As the others suggest something is seriously wrong, my cpu is at 2% @ 0.8GHz (i7-4800MQ) and I have youtube playing music in another tab as well!
On the amd note .. the 8 core amd chips perform similar to intel 4 core / 8 thread chips we'll see if zen is any better
And yet, trustedinstaller.exe still appears to use just a single thread.
Thanks, Microsoft.
Not every task benefits from multiple threads. If a process involves a set of sequential steps that all depend on the outcome of the previous step, then you can't make that faster by throwing threads at it. Horses for courses.Originally Posted by smargh
EDIT: also worth pointing out that a lot of things - disk IO, for instance - are actually parallelised in system threads on Windows. So whilst the program might only use a single control thread, it might be handing off tasks to other system processes that do use multiple threads.
It seems to be that your definition of a consumer chip is actually a CPU that costs what you would be prepared to pay. I don't agree with that definition of a consumer chip
"In a perfect world... spammers would get caught, go to jail, and share a cell with many men who have enlarged their penises, taken Viagra and are looking for a new relationship."
I guess he really means "Mass market". I think there are lots of reasons Intel are holding back though:It seems to be that your definition of a consumer chip is actually a CPU that costs what you would be prepared to pay. I don't agree with that definition of a consumer chip
There isn't much reason yet for the mass market to move beyond 4 threads as most people don't really need the threaded performance. Making a 6 core i5 and 8 core i7 would I think make for a more interesting market and would help drive software up to using more threads. But, in the mean-time the reality is it would be selling something most people don't want/need which would be subsidising the likes of us.
If an i5 is 6 core, that would probably make an i3 quad core so Intel would lose a lot of i5 sales. I don't see them giving up those profits, so I guess they would at best only update the i7 to more cores.
Modern Intel mass market chips are laptop biassed not desktop. that gets you a desktop i3 branded as an i5 in the laptop because that keeps the power consumption low and the profits high. I can't see an Intel 8 core laptop working that well, at least not in the ultra-thin form factors that Intel are trying to ram down our throats. As desktop is an afterthought, I don't see it happening unless AMD start eating into their sales with Zen APUs and they aren't out for ages and will probably only come with 4 cores again, just bigger cores than Carrizo.
By that definition, a data-chomping octo-CPU, 24-core Xeon system with the latest mega-milli-core Phe Phi Pho Phum plugged into it would also be a consumer system. Because, as far as I am aware, you don't need trade credentials to buy these things, just the finance.Consumer chips are simply chips that are available to the consumer.
This suggests that affordability and value are reasonable parts of an everyday definition for "consumer product". Top of the range offerings that give an extra 200 MHz for 40% more £££, 33% more cores for 140% more £££ or 66% more cores for 280% more £££, fail to give value and are therefore not everyday "consumer" items. This is obviously what cheesemp means.
I'm not these chips are meant for consumption.
The new i7 6600k has 6 cores, the i7 6850k 10 cores. There's a couple in between as well, so for Broadwell enthusiast they have 6, 8 and 10 core chips.
All of them probably slower than a i5 6600k for gaming though imo.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote