I am looking forward to a new chipset (Z370) and a i3 8350K.
Printable View
I am looking forward to a new chipset (Z370) and a i3 8350K.
Apparently the Core i3 is 4C/4T sadly and if the CPU is for gaming I am not so sure I would be looking at a 4C/4T one after seeing this article from Digital Foundry:Quote:
Originally Posted by ETR316
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/di...5-7500k-review
Just wow! Even with a 4.8GHZ overclock a Core i5 7600K can have issues,so I think even a locked Core i5 6C/6T CPU would be a better choice than a Core i3 8350K now.
It makes me wonder whether many websites will test games and not look at what they are testing.
Edit!!
Their video actually goes into more detail.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RMbYe4X2LI
As far as the core is concerned, Kaby lake is pretty much (if not exactly) architecturally identical to Skylake, and I expect more of the same from Coffee Lake. The only difference I'm aware of is some different capabilities in the media block on KBL. The most-different Skylake core is the Skylake-X one, what with its configurable AVX unit, additional AVX512 unit, and different cache hierarchy.
@kompukare> Yeah the Haswell>Broadwell was as much (if not more) of an 'optimisation' as KBL/CFL are to SKL, just Intel hadn't thought of marketing it until now. :P
Boring and not interesting FIRST with the socket change, I will now own an AMD machine.
INSANE, been more cpu advancements this year than in the last 5 years and it is only the beginning. This high grade of competition will bring major advancements each year. Intel will now have to use the tech they been developing in their labs the last 7 years but kept under wraps because there were no real competition in the cpu arena.
Same line that gets said time and time again, but is to put it bluntly, nonsense.Quote:
Originally Posted by fynxer
Intel have been keeping nothing 'under wraps' - Coffee Lake, like Kaby Lake, Skylake, Broadwell, Haswell, etc has been in development for 4+ years at Intel. Perhaps slightly less for KBL and CFL given they're still more or less Skylake architecturally and on the same 14nm node, but even physical layout for a new die, taping out, and production ramping takes on the order of years nowadays.
Intel have plenty of competition in other areas, such as mobile and HPC, and it makes absolutely zero sense to spend billions on R&D just to sit on it, anything Intel have successfully developed will be used in products, just without any competition in a given area you'll likely see higher prices and market segmentation (e.g. it's only enabled in the more expensive parts).
People need to understand the inertia of processor design like this, it is not feasible to just change direction at the drop of a hat, which is why it took years for Intel to shed Pentium 4, same for AMD with Bulldozer - work on Zen will have started shortly after Bulldozer made its debut and didn't perform how they expected in final silicon. Unfortunately there's nothing you can do at that point - you have to roll with what you've got.
CPU design is essentially pipelined, the likes of Intel and AMD will have several designs in development, at different stages, concurrently.
E.g just before Haswell's release, the design progress might have looked something like this:
|Start=============================================Completed|
=================================================Haswell
======================================Broadwell
============================Skylake
==============Cannonlake
IIRC, the way Intel work, as soon as a team reach completion on a project, they're cycled back round to the beginning and start work on the latest design.