• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Intel Core "Skylake" Processors Start Selling

FordGT90Concept

"I go fast!1!11!1!"
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
26,259 (4.46/day)
Location
IA, USA
System Name BY-2021
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5800X (65w eco profile)
Motherboard MSI B550 Gaming Plus
Cooling Scythe Mugen (rev 5)
Memory 2 x Kingston HyperX DDR4-3200 32 GiB
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT
Storage Samsung 980 Pro, Seagate Exos X20 TB 7200 RPM
Display(s) Nixeus NX-EDG274K (3840x2160@144 DP) + Samsung SyncMaster 906BW (1440x900@60 HDMI-DVI)
Case Coolermaster HAF 932 w/ USB 3.0 5.25" bay + USB 3.2 (A+C) 3.5" bay
Audio Device(s) Realtek ALC1150, Micca OriGen+
Power Supply Enermax Platimax 850w
Mouse Nixeus REVEL-X
Keyboard Tesoro Excalibur
Software Windows 10 Home 64-bit
Benchmark Scores Faster than the tortoise; slower than the hare.
So...what's your average laptop going to do with 16 cores/32 threads? Waste power, that's what. The consumer demand for parallel processors just isn't there. Still, I find the 91w TDP pretty ridiculous considering how small it is and the clocks not being anything fantastic.
 
Joined
Dec 9, 2013
Messages
911 (0.23/day)
System Name BlueKnight
Processor Intel Celeron G1610 @ 2.60GHz
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-H61M-S2PH (rev. 1.0)
Memory 1x 4GB DDR3 @ 1333MHz (Kingston KVR13N9S8/4)
Video Card(s) Onboard
Storage 1x 160GB (Western Digital WD1600AAJS-75M0A0)
Display(s) 1x 20" 1600x900 (PHILIPS 200VW9FBJ/78)
Case μATX Case (Generic)
Power Supply 300W (Generic)
Software Debian GNU/Linux 8.7 (jessie)
moar moar cores, cores here , cores there ...
where are you from AMD?
People want more physical cores!?

The current "Intel / AMD" core performance ratio is 2:1. Intel processors offers 4 physical cores and some models "multiply" those cores to reach 8 (hyperthreading), that's enough to keep at AMD level.

If Intel make 8 physical cores with the right price then AMD would be out of business. LOL!

Just my opinion.
 
Joined
Jul 2, 2015
Messages
117 (0.03/day)
Location
USA
System Name The Mini Nuke
Processor Intel i9-9900K at 4.9GHz -1AVX Vffset 1.27V
Motherboard Asus Maximus XI Hero WiFi
Cooling NZXT - Kraken X62 Liquid CPU Cooler
Memory G.SKILL TridentZ 32 GB (4 x 8 GB) DDR4-4000 Memory Model F4-4000C17Q-32GTZRB
Video Card(s) ASUS RTX 3080 TUF-RTX3080-O10G-GAMING
Storage Samsung 850 EVO 500GB SSD, Intel 660p M.2 2280 2TB NVMe
Display(s) 1 LG 27GL850-B and 2 ROG Swift PG278Q
Case NZXT - H700 (Black) ATX Mid Tower Case
Power Supply EVGA SuperNOVA 1000 P2 - 1000W Platinum
Mouse Razer Naga Trinity
Keyboard Razer BlackWidow Chroma
Software Windows 10 Pro

peche

Thermaltake fanboy
Joined
Nov 7, 2014
Messages
6,709 (1.83/day)
Location
San Jose, Costa Rica
System Name Athenna
Processor intel i7 3770 *Dellided*
Motherboard GIGABYTE GA-Z68X-UD3H-B3 Rev. 1.1
Cooling Thermaltake Water 3.0 Pro + Tt Riing12 x2 / Tt ThunderBlade / Gelid Slim 120UV fans
Memory 16GB DRR3 Kingoston with Custom Tt spreaders + HyperX Fan
Video Card(s) GeForce GTX 980 4GB Nvidia Sample
Storage Crucial M4 SSD 64GB's / Seagate Barracuda 2TB / Seagate Barracuda 320GB's
Display(s) 22" LG FLATRON 1920 x 1280p
Case Thermaltake Commander G42 Window
Audio Device(s) On-board Dolby 5.1+ Kingston HyperX Cloud 1
Power Supply Themaltake TR2 700W 80plus bronce & APC Pro backup 1000Va
Mouse Tt eSports Level 10M Rev 1.0 Diamond Black & Tt Conkor "L" mouse pad
Keyboard Tt eSports KNUCKER
Software windows 10x64Pro
Benchmark Scores well I've fried a 775' P4 12 years ago, that counts?
People want more physical cores!?

The current "Intel / AMD" core performance ratio is 2:1. Intel processors offers 4 physical cores and some models "multiply" those cores to reach 8 (hyperthreading), that's enough to keep at AMD level.

If Intel make 8 physical cores with the right price then AMD would be out of business. LOL!

Just my opinion.
do you even use at max 4Cores?

can't understand people complaining about intels 4ad cores, they also have more cores …. Intel extreme processors and Intel xeons have more cores, but those processors are mostly work and heavy tasking oriented, don’t know why you people are mad about that,


It has also been discussed several times, comparison and charts about benchs, tests and reviews, intels extreme exa core processors against moral 4ad cores…. so come up with a good point for the point,


and almost forgot, I really mad because of one thing, intel is putting so much effort on graphics when 95% of the intel i7 processor s use dedicated graphics… so intel WTF are you waiting for making a non integrated graphics i7?


Regards,
 
Joined
Feb 18, 2005
Messages
5,847 (0.81/day)
Location
Ikenai borderline!
System Name Firelance.
Processor Threadripper 3960X
Motherboard ROG Strix TRX40-E Gaming
Cooling IceGem 360 + 6x Arctic Cooling P12
Memory 8x 16GB Patriot Viper DDR4-3200 CL16
Video Card(s) MSI GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Ventus 2X OC
Storage 2TB WD SN850X (boot), 4TB Crucial P3 (data)
Display(s) 3x AOC Q32E2N (32" 2560x1440 75Hz)
Case Enthoo Pro II Server Edition (Closed Panel) + 6 fans
Power Supply Fractal Design Ion+ 2 Platinum 760W
Mouse Logitech G602
Keyboard Razer Pro Type Ultra
Software Windows 10 Professional x64
If you have a problem with it Intel's pricing, either move to North Korea where they don't do capitalism, or start your own CPU company, or join AMD.

Or you could just stop whining in general. That works too.
 
Joined
Mar 28, 2014
Messages
586 (0.15/day)
Processor AMD FX-8320
Motherboard AsRock 970 PRO3 R2.0
Cooling Thermalright Ultra120 eXtreme + 2 LED Green fans
Memory 2 x 4096 MB DDR3-1333 A-Data
Video Card(s) SAPPHIRE 4096M R9 FURY X 4G D5
Storage ST1000VX000 • SV35.6 Series™ 1000 GB 7200 rpm
Display(s) Acer S277HK wmidpp 27" 4K (3840 x 2160) IPS
Case Cooler Master HAF 912 Plus Black + Red Lights
Audio Device(s) Onboard Realtek
Power Supply OCZ ProXStream 1000W
Mouse Genius NetScroll 100X
Keyboard Logitech Wave
Software Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit

64K

Joined
Mar 13, 2014
Messages
6,773 (1.73/day)
Processor i7 7700k
Motherboard MSI Z270 SLI Plus
Cooling CM Hyper 212 EVO
Memory 2 x 8 GB Corsair Vengeance
Video Card(s) Temporary MSI RTX 4070 Super
Storage Samsung 850 EVO 250 GB and WD Black 4TB
Display(s) Temporary Viewsonic 4K 60 Hz
Case Corsair Obsidian 750D Airflow Edition
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply EVGA SuperNova 850 W Gold
Mouse Logitech G502
Keyboard Logitech G105
Software Windows 10
Joined
Apr 2, 2011
Messages
2,811 (0.56/day)
*Popcorn popping noise*


This seems like a fun discussion.
1) I want moar corez!
2) Why.
1) Because we had 4 core processors nearly a decade ago, where's the progress?
2) What do you need more cores for?
1) ....Gaming?....
2) Name one game using more than 4 cores.
1) *Utter silence*
1) Transcoding and encoding maybe.
2) Ever hear of Haswell-e? The 5820 has 6 cores, quad channel memory, and it cost about the same as the high-end mainstream offering. It's only drawback is the hobbling of PCI-e lanes (when compared to its more expensive companions).
1) *More silence*
1) Screw you.

And the debate ends with nothing gained.




Seriously though, Skylake is another inching forward of processors. The CPU performance increase is...minimal. The amount of PCI-e lanes isn't exactly going up. There's no new connectivity (SATA III, M2, and PCI-e 3.0 are from last generation). The only reason to upgrade is integrated graphics improvement and minor power management improvement. If you're spending $300 on a CPU it's ludicrous to think the iGPU is going to be used often. The increase in power efficiency is probably going to save you pennies a year, so that's out the window.

I'll state what I said previously again. Skylake is shaping up to be more famous for a new RAM standard than anything it actually brought to the table. Even then, Haswell-e stole that thunder over 6 months ago. Call me unimpressed.





Edit:
do you even use at max 4Cores?

can't understand people complaining about intels 4ad cores, they also have more cores …. Intel extreme processors and Intel xeons have more cores, but those processors are mostly work and heavy tasking oriented, don’t know why you people are mad about that,


It has also been discussed several times, comparison and charts about benchs, tests and reviews, intels extreme exa core processors against moral 4ad cores…. so come up with a good point for the point,


and almost forgot, I really mad because of one thing, intel is putting so much effort on graphics when 95% of the intel i7 processor s use dedicated graphics… so intel WTF are you waiting for making a non integrated graphics i7?


Regards,
They already do. It's the "enthusiast" platform.

If you were to propose something new, I'd suggest the following.
i3 - Dual core processors with half being 2 thread and half being 4 thread. No frequency modification.
i4 - Quad core processors with integrated graphics and locked frequency.
i5 - Quad core processors without integrated graphics or threading but unlocked frequency.
i6 - Quad core processors with integrated graphics, but no threading.
i7 - Fully unlocked chips with threading and frequency unlocked.

Right now the numbering scheme tells you next to nothing, except how bad it's going to screw your wallet. i5 is reasonable, i7 is overpriced, and most i3 is garbage (except that sweet little unlocked anniversary edition Pentium). None of this even touches on a 'K" or "X" costing a hefty pricing premium.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 19, 2007
Messages
8,257 (1.32/day)
Processor Intel i9 9900K @5GHz w/ Corsair H150i Pro CPU AiO w/Corsair HD120 RBG fan
Motherboard Asus Z390 Maximus XI Code
Cooling 6x120mm Corsair HD120 RBG fans
Memory Corsair Vengeance RBG 2x8GB 3600MHz
Video Card(s) Asus RTX 3080Ti STRIX OC
Storage Samsung 970 EVO Plus 500GB , 970 EVO 1TB, Samsung 850 EVO 1TB SSD, 10TB Synology DS1621+ RAID5
Display(s) Corsair Xeneon 32" 32UHD144 4K
Case Corsair 570x RBG Tempered Glass
Audio Device(s) Onboard / Corsair Virtuoso XT Wireless RGB
Power Supply Corsair HX850w Platinum Series
Mouse Logitech G604s
Keyboard Corsair K70 Rapidfire
Software Windows 11 x64 Professional
Benchmark Scores Firestrike - 23520 Heaven - 3670
Joined
Mar 28, 2014
Messages
586 (0.15/day)
Processor AMD FX-8320
Motherboard AsRock 970 PRO3 R2.0
Cooling Thermalright Ultra120 eXtreme + 2 LED Green fans
Memory 2 x 4096 MB DDR3-1333 A-Data
Video Card(s) SAPPHIRE 4096M R9 FURY X 4G D5
Storage ST1000VX000 • SV35.6 Series™ 1000 GB 7200 rpm
Display(s) Acer S277HK wmidpp 27" 4K (3840 x 2160) IPS
Case Cooler Master HAF 912 Plus Black + Red Lights
Audio Device(s) Onboard Realtek
Power Supply OCZ ProXStream 1000W
Mouse Genius NetScroll 100X
Keyboard Logitech Wave
Software Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit
*Popcorn popping noise*
This seems like a fun discussion.
1) I want moar corez!
2) Why.
1) Because we had 4 core processors nearly a decade ago, where's the progress?
2) What do you need more cores for?
1) ....Gaming?....
2) Name one game using more than 4 cores.
1) *Utter silence*

Why is 4 a so magical number beyond which there is no progress at all?
Is it because someone at Intel decided that it works well for them and locked the progress of the whole industry for the sake of their profits?

Seriously, there is no technical explanation or justification about why they chose exactly that number and not 8 or 12, or 16, or whatever other.

Thanks for the advertisement. No one is going to buy one.

Don't be so sure.
 
Joined
Oct 19, 2007
Messages
8,257 (1.32/day)
Processor Intel i9 9900K @5GHz w/ Corsair H150i Pro CPU AiO w/Corsair HD120 RBG fan
Motherboard Asus Z390 Maximus XI Code
Cooling 6x120mm Corsair HD120 RBG fans
Memory Corsair Vengeance RBG 2x8GB 3600MHz
Video Card(s) Asus RTX 3080Ti STRIX OC
Storage Samsung 970 EVO Plus 500GB , 970 EVO 1TB, Samsung 850 EVO 1TB SSD, 10TB Synology DS1621+ RAID5
Display(s) Corsair Xeneon 32" 32UHD144 4K
Case Corsair 570x RBG Tempered Glass
Audio Device(s) Onboard / Corsair Virtuoso XT Wireless RGB
Power Supply Corsair HX850w Platinum Series
Mouse Logitech G604s
Keyboard Corsair K70 Rapidfire
Software Windows 11 x64 Professional
Benchmark Scores Firestrike - 23520 Heaven - 3670
Why is 4 a so magical number beyond which there is progress at all?
Is it because someone at Intel decided that it works well for them and locked the progress of the whole industry for the sake of their profits?

Seriously, there is no technical explanation or justification about why they chose exactly that number and not 8 or 12, or 16, or whatever other.



Don't be so sure.
Im pretty sure 99% of the people are going to go Intel. Skylake or not. They have been since C2D was a thing.
 
Joined
Apr 2, 2011
Messages
2,811 (0.56/day)
Why is 4 a so magical number beyond which there is progress at all?
Is it because someone at Intel decided that it works well for them and locked the progress of the whole industry for the sake of their profits?



Don't be so sure.

..Serious?

Gaming is functionally a slave to the console market. Up until the latest generation the processors had at most one core (except the Cell processor, but that was a ball of fail from the programming side). If you were running something on a PC you got, at most, a couple of threads to function well. Anything more than that, and you have cores doing nothing. This is because developers didn't write games to be threaded, because it would be a waste of money for the console market.

If you can only really make use of 1-2 cores, why include more. In the case of quad cores, it was to multi-task. 2 cores running games, and 2 dedicated to everything else. It was insane to propose more cores, because they'd be sitting idle. If you have idle cores, you're wasting energy. Inefficient chips don't sell, so your product line tanks. I thought this would be evident, given the whole "6 core" AMD processor fiasco.


Even today, there are only a hand full of games that can utilize 4 cores effectively. We're locked into a vicious loop, that's impossible to break. Developers don't spend the resources on writing highly threaded code, so more CPU cores aren't used. Because more cores aren't used, CPU manufacturers stick to 4 cores. Because the next generation of chips is still 4 cores, the developers don't spend money writing highly threaded code.



I'm sure your next point is Photoshop and transcoding/encoding. The people that do this require speed, so they are willing to pay for it. The CPU developers bend them over, and empty their wallets, because anyone using these programs is a professional. Professionals can justify insane costing, because they make money from the activity. The mainstream offerings are not meant for performance, they're meant to be more cost effective and powerful enough for most tasks. Any highly threaded code isn't something where "fast enough" cuts it.



TL;DR:
The reason 4 cores is "standard" is that is all most people use effectively. Whenever threaded code is more prevalent, we'll see more cores on mainstream offerings. Until then, the enthusiast level hardware is more than willing to provide you extra cores for a hefty price premium.
 
Joined
Nov 3, 2013
Messages
53 (0.01/day)
Location
L2 Cache
System Name ANTARES V6
Processor AMD Ryzen 9 9950X
Motherboard ASUS ProArt X870E-CREATOR WIFI
Cooling Alphacool Core 1 Aurora, Noctua NF-A12x25, Alphacool Distro D5, Alphacool HPE 480 mm
Memory Patriot Viper Elite 5 DDR5-6200 64 GB
Video Card(s) Sapphire Radeon RX 7900 XTX NITRO+
Storage Sabrent Rocket 4 Plus 4 TB + Sabrent Rocket Q 8 TB
Display(s) LG 27UK650 x2
Case Corsair Obsidian 1000D
Power Supply Corsair AX1600i Titanium
Mouse Razer Deathadder V3 Pro
Keyboard Endorfy Thock
Joined
Mar 28, 2014
Messages
586 (0.15/day)
Processor AMD FX-8320
Motherboard AsRock 970 PRO3 R2.0
Cooling Thermalright Ultra120 eXtreme + 2 LED Green fans
Memory 2 x 4096 MB DDR3-1333 A-Data
Video Card(s) SAPPHIRE 4096M R9 FURY X 4G D5
Storage ST1000VX000 • SV35.6 Series™ 1000 GB 7200 rpm
Display(s) Acer S277HK wmidpp 27" 4K (3840 x 2160) IPS
Case Cooler Master HAF 912 Plus Black + Red Lights
Audio Device(s) Onboard Realtek
Power Supply OCZ ProXStream 1000W
Mouse Genius NetScroll 100X
Keyboard Logitech Wave
Software Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit
Gaming is functionally a slave to the console market. Up until the latest generation the processors had at most one core (except the Cell processor, but that was a ball of fail from the programming side).

Yes, programmers prove that they are actually not that smart to be able to cope with the beauty and complexity of Cell. Poor guys.

I would ask you about what we are doing now because obviously current generation PS4 has more than 4 cores.
Soon, it will be 2 two whole years since we have 8 eight-core-consoles.

Are we sticking even longer to 4 cores and why?
 

peche

Thermaltake fanboy
Joined
Nov 7, 2014
Messages
6,709 (1.83/day)
Location
San Jose, Costa Rica
System Name Athenna
Processor intel i7 3770 *Dellided*
Motherboard GIGABYTE GA-Z68X-UD3H-B3 Rev. 1.1
Cooling Thermaltake Water 3.0 Pro + Tt Riing12 x2 / Tt ThunderBlade / Gelid Slim 120UV fans
Memory 16GB DRR3 Kingoston with Custom Tt spreaders + HyperX Fan
Video Card(s) GeForce GTX 980 4GB Nvidia Sample
Storage Crucial M4 SSD 64GB's / Seagate Barracuda 2TB / Seagate Barracuda 320GB's
Display(s) 22" LG FLATRON 1920 x 1280p
Case Thermaltake Commander G42 Window
Audio Device(s) On-board Dolby 5.1+ Kingston HyperX Cloud 1
Power Supply Themaltake TR2 700W 80plus bronce & APC Pro backup 1000Va
Mouse Tt eSports Level 10M Rev 1.0 Diamond Black & Tt Conkor "L" mouse pad
Keyboard Tt eSports KNUCKER
Software windows 10x64Pro
Benchmark Scores well I've fried a 775' P4 12 years ago, that counts?
well, skylake ... what a endless topic...
 

rtwjunkie

PC Gaming Enthusiast
Supporter
Joined
Jul 25, 2008
Messages
13,995 (2.35/day)
Location
Louisiana
Processor Core i9-9900k
Motherboard ASRock Z390 Phantom Gaming 6
Cooling All air: 2x140mm Fractal exhaust; 3x 140mm Cougar Intake; Enermax ETS-T50 Black CPU cooler
Memory 32GB (2x16) Mushkin Redline DDR-4 3200
Video Card(s) ASUS RTX 4070 Ti Super OC 16GB
Storage 1x 1TB MX500 (OS); 2x 6TB WD Black; 1x 2TB MX500; 1x 1TB BX500 SSD; 1x 6TB WD Blue storage (eSATA)
Display(s) Infievo 27" 165Hz @ 2560 x 1440
Case Fractal Design Define R4 Black -windowed
Audio Device(s) Soundblaster Z
Power Supply Seasonic Focus GX-1000 Gold
Mouse Coolermaster Sentinel III (large palm grip!)
Keyboard Logitech G610 Orion mechanical (Cherry Brown switches)
Software Windows 10 Pro 64-bit (Start10 & Fences 3.0 installed)
well, skylake ... what a endless topic...

Well, when you have even diehard Intel users yawning at what is arguably a nice technical feat, then you might want to ramp your game up a little if your name is Intel. :rolleyes:
 

rtwjunkie

PC Gaming Enthusiast
Supporter
Joined
Jul 25, 2008
Messages
13,995 (2.35/day)
Location
Louisiana
Processor Core i9-9900k
Motherboard ASRock Z390 Phantom Gaming 6
Cooling All air: 2x140mm Fractal exhaust; 3x 140mm Cougar Intake; Enermax ETS-T50 Black CPU cooler
Memory 32GB (2x16) Mushkin Redline DDR-4 3200
Video Card(s) ASUS RTX 4070 Ti Super OC 16GB
Storage 1x 1TB MX500 (OS); 2x 6TB WD Black; 1x 2TB MX500; 1x 1TB BX500 SSD; 1x 6TB WD Blue storage (eSATA)
Display(s) Infievo 27" 165Hz @ 2560 x 1440
Case Fractal Design Define R4 Black -windowed
Audio Device(s) Soundblaster Z
Power Supply Seasonic Focus GX-1000 Gold
Mouse Coolermaster Sentinel III (large palm grip!)
Keyboard Logitech G610 Orion mechanical (Cherry Brown switches)
Software Windows 10 Pro 64-bit (Start10 & Fences 3.0 installed)
We have moved past Skylake into the rabbit hole of Sony Experia. I suggest he is ignored or reported and we stick to Skylake.

Oh gosh, you're right! We've been sucked in. Thanks!
 
Joined
Apr 2, 2011
Messages
2,811 (0.56/day)
Yes, programmers prove that they are actually not that smart to be able to cope with the beauty and complexity of Cell. Poor guys.

I would ask you about what we are doing now because obviously current generation PS4 has more than 4 cores.

Are we sticking even longer to 4 cores and why?

Why certainly.

The processor used in the PS4 and Xbone are Jaguar based "octo-core" chips. Demonstrably, the sharing of certain resources on the CPU makes their performance significantly less fantastic than what we think of as a true octo-core chip.

Of those eight processors, you've got one to two dedicated to running the underlying OS. You've got one dedicated to audio. You're likely to have one processing I/O from the controllers and peripherals. The remaining processors could, theoretically, be used on gaming. That's potentially 4 cores to work with, assuming that we actually started with an octo-core chip. What we've actually got is more akin to 2 or 3 processor cores.

You can argue that this means most completely new games should now run threaded applications, up to 3 cores, much better now. Of course, that means a 4 core processor would still have more utilizable cores than games, which kinda puts a kibosh on thinking all games should be programmed for great threading.




If I were to be generous, I'd conjecture that in the next few years threading will see genuine improvement. More recent incarnations of DX, and Open CL/GL will make threading something enabled by default. Of course, these developments are recent. If they were to influence the market it wouldn't be for several years. Intel and AMD spend years on developing chips, so even if they started with the goal of having mainstream CPUs being 6 cores today it's be well into 2017 before the change hit the market. Moaning that 4 core processors are the standard today would require you go back in time 3 years to change it. As a refresher, that's when DX 11.1 was introduced. 3D was all the rage. Multi-threaded consoles were the pipe-dream of the insane (the Cell failed on coding because Sony couldn't even reliably harness the black magic the processor needed to run better than a three legged dog).

That entire explanation should put your argument to bed, but if it doesn't consider this. If you wanted more cores you could go out and buy a Piledriver processor from AMD. If you want to moan about Intel not offering more cores, stop buying their products. Moaning about not having more useless cores, while ignoring the efforts AMD made to offer exactly that (with spectacularly underwhelming performance because of this effort), is just plain foolish.




Edit:

Before this stupid point is made, let me quash it. Just carving a 4 core CPU into a 6 core CPU isn't possible. It's about as stupid as cutting a horse in half, and expecting it to carry more people because there are now 2 horses. You gloss over the loss of essential faculties.

This is why a 4 core Intel CPU runs laps around an 8 core AMD CPU. The resources each core requires aren't shared, so they get their jobs done without having to wait for another core.
 
Last edited:

rtwjunkie

PC Gaming Enthusiast
Supporter
Joined
Jul 25, 2008
Messages
13,995 (2.35/day)
Location
Louisiana
Processor Core i9-9900k
Motherboard ASRock Z390 Phantom Gaming 6
Cooling All air: 2x140mm Fractal exhaust; 3x 140mm Cougar Intake; Enermax ETS-T50 Black CPU cooler
Memory 32GB (2x16) Mushkin Redline DDR-4 3200
Video Card(s) ASUS RTX 4070 Ti Super OC 16GB
Storage 1x 1TB MX500 (OS); 2x 6TB WD Black; 1x 2TB MX500; 1x 1TB BX500 SSD; 1x 6TB WD Blue storage (eSATA)
Display(s) Infievo 27" 165Hz @ 2560 x 1440
Case Fractal Design Define R4 Black -windowed
Audio Device(s) Soundblaster Z
Power Supply Seasonic Focus GX-1000 Gold
Mouse Coolermaster Sentinel III (large palm grip!)
Keyboard Logitech G610 Orion mechanical (Cherry Brown switches)
Software Windows 10 Pro 64-bit (Start10 & Fences 3.0 installed)
@Sony Xperia S Well, the technical reason is, for most people, their CPU's do everything they want them to do right now. I know, the joke is that it's not a technical answer.
 
Joined
Dec 31, 2009
Messages
19,371 (3.56/day)
Benchmark Scores Faster than yours... I'd bet on it. :)
Well, to humor this a bit...

I show 36% are going to get it, they just want the price to come down on boards or DDR4. But they will get it. So its not a 'no'. That said, people here tend to have CPUs that will easily do the job. Typically CPUs aren't the bottleneck anyway, so... makes sense that not a lot of people jumping right into it. Surely some of that reason can be because of the 5-10% gains overall (in 'real world apps or apps that translate directly to real world') over Haswell. Also, this is an enthusiast website really, so a lot of people have a newer platform (say SB on up or FX CPU on up) so there isn't a need to.

I wouldn't think that the meager improvements are the primary reason, but one of many that shape it.
 
Joined
May 25, 2015
Messages
44 (0.01/day)
The 4 Intel cores are already demolishing AMD 8-cores, then why the need of more cores?

I'm personally satisfied with the Intel 4C/8T performance, why go for a 6C/12T platform?
 

FordGT90Concept

"I go fast!1!11!1!"
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
26,259 (4.46/day)
Location
IA, USA
System Name BY-2021
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5800X (65w eco profile)
Motherboard MSI B550 Gaming Plus
Cooling Scythe Mugen (rev 5)
Memory 2 x Kingston HyperX DDR4-3200 32 GiB
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT
Storage Samsung 980 Pro, Seagate Exos X20 TB 7200 RPM
Display(s) Nixeus NX-EDG274K (3840x2160@144 DP) + Samsung SyncMaster 906BW (1440x900@60 HDMI-DVI)
Case Coolermaster HAF 932 w/ USB 3.0 5.25" bay + USB 3.2 (A+C) 3.5" bay
Audio Device(s) Realtek ALC1150, Micca OriGen+
Power Supply Enermax Platimax 850w
Mouse Nixeus REVEL-X
Keyboard Tesoro Excalibur
Software Windows 10 Home 64-bit
Benchmark Scores Faster than the tortoise; slower than the hare.
I regret to inform you of this. You can get better than that right now if you don't mind selling both kidneys.
 

64K

Joined
Mar 13, 2014
Messages
6,773 (1.73/day)
Processor i7 7700k
Motherboard MSI Z270 SLI Plus
Cooling CM Hyper 212 EVO
Memory 2 x 8 GB Corsair Vengeance
Video Card(s) Temporary MSI RTX 4070 Super
Storage Samsung 850 EVO 250 GB and WD Black 4TB
Display(s) Temporary Viewsonic 4K 60 Hz
Case Corsair Obsidian 750D Airflow Edition
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply EVGA SuperNova 850 W Gold
Mouse Logitech G502
Keyboard Logitech G105
Software Windows 10


"More slower cores is better for everyone because there's more cores. Why can't you people understand that?!"

:p


 

Aquinus

Resident Wat-man
Joined
Jan 28, 2012
Messages
13,171 (2.81/day)
Location
Concord, NH, USA
System Name Apollo
Processor Intel Core i9 9880H
Motherboard Some proprietary Apple thing.
Memory 64GB DDR4-2667
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon Pro 5600M, 8GB HBM2
Storage 1TB Apple NVMe, 4TB External
Display(s) Laptop @ 3072x1920 + 2x LG 5k Ultrafine TB3 displays
Case MacBook Pro (16", 2019)
Audio Device(s) AirPods Pro, Sennheiser HD 380s w/ FIIO Alpen 2, or Logitech 2.1 Speakers
Power Supply 96w Power Adapter
Mouse Logitech MX Master 3
Keyboard Logitech G915, GL Clicky
Software MacOS 12.1
"More slower cores is better for everyone because there's more cores. Why can't you people understand that?!"
I'm really starting to think that I need to do an entire write-up to describe how multi-threading works, where it helps and, what its limitations are. It seems to me that people don't seem to get that more cores doesn't linearly scale to more performance except in very select situations. More cores is fantastic for a server because the kind of load most servers have are inherently multi-process but, everyday tasks usually have data dependencies which makes concurrency a hard feat to accomplish while still gaining performance from it.

I think Intel is doing what the market (not power users, the market,) is demanding and that is lower power consumption and faster GPU performance. Both of which they've been doing a pretty good job on so far. Not to say Iris Pro on the latest CPUs are great but, they're a big step up from where Intel has been in the past. What good are more cores when most people won't use them? We are talking about a mainstream platform after all.
 
Top