jaghpanther
Distinguished
- Sep 23, 2010
- 150
- 0
- 18,710
- Status
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7255/intel-core-i7-4960x-ivy-bridge-e-review
Not every part, The current IB-E is pure 6-core.
"There goes the hopes and dreams of bringing an $500 8 core part"
It's almost that for a 6 core part.. get one of them.. there's no competition at this level of performance so just deal with it or save.
"Very disappointing they are keeping it at the $1,000 price range. It isn't worth that and given every single 6 core part in the Extreme lineup technically is 8 cores with 2 disabled it's very insulting."
Maybe for you I've read quite a few people that will be getting one or saving for one. Who cares if two are disabled maybe there's reasons why they can't be enabled.. who knows.. take what you're given for the price point.. You just sound like you're whining.
It's not insulting, it's just that you're unprepared, unwilling or unable to meet the cost, that's not insulting that's just you being cheap.
"The only positive is that it'll allow 6 core parts to go mainstream outside the regular high-end lineup by pushing a $300 6 core part out and expanding the LGA2011 segment."
No. What about the people actually buying the 8 core i7? No benefit to them at all?
C'mon.
It's almost that for a 6 core part.. get one of them.. there's no competition at this level of performance so just deal with it or save.
"Very disappointing they are keeping it at the $1,000 price range. It isn't worth that and given every single 6 core part in the Extreme lineup technically is 8 cores with 2 disabled it's very insulting."
Maybe for you I've read quite a few people that will be getting one or saving for one. Who cares if two are disabled maybe there's reasons why they can't be enabled.. who knows.. take what you're given for the price point.. You just sound like you're whining.
It's not insulting, it's just that you're unprepared, unwilling or unable to meet the cost, that's not insulting that's just you being cheap.
"The only positive is that it'll allow 6 core parts to go mainstream outside the regular high-end lineup by pushing a $300 6 core part out and expanding the LGA2011 segment."
No. What about the people actually buying the 8 core i7? No benefit to them at all?
C'mon.
danwat1234
Distinguished
- Jun 13, 2008
- 1,403
- 6
- 19,315
More work done per clockcycle on a core or higher frequency is more desirable than more cores for real world performance increases with software that can't take advantage of more than 4 cores.
I am wondering when 6 core laptop CPUs will be released. Maybe at 14nm or 10nm
I am wondering when 6 core laptop CPUs will be released. Maybe at 14nm or 10nm
More desirable for you perhaps. That's not the focus of Intels efforts with x86 right now. Sure there's some that can't take advantage of it, but there are many that can. How can you push forward getting support unless the hardware is there? Think about it.
I'm guessing mid 2015 for 14nm 6 core parts.
http://www.extremetech.com/computing/171477-intels-14nm-milkshake-its-better-than-yours
I'm guessing mid 2015 for 14nm 6 core parts.
http://www.extremetech.com/computing/171477-intels-14nm-milkshake-its-better-than-yours
Bison88, you're wrong you know. If you're going to whine, at least be correct about the whining, otherwise it's embarrassing.
Sandy Bridge-E had 8 cores total, of which two were disabled, making six. Wouldn't it be great if it ended there?
But no, it didn't, and you're wrong. Ivy Bridge-E is a straight six core. No disabled cores. It's just six.
Now repent, and pray to Intel for forgiveness. Or buy one of these expensive processors, and then you'll know Intel will forgive you. Maybe even like you. Wouldn't that be grand (forgive the pun).
I'd be really surprised if Intel sold even close to 5% of these pricey parts, unless they improve them. Sure, eight cores is nice, and the quad memory channel seems great, except it sucks for desktop apps and is often slower. .Sure, the large L3 cache is great, except it's also slower, so it's a mixed bag.
Some people can use the eight cores, but that's a much smaller percentage than five. Most people will not see any performance edge from this behemoth, and would be better off with a $300 processor, and another $300 processor a year from then. They would end up with extra money, and the second $300 processor will be faster on most apps.
Sandy Bridge-E had 8 cores total, of which two were disabled, making six. Wouldn't it be great if it ended there?
But no, it didn't, and you're wrong. Ivy Bridge-E is a straight six core. No disabled cores. It's just six.
Now repent, and pray to Intel for forgiveness. Or buy one of these expensive processors, and then you'll know Intel will forgive you. Maybe even like you. Wouldn't that be grand (forgive the pun).
I'd be really surprised if Intel sold even close to 5% of these pricey parts, unless they improve them. Sure, eight cores is nice, and the quad memory channel seems great, except it sucks for desktop apps and is often slower. .Sure, the large L3 cache is great, except it's also slower, so it's a mixed bag.
Some people can use the eight cores, but that's a much smaller percentage than five. Most people will not see any performance edge from this behemoth, and would be better off with a $300 processor, and another $300 processor a year from then. They would end up with extra money, and the second $300 processor will be faster on most apps.
merikafyeah
Honorable
- Jun 20, 2012
- 264
- 0
- 10,790
Meanwhile, AMD has eight-cores for less than $300. Multi-threaders eat your heart out. Does Intel have 4x the performance to back up something 4x the price of AMD's best eight-core? Maybe. Probably not. This is not speaking about the price of the rest of the platform either. But I suppose if every frame and minute saved counts, then by all means. Cash to the wind and burn baby burn.
I'm still using an i7 920 in my workstation (overclocked to 4.6ghz) waiting for a worthwhile upgrade that doesn't cost an arm and a leg. I know there are slightly faster options available that use (A LOT) less power, but when it comes down to it, I have solid processing power by todays standards in a 5+ year old cpu.
What disappoints me most is the sluggish rate that chipset development seems to be going. Worthwhile upgrades in I/O speed is what I'm really interested in. The current motherboard chipset lineup isn't incentive enough to upgrade.
What disappoints me most is the sluggish rate that chipset development seems to be going. Worthwhile upgrades in I/O speed is what I'm really interested in. The current motherboard chipset lineup isn't incentive enough to upgrade.
Grandmastersexsay
Honorable
- May 16, 2013
- 332
- 0
- 10,780
"other than video and autocad.......what does a 8 core or 4 core core do better than a 2 core cpu? And Jesus H Christ.....1000 for a cpu? I remember when intel tried to do that with the Pentium 4 extreme edition."
AutoCAD is still single threaded.
The only people that would use 8 cores are people who would be better served with a workstation or server. In both cases xeons are a better choice. Usually the E series chips are for people who like to waste money.
AutoCAD is still single threaded.
The only people that would use 8 cores are people who would be better served with a workstation or server. In both cases xeons are a better choice. Usually the E series chips are for people who like to waste money.
- May 18, 2007
- 23,878
- 5,317
- 108,890
With how small incremental performance improvements are from year to year, there isn't much of a point upgrading CPUs every third year... even more so on Intel's side where they decided to start splitting ticks and tocks between mobile and desktop chips, effectively putting their chips on a two years product cycle.
The speed increase here and with skylake (future chip on Intel road map) seems weak. When are we getting the next "big" upgrade? Sucky. I'll stick with my 2011 x79 chipset.
Its all downhill from here. All the corps are sucking profits as we unload our money. Think about it, Its just like UPS sucking the life out of the drivers in order to maximize profit.
Its all downhill from here. All the corps are sucking profits as we unload our money. Think about it, Its just like UPS sucking the life out of the drivers in order to maximize profit.
xxsk8er101xx
Splendid
- Dec 31, 2007
- 3,967
- 4
- 22,815
Ya don't buy a 2011 board now thinking the Haswell-E will work. It won't work.
Think about this for a second. If the 8-core CPU's is a 1000 dollars then the 6-core variants will be cheaper when released. We might be look at 400 bucks for a 6-core maybe? Even if it's 700. It's still better then a 1000.
Think about this for a second. If the 8-core CPU's is a 1000 dollars then the 6-core variants will be cheaper when released. We might be look at 400 bucks for a 6-core maybe? Even if it's 700. It's still better then a 1000.
- May 18, 2007
- 23,878
- 5,317
- 108,890
When mainstream software that requires it comes into existence or the market for media consumption PCs/laptops dries up.
Multi-threaded and multi-core CPUs have been common on desktops for the past 5-10 years depending on how you look at it yet most software and games these days are still predominantly single-threaded - if you try a broad sample of games, you will see that very few of them leverage significantly more than 1/Nth of available execution cores/threads... on a quad-core, you will often see games use about 30% of the CPU, meaning its threading is only tapping 5% extra processing power and a good chunk of that 5% is likely inter-process communication overhead.
Skylake is supposed to make quad-core standard (I'm guessing that means i3 and up) which will likely knock the rest of Intel's range up a notch such as i5 gaining HT and i7 gaining two extra cores. It should be interesting from a geeky point of view but potentially pointless if well-threaded software that makes meaningful use of it still fails to get on the market.
Between now and Skylake, there will also be about two generations worth of new mobile SoCs and devices. If these continue evolving at their current pace, the low-end PC/laptop will be in serious trouble two years from now... both of my sisters and their boyfriends are already doing pretty much everything off their phones and none of them are particularly tech-savvy.
xxsk8er101xx
Splendid
- Dec 31, 2007
- 3,967
- 4
- 22,815
Ya don't buy a 2011 board now thinking the Haswell-E will work. It won't work.
Think about this for a second. If the 8-core CPU's is a 1000 dollars then the 6-core variants will be cheaper when released. We might be look at 400 bucks for a 6-core maybe? Even if it's 700. It's still better then a 1000.
Think about this for a second. If the 8-core CPU's is a 1000 dollars then the 6-core variants will be cheaper when released. We might be look at 400 bucks for a 6-core maybe? Even if it's 700. It's still better then a 1000.
Sakkura
Illustrious
- Aug 22, 2011
- 8,129
- 3
- 37,965
Unknown so far, but it'll either be Haswell Refresh or Broadwell. Either way, it won't be much of an upgrade. Broadwell is a tick, the tock isn't until Skylake arrives in 2015 or 16. Your 2600K should be fine until that time; only real reason to upgrade would be to get newer motherboard features.
ingtar33
Glorious
- Dec 17, 2012
- 9,128
- 416
- 46,040
don't think there is one.
I've built and played with a lot of modern systems and i still don't see the need for 99% of GAMERS to go past a late model core2duo/quad or quad core phenomII... and i still doubt anyone can tell the difference between an 8 core piledriver, a 6 core thuban, or an i5/i7 haswell without a benching suite or the two computers sitting next to each other unraring gigabyte sized files.
besides, if a modern computer doesn't have an SSD it will feel like a 5-7 year old computer in day to day tasks anyway.
we need software to catch up to all the computing power that's out there before we need faster chips... cause right now 4 year old hardware is generally good enough.
- May 18, 2007
- 23,878
- 5,317
- 108,890
I have no SSD in my PC and it works perfectly fine. Then again, I do have 32GB RAM so pretty much everything I use on a regular basis stays in the OS' disk cache after the initial load and my HDDs hardly ever get accessed beyond that.
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
-
Discussion What's your favourite video game you've been playing?- Started by amdfangirl
- Replies: 4K
-
Question PC freezes and restarts, no event log, only kernel 41 critical ?- Started by mortents
- Replies: 1
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram