6700k price is inflated due to lack of stock, and possibly lack of demand too. Retailers feel they need to cash in fast, otherwise a new CPU will be released and itll be gameover for the Motherboard sales too.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Intel: future CPUs to be slower but more efficient
- Thread starter Renekton
- Start date
6700k price is inflated due to lack of stock, and possibly lack of demand too. Retailers feel they need to cash in fast, otherwise a new CPU will be released and itll be gameover for the Motherboard sales too.
Locuza
Member
Question, is Ivy-Bridge much slower or consuming a lot more power than Haswell/Skylake?
Not really would be the answer. Maybe slightly higher load power consumption.
Have my i7 3770 at 4.4Ghz (107.4Mhz x 41) 1.1v =P
Celcius
°Temp. member
In the future people may not upgrade when their cpu/mobo is obsolete but instead when it simply dies. Looks like we're going to find out what hardware company's hardware lasts a long time and who's doesn't.
2600k @ 4.6ghz + asus p8z68v pro gen3 still going strong here since 2011
2600k @ 4.6ghz + asus p8z68v pro gen3 still going strong here since 2011
jabberwocker
Banned
This is nothing new.. Intel started this process years ago. They haven't be been able to double chip speed year over year in over 10 years.
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/400710/the-end-of-moores-law/
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/400710/the-end-of-moores-law/
And look at TDP?
Its TDP vs IPC, not just IPC.
i7 920 was 130W CPU, i7 2600K was 95W, that 26% drop in TDP and easily 10% increase in IPC. Imagine if the TDP was nearly the same? Compare a 2600K at 130W (maybe 4.3Ghz) to a stock i7 920, it will obliterate it.
Oh and dont forget, the 2600K has the TDP of an IGP included.
UpDownLeftRight
Banned
Isn't this a bit of a spanner in the works for VR? Luckey's basically banking on the CPU's and GPU's getting stronger and cheaper over time. Now it seems stronger isn't going to happen with CPU's until someone can put Intel in a spot they're not confident in.
Good idea still baffled how well this CPU is only thing i upgrade is my GPU.
DOT DASH DOT
Member
I know what you mean, all that talk about i5 being be all and end all for gaming, luckily for me my psu went, shipped the PC back to the store and the courier smashed the whole PC up, so got a new PC and decided I should go for a 3770K.
Caffeine
Member
yup have the 4360 i guess the most demanding game right now is battlefront and it handles it at 30-40% cpu usage during 40 man matches.
Suzushiiro
Banned
From a business perspective, mobile devices continue to be more of a thing so efficiency is going to be much more important than speed. Meanwhile, on the desktop side, there's not much that consumers- even enthusiast ones like hardcore gamers- need more CPU power for than what we can already get. And if you are in a use case where you need shitloads of CPU power, whatever program you're running is probably already built to split its workload across multiple cores/processors/boxes, so if you can't scale up by getting more CPUs you can scale up by getting more powerful CPUs.
So yeah, while the main driving force here is basic laws of physics, it does work out well for them business-wise.
So yeah, while the main driving force here is basic laws of physics, it does work out well for them business-wise.
The fact that AMD hasn't been able to close the gap while Intel has been spinning it's wheels show how little low hanging fruit is left. Until a new paradigm arrives not much is likely to change.
So you know about overclocking but you don't know how to assess CPU performance in today's games.
Or is this just stealth brag?
So you know about overclocking but you don't know how to assess CPU performance in today's games.
Or is this just stealth brag?
Not too hard with OC genie. I know enough to check the parts thread here and built my PC, but no, I basically just upgrade every 3-4 years and don't know shit about benchmarks.
The Bookerman
Member
I have to retire my 2500k..
MotherBoard won't let me have more than 8gb(Tried several sticks of memory) getting the same result everytime.
I need at least 16 gb of ram to properly run UE4 SDK these days.
MotherBoard won't let me have more than 8gb(Tried several sticks of memory) getting the same result everytime.
I need at least 16 gb of ram to properly run UE4 SDK these days.
plagiarize
Banned
The flip side is that anyone with a minimum spec Oculus ready system can probably look forwards to a good number of years of support.
Trogdor1123
Member
Sweet, time to ocmy 2500k. Only need to work with my vid card and ssd.
Coulomb_Barrier
Member
Just reminded me. Does the 2500K run on motherboards that have a max RAM capacity of 8GB? That is a tiny amount these days and will be another bottleneck soon enough.
Celcius
°Temp. member
Nope, the p67 and z68 chipsets support 16gb just fine. I'm running 16gb with my 2600k.
IndoAssassin
Banned
Damn, how will we brute force past GTA VI's poor CPU code now?
Nocturno999
Member
Shouldn't we be sad by this news?
UpDownLeftRight
Banned
My understanding may easily be wrong, but isn't that little more than a pipe dream with barely any ground gained still? Not that it won't happen but sort of a graphene situation minus the breakthroughs? Aka coming 10-20 years down the line if we're lucky.
Princess Carl
Member
Me too dog! Forever and ever.
That's my way of seeing things too!
Using an i7 950 here. But it's not overclocked and only "overclock" by using its own Boost function.
Subpar Spatula
Banned
i920 is still king for me.
Awww yiss, going 7 years strong.
Awww yiss, going 7 years strong.
This.
Yep, 7yrs here too. Massively overclocked to 4.2GHz most of the time too. Basically.. until it 'goes/dies', I probably won't be upgrading. :S
They have plenty of competition. Just not from AMD.
It's only a matter of time before ARM ends up in a MacBook or a Surface.
Already was in the Surface.
And Intels broadwell 5W cpu isnt too shabby in the New Macbook.
Yes, I know. I read a compelling article talking about how SSD reached size parity with HDD and the next step is price. I should have elaborated that it isn't overall, but price per MB is in some examples very close to HDD prices. So it depends on the size of the HDD. I don't expect the average PC will have SSD by the end of this year (but many laptops do/will), but for some SSD offers, they can be just slightly more expensive. The very large SSDs are still way over priced, but at least we are seeing the horizon.
I also really want that to happen. Man, imagine the inevitable death of HDD and them being replaced with SSDs and other solid state solutions.
ersocaster
Member
I thought the solution was either graphene or diamond wafers? They're just expensive at the moment.
Theonik
Member
Do you have any idea how much energy a PC consumes vs any of those other home appliances? We are taking orders of magnitude here and significantly lower efficiencies. If PCs were anywhere near as bad not only would they already be legislated upon they just would flat out not work.
There is that as well though, I would argue that building more renewable plants to accommodate for increased power load is inherently environmentally unfriendly and overall we need to lower our energy consumption as well as switch to more sustainable energy.
Transistor quantity actually, which does translate to density but not always in the sense that often Intel just made the die slightly larger.
That's what Intel's enthusiast platform basically is. No iGPU, more cores and better TIM. Intel expects you to pay through the nose for them though, because AMD is not really competitive at the moment and to avoid cannibalizing Xeon sales.
Mind that the other two disadvantages you get there is a) You are stuck one generation behind mainstream so miss out on some IPC improvements and some newer tech on occasion and b) As processor nodes get smaller, even with better TIM the voltage tolerances and thermal densities also increase which make higher OC harder.
SolarMystic
Member
Hell yea, almost 7 years for me too.
Though all this talk has got me thinking of upgrading my system, though perhaps I should just slap a couple extra sticks of ram and a new gpu instead. Still rocking my gtx 285 I got when I built my i7 920 system.
Even if there was competition, it isn't like gamers are some super large cash source (even if, per product, they pay a nice premium).
Mobile with low TDP and high efficiency is where the moolah is, my friend.
If we need to take a brief step back to get efficiency right before moving forward with performance again, that is worth it IMO.
Innovation is what they're doing, what you want them to do is stay the course.
Innovation is what they're doing, what you want them to do is stay the course.
Dictator93
Member
Can a cousin join in? Core i7 930 here.
Are you perhaps assuming that I want to run the latest games at the highest settings?
I'm playing R6S on mostly High, some Very High just fine at 1080p/60 with a 2500K/680.