Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Sep 24, 2017.
Exactly, they are a business not a charity.
Anyone still on a Intel 2000/3000/4000 or older, might see an upgrade here.
More cores, DDR4, more motherboard features, etc.
I'm a gamer, but I'm starting to produce videos too and I can say 4 old cores ain't enough to render.
Also some of us just like building systems, for me its my hobby as i spend a lot of time away from home so over the months im away i plan a build, its not always top spec rigs but they are all custom case builds which again helps me unwind once im home. However i think my 2700k might be holding back my 1080Ti enough that il notice a boost, plus i encode some music and video.
So basically, it costs more, because it comes with more stuff. Of which it should have been, it costs the same, because it's the same naming scheme from previous years, regardless of the increase in stuff.
Why? Because AMD can bring to the table 8 cores for the price of a 6 core Intel processor? And can provide a 6 core processor for a lot less then Intels 6 core processors?
The intel processors will in general beat AMD processors per core, due to higher frequencies, hence them being more expensive (though their 6-core processors are still too expensive for the performance increase per core), but i fail to see how that somehow means AMDs cheaper processors, will need a price decrease, because of Intels overly priced processors?
The only processor that will compete with AMDs 6 core processors, price wise, will be the Core i5-8400, which has a low base frequency if 2.8Ghz, and will likely have a bump up in price to around $250 or more, just like the 8600k has a bump in price, and it'll still be more expensive then AMDs offerings for performance.
So again, i fail to see how your comment is relevant.
You will notice a small performance increase due to clocks and IPC.
Encoding times will take a big fall though with the added cores.
I had my X5650 @ 4.6. Your slacking. And that was on an H100 with 2 fans.
In term of temp and performance i think i7 6700k is the best chip from Intel's latest chips.Oc'd to 4.5 ghz still Temp remain below 65-67ºc in 30ºc Ambient temprature with Full load.I can Overclock it more furthur but due to living in Hot place and i am satisfy.All i wish that if i get couple of more cores would be better..."Human never be satisfied."
that's just not true at all, like literally, i had to sign on after two years due to how wrong this statement is
simply having more polygons on screen has a cpu demand, objects on screen are not gpu-exclusive, only shaders are
battlefield1 is bottlenecked on 4 threads, you NEED more to stop the stuttering down to 40fps (in multiplayer obviously, at normal clockspeeds), this is a fact
ryzen numbers show enough other games cant quite handle minimum 120fps compared to intel
many people stream, some get creative, blender is a powerful 3d tool for free, you can never have enough cores or speed until your games dont slow down during encoding or a good 3d CG rendered frame doesnt take more than a minute
websites are more demanding than before, browsers are more demanding, most software is pretty bloated, including the OS
if you're not going to utilize 6 cores, then why are you looking? it cant be called more expensive until the lower end models that match performance of previous generations are at a higher price
Agree - i had the same chip, except i was lucky to have a very good one and could 4.7 at reasonable temps, even oc to 5.0. But still sold it to get a ryzen 8 core. I was bored with 4 cores. No regrets at all
The chip that sticks in my heart the most is the x58 i7 920 at 2.66 to 4.00 GHz, one of intels finest
Same here.stuck on 4 cores from last 5-6 years.but i happy by its performance.
I always want to ask how much electricity bill in USA or Canada with average house with 2-3 air conditioner running per/month?
Mine electricity bill come in summer around 30000 rs(500$) a month.In winter its less.