Core i3 is now a Core i7: Intel increases core counts

[AndreiArgeanu]

I'd like to think this is real, but it probably isn't. Like why does it say best price for i3 10100 @ amazon

[mr moose]

5 hours ago, leadeater said:

tl;dr For a long time game engines only effectively utilized 2 physical CPU cores even if 4+ threads are be utilized, more that isn't a thing the more threads start to matter.

I've been saying this for a while now, my last PC was still keeping up with 4 physical cores (no HT).  I think people are forgetting that the "more core marketing" is mainly a data center/production workload thing and for 90% of uses they aren't necessarily a better option.

 

 

[pas008]

14 minutes ago, mr moose said:

I've been saying this for a while now, my last PC was still keeping up with 4 physical cores (no HT).  I think people are forgetting that the "more core marketing" is mainly a data center/production workload thing and for 90% of uses they aren't necessarily a better option.

 

 

another thing is resolution going up means less demand for cpu on majority of games

 

i always find this 4k summary fun considering everything is moving that 4k way

 

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-9-3900x/22.html

[mr moose]

2 minutes ago, pas008 said:

another thing is resolution going up means less demand for cpu on majority of games

 

i always find this 4k summary fun considering everything is moving that 4k way

 

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-9-3900x/22.html

 

4K is the great equalizer for those hell bent on defining the perfect gaming CPU.

[The Torrent]

They remove hyperthreading from i7's now they adding it to i3's whats going on.

[The Torrent]

34 minutes ago, mr moose said:

I've been saying this for a while now, my last PC was still keeping up with 4 physical cores (no HT).  I think people are forgetting that the "more core marketing" is mainly a data center/production workload thing and for 90% of uses they aren't necessarily a better option.

 

 

 

 

depends heavily for the game, stuff like rainbow loves cores.

[mr moose]

7 minutes ago, The Torrent said:

 

 

depends heavily for the game, stuff like rainbow loves cores.

I said mainly not exclusively.  there is always an exception and Gamer's are not the majority buyers of CPU's, we just becoming the majority of desktop owners.

 

 

 

[NumLock21]

22 minutes ago, The Torrent said:

They remove hyperthreading from i7's now they adding it to i3's whats going on.

Only the 9th gen desktop Core i7 does not have HT. Rest of the Core i7 including 9th gen mobile, still has HT.

[leadeater]

7 hours ago, comander said:

If I had to guess on why 0.1% lows aren't shown, it could just be that they were all over the place. That metric is very very sensitive to outliers. Far cry 5 in general seems relatively inconsistent (see how the minimums in the chart don't correlate all that well to the averages relative to other titles?)

FC5 in the other review has the 0.1% lows and shows anything without HT has bad performance in that regard even though 1% isn't too bad and averages are great. The frame time graph shows it better. The 7700k doesn't have the frame time issues, just overall high frame times from it just generally being slower. FC5 is also a bit strange in that a 4c/8t CPU performs better for 1% and 0.1% than a 8c/8t does but if had to guess that's down to having to pass information between caches more. I suspect FC5 engine is HT aware and will put threads on the same cores when it can, without HT it can't so isn't able to do optimal placement. That's just my guess at what is going on though.

 

Just have to cross reference the 7700k results, really sucks that graph with it doesn't have the 0.1% lows.

 

7 hours ago, comander said:

I generally disregard GTA V benchmarks because that game is all over the place (e.g. stuttering when the frame rate gets too high)

That pretty much applies most to CPUs without HT as well. That was validated by disabling HT on 7700k and getting the frame time issues, but doesn't happen with HT on.

[Harry Voyager]

Now, what I do find interesting is the I7-10700k. It's an 8/16 with a 5.1Ghz boost for estimated $339. That's basically an I9-9900K for the price of a 3700X, though without the upgrade path. 

 

I think now we see what Intel is doing with that warchest of theirs. It will be interesting to see what happens with AMD's November micro code update. 

[The Torrent]

19 hours ago, mr moose said:

I said mainly not exclusively.  there is always an exception and Gamer's are not the majority buyers of CPU's, we just becoming the majority of desktop owners.

 

 

 

if gamers are majority of desktop buyers how are they not majority of cpu buyers?

 

I mean google any high end consumer cpu its aimed at gaming.

[mr moose]

2 hours ago, The Torrent said:

if gamers are majority of desktop buyers how are they not majority of cpu buyers?

 

I mean google any high end consumer cpu its aimed at gaming.

Because majority of CPU'S are sold to enterprise computing.  Thin clients, workstations, straight up client terminals and laptops.  Many factories and high rises offices still use a lot of desktop computers,  but Laptops are the biggest seller.

 

Most industry analysis only talk ssabout desktops as a whole and don't generally breakdown to OEM v DIY markets.  However the latest round of figures shows somewhere between a 3 and 4.2% decline in desktop sales and Intel shortages are to blame.  The data they cite is OEM sales and total shipments.  

[The Torrent]

10 hours ago, mr moose said:

Because majority of CPU'S are sold to enterprise computing.  Thin clients, workstations, straight up client terminals and laptops.  Many factories and high rises offices still use a lot of desktop computers,  but Laptops are the biggest seller.

 

Most industry analysis only talk ssabout desktops as a whole and don't generally breakdown to OEM v DIY markets.  However the latest round of figures shows somewhere between a 3 and 4.2% decline in desktop sales and Intel shortages are to blame.  The data they cite is OEM sales and total shipments.  

Can you source? I’m interested in this.

[leadeater]

17 minutes ago, The Torrent said:

Can you source? I’m interested in this.

Places like Gartner, Statista and IDC track and report those sorts of things e.g.

 

 

These as far as I know do not count sales of PC components but pre-built systems only. Custom builds are way, way lower in volume than pre-builds.

[mr moose]

28 minutes ago, The Torrent said:

Can you source? I’m interested in this.

 

https://www.extremetech.com/computing/296655-amd-reports-q2-2019-market-share-as-intel-sticks-to-its-guns-on-pricing

https://www.zdnet.com/article/as-the-pc-market-continues-to-shrink-slowly-guess-which-oems-are-still-thriving/

 

 

Quote

the combined market share during 2017 and 2018 for Lenovo, HP, and Dell, which collectively account for nearly two out of three traditional PCs (desktop, laptop, and workstation) sold worldwide.

 

https://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/3074008/pc-sales-decline-q1-2019-gartner-idc

 

Quote

While their numbers are different, both analyst firms are blaming this slump on a shortage of Intel processors at the low-end of the market.

 

HP and Lenovo together sell over 40% for the total PC's shipped (mostly laptops) with laptops selling 171M v desktop at 79M Units. 

 

So there is a lot of info out there to chew through.  Some of it isn't what it seems on the surface too, like several articles I have read claim that enthusiasts are keeping the desktops environment alive, but that is not necessarily DIY enthusiasts, that is people buying prebuilt to game on as well.  So finding separation in those figures is going to be difficult.  

 

EDIT: another way to look at it is GPU sales, According to gartner something like 44M GPU sell every year.  IF we were to assume that was a new build for every GPU (not very likely as some will be upgrades and some will be bought by OEM's) You could argue that there are less DIY built systems than Prebuilt systems (for every market). 

[leadeater]

5 minutes ago, mr moose said:

So there is a lot of info out there to chew through.  Some of it isn't what it seems on the surface too, like several articles I have read claim that enthusiasts are keeping the desktops environment alive, but that is not necessarily DIY enthusiasts, that is people buying prebuilt to game on as well.  So finding separation in those figures is going to be difficult.  

There's a sort of simple way to gauge DIY vs pre-built, think about all the people you have ever interacted with and then think how many of those people you think would actually build a PC rather than buy a pre-built or a laptop. Even within ITS, about 200 people, I know of less than 20 that have built their own PC, ever.

[mr moose]

1 minute ago, leadeater said:

There's a sort of simple way to gauge DIY vs pre-built, think about all the people you have ever interacted with and then think how many of those people you think would actually build a PC rather than buy a pre-built or a laptop. Even within ITS, about 200 people, I know of less than 20 that have built their own PC, ever.

I did think of that, but I figured if I said that someone would quote me and cry about it being anecdotal and thus it has to be wrong.   One of the hardest things on this forum is showing people just how insignificant we enthusiast are on the scale of the industry as a whole.  We are big enough to warrant AMD and Intel whipping up some marketing gump and putting a presence in at games conventions but that's about it.  

[leadeater]

3 minutes ago, mr moose said:

I did think of that, but I figured if I said that someone would quote me and cry about it being anecdotal and thus it has to be wrong.   One of the hardest things on this forum is showing people just how insignificant we enthusiast are on the scale of the industry as a whole.  We are big enough to warrant AMD and Intel whipping up some marketing gump and putting a presence in at games conventions but that's about it.  

Well to be fair about that the gaming market is now bigger than Hollywood but gamers aren't exclusively DIY builders, not by a long shot.

 

Edit:

And to clarify there is a big difference even between buying a graphics card and adding it to a PC than actually building the entire thing from parts.

[GoldenLag]

2 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Well to be fair about that the gaming market is now bigger than Hollywood but gamers aren't exclusively DIY builders, not by a long shot.

gaming market also includes mobile and console players. and they represent a major portion of the market. 

[hollyh88]

no thanks ill stick with amd on the cpu side. 
intel is just doing what amd had because amd forced them to compete better. not that it will work. cause they are greedy bastards lol. 

[pas008]

8 hours ago, hollyh88 said:

no thanks ill stick with amd on the cpu side. 
intel is just doing what amd had because amd forced them to compete better. not that it will work. cause they are greedy bastards lol. 

both are openly traded and trying to meet shareholders expectations lol

 

love these statements

 

either shareholder wants the most of their company

[hollyh88]

1 hour ago, pas008 said:

both are openly traded and trying to meet shareholders expectations lol

 

love these statements

 

either shareholder wants the most of their company

true but also not true. amd is increasinly more succesful. has more cores and threads. and is just dominating the cpu market as of late. 
Intel sees their income drop. so now they see that they need to get off their lazy asses and do something to compete. 

i had a i5 7600 before i went to the 2600x. been happy ever since. Will 100% also go amd with their new cpu's when they come out. the 3000 series is good. but.. im going to wait a bit maybe ill jump the 2000 series and take the 3000 if the 3950x will be any good. 

[mr moose]

2 hours ago, hollyh88 said:

true but also not true. amd is increasinly more succesful. has more cores and threads. and is just dominating the cpu market as of late. 
Intel sees their income drop. so now they see that they need to get off their lazy asses and do something to compete. 

i had a i5 7600 before i went to the 2600x. been happy ever since. Will 100% also go amd with their new cpu's when they come out. the 3000 series is good. but.. im going to wait a bit maybe ill jump the 2000 series and take the 3000 if the 3950x will be any good. 

 

Please read the above links and discussion.  AMD is mopping up because Intel can't produce enough to maintain supply.    This is not to take away from AMD products, but the reality is they are starting to do well for many more reasons than just inherently being better. 

 

Comparing how well a company is doing or it's motives based on a small percentage of the buyers market (DIY is literally less than 10% of all CPU sales), will lead to erroneous figures.

[hollyh88]

Just now, mr moose said:

 

Please read the above links and discussion.  AMD is mopping up because Intel can't produce enough to maintain supply.    This is not to take away from AMD products, but the reality is they are starting to do well for many more reasons than just inherently being better. 

 

Comparing how well a company is doing or it's motives based on a small percentage of the buyers market (DIY is literally less than 10% of all CPU sales), will lead to erroneous figures.

thats because it only just shifted. people see that intel has been bsing them. i too thought intel was the better cpu, before amd came with better ones. while yeah they didnt give a good high end one. that changed with the 3000 series. And server wise well they swept intels buts right there. 

yes intel still has the bigger share. it will change if they dont change, and clearly they see the threat. which is why you now have intel chips with hyper threading. But a bit tooo late. i doubt they will give it a fair price too. 
besides.. you can get a 2600 for about 120 euros in my country. why would anyone want to go for a 4 core 8 thread cpu then.  

only thing you do need however is a mobo. but even then its a better decision to get the 2600. 
the only way intel will be interesting again is if they truly strike back with high speeds less power draw more execution supports aaand better pricing. 

 

[mr moose]

1 minute ago, hollyh88 said:

thats because it only just shifted. people see that intel has been bsing them. i too thought intel was the better cpu, before amd came with better ones. while yeah they didnt give a good high end one. that changed with the 3000 series. And server wise well they swept intels buts right there. 

Better is only a matter of end use specifics.  Some Intel chips are better and some AMD chips are better.  For most of us enthusiasts who play games and do light video/photo editing either will work just fine.  So it's not about domestic consumers for the most part, it's about industry presence and maintaining rigid product support and predictability.

 

What's hurting Intel right now has little to do with the performance of their chips and everything to do with not being able to guarantee supply.  Especially when the two largest OEM's can order up to 1/2 of your production runs.

 

1 minute ago, hollyh88 said:

yes intel still has the bigger share. it will change if they dont change, and clearly they see the threat. which is why you now have intel chips with hyper threading. But a bit tooo late. i doubt they will give it a fair price too. 
besides.. you can get a 2600 for about 120 euros in my country. why would anyone want to go for a 4 core 8 thread cpu then.  

only thing you do need however is a mobo. but even then its a better decision to get the 2600. 
the only way intel will be interesting again is if they truly strike back with high speeds less power draw more execution supports aaand better pricing. 

 

They don't need to do anything new,  just keep improving their product and price according to the market.  That's all they have ever done and it's what they will continue to do. Things that will  effect their market share will be 10nm issues, new sales lost to AMD in the process and large changes in the industry (like changes in corporate upgrade behavior).