Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Jan 13, 2020.
It is not called mainstream based on its price, but for its usage/purpose.
Literally the hottest shice available.
10990XE with the power of the sun!
If intel use this i will ask for royalties!
I would say that those days are back. In 2016, the most powerful consumer chip was 4c/8t (10t/20t for HEDT). In 2017 it was 8c/16t (16c/32t for HEDT) and in 2019 it was 16c/32t (32c/64t for HEDT, followed by 64c/128t this year). It's rare to see such a massive growth of computing power in such a short space of time - hell, it's far outpaced the growth of GPU power in that span, in both absolute terms as well as performance per dollar.
Who's gonna build an AIO for that thing ??? 380w, they must be joking.
Most DIY waterblocks wont keep up with it too, threehundredandeighty watts TDP means easily ~500w when doing serious work with or w/o overclocking.
Muaaahhhh, it's getting warm in here
and you betetr have a serious PSU with 2x8Pin EATX plugs, each one is 384w. So when overclocking real hard, it could tilt 2 x EATX 8Pins and have them MELT imho
That power rating is crazy ... Intel is "dying inside". I can't imagine the frustration they are going trough when AMD launches another rocket in their home base ...
It must be painful but they were greedy ohhh soooo greedy and sooooo ignorant for so LONG. I actually think they deserve it ....
This is what happens when you have the crown for far too long and forget what got you there in the first place. They were decent in the beginning after AMD stumbled and fall short year after year they didn't even bother to research 7nm and the BAM - Ryzen and it was too late and it still is too late for them now....
Are you suggesting their chip eventually will turn into a supernova ? cause we are close at 500W if they hit 1kW power draw by 2022 I will replace the radiator in one of my rooms for sure.
Sad there is NO growth in "single thread" power. It's the power most people want for sure.
50% faster "singlethread" performance > more than 8 cores
Need more renderpower? Try Blender with RTX support https://blender.community/c/graphicall/kdbbbc/
a 9600K has more cores than i really need
What are you talking about, AMD has higher IPC and its increased with each gen since the first ryzen.
I want much more! Amd is barly on par with Intel in games. I want low latency AND high IPC performance. Zen 2 @ 7ghz and 6ghz infinity fabric?
3900x gamingperformance i pretty much the same as the old 5960x @4,8ghz with 3200c14 tweaked memory. So not much growth in performance. Just watt/performance.
I want 50% more performance than 9900k@ 5.3ghz with 35ns latency
I have enough cores with Threadripper 16 core and 3900x
What you want, I don't know.
sorry guys, but except for laptops i ditched Intel cpu's after X99, when i bought Threadripper gen 1. i've since upgraded that to gen 2, but although i love the spec of Threadripper gen 3, the performance is far beyond what i actually need with the Ryzen 2 (3rd gen) 3700x.
i do have the mobile I-7 8750h, which is (8th gen) Intel's starting point for dealing with Ryzen. it's a nice enough chip w/ SMT and low power...and they never released the desktop version (imho power/heat signature) which is too bad as it would've cut some of the crap marketing from fanboys. which brings me around to my actual point (lol), set your performance envelope before you shop cpu's and you can not only save money, you can save frustration which is even more important as you will be using your rig all of the time.
I'm not sad one bit. I wanted more computing power and that's precisely what I got. App developers will eventually optimize for more threads so pining for more single-threaded power is backwards and redundant.
Lol.. I agree that generally software will shift to multithreaded but I don't see how asking for more single threaded performance is backwards. Certainly no one was saying that with bulldozer.
Also there will always be operations that cannot be threaded. While it's hard to increase general IPC CPU manufacturers should definitely be improving/committing to newer extensions, for example AVX512 -- we're starting to see applications take advantage of in the consumer space. I don't think anyone is saying AMD adding AVX512 is backwards or redundant.
Rendering with cpucores is soon dead, when we have Blender with RTX support
It's backwards in the sense that it puts the focus on how things were done up to now and not how things will/should be done going forward. If software scales with cores in the future then single-threaded performance won't matter much (the problem with Bulldozer was the software didn't go multi-threaded like AMD had hoped).
Aren't SIMD instructions all about parallelism?
single-threaded will always matter, even with perfect scaling with cores.
Not everyone plays Cinebench 24/7
I'm not going advocate abandoning more cores for single threaded performance - I'm just saying that wanting more single threaded performance isn't wanting to go backwards. There are immediate benefits for IPC improvements and when you scale that with more cores the benefits of having more cores is greater.
SIMD instructions are about parallelism but within the core. I'd rather have a 4 core with AVX512 then a 4 core without AVX512. Again I'm not advocating for less cores just that I fundamentally disagree with the idea that wanting better performance out of a single core is backwards.