How will the 3950x hold in 2030?

[Windows95]

Its a start of a decade and 3950x is kicking ass. How will it stand vs whatever top of the line desktop CPU is by 2030?

 

What was the 3950x equivalent by 2010 by comparation? will the progress be at the same rate?

[glenalz81]

Just ordered a crystal ball from Wish, i'll update once it arrives.

 

 

Seriously though, not sure maybe the 980 X of yesteryear,  still not the worst CPU today. Think Moores Law suggests double the amount of transistors every 2 years.

 

[Windows95]

2 minutes ago, glenalz81 said:

Just ordered a crystal ball from Wish, i'll update once it arrives.

 

 

Seriously though, not sure maybe the 980 X of yesteryear,  still not the worst CPU today. Think Moores Law suggests double the amount of transistors every 2 years.

 

but does moores law still apply

[Pasi123]

10 year old X58 LGA1366 6/12t CPU's like the i7-980X and Xeons are still pretty good for most things. When overclocked they are really similar to a Ryzen 5 1600.

It's hard to say how much CPUs will change in the next 10 years. In 2010-2017 most CPU's were still 4c/4t and 4c/8t (except HEDT X58/X79/X99)

[PianoPlayer88Key]

I feel like progress in CPUs stagnated between about 2011 to 2016 or so.

 

I hope the next 10 years is more like 1990 to 2000 or so, not slow like the last 10 years.

 

In the spoiler are a couple local (San Diego, CA, USA) computer magazine ads, one from December 1990 and the other from March 2001. 

Spoiler

The one I had from 2000 was from January, and Dec 1990 is the oldest I currently have from that magazine series.  I used to have some from back to 1987, but apparently have lost them.

 

 

1990 (Dec 12):

Spoiler

 

 

2001 (Mar 9):

Spoiler

 

 

 

I'd actually like to see significant progress in less time than that, like maybe 5 years or so.

 

If, for example, a Celeron G9920Y or Athlon 9000GY doesn't completely wipe the floor with 8 Xeon Platinum 8380s or Epyc 7743s (or whatever they're called), I think I'll be quite disappointed.

 

 

I currently have an i7-4790K (paid ~$330 in January 2015) in my desktop.  It took about 4 DAYS! to transcode a 4-minute video to H.265 4K in Handbrake in one test I did a while ago. 

Spoiler

(Yes, I used max settings, like quality 0, placebo, all frames as keyframes, etc, kind of like maxing out GTA V so it uses 9GB VRAM at 1920x1080 - and if yours is only using a fraction of that VRAM maxed out, go into the advanced graphics settings and set frame scaling to 5/2 or 2.5x.  I wonder if that would be a situation where a Quadro with its copious VRAM would be needed to max out that game in 4K...)

 

I want my next CPU at the same price to do that same transcode at least as fast as my 4790K encodes audio to 320kbps mp3.  (Encoding 2 hours of audio took about 2 minutes, using max quality settings here too.)

 

I'm planning on switching to Ryzen (or maybe Threadripper or Epyc since I need more PCIe lanes & RAM) when DDR5 and the next socket come out, or the Black Friday after that.

 

 

 

I'd REALLY like the CPU manufacturers / designers to quickly catch up to where we would be if the pace in the 1990s or thereabouts had never slowed down.

Spoiler

 

I'd be okay with waiting longer per generation, like 3 or 4 years or whatever the pace used to be in the 1980s, if that means we'd have huge per-generation gains, and the new lowest-end Athlon or Celeron-Y would be faster than the previous flagship Xeon or Epyc.

 

In the meantime, at least have no overlap between families in the same generation.  For example, a Rocket / Tiger Lake / 11000 series Core i7-Y mobile part should be faster & more feature rich than a same-generation Core i5-K or Xeon LGA part.

 

 

 

[Windows95]

On 2/15/2020 at 10:44 AM, PianoPlayer88Key said:

I feel like progress in CPUs stagnated between about 2011 to 2016 or so.

 

I hope the next 10 years is more like 1990 to 2000 or so, not slow like the last 10 years.

 

In the spoiler are a couple local (San Diego, CA, USA) computer magazine ads, one from December 1990 and the other from March 2001. 

  Hide contents

The one I had from 2000 was from January, and Dec 1990 is the oldest I currently have from that magazine series.  I used to have some from back to 1987, but apparently have lost them.

 

 

1990 (Dec 12):

  Hide contents

 

 

2001 (Mar 9):

  Hide contents

 

 

 

I'd actually like to see significant progress in less time than that, like maybe 5 years or so.

 

If, for example, a Celeron G9920Y or Athlon 9000GY doesn't completely wipe the floor with 8 Xeon Platinum 8380s or Epyc 7743s (or whatever they're called), I think I'll be quite disappointed.

 

 

I currently have an i7-4790K (paid ~$330 in January 2015) in my desktop.  It took about 4 DAYS! to transcode a 4-minute video to H.265 4K in Handbrake in one test I did a while ago. 

  Hide contents

(Yes, I used max settings, like quality 0, placebo, all frames as keyframes, etc, kind of like maxing out GTA V so it uses 9GB VRAM at 1920x1080 - and if yours is only using a fraction of that VRAM maxed out, go into the advanced graphics settings and set frame scaling to 5/2 or 2.5x.  I wonder if that would be a situation where a Quadro with its copious VRAM would be needed to max out that game in 4K...)

 

I want my next CPU at the same price to do that same transcode at least as fast as my 4790K encodes audio to 320kbps mp3.  (Encoding 2 hours of audio took about 2 minutes, using max quality settings here too.)

 

I'm planning on switching to Ryzen (or maybe Threadripper or Epyc since I need more PCIe lanes & RAM) when DDR5 and the next socket come out, or the Black Friday after that.

 

 

 

I'd REALLY like the CPU manufacturers / designers to quickly catch up to where we would be if the pace in the 1990s or thereabouts had never slowed down.

  Hide contents

 

I'd be okay with waiting longer per generation, like 3 or 4 years or whatever the pace used to be in the 1980s, if that means we'd have huge per-generation gains, and the new lowest-end Athlon or Celeron-Y would be faster than the previous flagship Xeon or Epyc.

 

In the meantime, at least have no overlap between families in the same generation.  For example, a Rocket / Tiger Lake / 11000 series Core i7-Y mobile part should be faster & more feature rich than a same-generation Core i5-K or Xeon LGA part.

 

 

 

i was born in 1990 and and 1990 to 2000 was crazy, then 2000 to 2010 also pretty good, but 2010 to 2020 pretty lame tbh

 

doom compared to quake 3 in 1999 is huge change, those times are over

 

i hope vr is finally good but gpus are too slow nowadays for 120fps in vr for 120hz in index valve for instance