Prima.VeraThere are a lot of tech forums regarding CPU designs out there, on where people are talking that the x86 architecture is near of its end of life. The x86 is an 40 years old Ancient architecture which should be replaced soon with something better, and I'm not talking of ARM. Some new architecture and new instruction sets needs to be invented, otherwise they will just keep add transistors to increase the performance but the miniaturization is coming to and end....

What would be that something better?

Captain_TomHaha ok buddy.


Look I can't say I would complain about them, but let's not pretend they were silent. I just built a Ryzen system with a 1600 and it's bundled cooler was truly nicer than a $30 air cooler.

It's true though. They have never been the loudest fan in my systems, and my systems have been decently quiet for a while now. Heck, the Hyper 212 I'm using to cool my Pentium G3220 is almost louder than the Celeron stock cooler I had previously, even on low speeds. The Xeon 1220 stock coolee was pretty quiet too.

Thank you, AMD. AMD will make Intel great again!

You know, this, plus the HEDT news and linus' little rant on that....I wish I could find the thread from last week where the guy was arguing with me, saying Intel is not knee jerk reacting to AMD. Yeeeeeaaaahhhh, riiiiigghht. :kookoo:

EDIT: oh yeah, it was effikan in "The Slumbering Giant Awakes" piece. Yeah, he has been remarkably quiet in the face of the continued antics of the big, blind giant thrashing around trying to find the mouse.

Jeez, Intel really are scrambling around like headless chickens right now! Would not be a pleasant place to be working I am sure. They simply forgot how to innovate having the marketplace to themselves all these years.

SupercritJust how many chips meant for Xeon repackaged into mainstream cpu?

These have nothing to do with Xeon, given the fact that Intel is just readying new Xeon chips built on the Skylake-X architecture.

So also a new socket for coofee lake. Mr. Wallet-ripper is realy giving it all. With that i mean ripping wallets before they lose costumer to amd.

Way to go intel....not:kookoo:

This time amd has realy taken intel with there pants down.

OctopussNew socket AGAIN? WTF is this? Seriously. Give us a break.

You didn't expect a new socket?

Remember, it's two (three if you're lucky) processor generations per socket.

JMccoveryYou didn't expect a new socket?

Remember, it's two (three if you're lucky) processor generations per socket.

We had z170, z270 and now z370 coming up in the first 8 months of the year. What is z270 for exactly?

Prima.VeraThere are a lot of tech forums regarding CPU designs out there, on where people are talking that the x86 architecture is near of its end of life. The x86 is an 40 years old Ancient architecture which should be replaced soon with something better, and I'm not talking of ARM. Some new architecture and new instruction sets needs to be invented, otherwise they will just keep add transistors to increase the performance but the miniaturization is coming to and end....

Microarchitecture is not the problem, the problem is that the current IC cannot be scaled more. We need quantum computers or something exotic to get better IPC (if there is a clock)

OctopussNew socket AGAIN? WTF is this? Seriously. Give us a break.

TomgangSo also a new socket for coofee lake. Mr. Wallet-ripper is realy giving it all. With that i mean ripping wallets before they lose costumer to amd.

Way to go intel....not:kookoo:

This time amd has realy taken intel with there pants down.

Wat
I think almost always was 2 generations per socket. Why is changing socket a rip after Skylake and Kaby. Or it's because of the P-A-O model (3 generations per socket)

ensabrenoir.....I'm just waiting to see who gets fired for this kerfuffle. Intel needs a new Sandy bridge level of jump in performance....Until then it's just ....Meh.

Moore's law is your answer. Lets see if the next AMD microarchitecture will make a jump comparable to Excavator-Ryzen



BTW this thread oozes AMD fanboyism (even if I am not a fanboy of anything, just give me something good and cheaper, not brands). What's bad about Intel responding to AMD? precisely AMD Ryzen is a response to Intel.

Derek12Wat
I think almost always was 2 generations per socket. Why is changing socket a rip after Skylake and Kaby. Or it's because of the P-A-O model (3 generations per socket)

Skylake and Kaby was NOT 2 generations. It was more like 1.1 Generations.

ratirtkiss Intel good bye

Unfortunately I have no other choice but to go Intel for my needs. I really, REALLY hate to say that but for my needs getting a Ryzen would be a mistake.

I two games (well OK, mainly one game) that are heavily single-threaded beasts, namely Starcraft 2.

For instance, you can't overclock a Ryzen chip past 4 GHz due to internal throttling. Even if you do some how manage to overclock it past 4 GHz the performance gains that you get past 4 GHz becomes negligible at best, 4 GHz on Ryzen is the wall of diminishing returns; hit that "wall" and you won't get any more out of it.

I was then reading about how this one user has an i5 7600k processor that's been overclocked to 5 GHz. By his math that's 5/4 = 1.25 or a 25% single thread performance increase from CPU clock alone. Add another 5 to 15% performance on Kaby Lake over Ryzen (we know this) and you end up with a potential 31-45% single thread performance benefit on his overclocked i5 7600k processor. With that being said, the game dips down to 30 FPS despite having that Core i5 7600k of his overclocked to 5 GHz along with DDR4-3200 memory.

On my system's overclocked Core i5 3570k CPU the game dips down to as low as 15 FPS when there's a lot of action on the screen.

Basically Starcraft 2, still one of my favorite games, requires all the CPU power you can throw at it and then some. The game itself under the hood is an un-optimized piece of shit, the only thing that will make it run better is throwing more hardware at it. Before you say that Blizzard can fix it, I doubt it. The game engine is over seven years old, I highly doubt that Blizzard would be willing to go "under the hood" and do anything about it.

More sockets... Again?

Why go for the X299, unify SKUs in a single platform, make casual models cheaper, etc.. if only to go back to new.. newer sockets? :S

Jeesus with these people. I try and i try and they just want me to think badly of them.

So funny tha here people make seem intel like crap :D

Is ryzen good? Hell it is!

But... Who has the best budget chip with 4 threads for 60 bucks?

Who has the best cpu for high refresh e-sports gaming, supporting high speed memory?

You guys are so biased it's funny :D like ryzen is undoubtely the best option for everyone... Lol and now intel announces 6 core mainstream and they are bashed. Come on guys.

(Intel fanboys are just as bad btw)

FrickEvery Intel coolee I've used for the past seven years have been adequate and pretty silent.

I don't know what coolers you've been using, but the last "good" Intel boxed ones were the thick Core 2 boxed coolers. I've swapped the stock coolers on my PCs (gaming rig has a copper core boxed, HTPC has 100% aluminium) and without tuning them from BIOS (capping the max rpm etc.), they're annoying as hell.

Manu_PTryzen is undoubtely the best option for everyone

Not for everyone. If you have anything that's single-threaded like some older games it's going to run like shit on a Ryzen due to its lower single-threaded performance when compared to Intel.

The one thing that's holding Ryzen back is its low clock speed. More cores don't really matter to those programs that are largely single-threaded beasts, the only thing that matters is high clock speed and high single-thread IPCs. If Ryzen v2.0 comes out and suddenly not only improves IPCs but provides for higher base clock speeds then, and only then, will Ryzen be an overall winner. The Ryzen CPU may be a great workstation CPU (no doubt about that) where you need lots of cores to do lots of number crunching but gaming is a different story.

trparkyNot for everyone. If you have anything that's single-threaded like some older games it's going to run like shit on a Ryzen due to its lower single-threaded performance when compared to Intel.

The one thing that's holding Ryzen back is its low clock speed. More cores don't really matter to those programs that are largely single-threaded beasts, the only thing that matters is high clock speed and high single-thread IPCs. If Ryzen v2.0 comes out and suddenly not only improves IPCs but provides for higher base clock speeds then, and only then, will Ryzen be an overall winner. The Ryzen CPU may be a great workstation CPU (no doubt about that) where you need lots of cores to do lots of number crunching but gaming is a different story.

Please, just name one 'older' game tha runs less than a 100fps at 1080p on ryzen?

Starcraft 2 due to the fact that it's an un-optimized piece of shit under the hood needs all of the single thread processing power you can give it and then some. I often play the game so in-game performance is important to me.

rtwjunkieYou know, this, plus the HEDT news and linus' little rant on that....I wish I could find the thread from last week where the guy was arguing with me, saying Intel is not knee jerk reacting to AMD. Yeeeeeaaaahhhh, riiiiigghht. :kookoo:

EDIT: oh yeah, it was effikan in "The Slumbering Giant Awakes" piece. Yeah, he has been remarkably quiet in the face of the continued antics of the big, blind giant thrashing around trying to find the mouse.

saw that rant as well.

4 core HEDT and 6 core mainstream, Kabylake X wtf intel! really?

FrickEvery Intel coolee I've used for the past seven years have been adequate and pretty silent.

Have you used the ones that come with the low end Celerons?

To all that think Intel is worried or reacting desperately to AMD, my take on all this is that Intel is enjoying a little game of cat-and-mouse, releasing so many SKUs to cover every possible price point and use case. It's like they're saying "We're still the best and we can still charge more - let's see how many budget gamers really think they need 16 or 32 cores, because professionals who actually use that many still want the best, and are willing to pay for it." Same as always, nothing has really changed.

This Z370.. i assume it will be dual channel again?

HoodTo all that think Intel is worried or reacting desperately to AMD, my take on all this is that Intel is enjoying a little game of cat-and-mouse, releasing so many SKUs to cover every possible price point and use case. It's like they're saying "We're still the best and we can still charge more - let's see how many budget gamers really think they need 16 or 32 cores, because professionals who actually use that many still want the best, and are willing to pay for it." Same as always, nothing has really changed.

Another Millennial gamer who thinks the world revolves around them. I doubt having the competition release a product that is nearly twice as fast as theirs (1998x vs 7900x) for a lower price was part of their plan. I doubt they are too excited to even have to sell a 10-core for $1000 at all. If Ryzen/TR didn't exist, it would still be $1500. I would say a lot has changed.

Pretty much nothing in your comment makes sense.

GoldenXRejoice Intel fanboys, for AMD has brought change and competition after so many years in the dark.

Next step is Intel finally giving good heatsinks.

You call this rejoice worthy ,intel ditching their last platform like that ,oh i get they will require a pin change (seriously wtf) but with this and x299 its all turning a bit arse
Shits sake the 18 core muther chucker will be out after coffee lake at this rate.
Total shitstorm of confusion if you ask me but yeah competition ,, tut one side always makes an ass of it.