Its been 5 years since Sandy Bridge was released, and it still absolutely shits on anything by AMD, and Skylake barely provides an upgrade
How did they do it, /g/?
>>54134198
They actually designed something good. It's pretty rare, but occasionally companies actually design something instead of just rehashing and rebranding whatever they made before.
>>54134198
>sandy bridge
no they've been owning everything with core since Nehalem
>>54134198
Skylake is +30% on sandy bridge, kid.
>>54134198
Intel did a one hit wonder and now people assume intel is holding back on their design, they can't magically come up with some new revolutionary shit again
Why does everyone go strait to Sandy Bridge? Nehalem was the big turning point. Sure it's stock clock speeds were significantly lower, but you could overclock locked CPUs back then. A Nehalem i5-760 can OC to 4.1 GHz+ and still crush stuff today. Hell, if you picked up x58 you can get the 6 core Westmere Xeons (same process as Sandy Bridge) and OC them to 4.3 GHz+ and get stock i7-5820k levels of performance, minus some instruction sets and cache. The only thing Sandy Bridge really did was increase stock clock speeds and slightly different architecture.
Intel went with power efficient architecture
AMD WENT FULL HOUSEFIRES & MOAR COARS RETARD
>>54135778
Intel builds way more architectures than AMD does, they're only building Zen now after quite some time. Of course their main strategy is going to be create more cores/factory overclock more, they want to avoid changing sockets and archs every year like intel.
>in4 amd fanboy
No, I'm just a guy with some sense who doesn't want to take part in intel's massive cuckoldery of needing to spend $500+ every time I want to upgrade, just because these Israeli jewish fucks can't stay on one socket for longer than a year.
>>54134198
aliens
>>54135778
It's funny that Intel avoid the housefires meme, despite their HEDT chips having a 140W TDP. Those things pull more juice than anything AMD has outside of the FX 9000 series genuine housefires.
>>54135914
Maybe it's to do with the fact that 90% of the world buys intel cpus so they don't start memes about products they buy. Even though intel does tons of memeworthy shit.
>>54135914
the chip that has half the perf of that (FX 9590) consumes double power tho
I have a i7 2700k sitting at a comfy 4 ghz. I feel like I'm going to die before I actually need to get a new mobo for a new cpu.
Is this why Intel is dying?
>>54136210
>220 is double 140
Back to university, Sanjay.
>>54135418
because while Nehalem was the turning point, Sandy Bridge sealed the deal by being braindead easy to overclock and damn good at doing so.
>Intel shills still trying to get everyone to use their horribly flawed, botnet processors by lying that any processor these days is better than another one
We hit a ceiling on processor power/speed years ago. There is no "better".
>>54136356
It's only temporary.
Its bad enough when the most interesting thing happening is a potential hyper-threading and 14nm CPU from AMD.
>>54134198
I remember a year ago people on /g/ were telling me not to buy laptops with Sandy Bridge CPUs.
What changed?
>>54136748
you shouldn't even buy laptops retard
Is AMD really finished? Are they the SNK of CPU manufacturers?
>>54136748
You were talking to idiots.
>>54136748
Because you shouldn't buy laptops with Sandy Bridge if you value battery life
>>54136764
You're an idiot
>>54136928
You're fucking stupid t b h
>>54136949
He's right and you're a buttblasted kid.
>>54136928
But that's wrong, you fucking retard.
>>54135306
Power savings maybe. Not speed after overclock.
>>54136972
I'm not the battery guy though but the cool guy who knows better than to get a fucking laptop
>>54136928
I prefer power and cheapness over battery life.
Didn't these guys just have a bunch of layoffs?
>>54136991
>muh ghz
clock frequency isn't everything when it comes to cpus.
>tfw the i3 2120 I got for 100 bucks is still going strong
>>54136990
But it's not
>>54137104
You're fully aware that skylake is one of the worst architectures to come out of intel right? Possibly the worst of all of them. It doesn't top the charts in anything, neither server performance, single core performance, multi core performance, multithreading performance - literally nothing, nill, nada. A fucking 2 generations old i7 haswell beats it and overclocks way better than it does for fuck's sake. Memelake is fucking garbage, and I don't know who the fuck keeps shilling it, but you need to stop.
>>54135418
Westmere-EP master race
>>54137153
>i3
>>54137459
only if you have 2 of them :^)
>>54137153
>i3 2120
I can't wait to update this piece of trash
>>54137487
well, I'm upgrading from a single x5650 to two.
>>54137104
It does when multi core support is still half shit.
Fuck your low heat and low energy you cant compete with arm on mobile anyways.
>tfw t420 with quad core sandy bridge i7
>2011 mfg date
>no reason to upgrade
It's nice to get this kind of longevity out of hardware. It still runs like a new machine.
>>54137487
>>54137641
Unless you have an EVGA SR-2 and can overclock the dual Xeons, you're falling for the "moah coars moah threads" meme harder than AMDtards. The massive clock speed boost from overclocking these chips is more important in the vast majority of applications.
>>54134198
Sandy Bridge
Developed primarily by the Israeli branch of Intel the codename was originally "Gesher" (meaning "bridge" in Hebrew)
now what
>>54134198
Sandy Bridge was a new architecture
Bulldozer was a new architecture
Everything since back then has been a Sandy Bridge revamp
Everything since back then has been a Bulldozer revamp.
Sandy Bridge was actually good
Bulldozer was shit for numerous reasons.
So, 5 years of evolution on a good architecture vs 5 years of evolution on a shit architecture.
Also, Intel has had a MAJOR lead in manufacturing technologies.
>>54137416
They haven't even brought the server chips to market yet. Xeons, yes but no server chips. And no haswell is going to beat a skylake, buddy. Take your meds.
>>54137699
I don't overclock, because I value stability over raw speed. a stock x5650 is more than enough for all my gayming needs, but since I also run multithreaded applications, those muh coars come in handy. that's why I'm moving to ecc memory along with another processor.
>>54137686
It's only 5 years old you dense fuck. Are your expectations so low? Do you buy a new car every year because your 5 year old car is now .7 seconds slower 0-60 than the new model?
>>54137858
People still haven't accepted dennard scaling broke down.
>>54137850
X5650 is really showing its age, core count be damned.
>>54137483
>You need an i5 to do basic stuff
>>54137591
Protip: If you put an SSD in there, your PC would be fast as fuck. I have a i3-2130 / GT 720 with an SSD and it flies.
>>54137929
You pretty much do. The i3 is total garbage.
. >>54137929
>consumers need 8 core amd chips
>>54137998
Good goy.
>>54137858
>From 2000 to 2005 CPU performance improved ~300%
>From 2010 to 2015 CPU performance increased ~30%
>Muh cars simile
It's a known fact that CPU scaling over the last few years has slowed down, Intel themselves publicly declared moores law is done.
>>54137998
you seem a """"funny"""" poster here
>>54137998
Garbage powers Scandinavian homes, tho.
But seriously, I have a 4 core, and still wish for an 8.
>>54137850
If you can't get a stable overclock, you are doing it wrong. It's not hard to get a rock stable overclock as long as you're willing to accept the results of the silicon lottery rather than pushing a chip beyond where it's stable.
>>54138049
Moore's observation. And even gordie himself stated that when it was over, they would just be able to put a bunch of computers together and still progress.
>>54136397
We're nearing the peak of IC engineering limit. Right now the bigglest hurdle is to find a better dielectric than SiO2, because they're nearing the quantum limit where SiO2 stops being one
>>54137699
>is more important in the vast majority of applications.
games
you're talking about your vidya gaymes
More and more of them are taking advantage of > 8 cores these days. Even Dank Souls 3 does it.
I like having dual hex cores because I make lots of porn edits.
Still rockin' a SB i3 here. Can run anything I throw at it. The only bottleneck is my slow-ass HDD but I'm kinda wary of upgrading to an SSD since the computer is already 5 yrs old.
>>54138247
>I like having dual hex cores because I make lots of porn edits.
>I make lots of porn edits.
Come again?
>>54136764
Some of of actually have to leave the house and work and go to school, friend. Enjoy your piss bottle collection.
>>54138341
>workplace doesn't have computers even though computers are needed
>school is too poor to have computers for everyone to use
enjoy your third world country
>>54138294
Watch where you come.
>>54138181
??????
>>54138049
When In the history of humanity have we been able to sustain a 300% jump in technological innovation/performance.? Do you really believe those numbers are long term sustainable?
>>54137882
How so? What can it not do?
>>54138294
Did I make a typo?
I chop up porn videos and repost them to tube sites, and share them on porn message boards.
>>54138383
You could say that about the last 100 years desu.
>>54137153
kek, i'm running the same CPU. Literally no reason to upgrade.
>>54138402
but why?
>>54138376
Those ICs are made of billions of tiny winy capacitors (which is a building block for MOS); basically an insulator sandwiched between 2 conductors go store charges.
Basically they have become so small that SiO2 cannot contain charges anymore, so the next step is to find a superdielectric that is stable enough at room temperature as SiO2 and can be deposited/grown at nano level
After that (and a couple more challenges like better steppers) then we should be worry about quantum or photonic computing
>>54138068
I have an 8c, and i want more goddamnit.
>>54138510
Advertisement for the full video which is behind a pay-per-click filehost (which I uploaded)
>>54138599
So you're the bastard filling the tubes with porn clips that end at just the right moment. I Hope you choke on a thousand dicks.
>>54138436
No I really don't think that you can. Name some tech,some process, some metric that gives 300% every 5 years. Anything; gas mileage, infant mortality, cancer treatments, anything. It's not sustainable.
>>54135306
>5 years
>30%
>"kid"
If Moore's Law wasn't dead performance would be around 4x over 5 years.
>>54138786
>implying moore's law is about performance and not about transistor density
>>54138642
At least I am not using upstore.net, дpyг
>>54138831
And price, but yes,.
>>54138786
Nowhere did he claim Moore's law was alive and well
If I wanted to get a skylake cpu, would I be able to use new features of the Z270 chipset once its released? Or do I have to use a Kaby lake processor to access those new chipset features?
>>54136564
That shit is going to be another bulldozer.
What cpu and mobo combo should I buy /g/?
>>54139740
Stupid question thread is elsewhere.
>>54138362
>he thinks I don't travel the world and I should work on public computers
Enjoy high school and 18+ faggot.
>>54139631
I don't know if anybody knows that for sure yet. It's still a small mystery what consumer interface 3d xpoint will use. H.265 is nice also. But we do know that z170 mobos will work with kaby lake. Native USB 3.0/1 won't need a chip to work, so the mobo design will be different.
>>54139778
I wouldn't be surprised if the first gen used either M.2 PCI-e(high end) or SATAe(low end).
>>54139842
http://www.thessdreview.com/daily-news/intel-announces-first-3d-nand-ssds-optimized-cloud-enterprise/
There's this.
>>54139857
Those drives actually connect through the M.2 slot. Using this adapter.
>>54136179
Like their new Tick-Tock-Cuck model?
>>54139896
Ahh yes, the u.2
>>54139930
Still better than flop-flop-flop-tick
>>54137820
>They haven't even brought the server chips to market yet. Xeons, yes but no server chips.
>>54139974
If you consider a 4 core a server chip, sure then
>>54139989
>>54135914
My OC'd 4790K pulls an extra ~200W from the wall going from complete idle (power saving shit enabled) to Intel Burn Test peak.
>>54140133
Nobody that is anybody is going to fill a rack with 4 core chips, fucktard. Skylake is irrelevant in the server market. That's one clue that that anon had no idea what he was talking about. Haswell/broadwell/-e (with skylake's 14nm process) are the only relevant architectures for servers right now. Skylake has no 22 core monster to power your data center with. Skylake does have a nice 4 core that would make a nice workstation, however.
>>54137882
You play and edit 4k video, run every video game you want, or use it as a server CPU. The only thing you'll have trouble with are applications which require a high single core performance like Dolphin.
>>54138292
>SSD
Trust me, it's worth it
>>54140335
you can do the same with an i5 or i7.
e5 2643 vs e3 1280v5
Which one do you think has better single core performance?
I don't know the upsides to AMD, but I've always built with Intel and Nvidia. However, I don't give a fuck about brands, and I usually search for good deals, good performance, reliability, etc. All of my rigs have been intel, but I would consider AMD for my next rig if they could offer a sweet deal.
Short story short, go with whoever you think you should go with.
>>54137998
What if I told you my celeron 1007u handles basic streaming, browsing and filesharing without an issue? Sometimes not even an i3 is required.
>>54136230
I feel like you will probably need to upgrade your ram first with how bloated websites are getting these days sooner than your CPU.
>>54140908
I would be impressed. Honestly. What are the rest of your specs?
>>54141324
4gb ram, an old as fuck ocz vertex 60gb with 28k hours power on time hooked up to my TV in the living room.
Pic related is the little shitbox. Fan is barely audible and it's been running 24/7 for over two years. Not bad for £80 plus whatever the ram was.
>>54135778
Funny, my 8320 rarely breaks 30c @4,3 ghz
>>54141717
I'm not sure if I believe you
>>54141772
I dont believe him.
>>54141717
Do you live in Antarctica?
>>54141433
How outdated, performance-wise, is the i5-3570K considered? I've got one overclocked to 4.0GHz - anything higher than that and some games through a spack. It's annoying because I had it up to like 4.3GHz and everything else except for those one or two games worked like a charm.
>>54141772
You are welcome to feel that way.
>>54141853
I live in Indiana. It's around 68F in my room, and the thing usually idles between 19-24C
Fans speed up when under stress of course, so it rarely breaks 30C until summer where my room will be getting well into 70F provided I turn on air conditioning.
Most of the time bad temps are user error (improper installation) and bad equipment.
>>54136748
OP obviously isn't talking about laptop CPUs.
>>54141997
Maybe you got a bad chip, since my 3570k is at 4.5GHz with no real effort, and Im sure it could go higher since temps at load are 70C
>>54142020
Yeah, I think that's pretty much it hey, which is a shame. I'm only running air, but an aftermarket cooler, so I don't think it's heat.
I fucked around with voltages as well for a while, but I couldn't get it stable, and if I'm honest, I don't think it's worth dicking around with volts for an extra few hundred MHz. To each their own, though.
Out of interest, how much actual difference would there be between my 4.0GHz OC and a 4.3GHz OC? Like, is 300MHz a significant difference? Maybe I just don't use CPU-intensive programs, but I didn't see a massive spike, even in CPU-heavy games like ARMA 3. Then again, ARMA 3 was one of the games that crashed when I OC'd too high.
>>54141717
>>54141772
>>54141822
Aren't AMD CPUs/APUs renowned for giving incorrect temperature readings - especially through Speccy - at low temps? I swear that was a thing I heard. Maybe not.
>>54142072
I dont know if 4-4.3GHz is too noticeable , but its definately better than stock. Did you run a stability test for your OC at load? Sounds like it doesnt like the voltage you gave it.
>>54142096
Yes, you would be correct, but through both motherboard and multiple other monitoring programs it is rather consistent.
In this case, good cooling and ambient temperatures being relatively low contribute to good temps.
>>54141717
Keke my FX8350 at stock 4.2Ghz couldn't be keep cool with the stock fan.
>>54142112
Yeah, I ran tests. I can't remember EXACTLY what I did, because it was over two years ago, but it was basically
> 4.6GHz - not even slightly, even fucking around with volts
> 4.5 - unstable. Messed around with volts for a while, couldn't get it to stick
> 4.3 - mostly stable with volts up. However, a handful of games shat themselves that were directly related to the CPU OC
> 4.2 - stable without volts. Games had the issues still
> 4.0 - completely stable, no game issues, no stress test issues.
I would've LIKED a higher clock, but I'll take fully stable over infrequent crashes.
I just did an impulse buy, got myself a E5 2648L v3 for 190 dollarydoos, already have a 3570k.
Fileserver/nas/self hosting box it is. Don't really care about single core perf as it is.
>>54142370
Grats on the nice deal but,
You really don't need 12 cores for any of that...
>>54138691
> Name some tech,some process, some metric that gives 300% every 5 years.
Doing covered calls nets you over 300 percent in returns every five years...........forever.
>>54134198
>2500k
My dad needed a new computer and I was looking to go itx route so I needed a whole new setup. I left him my 2500k build versus selling it since I just couldn't bare getting rid of that chip. OC to 4.6ghz np. Nice to keep it in arms reach if ever I need it again. Or any other parts from that build - damn thing has a corsair 750w gold modular in it for a freaking browser/netflix computer.
>>54135911
This. No joke.
