Are Intel joking re: i3 pricing?

[AMW1011]

This I know. But thats what we are going to see if we compare it to a quad. Power is a big part too.

JDJ, is there any way you can get sighQ2 to stop? hes aggrivating me with his schill talk.

Very true, but then the Athlon II X2 250 would use about the same power as the i3, since it is half the cores on the same architecture, for half / a third the price.

 

[jimmysmitty]

I meant if you consider power in the factor then it would trounce the quad.

It actually uses about the same as a X2 550 but ONLY because of the IGP thats factored into it as well. Thats why they have two high end ones that do different things:

One will OC the CPU to 3.6GHz and the IGP to 1GHz and the other will OC the CPU to 3.7GHz and not OC the GPU at all in order to stay within the TDP.

Take out the IGP and I am pretty sure it would use much lower power compared to the X2 550. Hell in order to be fair you need to add what the power usage from the IGP for the X2 550 is to see what its really using.

 

[Guest]

This is true. But it still doesn't mean that people wnat to know a dual core vs a dual core performance wise.

It's irrelevent. I'm sure if you look hard enough you'll find people who want to know what single cores vs single cores perform like.

Price is one part.

Price is more than just a part, it's everything. Do you really think intel care about performance so long as they can continue to charge top dollar even though they have inferior cpu's?

I think comparing it to AMDs dual cores and then getting a price/power/performance rating is important.

It isn't. People who buy AMD dual cores would not buy intel dual cores when they could have faster triple cores or quad cores for cheaper.

If you factor in everything and don't just cherry pick it so AMD has the best odds it doesn't look good for AMD. I bet if you factor in power with price and performance the Core i3 comes out near the same in terms of pricing as AMDs dual cores.

THG had a test showing it was near half TDP as a AMD quad at full load.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/clarkdale-review_14.html#sect0

Full load is pretty meaningless unless you are running a server 24/7, in which case you are using none of the listed cpu's.

These 32nm cpu's are no better for idle power consumption than anything else around. It's just continuing fail on this, these cpu's have almost *no* redeeming features at all save for decent overclocking but in reality they aren't even that much better than previous gen intels.

 

[AMW1011]

I meant if you consider power in the factor then it would trounce the quad.

It actually uses about the same as a X2 550 but ONLY because of the IGP thats factored into it as well. Thats why they have two high end ones that do different things:

One will OC the CPU to 3.6GHz and the IGP to 1GHz and the other will OC the CPU to 3.7GHz and not OC the GPU at all in order to stay within the TDP.

Take out the IGP and I am pretty sure it would use much lower power compared to the X2 550. Hell in order to be fair you need to add what the power usage from the IGP for the X2 550 is to see what its really using.

Unless you disable the IGP...

 

[AMW1011]

It's irrelevent. I'm sure if you look hard enough you'll find people who want to know what single cores vs single cores perform like.

Price is one part.

Price is more than just a part, it's everything. Do you really think intel care about performance so long as they can continue to charge top dollar even though they have inferior cpu's?

I think comparing it to AMDs dual cores and then getting a price/power/performance rating is important.

It isn't. People who buy AMD dual cores would not buy intel dual cores when they could have faster triple cores or quad cores for cheaper.

If you factor in everything and don't just cherry pick it so AMD has the best odds it doesn't look good for AMD. I bet if you factor in power with price and performance the Core i3 comes out near the same in terms of pricing as AMDs dual cores.

THG had a test showing it was near half TDP as a AMD quad at full load.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/clarkdale-review_14.html#sect0

Full load is pretty meaningless unless you are running a server 24/7, in which case you are using none of the listed cpu's.

These 32nm cpu's are no better for idle power consumption than anything else around. It's just continuing fail on this, these cpu's have almost *no* redeeming features at all save for decent overclocking but in reality they aren't even that much better than previous gen intels.

This is a good summary, clarkdale is wolfdale all over again, just 2 years too late.

I didn't even think of it, but Jenny is correct, idle power is really all that matters in a desktop environment and Intel's horrible IGP ruins that.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Unless its mobile, this market really doesnt care about power usage.
This is a "hey, its a computer, glad i have one" market, not one of 24/7 usage, or intense usage at a given time . This is average Joe on the lowere end, and isnt a power concerned scenario, other than mobile, where then it becomes a player, do you want better perf, for less, or longer battery life?

 

[Guest]

I think the AMD fanboys here ought to take on the spinner crown. Are you all forgetting the phenom dual core 550 IS 99.00. Now thats 2 cores not 4, so why would any crazy fanboy ever buy one of those ? Oh wait , we will hear some AMD fud for that to.

I would assume those will take a small price drop, making them incredible value for anyone looking to get a cheap quad by unlocking. I might actually get one myself if that happens.

Sorry but Intel just took over all the dual core market and most of the tr-cores as well. Show me a member here with a 4ghz AMD dual or tri core. I'm waiting ?

Lol you wont have long to wait before you see that.

We have a Clarkdale about to hit 5ghz in this thread. This is a enthusiast web site, one that caters to overclockers, this is where the fun is. its jealous trolls that want to spoil everyones fun and rant like a lunatic about company morals.

Nobody cares. 5 ghz dual cores still wont beat 4ghz quads and probably wont beat 4ghz triple cores.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Besides, the new AMD boards are just around the corner, with better perf and power and features, so thatll soon change all this anyways.
Point is, what average Joe sees for a given price, if he sees quad, for same/less, he will jump on it

 

[notty22]

Nobody cares. 5 ghz dual cores still wont beat 4ghz quads and probably wont beat 4ghz triple cores.

*sarcasm* in case you can't figure it out.
Sorry but your twisted logic comes full circle. The i5 750 made EVERY AMD tri/quad/dual/broken quad/broken tri whatever irrelavent the day it was released.
In fact as a owner of one you should feel ashamed by your own twisted apply when you want logic.
Yes it beats every AMD chip 90% of the time, overclocked 100% of the time.
its made the whole company's product line a "who cares" according to your standards.

 

[AMW1011]

Besides, the new AMD boards are just around the corner, with better perf and power and features, so thatll soon change all this anyways.
Point is, what average Joe sees for a given price, if he sees quad, for same/less, he will jump on it

And for once average joe will have made the right decision!

 

[Guest]

*sarcasm* in case you can't figure it out.
Sorry but your twisted logic comes full circle. The i5 750 made EVERY AMD tri/quad/dual/broken quad/broken tri whatever irrelavent the day it was released.
In fact as a owner of one you should feel ashamed by your own twisted apply when you want logic.
Yes it beats every AMD chip 90% of the time, overclocked 100% of the time.
its made the whole company's product line a "who cares" according to your standards.

You really don't get the concept of 'price-performance' do you?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price/performance_ratio

 

[AMW1011]

*sarcasm* in case you can't figure it out.
Sorry but your twisted logic comes full circle. The i5 750 made EVERY AMD tri/quad/dual/broken quad/broken tri whatever irrelavent the day it was released.
In fact as a owner of one you should feel ashamed by your own twisted apply when you want logic.
Yes it beats every AMD chip 90% of the time, overclocked 100% of the time.
its made the whole company's product line a "who cares" according to your standards.

Your not serious...

Your telling me that it makes $120 tri core CPUs with unlocked multipliers, $100 quads with slightly decreased cache, or $140 quads with all the bells and whistles irrelevant?!

Your nuts.

In reality, the i5 750 is an enthusiast chip that is overpriced and has a bad price/performance ratio, that happens to be slightly better than the Phenom II X4 965/955.

The truth is that after you look at anything higher than the Phenom II X4 925 then you are paying too much and are getting diminishing returns, unless you are a real enthusiast.

I own an i5 750 and I accept that, I paid the premium for the SLI+CFX feature, as well as the extra performance that I will never use.

The Athlon II X2 250, Athlon II X4 620, Phenom II X3 720, and the Phenom II X4 925 make everything irrelevant 95%+ of the time.

 

[jimmysmitty]

Jenny, 5GHz duals will bea 4GHz tri/quads in most apps since most apps still don't use more than 2 cores. And even games. And you know that.

 

[Guest]

The Athlon II X2 250, Athlon II X4 620, Phenom II X3 720, and the Phenom II X4 925 make everything irrelevant 95%+ of the time.

The i7 still has it's place to be fair.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

According to some here,when we see the P2 doing as well as i7 in games, theyre generally assumed to be gpu bottlenecked, so raising the speeds of a cpu shouldnt matter, or is a both ways scenario yet again?

 

[AMW1011]

Jenny, 5GHz duals will bea 4GHz tri/quads in most apps since most apps still don't use more than 2 cores. And even games. And you know that.

No no it wont, after 4.0 GHz the performance gains are pretty non existent in real world apps and you only need 3.6 Ghz in games. I don't give a damn if its at 7 Ghz, it still wont show in real world apps. Synthetics will love it though.

The i7 still has it's place to be fair.

In the professional world, yes it does just like i5 750 or lynnfield i7s. In the desktop environment it falls into the same 95% as the i5 750, though it is in the more extreme branch.

Does that mean only 5% of enthusiasts own i5/i7s? No, enthusiasts, myself included, don't care about what they "should" buy. I bought the i5 750 because of the SLI+CFX feature and because it was ridiculously fast, even if I'll never see it. It didn't make sense, it didn't need to, I did it because I love computers and I wanted to, that is the enthusiast's way.

Let us be honest, LGA 1366 makes more sense than LGA 1156, even though it isn't any faster for 99% of people. If you want 3+ high end GPUs then LGA 1366 is your answer, though that is a very small portion of the market.

Even then, if those cards are ATI cards, a good 790FX and a Phenom II X4 925 makes more financial sense and will result in basically the same gaming experience, but with 3+ high end GPUs you are already throwing "financial sense" out of the window and are in pure enthusiasts waters.

I do not regret my CPU decision in any way, I wanted the best for my money and so I got it. It also helps I don't have to look at another s****y nVidia motherboard too.

 

[sighQ2]

I actually agree with you for the most-part



I can not speak for anyone else, but I think its because there is a bigger price gap between Intel's quads (Q9xxx/i7/i5) in comparison to AMD's Tri cores, I would like it would be unethical to compare them just based on the fact that one is almost the double the price of the other.
Whereas, I believe people think its more acceptable to compare AMDs tri cores to Intel's dual cores because they fall in line with Intel's core 2 Duo and Dual Core i3. So they are simply matching up prices rather than cores for comparison which could be a fair comparison scientifically speaking.




I agree. People have different opinions and its not right to claim that Intel are paying people off (whether true or not) without evidence. Much respect for that.

People who live in a vacuum or under a rock might agree with this, for it's simple face value. I don't know if you realize what you "agree" to.

As for evidence, I prefer the evidence of my direct experience. Repeated experiences have taught me a lot. For instance, here, on this nice website, I have been repeatedly, at various times, going back quite a while, witness and/or receiver of;
insults, lying, misrepresentation, gross fantasy, rumour mongering, dissing, erroneous assessments of individuals, degeneracy, flaming, trolling, pro-spintel insanity, leasing prospective buyers astray, discreditation of truth, ganging up on individuals, character assassination, placation, conspiracy, innuendo, etc.
also; there's been a comparitively few genuine, pleasant interactions with various individuals.

But there is a central self-established core or clique here - and there's no sign on the front door advertising that; so those creeps are not part of the deal.

And there seems to be a common spintel agenda - so if you prefer to ignore your senses, that's your choice.

Repeated exposure to dark negative spineless individuals teaches some nasty lessons; those individuals give it out better than they can take it. If nobody says anything, it's ok. It is not ok. And those negative exposures are dark teachers; and so such individuals who lower the level generally are clearly visible. Direct experience is not subject to discussion or sway; it simply is what it is; there is no lie in it. There is so much gross, obvious, blatant abuse here - I can only assume that many do not know what abuse is or they don't care or it's just normal. It's not ok.

And so we have a war in a zoo of lies and illusions. it could be so much more; but that would require an interest in reality and empathy and honesty and a mutual investigative approach to the discovery of ever-greater truth, and the greater good of all involved. And so, I directly experience another agenda; and it is unannounced.; but I see it; and you might. The most vocal will deny it.

Perhaps you think it's all gentle and rosy. It's not.

 

[mindless728]

agner's blog has some info on this mess - lots actually.

Just by switching the CPUID dispatcher, they got a 50% improvement on a VIA cpu. !!!! and some 25% on an AMD. just by identify it as a phony "genuine intel".


LINK quoted below:
http://www.electronicsweekly.com/blogs/david-manners-semiconductor-blog/2009/12/intel-skewed-compilers-to-slow.html

= but here's the general scoop =

"Apparently, Intel also put code its compilers which would slow down any PC which used an AMD chip.

"Allegedly, Intel secretly redesigned key software, known as a compiler, in a way that deliberately stunted the performance of competitors' CPU chips', says the FTC, 'Intel told its customers and the public that software performed better on Intel CPUs than on competitors' CPUs, but the company deceived them by failing to disclose that these differences were due largely or entirely to Intel's compiler design."



= AND IT GETS WORSE = in the gpu scene.

"After illegally skewing the CPU market, Intel then turned to trying to skew the GPU market, says the FTC.

GPUs have lessened the need for CPUs, says the FTC, and therefore pose a threat to Intel's monopoly power.

The FTC states: 'Intel has responded to this competitive challenge by embarking on a similar anticompetitive strategy, which aims to preserve its CPU monopoly by smothering potential competition from GPU chips such as those made by Nvidia, the FTC complaint charges. As part of this latest campaign, Intel misled and deceived potential competitors in order to protect its monopoly. The complaint alleges that there also is a dangerous probability that Intel's unfair methods of competition could allow it to extend its monopoly into the GPU chip markets. '


= ABOVE THE LAW? =

"The FTC is the fifth anti-trust action to be brought against Intel. In actions by Korea, Japan and Europe, Intel has been found guilty of anti-trust illegalities and fined; a fourth action from the State of New York has still to be heard. The FTC's action makes it five".

= AND EVEN THE STOCKHOLDERS ARE GUNNING THEM =

"Meanwhile Intel's shareholders are bringing civil class actions against Intel and its management alleging that shareholders' interests have been damaged by Intel's alleged anti-competitive practices".



HERE'S AGNER'S BLOG INFO: linked and discussed at amdzone with special appearance by agner himself
http://www.amdzone.com/phpbb3/viewtopic.php?f=52&t=137238

and the blog itself:
http://www.agner.org/optimize/blog/read.php?i=25
.


This is a good read. This is what the fuss is all about. And there are many other articles.

well i guess to put this to rest would be to use a few compilers and see if there actually is a difference and then write a small benchmark in ASM to skip the compiler and test it on AMD chips and Intel chips (wish i had a VIA to test as well), it doesn't have to be anything multi threaded, just simple single thread test

i'll read through the links but if there is no benchmark including source code and links to the compilers tested then i don't care what he says on AMDZONE and his blog, all i would care about would be the numbers for these tests

though from what it looks like it is just intel's compiler so this would only affect anything compiled with it, microsoft's, gcc's probably are not affected at all, though this is why i want to see a test done or i have to do it myself

 

[sighQ2]

sighQ2, if you think there is any one corporation that is angelic, godly and loves you more than your mother does then you are a sad sad person.

Every company has their corruption and sleaze. Even AMD. The whole thing that happened with their ex CEO hector or the fact that somehow AMD had a shortage of HD5K series GPUs, the price goes up and then magically they ship 2 million faster than they shipped the HD4Ks which DIDN'T have the same shortage.

But the smaller the company, the easier it is to hide said corruption.

You know the biggest difference between me and you though? I know Intel is corrupt. I know AMD is the same. The difference is I go for whatever performs the best and don't just sit idly by supporting one company because of something I have no control over.

you can hide behind any faux structure you care to create.

you are well known to me.

 

[BadTrip]

hes aggrivating me with his schill talk.

He is aggravating EVERYONE with his constant spouting of nonsense.

He needs to realize his pathetic attempt to apear intelligent makes him sound like a damn fool.

 

[Guest]

Jenny, 5GHz duals will bea 4GHz tri/quads in most apps since most apps still don't use more than 2 cores. And even games. And you know that.

No.

http://en.inpai.com.cn/doc/enshowcont.asp?id=7475

Here we see the Athlon II 620 at 2.6ghz basically destroying the i3 630 at 2.93ghz. Sure the i3 wins by a tiny margin in a couple of synthetics and the gaming is shared, but it is pretty obvious that the Athlon II X4 is hugely superior all round.

So you can add 2ghz to the i3, making almost 5ghz. Now add 1ghz to the 620 making 3.6ghz but double the cores. Now consider that as you get further from the base core speed, diminishing returns give less performance.

No reason to believe that the i3 will ever get close to the Athlon II. Some of those results are just plain embarrassing. Just look at them - the i3 'wins' synthetics again (what a shock) but gets a real thumping in real apps. Sure it can hold it's own in gaming, but since when was the X4 620 considered a gaming chip?

The evidence just keeps on mounting against Clarkfail. Itanium could be looking good soon because of this.

 

[Guest]

He is aggravating EVERYONE with his constant spouting of nonsense.

He needs to realize his pathetic attempt to apear intelligent makes him sound like a damn fool.

Your defence of this terrible cpu isn't making you look particularly good btw.

 

[yannifb]

Ok just a quick question (didn't want to start a new thread b/c its about integrated graphics so its slightly on topic)- Im building a cheap $400 PC for a relative as a gift, and was wondering how the IGP on the 785G performs.

Also +1 to AMW- Tbh you are one of the most unbiased posters here.

 

[sighQ2]

One thing ominus here is, since we can now claim usage of other compilers, and Intels actually doing better now, didnt they also stop their "rebate" programs after C2D, or just before?
Didnt they also offer nvidia Atom by itself at an inflated price, or, its SoC solution, still prohibitively high? And nVidia filed? Or, itll be too late by the time nVidia hcan enter this market, as SoC will have been adopted, and this market was never challenged?
And, since it was generally known as to being more prevelent earlier as to Intels compiler issues, wasnt that also when AMD had a superior chip? And not now, so people understand the timing, its importance, and why it doesnt look so bad now?
All these things fit, so yes, Intel has it all coming back to roost

This is essentially the problem. spintel was doomed due to Athlon's hammer line. It was shut out; AMD was prevented from achieving what it earned. When c2d appeared, several years later, the damage was done, and the briberebates perhaps ended - I guess - who knows? This was the main theme of the EU case. That evidence comes around again in the other cases; and even more, it seems.

If people were to simply read the conclusions of the EU, they would easily understand all the talk against spintel. It's a story of deliberate devastation. It is amazing that AMD even survived at all - and their only way, some believe was to buy ATI; and then eventually restructure was required. The EU fine was like a slap on the wrist even tho it set a record for fines of that nature. I see that as an incentive to continue.

what goes around comes around.

 

[sighQ2]

The compiler I can understand. It was made by Intel so it would optimize for Intel not the competition. I am pretty sure if you tried to use a compiler made by nVidia on a ATI GPU it wouldn't get the best optimizations as the nV card would.

As for Atom, still nV just wants part of everything. I am supprised they aren't going after Core i3 now since it will furtehr cut into their IGP sales.....

you either don't understand, don't want to, or pretend not to.

and you seem to not be following the well known public information on this - or you don't want to

if you read the info, you would know better than to say this

that's simple