-
[HWU] The Evolution of CPU Gaming Performance, AMD vs. Intel
-
Intel really hit a snag with their 10nm delays and tying their chip designs to a specific process node. Core counts aside they wanted to be at around about Rocket Lake performance back during 8th gen, but not having a fallback plan in case their lithography didn't pull through put an end to that.
AMD OTOH being fabless were naturally used to being flexible about manufacturing on different processes, and using two different nodes for the core and I/O dies was truthfully rather genius that let them have their cake (TSMC) and eat it too (GloFo wafer agreement).
ID: hf3tn3mID: hf42jdyPersonally I think the "snag" was intentional though.
You think that having billions of dollars tied up in a fab that is producing nothing but failures for years on end only to finally being put to work when it's no longer cutting edge was part of Intel's evil plan to keep selling quad cores?
The ideas lurking in this sub sometimes astound me with their insight.
ID: hf58m9sWhat was intentional was them continuing with quad-cores across 22nm and 14nm. They had the technology for power-efficient 6 and 8-core desktop CPUs in 2008, but chose to keep serving us quad-cores until 2018 because they had no competition.
Skylake could've easily had an i7-6700K which was 8C/16T on desktop. In fact, that's all Coffee Lake was - the same Skylake architecture from 2015, but with 6 and later 8 cores.
They used their 10nm woes as an excuse to not ship higher core count desktop CPUs. It's only when Intel realised Zen was going to be good, that they started work on bolting another two cores onto the i7-7700K and calling it the i7-8700K.
ID: hf3v2t8I agree with you on this, especially since Skylake was actually a significant step up beyond Haswell/Broadwell that Krzanich probably felt ok sitting on it for a while.
We could say that Skylake saved Intel's butt coz if it hadn't been as good an architecture as it was the delays in manufacturing would have hurt them a lot more than it already has.
ID: hf4elg3That 4790k would probably go into a little home media server quite nicely. I believe that's the one with the big L4 cache?
-
That facial expression needs to not.
-
Timestamps: 00:00 - Welcome back to Hardware Unboxed 01:31 - Test System 02:29 - Rainbow Six Siege 06:45 - Assassin's Creed Valhalla 07:21 - Battlefield V 09:11 - F1 2020 10:22 - Hitman 2 11:28 - Horizon Zero Dawn 11:55 - Cyberpunk 2077 13:05 - Shadow of the Tomb Raider 13:52 - Watch Dogs Legion 14:31 - 9 Game Average 16:34 - Final Thoughts
-
I picked up a 1600AE for my HTPC back when they were $75 at Micro Center. I should've upgraded to the 3600 when they were $150 but I was anticipating a $200ish 5600 non-X that never came to be. Now I think it'll be years before I can afford a GPU that matches well with Ryzen 5000 series processors.
ID: hf4xt4sI had that same plan as well. Now I guess I'll just wait for Zen 3+ to launch and see what the prices of used Zen 3 CPUs on eBay look like.
-
[removed]
ID: hf3cxrq[removed]
引用元:https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/pztwhu/hwu_the_evolution_of_cpu_gaming_performance_amd/
Personally I think the "snag" was intentional though. Intel was perfectly okay with taking their sweet time. It's only when AMD actually started doing something that they fell under any modicum of time pressure. In a way I don't really blame Intel either, software demands have been increasing relatively slowly compared to the olden days. My 4790K lasted a good 7 years and is still completely usable even now.