark is using takes into account the extra cores.