Intel Core i9 Skylake - E clocks no higher than Broadwell - E

[cj09beira]

1 minute ago, TidaLWaveZ said:

 

They won't suffer because even if X299 is a complete failure and every penny put into it were lost, Intel would only have lost a small percentage of total worth, and that small percentage to Intel is probably AMD's total net worth.

 

I am however glad that you used the example you did, because in 1997 Apple was going to go bankrupt but they were bailed out by a $150 million investment from another competing company you may have heard of.

my point is that, its not only the x299 that its at risk, the entire product stack is under attack, and the attack seems (to me at least) to be stronger where intel makes most money: the server market, 

it seems to me that if they don't react well they might loose a lot of market share 

[mynameisjuan]

1 minute ago, cj09beira said:

my point is that, its not only the x299 that its at risk, the entire product stack is under attack, and the attack seems (to me at least) to be stronger where intel makes most money: the server market, 

it seems to me that if they don't react well they might loose a lot of market share 

That is the problem. They are focusing so hard at keeping the new i9s from digging into their Xeon profits that they are destroying their own image. I get it, you dont want your HEDT from being better than your workstation chips, but it they are then who cares? Come out with better Xeons down the road. 

 

But pricing i9s at stupid prices and limiting their features with a cost is not the way to win over customers. 

[cj09beira]

Just now, mynameisjuan said:

That is the problem. They are focusing so hard at keeping the new i9s from digging into their Xeon profits that they are destroying their own image. I get it, you dont want your HEDT from being better than your workstation chips, but it they are then who cares? Come out with better Xeons down the road. 

 

But pricing i9s at stupid prices and limiting their features with a cost is not the way to win over customers. 

especially with ryzen's price tag

[Phate.exe]

8 hours ago, Valentyn said:

I don't personally know a single person that when they play games closes down everything, and kills processes to only have the game open.

I used to do that before I had a multicore system (I went from a single core Athlon64 Newcastle to my Phenom II X6) if I was really scraping for performance, but normally I just launch the game.  I bought a 1600X because I want to never have to worry about background processes again.  If windows 10 wants to eat a couple gigs of ram and 2 processor threads, I literally don't care.

 

Even if I'm overclocking/benching I'll leave everything open in the background until I'm near a limit, then close it when I want my final top score.

[VerticalDiscussions]

On 2017-6-6 at 10:11 PM, Dabombinable said:

-snip-

What is FIVR?

[79wjd]

14 minutes ago, VerticalDiscussions said:

What is FIVR?

Fully integrated voltage regulator. So a CPU with FIVR requires a much less sophisticated power delivery system on the board because the chip handles it rather than a voltage regulation system on the board itself.

[Dabombinable]

10 minutes ago, VerticalDiscussions said:

What is FIVR?

Fully Integrated Voltage Regulator. Its not that common for it to be integrated onto the CPU. As far as I can remember, only Intel Overdrive CPU+Haswell+Broadwell have had one.

[CoolMarquis97]

What is intel thinking ?!

[Taf the Ghost]

15 hours ago, The Benjamins said:

I agree to this, the 7700k seems better in perfect scenarios in those test but I always have more then 50+ tabs open in chrome and will have a things running in the background (teamspeak, Discord, Remote desktop, plex, ect.)

 

Thats why I want my next CPU to be 8+ cores. (would like a TR build)

 

15 hours ago, Valentyn said:

My system never "only" has a game playing on a single monitor. I think a 7700K would start chugging and die if it tried my normal workload.

 

I often do Mythic Raiding in WoW some nights, while encoding a project in Premiere Pro, and recording the WoW raid at the same time as having a crap loads of chrome tabs open, and discord for voice.

 

I have 36% CPU, and 36% memory usage ( out of 32GB ) right now, simply with WoW open and chrome.

 

And WoW is one of the lightest games to run there is. I can't imagine playing Overwatch, or Battlefield 1 multiplayer on my system while encoding and all those chrome tabs.

 

I don't personally know a single person that when they play games closes down everything, and kills processes to only have the game open.

 

 

11 hours ago, cj09beira said:

as a fellow multitasker, chrome a game and the gpu also mining, i support the idea that we the people need this kind of test !

Haha, glad to know I'm not the only one. Most people I know are running at least 2 browsers or 20+ tabs just resting.  It's not 1995 where you have to close everything to play a game. And that's before dealing with extra programs running. 

 

I don't have a problem with "clean as possible" testing, as it gives us a baseline of what can be done.  However, that isn't a basis upon which to give actual buying or performance results. It's also why a high-clocking 6c CPU is probably the best "buy" right now. Games on Nvidia literally can't use much of the extra 2 cores, so, as long as the Windows Scheduler isn't being stupid, other programs won't effect your game.  (This actually makes Coffee Lake potentially super good.)