|
PC LOAD LETTER posted:I agree in principal with you but my post was more about pointing out how TSMC's 10nm isn't going to be anything to get too excited about rather than suggesting they were going to dunk on Intel or anyone else. I imagine somewhere someone has a warehouse full of previous generation gpu's and computer parts of all kind that never sold. Or maybe it's like the Atari ET graveyard.
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 16:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 11:38 |
|
|
There are small PC parts stores in my area that up until mid last year were still selling 7xx nvidia and 6xxx AMD GPU's for near launch MSRP's brand new. edit:\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/ Vulkan/DX12 are supposed to be capable of more efficiency so yes if the developers focus on lower power usage you'll see CPU/GPU power use go down. They could however just as well decide to focus on using the extra performance that the higher efficiency will allow to do other things (ie. better + more accurate game physics) that make the CPU/GPU use even more power than DX11 did. My guess/hope is they build their games to scale down and up as necessary to provide the best of both worlds depending on circumstances and platform they're targeting.\/\/\/\/ PC LOAD LETTER fucked around with this message at 16:47 on May 20, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 16:40
|
|
|
EdEddnEddy posted:Now they are going all in with IoT and 5G, and while their CPU stuff isn't going away, it just continues to be super unexciting where the GPU side of things for Nvidia/AMD has the potential to be not only exciting, but also needing more CPU power now than ever (If DX12/Vulkan is to be believed). Shouldn't DX12/Vulkan need less CPU power than ever? I thought one of the big improvements they bring is less single threaded overhead - that hardly seems like an impetus for Intel to squeeze more blood out of that particular stone. It might improve games' ability to use 4+ threads, but increasing core/thread count isn't really that exciting either, is it? I doubt people bored by Ivy Bridge / Haswell thought the 5820K was a revelation.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 16:41
|
|
|
HMS Boromir posted:Shouldn't DX12/Vulkan need less CPU power than ever? I thought one of the big improvements they bring is less single threaded overhead - that hardly seems like an impetus for Intel to squeeze more blood out of that particular stone. It might improve games' ability to use 4+ threads, but increasing core/thread count isn't really that exciting either, is it? I doubt people bored by Ivy Bridge / Haswell thought the 5820K was a revelation. Like "Edited" in in the post above yours, the Potential of being able to use More than 4 threads in the rendering pipelines has the potential to use more CPU power than current games seem to have been coded for (so why OC'ing/Clock Speed has been a bigger boost than just throwing cores at the problem) but at the same time, with GPU performance needing to scale up in the next year or two to handle not only 4K, but whatever is in the future of 4K and VR, they soon are going to start getting hit with the need to feed these things and other number crunching that just throwing more cores at the problem isn't going to fix. Latency between the CPU/GPU('s) and frame time is only going to become more and more of an important factor too with VR really going to be the driving force, not only for games too. Considering we are starting VR slowly with simple graphic games and such, it will only be a matter of time before they start wanting to push Photo Realism into VR similar to what they have been doing on flat screens in recent years, and the only way to do that, is massively improved hardware if Project CARS/Elite Dangerous is anything to go by. When it looks that good in VR, it is downright breathtaking and immersive as all hell. What has pissed me off is the efficiency has gone up sure, but even with OC'ing, the sheer performance of a single core hasn't really moved much more than 10% per generation which is pretty sad even coming from the jump we got from Core 2 to the Core i Series. I know new architectures take a lot of time and engineering to create (look at AMD I guess), but dammit if Intel is due for a new chip that isn't just a Atom. Nothing since SandyBridge - E was announced, has really gotten me excited for a CPU outside of some of the tech that the chipsets going with those CPU's has to offer. (Sandy Bridge - E brought back what Sandy Bride's chips seem to have lost from the X48/X58 platform) > 16/20 PCI-E lanes and Quad Channel RAM rather than Tripple/Dual channel. Now the new Z170 series has some neat bells and whistles that even X99 doesn't have natively, but nothing is quite pushing me to need to upgrade my aging X79 as outside of the more cores that even Haswell - E brought, my 4.6Ghz 6 core can still hit in the same ballpark as a mildly overclocked 8 core, which is great for the old tech, but sad considering how old it is in comparison now.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 17:05
|
|
|
EdEddnEddy posted:What has pissed me off is the efficiency has gone up sure, but even with OC'ing, the sheer performance of a single core hasn't really moved much more than 10% per generation which is pretty sad even coming from the jump we got from Core 2 to the Core i Series. Well yes, that's physics I'm afraid. The days of massive jumps in core frequency from year to year are now behind us barring some really blue sky technical breakthrough that resurrects Moore's Law.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 17:09
|
|
|
If you can't get clock speed and you can't get IPC out of transistors because you pretty much have all the ILP it's possible to extract, then welcome to being a post 2010 CPU maker. Single thread IPC gains are basically gone. AMD haven't reached that cliff yet, Apple might have, and ARM's other designers are probably still closing in on it.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 17:13
|
|
|
PC LOAD LETTER posted:
I dunno, I dont think anybody is confused about buttcoiners driving up the cost there... but regardless, effectively, too much money for a product sucks
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 17:27
|
|
|
EdEddnEddy posted:What has pissed me off is the efficiency has gone up sure, but even with OC'ing, the sheer performance of a single core hasn't really moved much more than 10% per generation which is pretty sad even coming from the jump we got from Core 2 to the Core i Series. I feel like the reason Intel hasn't improved this isn't for lack of trying, it's because after 35 years of scaling up and dieshrinking and optimizing their processors they're finding that it's really hard to make things that much better than they already are. Expecting big gains like clockwork assumes that there's a possible design that will get you those gains, but we can't really make those assumptions except by projecting past performance into the future. I feel like the fact that there's a 22-core Broadwell that runs at 150W is really cool, but it's not that useful for games and insanely expensive so it doesn't have the tangible consumer benefit that a 5GHz Kaby Lake or whatever would. Eletriarnation fucked around with this message at 17:40 on May 20, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 17:37
|
|
|
Which is why I'm looking forward, almost with a bit of desperation to the 8-core Zens. The promise of high clocks (and commensurate IPC) eight cores, and not having to shell out an arm and a leg for a Xeon means I *can* build that multiheaded Linux box I've been yawping about for more than a year now, and not have to worry that I'm leaving some performance behind because of lower server chip clocks or whatever, or paying $1000 for a shard of silicon. Seriously, piecemeal chips cannot loving come fast enough for AMD. I have big expectations for it, both on the CPU and GPU side. SwissArmyDruid fucked around with this message at 18:42 on May 20, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 18:40
|
|
|
Is PCIe 8x gonna bottleneck the Geforce 1080? I am building a new rig and thinking of putting an m.2 SSD drive which is gonna bring the video card from 16x to 8x. If it's gonna reduce performance, then I'll just get a regular SATA SSD.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 18:49
|
|
|
SwissArmyDruid posted:Which is why I'm looking forward, almost with a bit of desperation to the 8-core Zens. The promise of high clocks (and commensurate IPC) eight cores, and not having to shell out an arm and a leg for a Xeon means I *can* build that multiheaded Linux box I've been yawping about for more than a year now, and not have to worry that I'm leaving some performance behind because of lower server chip clocks or whatever, or paying $1000 for a shard of silicon. Yeah I had hopes for Broadwell-E having an affordable 8-core but it looks like they're not decreasing their per-core prices at all and the top end Broadwell-E part is like 75% as expensive as a Xeon  . Given Intel's pricing trends I'll probably be looking to the Zen as well, Intel is just getting too greedy.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 18:56
|
|
|
Animal posted:Is PCIe 8x gonna bottleneck the Geforce 1080? I am building a new rig and thinking of putting an m.2 SSD drive which is gonna bring the video card from 16x to 8x. If it's gonna reduce performance, then I'll just get a regular SATA SSD. It *might* at higher resolutions but a cursory search didn't show any PCI-E scaling for the 10x0 series cards I could find. I did find some info on the previous series where they showed x8 vs x16 on a GTX 980 making a negligible difference even at higher resolutions: https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GTX_980_PCI-Express_Scaling/5.html I doubt it would be a problem at 1440 and below but may see some differences at 4K and up.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 19:03
|
|
|
MaxxBot posted:Yeah I had hopes for Broadwell-E having an affordable 8-core but it looks like they're not decreasing their per-core prices at all and the top end Broadwell-E part is like 75% as expensive as a Xeon We can't really blame them. They don't have much incentive to lower prices when AMD isn't nipping at their heels and overall PC sales are flat. If I had to guess they're probably going to be pretty conservative for a while now that they've pulled out of phone SoC's. There's some risk that ARM chips in chromebooks will cannibalize the low end, but that might actually endanger AMD more than Intel.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 19:05
|
|
|
Truga posted:http://geizhals.eu/palit-geforce-gtx-1080-founders-edition-neb1080015p2f-a1441887.html Down to 790 across the board, and for every other companies founders edition as well.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 19:16
|
|
|
BOOTY-ADE posted:It *might* at higher resolutions but a cursory search didn't show any PCI-E scaling for the 10x0 series cards I could find. I did find some info on the previous series where they showed x8 vs x16 on a GTX 980 making a negligible difference even at higher resolutions: Thanks. It would be running one of these monitors. Supposedly the 1080 can run Witcher 3 at 3440 x 1440 and I wanna make sure of that.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 19:17
|
|
|
Looks like the retailer embargo ended: https://www.overclockers.co.uk/news/get-notified-on-the-nvidia-gtx-1080-founders-edition-graphics-cards-99.html lol at them charging a £30 premium to subject yourself to asus customer service
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 19:20
|
|
|
Animal posted:Is PCIe 8x gonna bottleneck the Geforce 1080? I am building a new rig and thinking of putting an m.2 SSD drive which is gonna bring the video card from 16x to 8x. If it's gonna reduce performance, then I'll just get a regular SATA SSD. If you are going VR, it may as well as higher res stuff. Forget SLI as well unfortunately. Finally with the higher end 900 stuff and now with 1080, we may finally start to saturate the 8X lanes and we already have for VR (need X16 3.0 for VR SLI especially.) Also on a separate note, I wonder if it would be possible to Build your own Razer Core for a external GPU. Talking with some Intel guys at the lan and they laugh at how simple the Core really is, and how it is currently just 99% markup for what it provides. You would think if that is the case though, that they and everyone else would get in on the external GPU box bandwagon.. I am guessing there may be some form of Thunderbolt licensing BS to jump around before you can bring one to market.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 19:25
|
|
|
Do review sites typically get 3rd party non-reference boards before they are for sale or after?
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 19:27
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/OC3D/status/733723998853324800 What is this? I like how the graph looks HUGE but is only in the 100's of points difference, however a "Mobile" chip that passes up a Titan X? I really do look forward to upgrading from my ASUS G73JH and it's 5870M and waiting till after the 900 series was the right choice it's looking.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 19:35
|
|
fozzy fosbourne posted:Do review sites typically get 3rd party non-reference boards before they are for sale or after? Completely dependent on the 3rd party in question and the review sites, it's very hit and miss and all you can really do is keep an eye out for reviews.
|
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 19:36
|
|
|
EdEddnEddy posted:https://twitter.com/OC3D/status/733723998853324800 So the successor to the "gently caress it we're stuffing a desktop 980 in this heatsink barge of a laptop", then? Desktop 1080 being 30% faster because of a TDP limit sounds plenty reasonable.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 19:38
|
|
|
Animal posted:Is PCIe 8x gonna bottleneck the Geforce 1080? I am building a new rig and thinking of putting an m.2 SSD drive which is gonna bring the video card from 16x to 8x. If it's gonna reduce performance, then I'll just get a regular SATA SSD. There is an mITX version as well if that's what you're going for.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 19:38
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:So the successor to the "gently caress it we're stuffing a desktop 980 in this heatsink barge of a laptop", then? Desktop 1080 being 30% faster because of a TDP limit sounds plenty reasonable. Yea that's what I was thinking, and if they used the desktop 980 designed chassis, they could have lots of room to OC even so all that R&D doesn't go to waste.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 19:49
|
|
|
I'm so happy that somehow in this decade 15 pound laptops are still a thing
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 19:50
|
|
|
EdEddnEddy posted:If you are going VR, it may as well as higher res stuff. SLI is out of the question because its a mITX build, which is why I'm getting the 1080 instead of 2x 1070's. I'll definitely be getting into VR, so if PCIe 3.0 @ 8x is gonna have a performance hit then screw the m.2 drive.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 19:51
|
|
|
Anime Schoolgirl posted:I'm so happy that somehow in this decade 15 pound laptops are still a thing But I need to play Dota and compile my CS101 homework.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 19:53
|
|
|
ItBurns posted:But I need to play Dota and compile my CS101 homework. Get an i7 for your surface pro.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 19:56
|
|
|
That graph is straight out of fox news
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 20:08
|
|
|
Slider posted:That graph is straight out of fox news Computer component manufacturer graphs.png
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 20:14
|
|
|
Your favorite resident accent has released a "review" of the Founder's Edition https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=myDYnofz_JE
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 20:29
|
|
|
 that fuckin graph
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 20:53
|
|
|
PerrineClostermann posted:Your favorite resident accent has released a "review" of the Founder's Edition Don't have time to summarize, but this is a pro click
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 21:11
|
|
|
EdEddnEddy posted:https://twitter.com/OC3D/status/733723998853324800 Looks like somebody enjoyed their copy of "How to lie with statistics"
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
teh_Broseph posted:Don't have time to summarize, but this is a pro click I generally find his videos enlightening
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 22:42
|
|
|
Animal posted:SLI is out of the question because its a mITX build, which is why I'm getting the 1080 instead of 2x 1070's. I'll definitely be getting into VR, so if PCIe 3.0 @ 8x is gonna have a performance hit then screw the m.2 drive. If you're buying new then Skylake added 4 PCIe lanes (20 total) so that you should be able to run a NVME SSD @x4 and still have 16 lanes left over for your video cards.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 23:20
|
|
|
Krailor posted:If you're buying new then Skylake added 4 PCIe lanes (20 total) so that you should be able to run a NVME SSD @x4 and still have 16 lanes left over for your video cards. The 170 chipsets also have a ton of 3.0 lanes.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 23:24
|
|
|
Krailor posted:If you're buying new then Skylake added 4 PCIe lanes (20 total) so that you should be able to run a NVME SSD @x4 and still have 16 lanes left over for your video cards. So this motherboard combined with an i7 6600k should still give me 16x PCIe lanes?
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 23:55
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:MSI is held to be one of the good ones, so hopefully it works right, and you've got what might be the single most gracefully aging card in history, so not trading in seems like a viable option. 
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 23:57
|
|
|
Animal posted:So this motherboard combined with an i7 6600k should still give me 16x PCIe lanes? Are Killer NICs better now or are they unstable still?
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 00:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 11:38 |
|
|
Tanreall posted:Are Killer NICs better now or are they unstable still? drat, I didn't realize it had that turd. I hate that snake oil company. But the model with an Intel chip is not as good at other things. It's so hard to find a good mITX board.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 00:06
|
|