eh i7 still seems a bit of a waste of time to me, for the price compared to performance anyway
I agree with superp. Intel spent over $2 billion and 2 years in R&D for skylake and the best they can muster is a measly 10% improvement?. That is a joke, especially bearing in mind that intel rehired the well known team who made sandybridge to make skylake and the best they can do is 10% over the 4790k. Lame, lame, lame. The only reason intel rehired the sandy team was in direct response to AMD who rehired Jim Keller to design the new (and hopefully amazing) Zen core and Raja Koduri (gpu) to design Fiji and upcoming Arctic islands. I am going to hold out for the new Zen core, as I have a feeling that will live up to, even surpass expectations.
I to hope that AMDs new chips are something to brag about as I hate 1 horse races with anything. Direct competition breeds inovation. If the new gen intel is 10% better says to me that Intel might be resting on it laurels.
That's assuming 10% is actually the best they can do.
Who knows? Perhaps that $2B R&D can actually get them a lot more, but they don't want to offer it all immediately. Given delays to things like 14nm and Skylake in the last 12 months, it's possible they'd actually prefer to slow down the pace of product improvements, and keep some options in reserve in case there are more issues in the future.
All pure speculation of course.
I'm still not holding my breath as AMD have proven to be well behind Intel on design and headline speeds but I'll generally echo other stuff said here. This seems like Intel just releasing another board/etc combo for the hell of it. We all still run our sandy/ivy/haswell chips at speeds well beyond what the broadwell looks to be coming in at, stock.
Really hoping AMD gets within range for warning shots as well as having something up it's sleeves to give Intel a wake up/take over again. It's been a lot of years since the first AMD64's were pretty much all everyone was using (San Diego 3700's and Opteron 3800's were the "go to" chip). I'd happily jump ship if AMD catch up (on both "per core" and multithread performance) just for a change. There's usually a lot of other companies step in with rival chipsets for the AMD so you get a nice bit of extra choice and cheaper hardware all round.
Ermmm, a 10% 'speed' increase in a highly mature product is amazing in itself.
Let's be honest here, the benchmarks don't look anything special. Even if it is a 10% increase it's not really visible.. it might be because it's a drop in the bucket compared to where CPU's already are. I'm sure this CPU will be decent for those on really old systems like from 2008 or 2009, but it's def not what was speculated - 20-30% IPC increase over Haswell.
The x99 and 5820k seems much better for the money, more cache, quad channel ram and extra cores which will make a difference in DX12 games. Next year AMD will catch up to Intel so prices will fall a bit all round, but it seems nothing revolutionary is due soon with large leaps in performance.. Probably not for a good 2-3 years at a guess.
Last edited by WelshJester; 23-05-2015 at 05:24 AM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)