I will update this OP later. Check out the linked article.
https://www.extremetech.com/computi...iracy-slow-cpu-advances-kill-frequency-boosts
https://www.extremetech.com/computi...iracy-slow-cpu-advances-kill-frequency-boosts
Krzanich then gave a rough timeline of events, including secret pacts between Intel and IBM, mutual agreements between itself and ARM that killed the early “smartbook” concept but led to Intel’s withdrawal from the mobile market, and AMD’s disastrous attempt to buck this shadowed conspiracy arrangement and go it alone. He chuckled, recounting how Intel funneled hundreds of millions of dollars in secret payments to GlobalFoundries and the Mubadala Development Company, ensuring that AMD’s fab partner was actually responsible for sabotaging the entire Bulldozer product family. That move, by the way, was payback for AMD’s counter-espionage that savagedItanium and the IA-64 instruction set by paying Microsoft billions to promote the false notion that AMD64 was a superior architecture.
I bet they waited on purpose.A bit late in the day for an April 1st's joke...
Well, it's already GMT 20:00 by me.
AMD upcoming vega(RX 590 maybe) 650 GFLOPS rumored double precision
12,000+ Rumored GFLOPS single precision.
who says Moore's law law is dead? Intel is simply being lazy because of AMD's non competitiveness. In the competitive gpu market, slicon is still improving at the speed of moore's law
I doubt it is a conspiracy. the problem is non competitive market and a consumer detrimental monopoly
The article isn't that funny, but I did appreciate the slide:
You'll be surprised to hear that a Celeron G540 2.5GHz Sandy Bridge can still be ordered today for new POS register systems. I thought it's a joke at first, but I'm able to purchase one new with September 2015 mfg. date at much lower cost than G1840.
So much for technological progress, but the G540 (not G3900 that we thought) is actually the entry-level 2017 LGA processor by Intel, using Haswell-die this time.
I missed the old days when a new CPU next year runs at a whopping 40% more performance than the processor of previous year at the same or less price tag. Now? People are using CPU from 5+ years ago because of lack of performance gains for the price. Who's still rocking sandy bridge here?
At home, Haswell and Phenom II.Who's still rocking sandy bridge here?
Dude I would not believe much these claims that CPUs are from new disassembled POS terminals. POS terminal is very expensive thing if every new unit damaged in shipping would be scrapped the company would go bankrupt in a month, broken part is replaced and machine is finally sold. I don't uderstand your desire to stockpile these processors other than collecting them.You'll be surprised to hear that a Celeron G540 2.5GHz Sandy Bridge can still be ordered today for new POS register systems. I thought it's a joke at first, but I'm able to purchase one new with September 2015 mfg. date at much lower cost than G1840.
So much for technological progress, but the G540 (not G3900 that we thought) is actually the entry-level 2017 LGA processor by Intel, using Haswell-die this time.
Most users are probably using sandies or other older CPUs, Core II, westmere, haswell, ivy bridge. It seems not many have upgraded to skylake or kaby lake.I missed the old days when a new CPU next year runs at a whopping 40% more performance than the processor of previous year at the same or less price tag. Now? People are using CPU from 5+ years ago because of lack of performance gains for the price. Who's still rocking sandy bridge here?
People are using CPU from 5+ years ago because of lack of performance gains for the price. Who's still rocking sandy bridge here?
Guys this is an April Fools joke.
I think this topic is valid and current-trend. Intel CPUs haven't advanced much in performance gain since Sandy Bridge days. The only difference today is better built-in GPU, lower TDP power consumption, lower nm size, and, of course, higher price.Indeed. Can we lock this thread now? It's been three days . . .
Oh no, it's totally because lack of competition than anything else. Apple's A10 ARM cyclone is 40% higher performance than its predecessor A9. If you look at the geekbench single core, A10 @2.2 ghz literally scores the same as a 2.8 ghz turbo i5 6200u. A9 itself is a 50% improvement over the A8. This makes intel's yearly 5% increase sound ridiculous. We consumers suffer the most and to add insult to injury, their top line extreme processor is $1700, a 70% price increase compare to the extreme processor of the past few years. It's all down to lack of competition.Progress being slower due to lack of competition might be true, but comparing it to GPU advances are stupid.
GPUs progress faster because its not as general purpose as CPUs are. It's harder to improve everything than on more specific tasks. Even now, "GPGPU" aims at extremely parallel applications which isn't everything.
Question would be, is it really needed? What is that you can't do on first tier i5? People barely replace their rigs, there is nothing to run on them that would require higher performance. As for scientific, corporate, industrial applications where they need HEDT Xeons and i7s, we don't need to care really, those $1700 are spare change for these organizations. They have to move the profit margin from one segment to another, stagnant sales of new consumer CPUs was outweighed by more expensive Industrial CPUs, I mean they will buy them regardless of pricing so what's the hassle.Oh no, it's totally because lack of competition than anything else. Apple's A10 ARM cyclone is 40% higher performance than its predecessor A9. If you look at the geekbench single core, A10 @2.2 ghz literally scores the same as a 2.8 ghz turbo i5 6200u. A9 itself is a 50% improvement over the A8. This makes intel's yearly 5% increase sound ridiculous. We consumers suffer the most and to add insult to injury, their top line extreme processor is $1700, a 70% price increase compare to the extreme processor of the past few years. It's all down to lack of competition.
Question would be, is it really needed? What is that you can't do on first tier i5? People barely replace their rigs, there is nothing to run on them that would require higher performance. As for scientific, corporate, industrial applications where they need HEDT Xeons and i7s, we don't need to care really, those $1700 are spare change for these organizations. They have to move the profit margin from one segment to another, stagnant sales of new consumer CPUs was outweighed by more expensive Industrial CPUs, I mean they will buy them regardless of pricing so what's the hassle.
Maybe some may not agree but HEDT X86 market is not really price sensitive, those CPUs will be purchased wherever needed for any price asked, it's not that big money long term, nor problem, they do have money.
Three Haswells and an Ivy Bridge...Who's still rocking sandy bridge here?
It's what I wanted to believeNice April fools thread. I actually fell for it to be honest. It sounded perfectly reasonable to me and not in the least bit surprising.