|
Corvettefisher posted:So does intel plan on releasing any >4 core DESKTOP cpu's soonish? I know they have this i7 3930x beast But I really would rather not pay 600 for it. I do quite a bit of VMware so more cores is something I look for. AMD I know has the 8 core bulldozer but I haven't heard anything good from those. I am currently running an X6, but as my studies push higher my cpu usage is hitting a bit higher than I like it to, >95% usage with my clusters active is not uncommon. I'm no expert, but it really sounds like you're looking for a dual-socket Xeon rather than current AMD stuff. Also, I'd bet that a higher-end core i7 is quicker than your Phenom II X6, regardless of the 2 core differential.
|
#
¿
May 14, 2012 05:36
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 20, 2024 04:26 |
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:I still don't get how BGA is that much better than LGA? I'm sure there's minor improvements in signalling, but is it so much it's worth it? It's probably much more of a packaging and cost issue than a performance issue.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2012 16:35
|
|
|
I've always stuck to Asus and ASRock. ASRock boards in particular have been incredibly solid, I know they're the same company but the lower pricepoint is nice.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2013 18:47
|
|
|
I know Forbes is far from the best source for tech news, but a columnist of theirs brings up a point I hadn't considered yet: Haswell prices being higher than Ivy Bridge. http://www.forbes.com/sites/sharifsakr/2013/06/04/intel-haswell-prices/ I'm excited for the better battery life and integrated graphics that comes with Haswell, but side by side I wouldn't pay much of a price premium for a Haswell device at all. I didn't realize it cost any more because pricing seemed just like Sandy & Ivy bridge around launch, stores are advertising 4770K for $279 and 4670K for $199. I'm really hoping that Haswell lineups and pricing comes from Dell and Lenovo soon, I'm telling several people who need laptops within 2 months to wait and see what happens rather than buying now.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2013 21:49
|
|
|
SRQ posted:AMD is being prodded by beachgoers with a stick while Japan is trying kill Intel? AMD has only one orifice it must use as a mouth and anus while Intel is the only company able to dive deep enough to fight giant squid (Asian Foundries)? Back on-topic though, I have an X120e that I got in first half of 2011 and it was an excellent machine in a space with no Intel competition. With the $300 Haswell chromebooks available now, and these new Atoms creeping up in the tablet & even lower end space I see no room for AMD anywhere. I'm also optimistic that Intel will find a way to remain highly profitable in a world of declining PC shipments and a huge market for commodity tablets.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2013 15:28
|
|
|
JawnV6 posted:I'm unfamiliar with the older manufacturing techniques you're talking about, but right there you're looking at silicon. Under a few microns of that is the poly layer with transistors, then the various metal layers, then the pads and the PCB. The term is flip chip. I have some 1 micron Motorola parts, and you can clearly see the patterns on the die. I guess they weren't flipping chips at that point? I bet I could get a good picture of an 80s die with nothing but a macro lens.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2014 18:17
|
|
|
Midee posted:I've been looking to build a Haswell-E audio/gaming rig this year and if this is true, then all the better. Now if only Nvidia could have their Maxwell GPUs out by then... Isn't the GTX 750 Maxwell? Are they introducing a flagship Maxwell chip sometime soon? I could have sworn reading Maxwell was low power usage / mobile focused.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2014 21:25
|
|
|
The Lord Bude posted:If you manage to overclock the bejeesus out of it; then it can nearly match a core i3. Of course this also relies on buying a more expensive z97 mobo (unless you're willing to trust in hacked in overclocking support on H series boards) and also spending money on a good cooler, at which point you've already spend more money than just buying a core i3 in the first place, so there is literally no point beyond some sort of feel good marketing crap. Nice mobos can have some other advantages besides just ability to overclock, and a good cooler isn't that expensive. Given that this Pentium will top out at about the same clock speeds as an i5 or i7, it's an incredible gaming value.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2014 17:09
|
|
|
Hace posted:Does it though? Looking at this, it seems to perform like a slightly worse i3, and with extra frame time variance. What I saw in this is that there are negligible framerate differences in most games between an i5, i3, and overclocked Pentium, and they are all far ahead of the AMD CPU. Those framerates are high enough that your GPU will normally be your bottleneck, which is exactly the right amount of CPU for most people. Most games are really poorly threaded, and until that changes I will heartily recommend dual-cores to people looking to save money on a gaming build. Did you see how the Pentium did on a task that didn't scale to 4 threads? 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2014 19:29
|
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:Pentium I've been talking up these Pentiums to friends for budget gaming and HTPC builds. Well, I put my money where my mouth was, lets see how this thing does. I got that Pentium + an MSI Z97 motherboard for $99 together. I think this might be the best $100 I've ever spent towards computer building. This Microcenter deal is only being advertised during their email list and apparently I was the first one at my store to use it, the cashier couldn't understand how a $110 motherboard and $70 CPU ring up together under $100. http://www.microcenter.com/site/brands/G3258Bundle.aspx
|
|
#
¿
Jul 10, 2014 02:03
|
|
|
Alereon posted:Jesus. Report back if the motherboard bursts into flames. That's what I'm expecting, with how cheap this was I'm going to aim for 1.45V because I don't really care if it dies. I've always overclocked really conservatively, this is new and exciting.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 10, 2014 02:09
|
|
|
1gnoirents posted:Got the last one Sure thing! My store still had 6 of the motherboards and 8 of the CPUs, I've been letting my friends know and we are slowly but surely cleaning them out.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 10, 2014 23:44
|
|
.
|
Police Automaton posted:Nah, what mostly explains it was that I was looking for a Desktop case actually, somehow they seemed to just completely fall out of fashion around the early 00s, (Outside of MiniATX and all those other small form-factors, where it seems to be really easy to find one) but this is not the case thread so lets end it here. You want a full size tower? That and the full size desktop form factor are extremely out of favor now that people don't need a bunch of PCI and ISA cards. If you want a desktop case, you can run extremely powerful hardware in something like this: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811163256
|
|
#
¿
Sep 13, 2014 02:09
|
|
|
Tacier posted:The IT guy in my office insists AMD is the best for price/performance (he says intel motherboards cost way more or something) and recommends them to everyone and recently replaced all our 3.4Ghz Phenom II X4 965 machines with 3.1Ghz Bulldozer FX-8120s (is that even an upgrade??). We do some fairly computationally intensive stuff (Geographic Information Systems) that is almost all single threaded. This is insanely bad advice at best and a misuse of IT funds at worst, especially in an industry where time is money. Where is he even finding AMD workstations? We have nothing but Xeons here because I think that's all Dell puts in Precision workstations. TL; DR: Guy is a moron, possibly a dangerous one.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2014 00:02
|
|
|
atomicthumbs posted:How is the 5820K in single-thread performance compared to a 4790K? Slower, because the 5820K is clocked lower both stock and overclocked.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2014 20:58
|
|
|
Tacier posted:So I had a conversation with the IT guy at my office who buys only AMD processors and he seemed receptive to the idea that Intel might be better for our totally single threaded workloads, but still maintained that going AMD saves us money on RAM because Intel processors require you to use 3 sticks instead of two. I can't find anything to back up that claim, however. He's wasting money for lower performance.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2014 05:37
|
|
.
|
Factory Factory posted:I am a law student. I have to take the bar in a year or two. I would call it "a very stupid idea" to knowingly violate Federal law. Isn't using VLC in violation of federal law because of the inclusion of CSS decrypters? Or for that matter, subscribing to the "Aereo" online video service?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2014 05:32
|
|
|
Aleksei Vasiliev posted:Is it worth upgrading off an i7-2600k yet? I'm occasionally CPU-limited in Planetside 2 and do some video encoding, but I haven't been able to tell what the performance improvements are for that of the current gen vs mine. Are you overclocking? If you're not overclocking, I'd spend $40-50 on a good cooler and then you'll be up to par with latest generation chips.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2014 14:44
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:I'm now putting together a new machine, because either my motherboard, or the i7 930 @ 4.2 that lives in it has finally given up the ghost. Lots of random crashes, even after I took the overclock out. What kind of voltage? That's an absolutely monster overclock, and if you were running high voltages to support it I'd absolutely expect the chip to not be in the best of shape 4 years later.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2014 17:03
|
|
|
necrobobsledder posted:I think the implication may be that Skylake could be getting delayed because of some of the delays occurring within Broadwell. I'd be very surprised if most Skylake consumer parts don't slip to 2H 2015. We're not going to have any Broadwell in consumer channels until 2Q 2015 now, it almost doesn't make sense to produce Broadwell at all.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 23, 2014 17:01
|
|
|
atomicthumbs posted:are four 80mm fans really enough to dissipate 1.08 kilowatts of computing https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0osWXSfWPsc
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2014 22:47
|
|
|
Rime posted:- Terrible for everything else. Eg: Photoshop CC will drive it to 100% usage and heavily lag when painting a simple line. Check your voltage & temperatures. I saw reports of something similar where people would report the Starcraft 2 menu bringing their system to its knees at 2fps, but the game itself would run great. It's likely that Photoshop CC is doing something that's driving the CPU to run so hot it's throttling, which would result in terrible performance. You may need to turn down your clocks and voltage, because I guarantee that at stock clocks it performs fine in Photoshop CC. Obviously half the speed of something quad core in multithreaded things, but certainly smoothly.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2015 21:14
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:Should I be impressed by these numbers? I can't honestly tell. Actually, it seems more like they're bottlenecking things at the graphics card. I don't really trust anything from WCCFTech, especially this far out. I'd expect 5-10% better IPC, lower power usage, nice new chipset features, and better integrated graphics. 10% better IPC is better than we've seen from anything since Sandy Bridge over Nehalem, so that would be pretty big.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2015 23:04
|
|
|
Methylethylaldehyde posted:Between 5% and 55% better performance depending on what exact mix of threads you have, and what part of the CPU they're using. In cases where you're doing the exact same poo poo with every thread, it'll be much closer to the former than the later. What's going on with GTA V then? All my friends playing it report that disabling HT in BIOS gets them 3-5 fps in the in-engine benchmark, most of the FAQs I've seen about it say "turn off hyperthreading if you have an i7".
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2015 15:38
|
|
|
go3 posted:People are really really really overestimating the CPU demand of 99% of consumer use cases Which is what makes Sklyake interesting, a Skylake NUC or other <15W part probably is at performance parity with full wattage Sandy Bridge parts.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2015 22:22
|
|
|
MaxxBot posted:Unless that 2500k is sitting at 5GHz or something you would get more than 10%, the benchmarks I saw were showing around a 8-10% increase from Haswell. If you do have one of those 2500Ks or 2600ks that sits at 5GHz, then it looks like you're ahead of a 4790k still. A friend of mine has a 2600K at 5.1ghz on air comfortably, and just has no reason to upgrade.
|
|
#
¿
May 30, 2015 01:15
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:How are you getting that ARM is beating Intel? Well, unit sales of smartphones + tablets vs laptops paints a pretty dire picture. Then you look at CPU sales in USD and realize its a false comparison.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2015 18:10
|
|
|
JawnV6 posted:Shipping 1000:1 is a nice start. If we're comparing dollars for some reason I'd prefer it be market cap, why exactly would per-unit cost merit any discussion? I posted the mechanism by which higher volumes train competitors to come up the stack towards premium products. Did you have some metric where you thought Intel was ahead? Profitability, market cap, and a lower price/earnings, especially vs the major ARM manufacturers like Qualcomm. Intel's margins are enormous compared to them. Growth could be a problem, I'll give you that. Right now Intel is making money hand over fist. Because anybody can make ARM chips, they are doomed to become a commodity.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2015 18:18
|
|
|
Lord Windy posted:Does single threaded performance need to get much better than the 5~10% we are getting? I figured it was us that needed to get better with utilising cores. You know what would be way better than us getting better at using multiple cores? Really fast single cores. I would love to have a single core 17.6GHz Haswell instead of a quad core 4.4 GHz one. We were supposed to be around 20 GHz by now! http://www.geek.com/chips/intel-predicts-10ghz-chips-by-2011-564808/
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2015 01:34
|
|
|
Tapedump posted:This is where I need you need assure me that you're just joking and not really an idiot. I'm not joking. What would the downside of a modern CPU architecture running at 20GHz be vs a 4ghz quad core? You can still schedule multiple threads on a single core just fine, and when you do have just one thread crunching it would be way faster.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2015 05:18
|
|
|
Ragingsheep posted:That's what Intel tried to do with the P4 and they ran straight into a thermal brickwall. Oh, I know that it's impossible in reality, but it's a nice dream. If we somehow could get more single threaded speed it would be vastly preferable to more cores.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2015 05:23
|
|
|
Tapedump posted:Nope sure how to respond, as it wouldn't be modern architecture, would it? All that I meant is as a software developer, faster single cores would be vastly preferable to multiple slower cores. Why couldn't we have modern architectures at higher clocks? The reason I chose ~20GHz is that's roughly 4x the current clock speed of quad cores, so there's theoretically about the same amount of cycles there.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2015 15:48
|
|
|
JawnV6 posted:Can I be there when you tell the poor designer trying to hit a 1ns window that he now has to hit .05ns? It's ok, we'll reassure him with this bit about the OS's scheduler. Also we went from 4 cores but multiplied the time by 5. So everyone be aware we're not using that boring linear speedup, it's something superlinear at the least. I should have just used 4ghz and 16ghz, I meant I'd rather have all the cycles on one core rather than across several. Also, all my thoughts have been purely from the software end and ignoring chip design itself, I know absolutely nothing about it.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2015 15:56
|
|
|
JawnV6 posted:Well, yeah, if you knew anything about chip design you would've seen the multi-core future coming from a decade ago. That much is clear. We all know SW folks are lazy and can't be bothered to learn and leverage parallelism, it's just funny to see someone take that and start demanding physical impossibilities. It's a tough problem. Some workloads parallelize well, some just don't. If it were easy to do highly parallel software then AMD would be more competitive right now. Their FX CPUs with 8 integer cores theoretically have similar performance to Ivy Bridge quad cores for highly parallel integer math.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2015 16:13
|
|
|
I'm toying with the idea of doing a "lite" version of this: https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Multi-headed-VMWare-Gaming-Setup-564/ At Microcenter I can get a 5820k, ASRock X99 board, and 32GB of DDR4-2400 for $700-ish. I was planning to replace my wife's Phenom II 965 with Skylake later this year, but now I'm considering consolidating both of our machines into a single box, putting both our GPUs into it, and having a single box be our gaming / general use desktops. Is this an insane idea? In my harebrained plan, we get effectively 2 desktops, with the option to shut down one and allocate all resources to the other if wanted.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2015 17:49
|
|
|
slidebite posted:Do we have an estimated time that Intel will start cease manufacture of Devils Canyon processors? (4790k in particular?) I can't answer about a manufacturing stop, but they should be in retail channels in decent quantity until mid next year. If you don't mind paying a small price premium, I'd expect you to still be able to easily get them new in box in 4 years. You can still find 2500Ks new, and even older CPUs if you look harder.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2015 20:47
|
|
|
PC LOAD LETTER posted:I think if you need the best possible performance per watt they're unbeatable right now. In terms of total single threaded performance it seems they're not so hot and a 3-ishGhz Haswell will beat it by a fair margin there. Isn't that price significantly undercutting existing 10GigE pricing? I thought that NICs alone were >$200 still.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2015 16:47
|
|
|
Khagan posted:So Cannonlake moves to 'Tock' now? We're waltzing now. Process shrinks in bold. Ivy Bridge, Haswell, Devil's Canyon, Broadwell, Skylake, Kaby Lake, Cannonlake.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 24, 2015 15:50
|
|
|
Boiled Water posted:What exactly are you planning that requires Skylake specifically except for raging nerd-boners. I'm really hoping for some nice chipset features on Z170. I'm still not sure if I should refresh my Phenom 2 & DDR2 machine now, or keep waiting for Skylake like I was planning. All that I seem to lose by waiting is $30 that I'll have to spend for DDR4 vs DDR3.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 26, 2015 22:14
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 20, 2024 04:26 |
|
|
Boiled Water posted:Would you please, for the audience, list these nice features you'll be gaining by waiting? More PCI-E lanes, NVMe support on an M.2 connector (Z97 may already do this, I'm not sure), and 5-10% better IPC. Overall Skylake should be slightly better in lots of small ways, right? Is there really zero reason to get an i5-6600 vs a i5-4590? It would be one thing if old intel CPUs went on clearance when the new stuff was introduced, but the new generation always costs the same as the old so you may as well take it. Edit: You're making me second guess myself here, I guess I could just do an H97 and i5-4590 in an RVZ01B, but it feels so lame to buy Haswell 2 whole years after its introduction. Twerk from Home fucked around with this message at 23:03 on Jun 26, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jun 26, 2015 22:32
|
|