Search results

Yeah, just pointless drama. It's not like things that are hurt most by this flaw (data centers) mostly run on Linux.

So it's the same as with 470D that was launched in China (the one with 1792SP). 560 remains 560 i.e full chip with 1024SP, people just need to be vary of >D< in the name of 560. BTW, D versions were available since launch, they were simply rarer. https://i.imgur.com/FbPPRN3.jpg

Well that's a huge negative. One of the main reasons I'm on Firefox is cause I get to make it look the way I want. Oh well, guess I'll stick with 56 for as long as I can.

Except that if you read the article you'd see that 266W is whole system consumption while 172W is the estimated GPU consumption. So it's 37Mhash@172W. http://www.legitreviews.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/vega-mining-performance2-645x608.png

Looked cheap, is cheap. The packaging, not the CPU.

https://www.semiwiki.com/forum/attachments/f293/19496d1490825290-intels-manufacturing-day-materials-intel-10nm-slide-jpg

Nano fan profile can be easily tweaked, and like I said, It's an ITX card. I'd like to see 980Ti do better in that form factor. As for Vega: "Our peak power consumption is 442W during the stock test and 569W during the overclocked test. Thermally, we’re averaging 79.9C with the stock...

That's all well and good but it's also besides the point. Full fat Fiji can work with air just fine (Nano proved it), Vega can work just fine on air (Vega FE proved it). Hell, even FX 9590 probably does just fine on better air coolers, at least under gaming. 1080Ti sure is hella fast...

1080Ti's are huge as f*** as well, also easily doing well above 300W when OCed, you don't have a problem with that. Besides that, Fiji PRO ran very cool and air would handle full chip without any issues. And Nano was designed that way, hence the "up to" and it still does well in ITX case...

And both of them will be much easier to cool, certainly less power hungry and cooler than 7900X. If AIOs have no trouble cooling [email protected] at which point power draw is nearly double than stock one, I see no problem in cooling CPU with twice the surface area. Also Fury was pretty cool on air...

i5's being 6C is news to me. I though they'd be 4C/8T. Guess with Ryzen around Intel can't cheap out on core count.

And farewell 7800X, you had purpose for nearly entire month. Now it's time for you to take a place next to 7740X and 7640X. AMD sure is feeling the heat with these CPUs around tho. Manufactured on further refined 14nm process, I'll bet these will hit 5GHz without a problem. Zen refresh better...

At this point I don't know why they even bother. For one gaming performance is disappointing. 77% more cores than RX580, clocked higher and supposed uarch improvements, barely does 40-55% over it. It's also huge, coming at 484mm2 it is 54% larger than GP104 that it can't even beat properly...

Shintai already has you covered :D. Steam shows what it shows most likely because AMD still has to offer mobile Ryzen CPUs. While Desktop Ryzen CPUs are a huge hit and almost all of them are placed in Amazon top 20, Intel is still selling their dual core cr4p (dual core i7 lol, now we know...

https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/bff251fc36e2d2f9eb3745cc2f6a6ac155e07d2ccc5d32b29c688fb34546e327.jpg?w=800&h=362 xD. OT: Fast but with hefty drawbacks like heat, OC potential that's kinda wasted since running the damn CPU while OCed easily pushes you into high 90s even with beefiest of...

Difference is marginal at best.

https://browser.primatelabs.com/v4/cpu/2191993 Like this? Still not bad considering it's 2 less cores and lower overall clock speed. Also still beats 1950X, indicating that score has something seriously wrong with it, almost like only half the processor was utilized.

https://browser.primatelabs.com/v4/cpu/2915025 7900X meet 1800X 1800X: 5178ST, 30832MT, less than half the price.

Possible pricing, to be taken with truckloads of salt. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/4b31db91d228c8bac3866c5904a71a9ed036b05f7be6e3890b561d4c5ea9c8ef.png

True, but it was still considered quite niche, being X99 part and still pricier than already pricey LGA1150/1 i7, Intel topping out with quad cores in their mainstream segment. Ryzen 8 and 6 cores on the other hand are part of mainstream platform, their six cores are also very much affordable...

939$ http://ark.intel.com/products/92984/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E5-2640-v4-25M-Cache-2_40-GHz So additional 600MHz on core is worth 800$?

F3 really wasn't anything new. Bethesda just took their TES model and added guns into it. Then they decided to add infinite, 100% freeze-time, VATS which doesn't fit into real-time, first person shooter at all and if anything, ruined the whole experience. IMO they should've either made F3...

I find all of this "overclock is not what K CPUs are for" ridiculous considering this: https://www.hardocp.com/news/2017/01/19/intel_core_i77700k_cpu_5ghz_overclock_chances/ https://images.hardocp.com/images/news/1484847314njjCnT4YPb_1_1.png

You mean K cpus don't cost more than non-K variants?