When will CPU's improve? Where are my 6ghz chips already?
Intel are you even trying? Are you jacking off all day?
>>54152840
6ghz would generate too much heat.
Just buy more xeons goy
>>54152840
It's all about making the same performance with less power now.
Current chips are just as fast as the ones 5 years ago, but use less power doing so.
But fuck me if I dont want a 5GHz stock hex core i5 already.
There's a reason people are still using the 2500k. Those few extra watts only matter to phonefags.
>>54152877
>not frying eggs on your CPU
I DONT GIVE A SHIT
I WANT MORE POWER
>>54152914
Too bad nobody gives a shit about saving power except hipster faggots
>>54152877
put an icepack on your cpu
>>54152840
What do you even need that for?
>>54152840
Because clock speed isn't the be all and end all of performance measurement. IPC is a factor, and that has been steadily, if slowly, improving every generation.
Also, blame AMD for sucking so hard. No competition means Intel has no reason to push hard to stay on top. Meager gains will keep new models selling, and they've already got a drastic lead over AMD's offerings. I hope Zen shakes things up, but AMD's made big promises that fall flat so often in the last few years that I'm not holding my breath.
>>54152914
>Those few extra watts only matter to phonefags.
>>54152951
Laptops too.
>>54152877
Just use more thermal paste. Problem solved.
Well, this is a subject I can speak to as I worked in the semiconductor industry for almost 30 years. What we are seeing with Intel is not so much the beginning of the end.... that happened about 4 years ago. It's the after shocks of what happened and, quite frankly hubris and total screw-ups by Intel management. What happened about 4 years ago is Moore's Law (not really a law BTW, just a well understood observation) hit the proverbial physics and economic brick wall. I just upgraded my Windows workstation from what I had 4 years ago. The CPU I now have, a quad core 4Ghz Skylake is no faster in renders than the 3.3Ghz Hex core i7 I use to have. The SSD interface is a crapload faster but that is the only reason I really upgraded. Point is, we are all seeing it in everything electronic we buy. Nothing is faster, cheaper, smaller. It's all about the same size, a little bit faster and it's not really cheaper. And....... hold on to your rears because it's going to be more expensive as time marches on..... which is why, down the road, the only thing you will be able to afford is cloud computing.
>>54153077
>>54152951
Intel knows MUH SPEED isn't going to give them as much of a RoI as power efficiency. Their major competition isn't AMD, it's smartphones taking over the market. Which they already have, in 2014.
>>54152840
>where are my 6ghz chips
Gigahertz is fucking meaningless, when will people learn this? There are already plenty of chips which you can overclock to 5 ghz+, but it means jackshit when all of these processors are old as fuck by now and run on ancient architectures and node processes.
Gigahertz is just like vram in today's graphics cards, a meaningless quantity to measure performance, which your card already has tons of probably.
>>54152840
What CPU are you using now? It it a 5960X? If not, then your fault for not buying a better CPU
>>54152840
>Intel, pls haaalppppppp.
Intel lays off 12,000 because they see no future in the desktop market.
>>54153314
They still will make processors, but just for the enterprise and 'internet of things' (like IBM). The good news is, all of their old processors will now be sold at a much cheaper price probably. The bad news is they probably will no longer provide a lot of support for people with old chips.
>>54153061
Faster downloads.
>>54153314
Of course. Desktops are mainly used for office work and gaming. Office work doesn't need much computing power, and PC gaymurr manchildren are a minority. Smartphones is where the normies shekels are. Also servers because the normie phones are connected to the cloud 24/7. The next big thing will be the "internet of things" which means that even milk cartons will be a part of the botnet.
>>54153199
>the only thing you will be able to afford is cloud computing
So what you're saying is that it's a Jewish conspiracy to connect everything to the botnet?
>>54153297
>muh multicore
Nobody cares, AMDfag. Single core performance is where it's at and will remain so aside from a tiny number of edge cases. i7-6700k is superior if you're really dumb enough to try and upgrade from something like an i7-2600k.
>>54153462
It honestly seems like that's how things are headed
>>54153199
So I'm picturing this dystopia where the NSA/Prism has banned the sale of new desktop chips and the neckbeards are forced to scavenge for old cpus in the garbage
>>54153452
>>54153314
It's dropping hard. Before anyone says "muh laptops", this includes those.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-04-11/global-pc-shipments-fall-9-6-percent-amid-sluggish-economy
http://www.forbes.com/sites/adamhartung/2016/04/15/pc-sales-in-q1-drop-more-than-10-are-you-surprised-do-you-care/
>>54153559
Banned? More like they cost a small fortune because the market propping up sales has vanished and only businesses can afford i7 levels of performance.
>>54153438
incorrect
ibm has like 8ghz power chips somewhere i think
>>54153622
Yeah? Up their ass, right?
The desktop "big box" PC market is basically dead. No normie buys a huge box PC anymore just to be able to browse the web. And those who have older PC boxes don't replace them with new ones, they buy small form PCs, like 2 in 1s, tablets.
So the classic desktop PC sales have plummeted. Only heavy gamers and geeks buy computers with big cases. Not even miniITX, only nerds buy that. Normies only buy flat and light computers now. So Intel will focus next on mobile computing more and small factor PCs and less on big box PCs used by nerds and gaymen.
Jackin is a good way to clear your mind desu
>>54153920
What if you need a powerful workstation for audio or video?
Blame AMD.
Seriously they have been so shit that Intel R&D have actually been proven to have taken more vacations in the last 5 years than in the last 20.
>>54154014
They wil probably have CPUs for enterprise and professional rigs that will cost more.
>>54154074
All they do is cost more they are no more powerful.
>>54153559
>2066
>Consumers buy a fraction computational power in one of the cloud clusters
>Monthly plans based on flop limits
>Anons form packs of scavengers to raid guarded landfills in search for microchips
>Forgotten backdoor planted into an old Skylake broadcasts it's presence when powered on
>FBI raids Anon's Government Issued Living Cube
>Sent to Google Emergency Management Agency camp for reeducation
>>54153221
So the normies who are mainly concerned with the batter life on their phones are making things worse for the rest of us?
>>54152840
Intel only cares about performance per watt, not performance per thread
This is why they're letting go of 11,000 people working on desktop stuff.
>>54154104
>they are no more powerful
for playing games, watching videos on youtube, reading email etc., aka the average uses of 99% of people who own a home PC? No, but these chips are specifically designed to be very powerful at a certain task. Because they're designed to be specialised at one thing ,they're crap at every other thing that's unneeded for the job. They're by no means weak chips, but just chips designed for a specific purpose. The people who want these chips for these purposes are willing to pay millions and even billions of dollars for them.
>>54155177
And they suck horribly at it. Haswell is 8 cores and consumes 140 watts of power, while the upcoming zen is 16 cores and runs on 95 watt of power.
>>54155255
[citation needed]
>>54155297
http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/203210-leaked-details-if-true-point-to-potent-amd-zen-cpu
>>54153199
I mostly agree with you, the Moore's law is dead.
But
>which is why, down the road, the only thing you will be able to afford is cloud computing.
If performance has stagnated then you should be Ok with current desktop hardware forever.
Also note that there is still good growth in GPU niche. Pascal has 20 teraflops of FP16 performance, and it can reach a good chunk of this theoretical performance on deep learning tasks.
There is still progress, just not for the poor masses.
>>54152840
>Intel are you even trying?
Actually no.
Intel gave up and is only using ASML machinery now.
>>54155339
Everybody uses ASML.
>>54155157
Honestly, I think phone companies fucked up when they went with the "muh thin". Battery life affects all of us now
>>54155352
Yes, because everybody gave up.
>>54153470
How would you rate an i5-6600k?
>>54153470
How does it feel to know you payed extra for a meme processor when a haswell processor that's 2 generations old and cheaper beats your mem procesor in single core performance, and actually overclocks better (there are people who actually thing memelake overclocking from stock 4.0 ghz to 4.4 ghz is 'good'. Kek. You should see a haswell overclocked from 3.0 to 4.5).
>>54155379
It's prolly worse than the 2600k in multithreaded tasks.
>>54155425
Well, I need per-core performance and my 10-year-old meme i7 wasn't cutting it
is skylake even worth it atm? i have a 2500k right now
>>54155453
Per core it's gonna be @ 20% faster or so. Did you OC? You can go ahead and buy it if you wanna splurge but don't expect noticeable improvements.
>>54155478
No. Wait for zen. Not even shilling, the cheapest zen will be at $150 (half the price of a current skylake processor) and amd said that it will only be slightly slower than current skylake.
>>54155316
Rumors aren't facts.
>>54155478
If you have 2500k, no.
>>54155560
Except AMD said this at their conference. It's confirmed, all the specs of the amd zen have been confirmed by the CEO of amd herself. Zen will also have a 32 core version for servers, which will be the highest core count achieved for that market (higher than intel's current 22).
>>54155482
Well my biggest problem is that TF2 (my favorite vidya) ran inconsistently with meme i7
Hopefully it'll be better with i5
New build specs:
Motherboard: Asus Z170 Pro Gaming
CPU: i5 6600k
GPU: GTX 970
PSU: Corsair CX 600W 80+ Bronze
CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO
SSD: Samsung 850 EVO 250GB
HDD: Western Digital Caviar Blue 1TB
RAM: Kingston FURY HyperX 16GB DDR4 (2x8)
Opti Drive: Asus DRW-24B1ST
Case: Bitfenix Ronin
T. Paste: Arctic Silver 5
Zen better be fucking decent
>>54155547
>>54155582
i'm just planning for the future but there doesn't seem like any great upgrade paths to set yourself up for the future
>>54155853
Zen. AMD is going to rule the desktop from here on out as intel is going to focus mainly on big companies, so AMD is going to be the only real desktop platform left after intel completely shifts to enterprise. Stick to AMD, you'll feel better about it because AMD won't cuck you constantly by changing sockets every year.
>>54155645
you forgot to list your mouse, keyboard, monitor, speakers, underwear brand, what color your walls are painted, and your granma's lastname
>>54155645
Not him, but TF2 is an old game, even the i7 should have been good
Did you try reinstalling the game?
>>54155923
Mouse: Meme Razor DeathAdder
Keyboard: Meme Razor DeathStalker
Monitor: Acer H226HQLbid 60 Hz 21.5"
Speakers: Come with monitor
Underwear Brand: Lucky Brand
Wall Color: Red
Gramma's Last Name: Brennan
>>54155973
This. You obviously had a bottleneck somewhere else. The 2600k should do decent even in Witcher 3. Also I don't get it why you keep calling it "meme i7". The only meme here is skylake.
>>54155973
Tried everything pham, even launch commands and settings, but it just ground to a halt during firefights
I don't think the radeon was the problem because tf2 is a cpu game
>>54156110
i5 6600k guy here, it was a shitty, entry level i7 even back in 2006 that came in an expensive HP laptop
>>54156159
There was no i7's in 2006. Stop being a retard.
>i7 2600k
>laptop
What the fuck are you talking about?
>>54156131
>I don't think the radeon was the problem because tf2 is a cpu game
These are the kind of people that buy intel. The kind of people that think a 2600k can't handle TF2 and if it stutters it's because it's "A CPU GAEM"
>>54156173
>>54156196
IT SAYS 2006 AND IT'S OLD AND SLOW AND AN I7 AND AN HP WHAT DO YOU WANT FROM ME REEEEEEEEEE
it's an hp pavilion dv7
>>54156227
The first laptop Nehalem based i7's were relesed @ 2009.
Also I was replying to the guy with the i7 2600k which is a desktop i7 and it's second generation (sandy bridge).
Of course an i5 6600k would crush a laptop first gen i7.
>>54156227
It's not from 2006 then
>>54156227
>WHAT DO YOU WANT FROM ME REEEEEEEEEE
I want you to stop saying wrong things
Intel didn't make any processor called an i7 until the end of 2008/early 2009. So either that machine wasn't made in 2006 or it's not an i7. or both.
I also want you to stop being a moron but thats probably asking too much
>>54156306
yay
The laptop I was reee-ing about was an HP Pavilion dv7-4280us Beats Edition
It has a factory i7 sticker on it and I'm confused
System info says it's from 2006 but it's win 7
>>54156326
>/g/ bullies me
Read the post above mine
>>54152840
Hope for an IngaAs or graphene miracle, silicon can only go so far.
>>54156344
>HP Pavilion dv7-4280us
If you'd do a simple google search you'd realise that laptop was released @ 2011.
>System info says it's from 2006 but it's win 7
What system info are you talking about buddy.
Also win 7 was released @ 2009.
>>54156393
I went into settings and "about"
It said 2006 as it's production date
I got it from a friend so it might be haunted by a dead relative or something
>>54154014
This argument gets trotted out time and time again by amateur montage parody and """"synthwave"""" dank meme producers.
If you're ACTUALLY paying rent (not at your mom's house) from video editing, you are a tiny, tiny, MINISCULE fraction of the total addressable market. 99.99% of normies just need to crop, zoom, and MAYBE do color balancing on <90 second clips, which is already possible on $4 mediakuk SoCs.
If Intel moves away from the ILM/Gay Buttsex Wedding Hipster then presumably another company will step up to gouge you $5000+ for a $300 BoM.
I didn't even respond to your Audio part because a fucking C2D is perfectly adequate and a 2016 i7 is already massively fucking overkill given human perceptual capabilities. (no fucking need for 4096 track projects @ 384/96 tracks for our shitty 2-channel meatdrums)
>>54156443
well then let the thing you learn today be that you can change the OEM info to say whatever you damn well please in Windows. It's just some registry settings and a file somewhere in the windows dir. (at least it used to be back when I used windows, maybe they do it differently now.) Maybe your friend changed it. Maybe he reinstalled windows and the installer read the wrong date from the BIOS or something. Maybe a lot of things. The only way to know when hardware was built is if it has a "produced 1/1/2011" stamp on it, or you look up the serial number for that.
>>54152840
intel is on tick-tick-tock now but don't get your hopes up for large performance increases in the future.
>>54156561
Gotcha.
Thanks for the info man
>>54156540
What about guys making animated 3D films?
>hurr durr what is heat barriers
>hurr durr what is space limitations
the future is multicore, cry me a river single thread babies
>>54156792
lots of tasks parallelize poorly or not at all
>>54152877
Why not just make the chips physically larger so the heat doesn't build up as easily? Obviously that'd only be for desktops.
>>54156811
too bad, because chips aren't getting any faster unless we pull quantum
>>54156822
Light travels at a finite speed, and signals have to be able to get from one side of the chip to the other within one clock cycle, with some time to spare.
>>54156872
Why can't they just use light instead of electrons?
>>54156822
because than the electric impulses would register slower and we'd have to increase the tic-rate to compensate
>>54156930
Both of those travel at (at most) light speed. At 6GHz light can travel about two inches in one clock cycle.
>>54156872
Thanks. I had no idea clock cycles were that fast. But would making current desktop CPUs (~3GHz) bigger improve cooling by a significant amount? I mean making the die bigger and the components more spaced out, not making the components inside bigger. If the desktop market is becoming more and more oriented to niches like gaming and professional work, I would think that cooling would be a bigger concern because people want their hardware to be more reliable, quieter, and last longer. I think most gamers would rather have a bigger CPU instead of shrinking the CPU size and putting an integrated GPU on the chip so that it runs cooler/quieter since they have an actual GPU anyways. At least that's my uneducated opinion.
>>54152840
you cant, atleast with tech we have now
So much for "super computers". Can;t believe I felt for the meme
>>54152840
with directx12 new games will use al cores on your cpu and games can combine any gpus from any vendors. you will NOT need a high gigahertzcpu
>>54157432
it is easier to remove a given amount of heat from an object if that object has a larger surface area. That's why heatspreaders are a thing now and you don't see bare-die chips like P3s and AXPs were. A significant part of the expense of making a chip is the high-purity silicon wafers you make them on, though, so they don't want to make them any larger than need be. Also the server market doesn't care about reducing heat per unit die area for quieter cooling, server chips live in a server room and its okay to cool them with loud fans. The datacenter people care about the amount of heat used, period, because thats what determines electricity and cooling costs. And most of the remaining desktop market isn't the high-end power desktop chips anyway, for most normies an i3 is more than enough already. Those already run cool and quiet and will probably last decades. The high-end desktop market isn't big enough to support custom designs anymore, thats why we get cut-down Xeons (X99 and Haswell-E)
>>54157432
It's exactly the other way around. The larger the die, the longer the lanes have to be, the higher the resistance of the die, the more heat is generated. They are actually shrinking the CPU size BECAUSE they want them to be more efficient = cooler.
>>54157595
I had no idea, but that makes a lot of sense. Thanks.
>>54157595
well they could just make larger chips. all the limitations are imaginary. they CAN make 300 watt laptops which dont have batteries. or make system which can consume crazy amount of watts when plugged in and reduce multipliers when on battery.
>>54155363
I don't see the problem :^)
>>54152840
They will improve as soon as Intel can break the laws of physics, make multicore performance actually useful for the average user, and stop the slow, inevitable progress of technology to smaller form factors.
>>54155420
>>54155425
You two are so full of shit
>>54152840
>Where are my 6ghz chips already?
Do you even overclock, m8?
>>54158430
Give us some benchmarks to masturbate to
>>54158430
Garbage.
>>54157758
Are you trolling or did you not read a word he said
>>54158430
>>54158496
>>54158496
>1.818 volts
sounds perfectly reasonable to me
>>54157073
so you are telling me that computers are at their peak. They cannot get any better?
>>54158626
Doesn't matter, as long as the cooling is sufficient.
>>54152914
No it's not your fucking dip.
>>54155157
>So the autists trying to render their "waifus" in 4k VR are ruining battery life for the rest of us?
>>54157500
>games
>games
>games
Look, I like games and all, but a computer does so much more than crunch numbers for games.
>>54152840
MUH GIGGAHURRZ
>>54160367
AMDs CPUs can still get better because they have been dogshit since Bulldozer.
>>54152840
>intel
arm is where the future is at m80
>>54160880
What can you do with a Skylake you can't do with a Sandy Bridge? The functional power is the same.
>>54153199
Stagnation means prices will go down or stay the same.
>>54152840
I sit around all day masterbating i don't see why people with heaps more money than me wouldn't do the same thing
I don't really feel the need for CPUs that are massively more powerful than the CPUs of today.
I am interested in extremely inexpensive CPUs that match their performance but have a much smaller form factor, perhaps BGA, and are passively cooled or require no cooling at all. Same for GPUs
Imagine getting the same performance as a top-end gaming rig out of a tiny pico-itx board with just some connectors and BGAs on it in a cute little router-sized case putting out no sound or heat.
That is my dream.
>>54156106
I found the problem you need to reinstall drivers for your grandma
>>54163368
It's cute that you believe that
>>54155255
>while the upcoming zen is 16 cores and runs on 95 watt of power.
the rumor for zen was a 95w TDP HEDT part with 4 cores, with the flagship being 8 cores with 140w TDP. AMD isn't going to fab 16 core zen dies for server or consumer parts, the server parts will just be two 8 core dies laid on an interconnect as AMD have done for like 20 years now.
