10/2/2023 0 Comments Intel tick tock 2016![]() ![]() CONFIGURAR FIBRA OPTICA MOVISTAR EN ROUTER NETGEAR.CONFIGURAR FIBRA OPTICA MOVISTAR EN ROUTER TP-LINK.CONFIGURAR FIBRA OPTICA MOVISTAR EN ROUTER ASUS.MEJORES REFRIGERACIÓN AIRE, LIQUIDA Y VENTILADORES.CONFIGURACIÓN PC DISEÑO GRÁFICO Y VIDEO.The G3258 is the only fun chip Intel has released in half a decade. I have stopped caring what Intel does in socketed CPUs until we get hex cores that run on z level mobos. Just admit they stopped catering to us, hug your current CPU, and spend your money on a better GPU or monitor or whatever. I know the real answer is they lack competition, but what I don't understand is why people pretend to get excited about 5% here, 10% there or perf/watt on a big desktop with a 600w PSU. I feel like at this point Intel is just coasting in the desktop consumer CPU space, using us as part of an economy of scale go make better devices for portable and smal form factor computers that CAN need a better integrated GPU. There is no point of better integrated GPUs in our desktop chips but year after year that is the only real improvement that we are sold. Quite frankly ANY desktop chip with a better than a decent integrated GPU is a waste because general business machines just need Windows and 2D apps to work and gamers will put a real card it. I look at an Intel CPU die and I see so much space dedicated to a GPU that many of us don't use, so it's not like it couldn't get done if that was the priority. But screw paying $200+ for a decent mobo that can support six cores today for a chip Directx12 makes us need less. I would upgrade past Sandy finally even if I don't need it just to finally bask in a decent leap in performance. Intel could bump CPU power 50% tomorrow by throwing another two cores in consumer i7 products and we would all celebrate. People are hesitant to upgrade because Sandy->Skylake is like 25%, and the next gen is something like 5% again or whatever, but it doesn't have to be that way. I mean I get that is how IPC or perf/watt or whatever improves, but I don't get why that is the only limit to CPU value that matters. One thing I don't understand is why physics matters to value. ![]() But this time they have competition coming from all sides! Kind of like when they realized they took a wrong turn with NetBurst and AMD caught them with their pants down. I can imagine people running around at Intel like chickens without head, scrambling here and there. I'm very interested to see what Kaby Lake will bring over Skylake. So really how much IPC improvement is left. And on the architecture side of the coin the low hanging IPC improvement fruit was picked long ago. They have to slow down the process shrinks because they are so hard to get the yields going and there probably aren't too many left. Seems as though Intel is getting caught between a rock and a hard space here. Intel would also have the issue of the new process being "exposed." And by that I mean power savings could be accurately quantified as stemming solely from the new process. On one hand this would seem to reduce the complexity of the die shrink which we all know has been getting more and more difficult and will continue to do so.īut on the other hand it will be kind of strange to have a new part that is nearly identical from a raw performance point of view (not per watt) to it's predecessor. Since in the old "tick-tock" model "process" always involved some pretty significant optimization I'm wondering if in the new model "process" will be more of a strict die shrink and very few if any architecture optimization.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |