Read more.Unleash the deca-core beast!
Read more.Unleash the deca-core beast!
How disappointing I guess there *may* be some kind of justification in getting this top of the line one due to the extra cores (if for some reason you're stuck in a single chip environment) but it looks like the rest of the line won't be any improvement over ye olde Haswell-E.
In the testing methodology table, you have put 10/20 cores/threads for the 5960X (instead of 8/16).
Hexus, are you sure about this bit?
Other reviews I've read say the 6800k is cut to 28 again:Originally Posted by hexus
Originally Posted by anandtech
I doubt Intel intended this for gamers somehow...
------------------
Valar Morghulis
I would like to see this in my DEV PC, when running a build, my CPU is at 100% for some time (i5-2500K).
This could help me...now,where do I find that 1723USD ... :-)
The more you live, less you die. More you play, more you die. Isn't it great.
Looks like intel ARK confirms the 28 lanes also...
http://ark.intel.com/products/94189/...up-to-3_60-GHz
kalniel (31-05-2016)
You'd be wrong..
https://www-ssl.intel.com/content/ww...us-gaming.html
If you look at the games performance you would see its utterly pointless. Just buy a 6700K and a better GPU and still have money left.
Render monster, gaming pointless.
Pleiades (31-05-2016)
Performance as expected to be honest but that price is a complete and utter joke.
Seriously for the people that truly need/want 10 cores (ie 3D rendering, video editting etc) most programs now offer network rendering so you can pool rigs together so based on the listed price of nearly £1400 you can buy 2x 6 core machines and have MORE performance for the price of 1x 10 core machine.... yeah you need more desk space and it uses more power but I know which way I'll be going.
The only thing we can hope for now is that Zen really does have similar performance and it brings the prices down.
Having said that:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/10382/...d-gtx-1080-gpu
------------------
Valar Morghulis
I guess I'll be keeping my xeon-5650x hex-core @ 4.0GHz for another generation or two then.
While a newer chip would arguably provide more cores, with relatively few exceptions 4 is about as much as most programs can leverage. This leaves me with an additional 2 cores.
While there is a 10% per-clock improvement from arch to arch, that puts my chip about 20-25% per clock slower than this latest beast. Meaning that @ 4GHz I'll gain mothing without overclocking anyway and thus puts my chip as leading performance above mainstream levels required for gaming.
Also with DirectX-12 purported to be more multi-core friendly I'll be ably to use my 2 additional cores to increase my performance to meet/exceed the current Sky/Kaby-Lake quadcore mainstream.
And intel have the gall to charge these kinds of exorbitant prices for cores that are already over 1 generation and architechture behind and lagging fast - against chips that they released half a decade ago that are available almost free on eBay that perform equally well?
Yeah I'll wait until either another Amd Athlon-64 moment causing intel to pull another Core-Number-Numeral outta their rear or wait until my current chip either dies or is less than 75% of a non-overclocked mainstream chip.
Pleiades (31-05-2016)
This one isn't meant for normal gamers, it's for streamers and gamers that do video editing. Having 6 extra cores makes a huge difference for those purposes. Any other gamer should be perfectly served with the 6 core version for the next 5 years.
It's a £1500 desktop chip...
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)