Frys has it for $259 allready...how low can it go
yeah they had the 7600k at 175 yesterday, they are gonna firesale them so they don't get stuck with stock after launch.
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.
Frys has it for $259 allready...how low can it go
games like iracing can't scale. Hell even Adobe can't scale efficiently. Throw more clocks at itSo true! We need to go back to single core computers. They are much better than the bothersome multi cores....
Then I guess the programmers need to get to making things more core optimized and aware.games like iracing can't scale. Hell even Adobe can't scale efficiently. Throw more clocks at it
What fairly new games are single threaded?https://videocardz.com/73061/yet-another-core-i7-8700k-i5-8600k-review-posted-ahead-of-launch
so is lab501 reliable? My question is wasnt someone claiming single thread doesn't matter in gaming or something stupid and i correctly pointed out how single thread is important for minimum framerate and that makes the biggest difference in quality of experience with removing stutters and smoothness issues.
in far cry primal 7700K and 8700K (all the CPUs with great single thread) are the only ones near 100FPS while AMD is at 68 lol. That is ~40% different hahahahahahaha
far cry primal 100v68
GTA5 52v31 lawls
doom 137vs83
sleeping dogs 113v75
is this place reliable? because that is huge differences and those are even well designed games...not even counting the 10,000's of single threaded or poorly optimized games hahaha
That is why HEDT is trash for gaming and those high clocked quads or now finally 6 cores are awesome
Also lab501 or whatever has the shittiest charts i have ever seen. I made better ones in middle school in the 90s
EDIT: those differences are honestly much larger than i would have expected. I was assuming maybe 30% but this is way worse lol. Is it really accurate because those scores are awful.
The way computers work and do so many things now, I really feel like 4 cores should kinda be mainstream.Not many people need or want more threads
single thread limited. Those minimum frames is a key sign of single thread limited especially when more core lower clock CPUs have lower FPSWhat fairly new games are single threaded?
Then I guess the programmers need to get to making things more core optimized and aware.
also paralleling is expensive and difficult. Its something only big budget games do.There are stuff cannot be parallelized. So simple like that.
There are stuff cannot be parallelized. So simple like that.
VR is higher resolution and doesn't seem to quite tax the CPU as much. VR will need more video power as it progress's, which will probably be the next version.(Rift and Vive)Now with vr in the mix for racing, I need more clocks i currently run 4770k
Same answer. They need to start programming for multiple cores. I would skip over a game if it ran like crap on just a single core. 21st century, 1st world problem, etc.also paralleling is expensive and difficult. Its something only big budget games do.
ark is terribly single thread limited...especially the server client
AMD also has 1/10th the number of projects and products, not to mention that you would consider AMD plus Glofo since Intel is a foundry as well. Intel has iGPUs and also has the Phi line for GPU-compute tasks.
Even former CEOs and engineers from AMD admit that those "Intel's underhanded tactics" aren't the source of AMD financial problems. The source of AMd problems are the dozens of strategic, financial, and engineering mistakes made by AMD.
Paraphrasing you, if Intel goes down, i'd guess we'll see 4 core mainstream last 20 yrs, with no IPC gain, milked by AMD to the max, yep. Luckily for us Intel is giving 6-core mainstream this year and 8-core mainstream next year. Hopefully we will get a 6-core APU from AMD somewhat in 2020, after a decade of AMD quad-core APUs!!!
have fun owning like 30 games and only having 30 games to play. I'll stick with the option to enjoy 10,000s of games and buy a good CPU.Same answer. They need to start programming for multiple cores. I would skip over a game if it ran like crap on just a single core. 21st century, 1st world problem, etc.
Stuff that cannot be parallelized can run with other stuff that can't be parallelized .There are stuff cannot be parallelized. So simple like that.
i plan on it if i got the money. These look like a solid upgrade.Stuff that cannot be parallelized can run with other stuff that can't be parallelized .
The 8700K and 8600K looks like the only chips from Intel this newer generation looking to be worth while. Not sure it will be worth it to upgrade the 6700k from a system basically for gaming but Intel is looking nice on these processors.
I have more than 30 games. I guess the games I choose are just better.have fun owning like 30 games and only having 30 games to play. I'll stick with the option to enjoy 10,000s of games and buy a good CPU.
Also have fun not using like any software ever made. OCR, PDF, Web browser, Win 7, audio editors, teracopy (enjoy having corrupted files), and endless other programs.....because they should just make them threaded and i wont use it because it isn't threaded.
Took a picture for the memory book on how stupid of a notion that is.
Good luck not using a document scanners or any other peripheral.
Yeah, I game at 4k so a nice TR machine would be nice. I am not sure why Intel went with double the price. If it was 1499 I bet it would be picked over the TR.i plan on it if i got the money. These look like a solid upgrade.
Also the 18 core unlocked chips are god sends for people who can afford them. I cant wait to see reviews pushing a delidded 18 core CPU. IIRC thats not out yes right? I would never buy one even if i had the money because intel doesnt support ECC on them because they are dirty bastards.
I would go (assuming i had the money) 16/32 core unlocked threadripper instead due to the massive PCIe lanes and ECC support even though it isnt as good of a CPU.
assuming money was no object of course. If money was an object threadripper would still win. Money no object and Intel supported ECC? Intel 18 core lol. Instead my server has a meh 6 core TT
not understanding how i was making a joke of your original statement is hilarious because i used your logic on programs. lolI have more than 30 games. I guess the games I choose are just better.
I have no idea what you are rambling about in the second part so I can`t reply.
By comparing taxing games versus a browser? You got me!not understanding how i was making a joke of your original statement is hilarious because i used your logic on programs. lol
web browsing is single thread limited genius.By comparing taxing games versus a browser? You got me!
Same answer. They need to start programming for multiple cores. I would skip over a game if it ran like crap on just a single core. 21st century, 1st world problem, etc.
The 8600k and 7700k seem to trade blows. Some expected the 8600k to win easily. It does do alot better in pov ray though
I have a feeling 2-3 years down the road, the excuses for why games isn't more "multicore" than now will just enter a new era. Intel got the blame first time, because blabla if just more cores. Next already seems to be "lazy developers". And I guess after that we get the blame back on consoles/zen for high latencies between core clusters.
You only prove me right.
In your 2 examples it goes from 45 or so to 140 on the 1800X and 45 or so to 110 on the 1600X.
8700K for example would stay at around 45 for all cores if mapped on your first chart.
Point was that if latency is such a bad thing, Ryzen is doing practically the same on 3200 intra-CCX as a 7900x is on all cores... In fact, it has far less latency in anything with under 7 threads vs 7900x, just like the 8700k.
Second point is when latency like that is an issue, the load cannot easily be multi-threaded anyway.
Latency in this day and age is really a pretty useless metric to bring up as a stab at AMD.
Are we really going to notice latency in the ns range (the rise time of an LED/Laser lol) when we are usually talking ms for e.g. gaming.. No.
https://videocardz.com/73061/yet-another-core-i7-8700k-i5-8600k-review-posted-ahead-of-launch
so is lab501 reliable? My question is wasnt someone claiming single thread doesn't matter in gaming or something stupid and i correctly pointed out how single thread is important for minimum framerate and that makes the biggest difference in quality of experience with removing stutters and smoothness issues.
in far cry primal 7700K and 8700K (all the CPUs with great single thread) are the only ones near 100FPS while AMD is at 68 lol. That is ~40% different hahahahahahaha
far cry primal 100v68
GTA5 52v31 lawls
doom 137vs83
sleeping dogs 113v75
is this place reliable? because that is huge differences and those are even well designed games...not even counting the 10,000's of single threaded or poorly optimized games hahaha
That is why HEDT is trash for gaming and those high clocked quads or now finally 6 cores are awesome
Also lab501 or whatever has the shittiest charts i have ever seen. I made better ones in middle school in the 90s
EDIT: those differences are honestly much larger than i would have expected. I was assuming maybe 30% but this is way worse lol. Is it really accurate because those scores are awful.
According to iracing which is a car racing simulator,
physics and graphics have to the same thread to be able to keep proper timing. But sounds are on a second thread
Stuff that cannot be parallelized can run with other stuff that can't be parallelized .
Point was that if latency is such a bad thing, Ryzen is doing practically the same on 3200 intra-CCX as a 7900x is on all cores... In fact, it has far less latency in anything with under 7 threads vs 7900x, just like the 8700k.
Second point is when latency like that is an issue, the load cannot easily be multi-threaded anyway.
Latency in this day and age is really a pretty useless metric to bring up as a stab at AMD.
Are we really going to notice latency in the ns range (the rise time of an LED/Laser lol) when we are usually talking ms for e.g. gaming.. No.
A little browser is single thread I never would have thought. A massive game is programmed to use 1, thats stupid.web browsing is single thread limited genius.
https://jlelliotton.blogspot.com/p/the-economic-value-of-rapid-response.html
read that to understand why the average notion is wrong and how it was proven wrong by IBM in 1982.
Single thread limited is single thread limited. Most of Win 7 and most programs are single thread limited so why buy a system that is 25-50% slower?
Your logic you said was you wouldnt play a game that was not multithreaded. So why would you use a program or OS that was not threaded? They should get with the times!!!!
Anyways, I just listed a small list of a huge amount of programs and areas of computers that are single thread limited and it hurts daily productivity a lot....go read IBMs study. Your thought process was proven wrong 35 years ago.
lol