Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Vishera

Nehalem is 10 years old,and Intel are still using it

Recommended Posts

Posted · Original PosterOP

All Intel desktop CPUs since November 2008 are based on the Nehalem microarchitecture,even the Core i9 9900K is based on the ancient microarchitecture.

Intel are improving or trying to improve Nehalem since it's November 2008 launch.

Since the improvements of Sandy Bridge all desktop consumer Intel CPUs are capable of 5GHz with a liquid cooler.

Intel have been increasing the base clock and boost clock speeds every year to create an illusion of bigger architectural improvements when in fact all desktop consumer Intel CPUs are capable of 5GHz with a liquid cooler.

Intel hit a wall in 2018 and didn't manage to improve Nehalem (Coffee Lake revision) any further,Even in the end of 2019 Intel still failed to improve the Coffee Lake revision of Nehalem,

It seems like from here on "significant" improvements can only be achieved by a process node shrink.

Intel calling every new generation an "architecture" is misleading considering Intel have been using and improving the same architecture since November 2008.

 

I suggest Intel to ditch Nehalem based microarchitectures and focus on R&D a completely new architecture,

The 2 years old Ryzen architecture is efficient and still has room for improvements but is already outperforming Intel in the server market and has significantly higher IPC.

 

I wonder what are your thoughts on that,and will gladly make any correction.

 

 

 

 

Note:

1 hour ago, GoldenLag said:

There are IPC improvements since sandybridge. Tho they are minor.

 

Also they are actually improving yields and in some cases performance of the nodes they are using.

 


A PC Enthusiast since 2011
AMD Ryzen 5 2600@4GHz | GIGABYTE GTX 1660 GAMING OC @ Core 2040MHz Memory 5000MHz
Cinebench R15: 1382cb | Unigine Superposition 1080p Extreme: 3439
Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a Nehalem system back in 2010 or 2011(Xeon W3520 + Asus Rampage ROG 2 Gene mtax) Damn, that motherboard was hot as hell(I had that screeny thing) That thing overclocked pretty well 4.4ghz. And then I sold that x58 system and invested in an AM3+ platform. It was the biggest mistake in my life.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are IPC improvements since sandybridge. Tho they are minor.

 

Also they are actually improving yields and in some cases performance of the nodes they are using.

31 minutes ago, Vishera said:

Intel calling every new generation an "architecture" is misleading considering Intel have been using and improving the same architecture since November 2008.

They have been using the same "macroarchitecture" like how GCN has been used at AMD since the 7800 series. 

 

33 minutes ago, Vishera said:

architectural improvements when in fact all desktop consumer Intel CPUs are capable of 5GHz with a liquid cooler.

Depends on what liquid you mean and yields and delidding. 

 

There have been improvements. 

 

While second and third gen can do 5ghz. They run hot while doing so and usually at quite a high voltage.

34 minutes ago, Vishera said:

suggest Intel to ditch Nehalem based microarchitectures and focus on R&D a completely new architecture,

Synny cove. Is something new. Its not like they havent got stuff in their pipelines. 

 

And Ryzen has traces of FX in it, so there will allways be stuff leftover. 

 

36 minutes ago, Vishera said:

Intel hit a wall in 2018 and didn't manage to improve Nehalem

They most likely didnt try to improve it too much. Focus on 10nm and sunny cove probably took priority. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, pizapower said:

I had a Nehalem system back in 2010 or 2011(Xeon W3520 + Asus Rampage ROG 2 Gene mtax) Damn, that motherboard was hot as hell(I had that screeny thing) That thing overclocked pretty well 4.4ghz. And then I sold that x58 system and invested in an AM3+ platform. It was the biggest mistake in my life.

Then I bought a used 990fx-ud7 for pretty cheap because it was version 1.0 (no LLC) I ran a Phenom X6 1035t on that board @ 4.2ghz and then I bought a FX8320E in 2014 and used it @ 4.7ghz. My 990FX-UD7 died in late 2016 and then I bought an Asus 970 Aura Pro board and now the whole system is my secondary system.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
3 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

There are IPC improvements since sandybridge. Tho they are minor.

 

Also they are actually improving yields and in some cases performance of the nodes they are using.

As i said Intel have been improving Nehalem ever since it was launched.

5 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

They have been using the same "macroarchitecture" like how GCN has been used at AMD since the 7800 series. 

 

True

8 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

Depends on what liquid you mean and yields and delidding. 

 

There have been improvements. 

 

While second and third gen can do 5ghz. They run hot while doing so and usually at quite a high voltage.

While there have been improvements,Sandy Bridge can still do 5GHz.

10 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

Synny cove. Is something new. Its not like they havent got stuff in their pipelines. 

 

And Ryzen has traces of FX in it, so there will allways be stuff leftover. 

They sure take their sweet time,10 years and still counting,and the road map of the near future doesn't even mention Sunny Cove...

 

As long as the FX traces don't hinder performance and efficiency it doesn't matter.

14 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

They most likely didnt try to improve it too much. Focus on 10nm and sunny cove probably took priority. 

Sounds logical,but it's impossible to have an infinite improvements of a microarchitecture (realistically).


A PC Enthusiast since 2011
AMD Ryzen 5 2600@4GHz | GIGABYTE GTX 1660 GAMING OC @ Core 2040MHz Memory 5000MHz
Cinebench R15: 1382cb | Unigine Superposition 1080p Extreme: 3439
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Vishera said:

As i said Intel have been improving Nehalem ever since it was launched.

you spoke as if there havent been any real changes since sandybridge. thats what i was pointing out. because there have been changes. 

3 minutes ago, Vishera said:

While there have been improvements,Sandy Bridge can still do 5GHz.

5ghz skylake is quite a bit nicer than 5ghz sandybridge. 

 

4 minutes ago, Vishera said:

They sure take their sweet time,10 years and still counting,and the road map of the near future doesn't even mention Sunny Cove...

ice lake is sunnycove. 

 

its the new "macroarchitecture". 

 

AMD has been using GCN since 2012, and still are using it. and for low corecount CPUs, sandybridge derivatives are pretty darn unbeatable. 

6 minutes ago, Vishera said:

Sounds logical,but it's impossible to have an infinite improvements of a microarchitecture (realistically).

at some point yes. at  the end you have to make sacrifises to make something better and other things worse. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
2 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

you spoke as if there havent been any real changes since sandybridge. thats what i was pointing out. because there have been changes. 

 

Good point,and an important one too,how shall i correct it?

4 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

5ghz skylake is quite a bit nicer than 5ghz sandybridge. 

 

True :D

4 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

ice lake is sunnycove. 

 

its the new "macroarchitecture". 

Good to know,I didn't know that.

5 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

and for low corecount CPUs, sandybridge derivatives are pretty darn unbeatable.

That's true but that can't hold forever.


A PC Enthusiast since 2011
AMD Ryzen 5 2600@4GHz | GIGABYTE GTX 1660 GAMING OC @ Core 2040MHz Memory 5000MHz
Cinebench R15: 1382cb | Unigine Superposition 1080p Extreme: 3439
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Vishera said:

That's true but that can't hold forever

for low corecounts that might actually hold forever. not accounting for node changes. Ringbus is honestly practically unbeatable. 

4 minutes ago, Vishera said:

Good point,and an important one too,how shall i correct it?

just add an "edit:_______" and correct yourself a bit, i dont mind. do what you want. there have been iterative changes. often when it comes to AVX or small cache improvements that increases IPC in certain tasks. 

 

i do not know the exact changes and improvements over each gen (im too young to for that). but i know roughly the full generational leap from sandybridge to skylake. which i think is quoted to be between 3-11% improvements in IPC. varying by task offcourse. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
19 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

just add an "edit:_______" and correct yourself a bit, i dont mind. do what you want. there have been iterative changes. often when it comes to AVX or small cache improvements that increases IPC in certain tasks. 

 

i do not know the exact changes and improvements over each gen (im too young to for that). but i know roughly the full generational leap from sandybridge to skylake. which i think is quoted to be between 3-11% improvements in IPC. varying by task offcourse. 

Lol i have no idea how to phrase it.


A PC Enthusiast since 2011
AMD Ryzen 5 2600@4GHz | GIGABYTE GTX 1660 GAMING OC @ Core 2040MHz Memory 5000MHz
Cinebench R15: 1382cb | Unigine Superposition 1080p Extreme: 3439
Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, pizapower said:

Then I bought a used 990fx-ud7 for pretty cheap because it was version 1.0 (no LLC) I ran a Phenom X6 1035t on that board @ 4.2ghz and then I bought a FX8320E in 2014 and used it @ 4.7ghz. My 990FX-UD7 died in late 2016 and then I bought an Asus 970 Aura Pro board and now the whole system is my secondary system.

I still have my 990fx-ud7 board.

jlrtppF.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, pizapower said:

<snip>

Not to sound rude, but why are you showing us a picture of your 990fx board when this thread is about Nehalem?


Primary PC:

Spoiler

CPU: Intel® Xeon® X5675 @ 4.62 GHz 1.4V Motherboard: ASUS P6X58-E WS (BCLK: 201 MHz) CPU Cooler: NZXT HAVIK 140 & Noctua NA-SRC10 RAM: Crucial DDR3-1606 8-11-11-28 (2x4GB) GPU: ASUS GeForce® GTX 770 DirectCU II (Core Clock: 1250 MHz, Memory Clock: 3505 MHz) SSD: Samsung 860 EVO 2.5" 1TB (W10 Pro) HDD: WD Green 3.5" 1TB (7.2K RPM) PSU: Corsair AX860i & White CableMod ModFlex™ Cables Case: Fractal Design Meshify C TG (White) Fans: Intake: 1x Dynamic X2 GP-12, Exhaust: 1x Dynamic X2 GP-12 Monitor: Samsung S24D390 23.6" 1080p 60Hz 250 nit PLS (OC'd to 75Hz) Keyboard: Logitech G710+ (Cherry MX Browns) Mouse: Logitech G502 Proteus Spectrum Mouse Pad: Steelseries QcK Racing Wheel: Logitech G27 & Six-Speed Shifter Audio: Bose SoundSport In-Ear Headphones (Charcoal) CPU-Z

Primary Laptop:

Spoiler

Model: Apple MacBook Pro 13" 2019 (Silver, Touch Bar, 2x TB3 Ports) CPU: Intel® Core™ i5-8257U @ 1.4 GHz RAM: LPDDR3-2133 (8GB) GPU: Intel® Iris® Plus Graphics 645 SSD: NVME PCIe 256GB Display: 13.3" 2560x1600 60Hz 500 nit IPS Battery: 58.2 Wh dbrand Skins: Trackpad (White Marble) & Palmrest (Hyperblack Titanium) Audio: Beats Studio3 Wireless (Midnight Black)

Secondary PC:

Spoiler

CPU: Intel® Core™ i7-6700 @ 3.6 GHz Motherboard: HP Thimphu Z170 mATX CPU Cooler: 120mm Asetek-based AIO RAM: G.Skill DDR4-2133 13-13-13-31 (4x8GB) GPU: Pegatron GeForce® GTX 970 (Core Clock: 1450 MHz, Memory Clock: 3750 MHz) SSD: SanDisk X300S 2.5" 128GB (W10 Pro) HDD: WD Blue 3.5" 1TB (7.2K RPM) PSU: HP 500W Unit Case: HP OMEN 870 Audio: Samsung Earbuds

Secondary Laptop:

Spoiler

Model: ASUS ROG G750JW CPU: Intel® Core™ i7-4700HQ @ 3.4 GHz RAM: DDR3-1600 11-11-11-28 (3x4GB) GPU: NVIDIA GeForce® GTX 765M SSD: SanDisk SSD Plus 2.5" 120GB (W10 Pro) HDD: Toshiba 2.5" 750GB (5.4K RPM) Display: 17.3" 1080p 60Hz 350 nit TN Monitor: Dell E2418HN 24" 1080p 60Hz 250 nit IPS Battery: 88 Wh Mouse: Logitech MK235

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
Just now, r2724r16 said:

Not to sound rude, but why are you showing us a picture of your 990fx board when this thread is about Nehalem?

He started talking about Nehalem but then got carried away,

Anyway i don't mind that :D


A PC Enthusiast since 2011
AMD Ryzen 5 2600@4GHz | GIGABYTE GTX 1660 GAMING OC @ Core 2040MHz Memory 5000MHz
Cinebench R15: 1382cb | Unigine Superposition 1080p Extreme: 3439
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
27 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

just add an "edit:_______" and correct yourself a bit, i dont mind. do what you want. there have been iterative changes. often when it comes to AVX or small cache improvements that increases IPC in certain tasks. 

 

i do not know the exact changes and improvements over each gen (im too young to for that). but i know roughly the full generational leap from sandybridge to skylake. which i think is quoted to be between 3-11% improvements in IPC. varying by task offcourse. 

In the end i just quoted you :D


A PC Enthusiast since 2011
AMD Ryzen 5 2600@4GHz | GIGABYTE GTX 1660 GAMING OC @ Core 2040MHz Memory 5000MHz
Cinebench R15: 1382cb | Unigine Superposition 1080p Extreme: 3439
Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Vishera said:

He started talking about Nehalem but then got carried away,

Anyway i don't mind that :D

Thank you!

Link to post
Share on other sites

How much change is needed before you consider an architecture to be different from its predecessor?

 

My interest only really starts from Sandy Bridge onwards, and each change has bought with it measurable IPC improvements in the FP performance. Sandy Bridge introduced AVX instructions, which gave ~2x the best performance of before, and I consider this my minimum operating level today. Haswell extended that with FMA. For my use of it, that's another 50% IPC boost on top. Skylake didn't add new there, but the cycle times were optismised, and the end result is about 14% IPC increase over Haswell. Moving onto Skylake-X derivatives, AVX-512 is another up to 2x improvement over Skylake.

 

Zen and Zen+ were designed to be low in FP performance, and in practice were around Sandy Bridge levels. Only since Zen 2 have they finally caught up (and slightly overtaken) Intel consumer CPUs, but still lag behind AVX-512 parts with no signs of adding meaningful support. I'm still not done with my own testing, but while the Zen 2 cores are for sure strong, they also gain further uplift from generous if split L3 caches to mitigate their lack of general bandwidth. If rumours I've heard so far of Zen 3 come true, that would be even nicer.

 

Suppose my beef is that saying Intel haven't changed architecture in 10 years is like saying Zen 2 is the same as original Zen. They're not. Each iteration builds upon the past. You get some smaller gains in some areas, bigger gains in others. See below for some of my past testing I did on Skylake vs Zen(+). I still need to fully test for Zen 2. Can't find my WIP on it but they're somewhere in these forums.

 

 


Main rig: Asus Maximus VIII Hero, i7-6700k stock, Noctua D14, G.Skill Ripjaws V 3200 2x8GB, Gigabyte GTX 1650, Corsair HX750i, In Win 303 NVIDIA, Samsung SM951 512GB, WD Blue 1TB, HP LP2475W 1200p wide gamut

Gaming system: Asrock Z370 Pro4, i7-8086k stock, Noctua D15, Corsair Vengeance LPX RGB 3000 2x8GB, Gigabyte RTX 2070, Fractal Edison 550W PSU, Corsair 600C, Optane 900p 280GB, Crucial MX200 1TB, Sandisk 960GB, Acer Predator XB241YU 1440p 144Hz G-sync

Ryzen rig: Asrock B450 ITX, R5 3600, Noctua D9L, Corsair Vengeance LPX RGB 3000 2x4GB, EVGA GTX 970, Corsair CX450M, NZXT Manta, Crucial MX300 525GB, Acer RT280K

VR rig: Asus Z170I Pro Gaming, i7-6600k stock, Silverstone TD03-E, Kingston Hyper-X 2666 2x8GB, Zotac 1070 FE, Corsair CX450M, Silverstone SG13, Samsung PM951 256GB, HTC Vive

Gaming laptop: Asus FX503VD, i5-7300HQ, 2x8GB DDR4, GTX 1050, Sandisk 256GB SSD

Total CPU heating: i7-7800X, i7-5930k, i7-5820k, 2x i7-6700k, i7-6700T, i5-6600k, i7-5775C, i5-5675C, i5-4570S, i3-8350k, i3-6100, i3-4360, i3-4150T, E5-2683v3, 2x E5-2650, E5-2667, R7 3700X, R5 3600

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder how many + after the 14nm will it finally stop...😵


  • CPU
    AMD Ryzen™ 7 3700X 4.3Ghz 1.3V
  • Motherboard
    MSI MEG X570 ACE
  • RAM
    G.SKILL Trident Z Royal Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin RGB DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 3200 (PC4 25600) Desktop Memory Model F4-3200C16D-32GTRS
  • GPU
    GIGABYTE AORUS GeForce® GTX 1060 6G (rev. 2.0)
  • Case
    Tecware Nexus Evo
  • Storage
    ADATA Ultimate SU800 2TB 2.5" SSD, Toshiba X300 4TB Performance Desktop and Gaming Hard Drive 7200 RPM 128MB Cache SATA 6.0Gb/s 3.5 Inch Internal Hard Drive
  • PSU
    Cooler Master MWE GOLD 750 FULL MODULAR
  • Display(s)
    Acer KG271B
  • Cooling
    Cooler Master MASTERLIQUID ML240R RGB
  • Keyboard
    ARMAGGEDDON Kalashnikov AK-700 Gaming Keyboard
  • Mouse
    Razer Naga Hex Wraith Red Edition Wired Laser Mouse
  • Operating System
    Windows 10 Home
Link to post
Share on other sites

Nehalem where back then a innovative desing with great performance and even throw it cost a pretty penny back then, it whas every single penny good spend. Been on X58/Nehalem for over 10 years now first with a I7 920/Asus Rampage 2 extreme board setup and now a I7 980X/ASUS P6X58D Premium setup. Never exspected it to last this long. Sandy Bridge also delivered a significant performance gain, but after that intel became boring and performance gain whas low like 10 % gain for every new gen after Sandy Brigde. After Nehalem and Sandy Brigde intel really became way less innovative and phase of CPU core count and new features good really slow.

 

But yeah Nehalem where really ahead of its time as OP said, intel still using a desing that can be tracked back to Nehalem. Nehalem had a great long run, but i have desided that it is time forme to move on and i for now consider Ryzen 9 3950X/Asus ROG Crosshair VIII Hero X570 board to be my next setup.

 

Well here is Nehalem in all its glory or maybe not any more. My system beaten throw a few benchmark and games.

I7 920 setup

https://imgur.com/a/WqD1iHK

 

I7 980X

https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/10037039

https://imgur.com/a/uHjbbMg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Architectures generally last quite a while. The Netburst Architecture from 2000 was only replaced in 2006, and it was supposed to last longer, but turned out to have some significant design problems that drove them to replace it earlier. 

 

The Sunny Cove Architecture was intended to go live a couple years ago, but as I've read, it was closely tied to the 10nm fabrication process, so when that went sideways, it got delayed and they had to keep improving the 14nm architectures in the meantime. 

 

And as was pointed out above, the Ice Lake chips are showing big architectural improvements over the coffee lake CPUs. They just don't seem to be getting the clock cycles to be performance competitive at this iteration of the process. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
6 hours ago, porina said:

How much change is needed before you consider an architecture to be different from its predecessor?

As long as the design is similar and based on the same microarchitecture,It's just a revision of the original design...

6 hours ago, porina said:

Suppose my beef is that saying Intel haven't changed architecture in 10 years is like saying Zen 2 is the same as original Zen. They're not. Each iteration builds upon the past. You get some smaller gains in some areas, bigger gains in others. See below for some of my past testing I did on Skylake vs Zen(+). I still need to fully test for Zen 2. Can't find my WIP on it but they're somewhere in these forums.

As i said before: "Intel are improving or trying to improve Nehalem since it's November 2008 launch."

The problem is that Intel have been using the Nehalem microarchitecture for far too long (10 years!) while the Zen microarchitecture is only 2 years old and has plenty of room for improvements,the same thing can't be said about Intel's Nehalem based CPUs,

with Coffee Lake: "Intel hit a wall in 2018 and didn't manage to improve Nehalem (Coffee Lake revision) any further,Even in the end of 2019 Intel still failed to improve the Coffee Lake revision of Nehalem"

 

For proper improvements comparison you could compare Zen 2 and Sandy Bridge,both are a proper second generation of a microarchitecture.

6 hours ago, ZephCloud said:

I wonder how many + after the 14nm will it finally stop...😵

That's a different problem Intel has to worry about.

3 hours ago, Intelfreak said:

Nehalem where back then a innovative desing with great performance and even throw it cost a pretty penny back then, it whas every single penny good spend. Been on X58/Nehalem for over 10 years now first with a I7 920/Asus Rampage 2 extreme board setup and now a I7 980X/ASUS P6X58D Premium setup. Never exspected it to last this long. Sandy Bridge also delivered a significant performance gain, but after that intel became boring and performance gain whas low like 10 % gain for every new gen after Sandy Brigde. After Nehalem and Sandy Brigde intel really became way less innovative and phase of CPU core count and new features good really slow.

 

But yeah Nehalem where really ahead of its time as OP said, intel still using a desing that can be tracked back to Nehalem. Nehalem had a great long run, but i have desided that it is time forme to move on and i for now consider Ryzen 9 3950X/Asus ROG Crosshair VIII Hero X570 board to be my next setup.

 

Well here is Nehalem in all its glory or maybe not any more. My system beaten throw a few benchmark and games.

I7 920 setup

https://imgur.com/a/WqD1iHK

 

I7 980X

https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/10037039

https://imgur.com/a/uHjbbMg

Nehalem based CPUs are not bad,they are just old and inefficient,

My favorite is the 2600K,it's a legend that could overclock like crazy (5GHz),and had pretty good performance until it became outdated in 2017.

2 hours ago, Harry Voyager said:

Architectures generally last quite a while. The Netburst Architecture from 2000 was only replaced in 2006, and it was supposed to last longer, but turned out to have some significant design problems that drove them to replace it earlier. 

 

The Sunny Cove Architecture was intended to go live a couple years ago, but as I've read, it was closely tied to the 10nm fabrication process, so when that went sideways, it got delayed and they had to keep improving the 14nm architectures in the meantime. 

 

And as was pointed out above, the Ice Lake chips are showing big architectural improvements over the coffee lake CPUs. They just don't seem to be getting the clock cycles to be performance competitive at this iteration of the process. 

10 years is too much...


A PC Enthusiast since 2011
AMD Ryzen 5 2600@4GHz | GIGABYTE GTX 1660 GAMING OC @ Core 2040MHz Memory 5000MHz
Cinebench R15: 1382cb | Unigine Superposition 1080p Extreme: 3439
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Vishera said:

10 years is too much...

Why? They still perform just fine (also would the X299 lads count as refreshes of Nehalem? IIRC they use some mesh thing, not ringbus).


Always try googling your motherboard and looking at the spec sheet and manual - OEMs keep those up for a reason - and maybe you'll learn something 🤔

 

X58 Madlads: X58 Xeon/i7 discussion     X99 bois: X99 Xeon/i7 discussion

 

Current Rig: 

Spoiler

 5960X on a Heatkiller IV Pro Acetal
EVGA X99 Classified
32GB (4x8) 3200Mhz CL16 HyperX Predator DDR4
Radeon VII on an EK Acetal block and black EK backplate 
250GB 960 Evo, 1TB 970 Evo, 1TB Crucial MX500, 3x 2TB Seagate Barracuda Compute, 1x Random 1TB WD drive
Corsair RM1000i

Phanteks Enthoo Evolv ATX TG, Grey
EK D5 pump/res combo, EK-ZMT tubing, EK stubby barb fittings, 360mm GTS stealth rad, 4x Noctua iPPC NF-F12s, 2x Noctua NF-A15s

Folding Rig:

Spoiler

E5-4610 v3 on a Noctua NH-L12S 
EVGA X99 Micro2
16GB (4x4) EVGA SuperSC 2800Mhz DDR4
EVGA 1660 Ti XC Ultra

120GB TCSunbow SSD
Corsair CX550
Fractal Design Define S

Current project-ey plans:

Spoiler

Xeon X5670 - Cryorig H5 Universal

EVGA X58 Classified SLI 4-Way
24GB (3x8) HyperX Fury DDR3 in Red - 1600Mhz CL9/OCed to ~2100Mhz CL10
EVGA 1050 Ti FTW

120GB ADATA SU800
EVGA 1000W G3
Corsair Air 540

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
18 minutes ago, Zando Bob said:

Why? They still perform just fine (also would the X299 lads count as refreshes of Nehalem? IIRC they use some mesh thing, not ringbus).

They are hot,inefficient and reached the limit of how much they can be improved,

X299 CPUs are based on Sky Lake,which is based on Nehalem too.

The improvements introduced with Kaby Lake limit the core count to 8,

so to get core count higher than 8 Intel simply used Sky Lake based design,Sky Lake has a limit of 28 cores,

And the new Cascade Lake-X is based on Sky Lake-X,I wonder if Cascade Lake-X has better IPC than Kaby Lake.


A PC Enthusiast since 2011
AMD Ryzen 5 2600@4GHz | GIGABYTE GTX 1660 GAMING OC @ Core 2040MHz Memory 5000MHz
Cinebench R15: 1382cb | Unigine Superposition 1080p Extreme: 3439
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×