EPTComputer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread - Page 644
| Forum Index > Tech Support |
When using this resource, please read the opening post. The Tech Support forum regulars have helped create countless of desktop systems without any compensation. The least you can do is provide all of the information required for them to help you properly. | ||
|
riotjune
United States3394 Posts
| ||
|
Shield
Bulgaria4824 Posts
 Edit: I'm wondering if I should upgrade my old Core 2 Quad PC... I only use it like a month per year when I'm on holiday... :D In the meantime, I just use my i7-5820K CPU. It definitely makes sense to upgrade the other PC, but I'm just trying to justify it financially and it'll definitely be on a budget. | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20344 Posts
| ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20344 Posts
Should kill intel's enthusiast platform overnight with that price&perf 6c12t near i5 price too  | ||
|
bluegarfield
Singapore1128 Posts
On February 22 2017 23:53 Cyro wrote: We have some Ryzen news atm, looking very strong as expected. Not sure about the lower end but they have an 8c16t unlocked CPU that is cheaper than a 7700k and not much weaker on ST. Should kill intel's enthusiast platform overnight with that price&perf 6c12t near i5 price too not sure how did they pull that off given the lackluster performance of their previous gen, and also this is kind of black box system benchmark, but look promising indeed. hopefully when it reach consumers' hand it can still perform similar to the engineering sample | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20344 Posts
not sure how did they pull that off given the lackluster performance of their previous gen It's not related to bullldozer at all and much closer to skylake design-wise. Intel also uses an absurd amount of the CPU die area for iGPU, over half of it IIRC. These Ryzen CPU's don't have an iGPU so they could fit twice as many cores on the same amount of silicon | ||
|
bluegarfield
Singapore1128 Posts
On February 23 2017 01:00 Cyro wrote: It's not related to bullldozer at all and much closer to skylake design-wise. Intel also uses an absurd amount of the CPU die area for iGPU, over half of it IIRC. These Ryzen CPU's don't have an iGPU so they could fit twice as many cores on the same amount of silicon yeah understood about the design part. actually what make me wondering is what took then so long to abandon the bulldozer ship. Anyway I forgot about the iGPU, so that's kind of make sense now. still, the 1800X seem comparable to the 6900K, at half the price, is quite insane, although it's almost half a year late also. Intel has made so much money during that time I guess they can just lower the price, but that also means admitting they have been charging absurd amount of money for those chips @Poopi: Thanks | ||
Poopi
France13018 Posts
On February 23 2017 01:12 bluegarfield wrote: yeah understood about the design part. actually what make me wondering is what took then so long to abandon the bulldozer ship. Anyway I forgot about the iGPU, so that's kind of make sense now It takes time for a new architecture to be ready. As for how they pulled that off, you can google Jim Keller for an answer! I just got my computer, still happy with my 7700k choice since I need the single thread performance for sc2. It'll probably take time before i7 drops off in price, if it does at all, and I would rather not wait so I'm ok with that too :D. If Ryzen delivers as much as it promises it would be cool, I could buy a dedicated streaming computer if needed for a decent price, or if I want to use highly threaded applications m, in a year or two. | ||
NovemberstOrm
Canada16217 Posts
i'm glad i actually waited before deciding to upgrade... looks pretty exciting! | ||
|
Shield
Bulgaria4824 Posts
| ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20344 Posts
I just got my computer, still happy with my 7700k choice since I need the single thread performance for sc2. Yeah, i'm probably not going to upgrade for a while (mostly playing games where the cores won't matter but the ST downgrade will hurt) but will take a very serious look at zen+ and what intel does in response. Twice as many cores with similar or slightly better per-core performance is a nice upgrade -- OCUK has Ryzen 8c16t unlocked CPU for preorder @£320 shipped, meanwhile 7700k costs £380 and has peaked closer to £420. | ||
|
semantics
10040 Posts
On February 23 2017 01:12 bluegarfield wrote: yeah understood about the design part. actually what make me wondering is what took then so long to abandon the bulldozer ship. Anyway I forgot about the iGPU, so that's kind of make sense now. still, the 1800X seem comparable to the 6900K, at half the price, is quite insane, although it's almost half a year late also. Intel has made so much money during that time I guess they can just lower the price, but that also means admitting they have been charging absurd amount of money for those chips @Poopi: Thanks Pretty much, we all know intel has been making money hand over first because AMD has been incompetent. It's why intel shareholders are so happy. That being said because of bulldozer i'll reluctant to buy until i see the 3rd party reviews. This could be good news maybe intel will start to sell cpu's only outside of their x99 enthusiast platform and cutting their prices quite a bit. Intel spends a ton of r&d i'm sure they will still come out on top but this could finally mean backs to the days of actual competition bringing down prices. | ||
|
FiWiFaKi
Canada9859 Posts
On February 23 2017 05:53 Cyro wrote: Yeah, i'm probably not going to upgrade for a while (mostly playing games where the cores won't matter but the ST downgrade will hurt) but will take a very serious look at zen+ and what intel does in response. Twice as many cores with similar or slightly better per-core performance is a nice upgrade -- OCUK has Ryzen 8c16t unlocked CPU for preorder @£320 shipped, meanwhile 7700k costs £380 and has peaked closer to £420. I don't see how you're extracting "slightly better per-core performance". In the presentation they showed that a 1800x has the same single core performance as a 6900k, which has significantly worse core performance than a 7700k. | ||
|
Poopi
France13018 Posts
On February 24 2017 06:32 FiWiFaKi wrote: I don't see how you're extracting "slightly better per-core performance". In the presentation they showed that a 1800x has the same single core performance as a 6900k, which has significantly worse core performance than a 7700k. I think he meant future zen iterations and future intel iterations will have better per-core performance than skylake/kabylake but with twice more cores since it'll probably the new standard for mainstream CPUs of ~350$ | ||
|
FiWiFaKi
Canada9859 Posts
On February 24 2017 06:55 Poopi wrote: I think he meant future zen iterations and future intel iterations will have better per-core performance than skylake/kabylake but with twice more cores since it'll probably the new standard for mainstream CPUs of ~350$ I see. I'm curious whether going above 4c8t doesn't improve performance on games doesn't happen because it's too difficult to parallelize those tasks, or if it's because the developers haven't had a reason, since there weren't many consumer level CPU's that could utilize them. | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20344 Posts
On February 24 2017 07:07 FiWiFaKi wrote: I see. I'm curious whether going above 4c8t doesn't improve performance on games doesn't happen because it's too difficult to parallelize those tasks, or if it's because the developers haven't had a reason, since there weren't many consumer level CPU's that could utilize them. It's largely due to parallelization issues. DX12 for example put a huge focus on it but scales okay to 6 threads and then gets almost no benefit beyond that; dx11 is a lot worse. Vulkan hasn't taken off yet. | ||
|
semantics
10040 Posts
Just remember developers don't really care to do the level of optimization that DX12 requires, they could barely bother to run games on multiple cores awhile back. When they did they maybe just split up things like all physics on one core, all sound on another core etc etc. Basically just splitting up the easy threads not really doing any dirty work. | ||
|
Shield
Bulgaria4824 Posts
On February 24 2017 07:07 FiWiFaKi wrote: I see. I'm curious whether going above 4c8t doesn't improve performance on games doesn't happen because it's too difficult to parallelize those tasks, or if it's because the developers haven't had a reason, since there weren't many consumer level CPU's that could utilize them. If you stream and do something in the background, then 4 cores shouldn't be your limit. I have i7-5820K and there's no game that makes me change CPU. I'm sure someone will say SC2, but i7-5820K runs perfectly fine for my needs. | ||
|
NovemberstOrm
Canada16217 Posts
http://www.ebay.ca/itm/Intel-Core-i7-6700K-Skylake-Quad-Core-4-0-GHz-LGA-1151-91W-BX80662I76700K-Deskto-/201444932989?hash=item2ee70dbd7d:g:LWoAAOSwWnFWBXIs | ||
|
Shield
Bulgaria4824 Posts
My PC is old too (maybe Core 2 Quad Q6600, DDR2 RAM, NVIDIA GT 8600). I don't know if I'll upgrade PC soon because I barely use it, which is when I visit my parents. Regardless, do you think it'll be a good idea to only upgrade monitor so it's easier on eyes? I suppose modern monitors are better for eyes than 2006-2007 monitors. | ||
| ||
