|
JazzmasterCurious posted:Fake. It should have a base clock speed of 4.7 GHz with the boost maxed at 5 Khorne fucked around with this message at 15:54 on Apr 16, 2018 |
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 12:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 18:59 |
|
|
Wish they'd do an unlocked pentium again
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 15:12
|
|
|
redeyes posted:A little known secret is NVMe scales with more CPU cores. This is Extremely Important for my home workload such as [blank] and [input missing]
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 17:55
|
|
|
Khorne posted:A-B testing shows consumers like a big turbo boost and some overclock headroom. Can't do things like AMD and provide the chip's actual speeds. Need to use lovely TIM and ship the CPU at a clock 30% or more below what 99% of our binning can do.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 21:46
|
|
|
Khorne posted:A-B testing shows consumers like a big turbo boost and some overclock headroom. Can't do things like AMD and provide the chip's actual speeds. Need to use lovely TIM and ship the CPU at a clock 30% or more below what 99% of our binning can do. (you missed the joke) (hint: 4.77)
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 03:21
|
|
|
BobHoward posted:(you missed the joke)
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 05:01
|
|
|
I wonder how much processing power they could fit into the original x086 package, and not have it overheat.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 11:04
|
|
|
GRINDCORE MEGGIDO posted:I wonder how much processing power they could fit into the original x086 package, and not have it overheat.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 12:31
|
|
|
ufarn posted:They'll just hand over everything to the GPU.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 13:07
|
|
|
"Intel Advanced Snake Oil"
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 13:43
|
|
|
mystes posted:This is interesting, but does Intel really have to call it "Security Essentials"? Couldn't they have used any other name?
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2018 14:04
|
|
|
If I have a 4770k plugged into a Z87 board, are my PCIe cards running at gen2 or gen3 speed? e: oh it seems I get gen3 on the CPU connected slots! Shaocaholica fucked around with this message at 20:00 on Apr 18, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2018 19:55
|
|
|
When is intel announcing 8 cores?
Khorne fucked around with this message at 22:19 on Apr 18, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2018 21:21
|
|
|
Khorne posted:When is intel announcing 8 cores?
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2018 23:39
|
|
|
ufarn posted:June 8 is a big Intel anniversary (8086 in 1978), so possibly then. It's also square in the middle of Computex.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2018 23:49
|
|
|
I'm still praying to the CPU gods for a 8c/8t Core i5. 
spasticColon fucked around with this message at 00:01 on Apr 19, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2018 23:57
|
|
|
I somehow doubt they'll call them 9th Gen if they're still running on 14nm++. My guess is they'll go with the i5-8850K and the i7-8870K, even if x8xx and x9xx SKUs are normally reserved for the HEDT parts. Maybe 8785 and 8787? We probably won't see locked consumer-focused octacores until Ice Lake. BIG HEADLINE fucked around with this message at 00:26 on Apr 19, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2018 00:24
|
|
|
spasticColon posted:I'm still praying to the CPU gods for a 8c/8t Core i5. That would be the budget king for ages to come, a bit like how the i5 2500k was. I can't see it happening for a while yet. Intel wants people to buy their i7s.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2018 05:01
|
|
|
Zedsdeadbaby posted:That would be the budget king for ages to come, a bit like how the i5 2500k was. I can't see it happening for a while yet. Intel wants people to buy their i7s. All the more reason I see the first 8C/8T being a K-SKUed CPU, specifically *so* Intel can overcharge for it, and wait until Ice Lake to release the consumer-focused ones. The original sale price of the 8700K was ~$429 (despite having a lower MSRP). I could see the initial "gotta have it" price for the i7 14nm++ 8C/16T part being $599, even though i7-7820s are ~$470, but you make up the difference in having to buy a 'full' X299 board for ~$250-300+ if you want one that's not a *complete* piece of first-generation crap, and also not one of those cut-down ones they put out for the Kaby-Xes. BIG HEADLINE fucked around with this message at 12:38 on Apr 19, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2018 06:02
|
|
|
There's been a bunch of rumors that there's going to be a Skylake-X refresh this fall (instead of Cascade Lake-X), going back to soldered IHSes. If true, this would be hilarious.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2018 19:30
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:There's been a bunch of rumors that there's going to be a Skylake-X refresh this fall (instead of Cascade Lake-X), going back to soldered IHSes. If true, this would be hilarious. what the hell is happening at intel, is their products managers just think the shotgun method of shove more chips out the door from differant SKUs more better?
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2018 19:34
|
|
|
This is what it looks like when process improvement dies i guess.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2018 20:01
|
|
|
I love how the 8400 is easily in the top 3 in most of these benchmarks when in comes to games(!), power consumption and pure performance (ST, but still).
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2018 09:55
|
|
|
lllllllllllllllllll posted:I love how the 8400 is easily in the top 3 in most of these benchmarks when in comes to games(!), power consumption and pure performance (ST, but still). I can go back to my old 4790K from my 8700K and it will make zero difference in gaming besides offline 31 bots CS:GO which is far and away the most ST intensive gaming load I can think of. I really didn't need a CPU upgrade but I was so loving bored with the desktop CPU landscape.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2018 13:40
|
|
|
Palladium posted:I can go back to my old 4790K from my 8700K and it will make zero difference in gaming besides offline 31 bots CS:GO which is far and away the most ST intensive gaming load I can think of. This is pretty much where I’m at. I have this irrational desire to upgrade my 6700K, but there’s no legitimate reason to do so. Not until 6+ cores get more heavily leveraged in gaming anyway. That said, if Intel does roll out a mainstream 8C/16T chip soon, that might do the trick.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2018 14:10
|
|
|
There was a "worth-it" improvement going from a 2500k to an 8700k, but barely, even with a 1070 powering it. For most gaming/enthusiast users on Ivy or later I would not suggest upgrading yet unless there's money burning a hole in your pocket.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2018 14:33
|
|
|
For games alone there's very little reason to go to 6 cores. For encoding in the background it's very nice. About 4 cores get used for encoding and leave 2 free for foreground apps and there's virtually no performance hit. Encoding blurays takes more CPU power but I have a lot more DVDs of old TV shows that never got or have no quality change from a better medium than I do blurays, probably in a 10:1 ratio.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2018 15:07
|
|
|
Lockback posted:There was a "worth-it" improvement going from a 2500k to an 8700k, but barely, even with a 1070 powering it. For most gaming/enthusiast users on Ivy or later I would not suggest upgrading yet unless there's money burning a hole in your pocket. I went from a 2700k -> 8700k, and if I didn't have a different color motherboard when I look through the window, I'd be hard pressed to notice :\
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2018 18:47
|
|
|
The only time I ever notice I need a processor with more balls is video editing. My 6600K chokes hard, it feels like the terrible slowdown of conventional hard drives bad. So more cores it is. (In my defence I never touched a video editor ever until recently, or I wouldn't have a 4c w/o HT) GRINDCORE MEGGIDO fucked around with this message at 19:10 on Apr 20, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2018 19:00
|
|
|
.
sincx fucked around with this message at 05:55 on Mar 23, 2021 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2018 19:02
|
|
|
The only difference I noticed going from a 2500k to a 6600k was framerates in World of Warcraft's Dalaran city being much higher. I generally saw less dips overall, especially in raids. It's weird, WoW doesn't really use much CPU but it got the biggest improvements. Perhaps the new memory had something to do with it, I went from 1600mhz to 2666mhz when I upgraded my CPU and board.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2018 19:53
|
|
|
Zedsdeadbaby posted:The only difference I noticed going from a 2500k to a 6600k was framerates in World of Warcraft's Dalaran city being much higher. I generally saw less dips overall, especially in raids. It's weird, WoW doesn't really use much CPU but it got the biggest improvements. Perhaps the new memory had something to do with it, I went from 1600mhz to 2666mhz when I upgraded my CPU and board. There is definitely stuff in WoW that is cpu limited, I noticed a huge boost as well after doing a processor upgrade, esp in high pop areas where you'd think the GPU would be struggling to draw all the characters
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2018 19:58
|
|
|
AlternateAccount posted:I went from a 2700k -> 8700k, and if I didn't have a different color motherboard when I look through the window, I'd be hard pressed to notice :\ Even games that were single thread-heavy I noticed a decent (though not dramatic) framerate increase, far less dips, and even things like loading was faster. A few games that used the additional cores had a significant performance increase, but those are rare. It's noticeable for sure for me, but as I wouldn't categorize it as a giant leap. The GPU jump in the same timeline would be from a 570 to a 1070, and it wouldn't even be close to that relative performance increase.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2018 20:14
|
|
|
i'm still on an overclocked 4970k which i upgraded to after using a 2500k. I noticed a pretty big difference after the upgrade but I did have a 120hz monitor at the time. if i upgrade anytime soon it's going to be more for the motherboard features at this point
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2018 20:19
|
|
|
Yeah, there’s really only motherboard features worth upgrading for if you’ve got a decent SSD and GPU for most desktop uses now. Other cases are purely for specific cases like video encoding (AVX-512 helps significantly if you work with HEVC a lot evidently). With a 1080 Ti and 16GB of RAM, my 4790k is handling everything fine except for my HEVC transcodes. I bought an NVMe SSD and the hours I’ve wasted dealing with booting from it on a Z97 board would have probably paid for a new system by now.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2018 21:14
|
|
|
Zedsdeadbaby posted:The only difference I noticed going from a 2500k to a 6600k was framerates in World of Warcraft's Dalaran city being much higher. I generally saw less dips overall, especially in raids. It's weird, WoW doesn't really use much CPU but it got the biggest improvements. Perhaps the new memory had something to do with it, I went from 1600mhz to 2666mhz when I upgraded my CPU and board. From what I remember WoW pegs one CPU really hard and doesnt touch the others, in general MMOs lean very heavy on the CPU.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2018 21:21
|
|
|
Slider posted:From what I remember WoW pegs one CPU really hard and doesnt touch the others, in general MMOs lean very heavy on the CPU. The funny part is that online multiplayer titles are both real demanding on CPUs, and also the most difficult to accurately benchmark.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2018 21:36
|
|
|
They're mostly just memory-hard.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2018 22:00
|
|
|
Looks like Cannonlake engineering samples are starting to finally to trickle out to a wider audience, including a bizarre NUC with a RX550 dGPU. Wccftech so be skeptical etc https://wccftech.com/intel-10nm-cannonlake-nucs-amd-radeon-rx-500-gpus/
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2018 02:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 18:59 |
|
|
canyoneer posted:The funny part is that online multiplayer titles are both real demanding on CPUs, and also the most difficult to accurately benchmark. I remembered my CS:GO average framerates jumped by 60% from a 2500K @ 4.2GHz to a 4790K stock on the same DDR3-1600. For 5v5 you won't be able to A/B the difference in a blind test, but 40+ player mods it's a massive boost where even a 4790K struggle to maintain 60 fps in a intense firefight.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2018 09:13
|
|