Intel Coffee Lake/X & Cannon Lake PCH leaked

[sof006]

I'll have a decaf coffee lake please.

[patrickjp93]

7 hours ago, Sauron said:

That's not the point, "the mainstream" doesn't even take advantage of the high end quad cores properly. It just doesn't make sense to still have to shell out 300 bucks for those quad cores and have to buy a more expensive motherboard to access the hexas.

I'm pretty sure devs get quite a bit of flac if the software doesn't perform well.

Not half as much as Intel and AMD do.

[Sauron]

2 hours ago, patrickjp93 said:

Not half as much as Intel and AMD do.

Only because they share a monopoly. You can't buy desktop cpus from someone else, therefore if it's not good enough you can only complain.

[Mira Yurizaki]

I'm still going to argue that single-threaded performance is more important than cores for the "mainstream" user. You can only split "waiting person to press a key" so many ways before it becomes silly.

[patrickjp93]

3 hours ago, Sauron said:

Only because they share a monopoly. You can't buy desktop cpus from someone else, therefore if it's not good enough you can only complain.

Oh please, the base x86's patent is expired anyway, and it's not like AMD wouldn't sell licenses to base x86_64. They aren't a shared monopoly, and AMD is fiercely trying to compete.

[DELTAprime]

13 hours ago, M.Yurizaki said:

I'm still going to argue that single-threaded performance is more important than cores for the "mainstream" user. You can only split "waiting person to press a key" so many ways before it becomes silly.

Multicore and multithread is being used by many games these days. GTA V, Mafia III and Battlefield 1 all come to mind as multithreaded CPU hungry games. You can blame the consoles with their 8 core AMD APUs for it. single core performance is going away as a main concern.

[Thony]

Rip Cannonlake 7nm dream I was planning on upgrading to it but since it got delayed until 2019/20 Im not gonna wait. 

 

I like seeing 6core on Coffelake, might try that out. 

[Mira Yurizaki]

3 hours ago, DELTAprime said:

Multicore and multithread is being used by many games these days. GTA V, Mafia III and Battlefield 1 all come to mind as multithreaded CPU hungry games. You can blame the consoles with their 8 core AMD APUs for it. single core performance is going away as a main concern.

However I'd argue that PC gamers are not considered "mainstream" users, and the console gaming scene had nothing to do with it. The APUs in consoles use netbook class processors. Jaguar was more an SoC architecture in the likes of Intel's Atom. A Pentium Dual Core can outpace an AMD Jaguar easily.

 

Multithreading for games I would wager is a trickier business than rendering a video as well. Data is shared in games, requiring semaphores and synching. This kills multithreading performance.

 

I don't know if there's a game considered a "multithreading king", but I'm just going to pick Ashes of the Singularity since supposedly it has hundreds of entities that are actual entities, unlike Total War where they're kind of entities. But TechSpot and PCPer, and  showed an i3 can dance around an FX 8350

[NumLock21]

1 hour ago, M.Yurizaki said:

However I'd argue that PC gamers are not considered "mainstream" users, and the console gaming scene had nothing to do with it. The APUs in consoles use netbook class processors. Jaguar was more an SoC architecture in the likes of Intel's Atom. A Pentium Dual Core can outpace an AMD Jaguar easily.

 

Multithreading for games I would wager is a trickier business than rendering a video as well. Data is shared in games, requiring semaphores and synching. This kills multithreading performance.

 

I don't know if there's a game considered a "multithreading king", but I'm just going to pick Ashes of the Singularity since supposedly it has hundreds of entities that are actual entities, unlike Total War where they're kind of entities. But TechSpot and PCPer, and  showed an i3 can dance around an FX 8350

Excel is multi-thread too. MOAR COARS!

[Mira Yurizaki]

12 minutes ago, NumLock21 said:

Excel is multi-thread too. MOAR COARS!

If your sheet is large enough such that you need multi-cores to get any appreciable performance, I think you're doing it wrong.

 

But eh, I'm not an bean counter. And Excel has some antiquated restrictions that still boggle my mind.

[NumLock21]

8 minutes ago, M.Yurizaki said:

If your sheet is large enough such that you need multi-cores to get any appreciable performance, I think you're doing it wrong.

 

But eh, I'm not an bean counter. And Excel has some antiquated restrictions that still boggle my mind.

I don't use excel that much, sometimes. Just saying that even excel is multi-threaded. So your single thread is more important is outdated. Excel 2007 can support up to 1024 threads. And it's not doing something wrong. It's call moving forward, taking advantage of current technology.

[Mira Yurizaki]

8 minutes ago, NumLock21 said:

I don't use excel that much, sometimes. Just saying that even excel is multi-threaded. So your single thread is more important is outdated. Excel 2007 can support up to 1024 threads.

And Firefox spawns 100+ threads, but that doesn't mean it uses multiple cores effectively. Microsoft Word uses 18 threads, but feeding it into a Xeon 18-core won't make it run better than running it on a Core i3.  The fact is, Excel is an I/O bound program most of the time and the intense computational use cases are rare. It can use multiple cores, but it's not a strong argument that multiple cores is now king.

[NumLock21]

2 minutes ago, M.Yurizaki said:

And Firefox spawns 100+ threads, but that doesn't mean it uses multiple cores effectively. Microsoft Word uses 18 threads, but feeding it into a Xeon 18-core won't make it run better than running it on a Core i3.  The fact is, Excel is an I/O bound program most of the time and the intense computational use cases are rare. It can use multiple cores, but it's not a strong argument that multiple cores is now king.

Says single core is still king and yet you have Core i7 6700 quad core with HT

 

 

[Mira Yurizaki]

Just now, NumLock21 said:

Says single core is still king and yet you have Core i7 6700 quad core with HT

Because I play games and dabble in high performance applications from time to time?

 

People getting giddy on this subject bugs me because they just see numbers and go "well it obviously should be able to do this better" without digging deeper into the subject.

 

Do you know why programs like video encoding and file compression work amazingly well with multiple cores? Because the problem includes data sets that can easily be broken up and are independent of each other. With a large enough cache, you can reduce the memory bottleneck while the processor spends all of its time on part of the task in cache. If your problem can be broken up in that fashion, not only is parallelization stupid easy, but performance per core goes up.

 

Again, if cores were king, how come AMD's FX 8000 series isn't still kicking ass against Intel's CPUs? Because its single threaded performance sucks. Case in point:

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1340?vs=1783

[NumLock21]

1 minute ago, M.Yurizaki said:

Because I play games and dabble in high performance applications from time to time?

 

People getting giddy on this subject bugs me because they just see numbers and go "well it obviously should be able to do this better" without digging deeper into the subject.

 

Do you know why programs like video encoding and file compression work amazingly well with multiple cores? Because the problem includes data sets that can easily be broken up and are independent of each other. With a large enough cache, you can reduce the memory bottleneck while the processor spends all of its time on part of the task in cache. If your problem can be broken up in that fashion, not only is parallelization stupid easy, but performance per core goes up.

 

Again, if cores were king, how come AMD's FX 8000 series isn't still kicking ass against Intel's CPUs? Because its single threaded performance sucks. Case in point:

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1340?vs=1783

Don't give a damn about stupid numbers, pie charts, or bar graphs. It's time to accept that mult-core will one day take over single cores.

Single core king is dead!

Long live multi-core King!

MOAR COARS!!!!111!11

[Mira Yurizaki]

1 minute ago, NumLock21 said:

Don't give a damn about stupid numbers, pie charts, or bar graphs. It's time to accept that mult-core will one day take over single cores.

Single core king is dead!

Long live multi-core King!

MOAR COARS!!!!111!11

Okay, so we should be using quad core Atoms? That's fine for 99% of the world?

[NumLock21]

Just now, M.Yurizaki said:

Okay, so we should be using quad core Atoms? That's fine for 99% of the world?

No quad core Atoms are garbage, need something with more horsepower like Xeon PHI!

[Tech_Dreamer]

Coffee lake? that's a hipster mainstream by default!

[Mira Yurizaki]

3 minutes ago, NumLock21 said:

No quad core Atoms are garbage, need something with more horsepower like Xeon PHI!

Why are Atoms garbage? They have the same amount of cores as an i5.

[Jv2391]

On 11/19/2016 at 8:27 AM, SamStrecker said:

Coffee lake? Really?

They liked coffee way before anyone else. They are trying to just bring it back now. It's kind of the in thing now. /spoken in hipster

[Dackzy]

57 minutes ago, M.Yurizaki said:

Why are Atoms garbage? They have the same amount of cores as an i5.

because single core performance is shit.

[Mira Yurizaki]

23 minutes ago, Dackzy said:

because single core performance is shit.

But this guy said single core performance is stupid.

[Dackzy]

1 minute ago, M.Yurizaki said:

But this guy said single core performance is stupid.

you need good single core performance to get good multi core

[Mira Yurizaki]

Just now, Dackzy said:

you need good single core performance to get good multi core

Yeah, I was trying to convince them that but eh.

 

Too few people have dived into the topic well enough to know that multiple cores doesn't automagically mean better performance.

[Unhelpful]

2 hours ago, M.Yurizaki said:

If your sheet is large enough such that you need multi-cores to get any appreciable performance, I think you're doing it wrong.

 

But eh, I'm not an bean counter. And Excel has some antiquated restrictions that still boggle my mind.

Our power supply engineers would like a word with you