something recent? like this millennium?I thought Intel debut the idea with the original Pentium Pro in 1995? Two separate silicon cores (Cache and CPU), one package.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
something recent? like this millennium?I thought Intel debut the idea with the original Pentium Pro in 1995? Two separate silicon cores (Cache and CPU), one package.
And Intel's 10nm was due [according to Intel] to drop in 2018, and in 2017, and in 2016, and originally in what 2015?
At this point, what credence can Intel's claims regarding when either credible 10nm products or 10nm products that can combat Ryzen will release be given?
At this point, what credence can Intel's claims regarding when either credible 10nm products or 10nm products that can combat Ryzen will release be given?
https://www.anandtech.com/show/1385...nt-on-matisse-cpu-tdp-range-same-as-ryzen2000Hey Adoredtv does know that extra space can be used for a Gpu right? I think he might, but I am not totally sure he does.
They've been up front about the issues that they've had, and now they're ready to start releasing. So the same credence we've always given them.
And Intel's 10nm was due [according to Intel] to drop in 2018, and in 2017, and in 2016, and originally in what 2015?
At this point, what credence can Intel's claims regarding when either credible 10nm products or 10nm products that can combat Ryzen will release be given?
No - its BEING fixed, it's not been fixed yet.It was a huge fuck-up but it looks like it's been fixed now.
.
AMD [is] using a new node while Intel is on the old. AMD isn't being criticised unfairly; it's the 'beats Intel' proclamation that is being criticized given the unequal comparison.
I was being sarcastic. You didn't got it.
??? AMD has credibly demo'd a chip that does exactly as described, beating Intel's current best at much less power. Which actually means thrashing Intel's best. You say this conclusion is "unfair" because... umm... Intel doesn't have a better chip to demo.
Got it.
something recent? like this millennium?
And missing a connective technology like Infinity Fabric.The original core i3 and i5 dual core CPUs do look similar.
And missing a connective technology like Infinity Fabric.
Hey Adoredtv does know that extra space can be used for a Gpu right? I think he might, but I am not totally sure he does.
No point in having a GPU there unless you can somehow manage to put a stack of HBM on there or even EDRAM to use as a frame buffer. AMD's APUS for desktop will continue to be bandwidth starved until they figure out how to address that issue.
That's where it all comes down to. I highly doubt that it would be economical to do so.Dunno if it would be economical.
It's not like they couldn't- they could even split the current eight-core die into a four-core or six-core die and a GPU, then put the memory on the other 'pad'. Dunno if it would be economical.
Interconnects are a barrier that IF helps bypass to an extent.https://www.anandtech.com/show/2901
It's an io die and a CPU die basically. Yes it's different of course, never designed for more cores to be attached but it's not a million miles away.
I just thought about this. It's also possible that they don't use a chiplet at all on the APU design. Could possibly shrink everything (CPU/GPU) down to 7nm and still have space left over for EDRAM or HBM. It will be interesting to see a naked APU to see what route AMD actually takes when they become available for purchase.
Slight correction: it's AMD's new to Intel's current. Criticizing that comparison is a bit silly because, first, there's nothing else yet to compare to. And second, yes, Intel will be releasing new chips that may--and likely will--outperform the CES demo... but so will AMD. Remember that this is an engineering sample running just 8 cores; there's absolutely no chance that what we saw was the best AMD will have to offer.The comparison is AMD's new product to Intel's old. I'm also not saying that the comparison is 'unfair', but that criticism of the comparison is fair.
Interconnects are a barrier that IF helps bypass to an extent.
There were actually a couple of videos posted leading up to CES.... I watched both the video in advance of CES and the one above, ...
Will be interesting to see how Navi compares in terms of price/performance and power/performance.Maybe, I know one thing for sure. nVidia is still king when it comes to GPU's so there sure as hell won't be no 10% difference in that arena.
Before the Ryzen release I took AMD statements with a spoon of salt, but now they have an architecture that will keep delivering for a while.I still take anything with AMD with a grain of salt because I believed them when they said Bulldozer would be great, ...
Same as Intel's 140W (TDP) Prescott and 140W (de facto) Core i9...When AMD released those 220W Piledriver and power consumption raised to the moon, the argument was that power was irrelevant for high-performance desktop.
Is it?.. that package is more expensive to manufacturer ...
There were actually a couple of videos posted leading up to CES.
It really starts with the one about chiplets, posted half a year ago (2018-06-30).
Will be interesting to see how Navi compares in terms of price/performance and power/performance.
Nvidia might not be able to keep the crown for long.
Before the Ryzen release I took AMD statements with a spoon of salt, but now they have an architecture that will keep delivering for a while.
Same as Intel's 140W (TDP) Prescott and 140W (de facto) Core i9...
Is it?
Mounting two (or three) dies on the interposer is probably marginally more costly than mounting only one.
The aggregated cost of the dies should be lower or same compared to a single die.
Hey Adoredtv does know that extra space can be used for a Gpu right? I think he might, but I am not totally sure he does.
They're both coming out with new chips on new nodes. The comparison is AMD's new product to Intel's old. I'm also not saying that the comparison is 'unfair', but that criticism of the comparison is fair.
What you 'got' was making stuff up.
Aren't all compaisons point in time? I mean, Intel will release something, and it'll be better... but when? AMD is much closer, things are leaking and we even have a demo of cinebench. For a time AMD will have the upper hand on speed and core count. After that, Intel will probably claim it.
Since manufacturers rarely release things the same day, there will always be a leapfrog effect.
They often are called shareholdersYou realize Intel has paid shills all over the net, right?
That DEFINITELY explains some of the "salt" and "naysaying".
They often are called shareholders
The hilarious derailing from the fact that AMD demoing something with half the power beating the 9999k flagship is quite telling. Some people are fucking terrified of what is coming.
Get ready to hear muh latency every few posts going forward without any evidence of it being an issue. No one has the actual part in their hands, maybe wait and see what the tests are like from people such as [H] first before making huge assumptions that didn't really make any difference with Zen1 for most workloads.
The latencies between monolithic ring bus (many core Intel) and inter-CCX AMD were basically the same even with average ram, it's already tested. In fact, the intra-CCX in this case is quite a lot less latency than Intel monolithic ring bus topology, but they hate discussing that
They often are called shareholders
The hilarious derailing from the fact that AMD demoing something with half the power beating the 9999k flagship is quite telling. Some people are fucking terrified of what is coming.
Get ready to hear muh latency every few posts going forward without any evidence of it being an issue. No one has the actual part in their hands, maybe wait and see what the tests are like from people such as [H] first before making huge assumptions that didn't really make any difference with Zen1 for most workloads.
The latencies between monolithic ring bus (many core Intel) and inter-CCX AMD were basically the same even with average ram, it's already tested. In fact, the intra-CCX in this case is quite a lot less latency than Intel monolithic ring bus topology, but they hate discussing that
I'd rather think that since Intel's been increasing their IPC for so long they're now at the point of diminishing returns.... we can be more certain that Intel will improve overall IPC because they've been working on it longer and because they have a history of doing so, ...
I'd rather think that since Intel's been increasing their IPC for so long they're now at the point of diminishing returns.
I don't expect anything significant there until they take a leap away from the Core architecture.
I'd rather think that since Intel's been increasing their IPC for so long they're now at the point of diminishing returns.
I don't expect anything significant there until they take a leap away from the Core architecture.
That's what they have coming. Meanwhile, AMD just caught up to Skylake...
What do they have coming? We have no evidence of anything at this time. Meanwhile, Pentium 4 and Intel Itanium would like to have a word with you.
We don't have any more evidence of Ryzen 3 either