Dunno why you care so much. He could be right. You could be right. Only way to find out is to wait and see. I don't understand your bitterness over his refusal to agree with you.
Dunno why you care so much. He could be right. You could be right. Only way to find out is to wait and see. I don't understand your bitterness over his refusal to agree with you.Agreed? or would you rather change the terms.
He could absolutely be right, the issue is he makes these assumptions through reasoning so poor that they could be considered lies. Look at the original post he made which started this entire thing:Dunno why you care so much. He could be right. You could be right. Only way to find out is to wait and see. I don't understand your bitterness over his refusal to agree with you.
Intel doesn't use N4 they use N5. N4 wafers aren't 20k based on toms hardware they are 18k$ according to his own article he later linked. N7 prices aren't 9,500 according to Tom's hardware they are 10k, and you cannot use N7 prices for N6. Through multiple days of arguing he still holds that N5 wafers are undoubtedly at least 18K and will be closer to 20k in 2025 and refuses to acknowledge even the faintest possibility that BMG isn't actively losing Intel money for every card they produce. He also continuously refuses to acknowledge that N5 and N4 are separate nodes that are priced separately by TSMC. He uses yields here as if they are likely to be a significant cost increase, but based on what? Aren't yields for these more mature nodes relatively good, and even the larger BMG die isn't at such a large size that its yields will be significantly worse than the rx 7600 especially when you add in the fact that the B580 is less dense of a design than typical N5 devices.It's even worse than it looks based on size - N4 wafers that Intel uses are priced at $20k whereas N7/6 are $9500 (Tom's Hardware estimates), plus yields will be different.
No thank you, one silly wager is enough, plus if Intel cancels BMG next year that would almost certainly mean no Celestial either, in which case you'll have to self delete from here, so no more any talk anyway.so let's make another bet on top of our celestial bet
MLID's (who might deserve some of the flak he's getting, but still has a better track record than many other rumor mills, including some exclusives that turned out to be correct, like the Zen5 IPC) alleged sources at Intel are saying they'll only produce the absolute minimum they have to to keep up appearances (because they're really losing money per card sold), but will trickle that low volume out over time instead of selling it all in one go.If Intel effectively or outright cancels BMG in the first 9 months of 2025 (no more sales)
I really wouldn't put much stock into MLID info, I mean he's the same guy that claimed arrow lake would bring +40% higher single core performance and 25% ipc for lion cove, not even joking this is word for word. Also all this flak he's getting has been 10x worse for battlemage to the point where he's had to go to the comments and defend himself in a lot of his videos covering it. I wouldn't really trust him to be unbiased when it comes to battlemage even if he actually had connections with reputable sources. Also he's literally said this same no volume given to retailers thing for multiple cards from Nvidia and AMD in the past and even if he was right about those cards at launch day, they ended up being shelves and have continued to be produced for the majority of their product cycle. Watching his video, I think I'm starting to understand where so many people here get the idea that Intel is selling its cards at a loss. Seems like we got some MLID patreon subs here.MLID's (who might deserve some of the flak he's getting, but still has a better track record than many other rumor mills, including some exclusives that turned out to be correct, like the Zen5 IPC) alleged sources at Intel are saying they'll only produce the absolute minimum they have to to keep up appearances (because they're really losing money per card sold), but will trickle that low volume out over time instead of selling it all in one go.
So assuming that info might have some substance to it, nobody should risk taking that bet, even if they thought you're otherwise wrong...
And what's your Googling coming up with, have you got some alternative sources contradicting what I have offered?
So far it appears you've got squat whereas I've provided the best currently freely available.
It definitely has high overhead. People with Zen 1/2 systems say it performs quite a bit lower in the Intel ARC reddit. One guy upgraded it to Zen 3 X3D and it improved a lot.And if it is anything like Alchemist, CPU overhead is higher than even Nvidia.
It definitely has high overhead. People with Zen 1/2 systems say it performs quite a bit lower in the Intel ARC reddit. One guy upgraded it to Zen 3 X3D and it improved a lot.
It's clear from 1080p tests and relative standing against A770 if anything the overhead is worse.
This is why I keep wondering if they can pull out a driver that puts out 10% general performance improvement in 1080p. The card definitely improved a lot on both perf/watt and perf/mm2 ISO-node but some expectations didn't pan out like UE5 performance and 1080p.
If the driver overhead is high with B580, then B770 is going to become critical.
All source links that I've provided are from quick "Googling", I've even provided keywords for Googling to find them.You didn't actually present any evidence from your "Googling" that I'm aware of.
Wondering if this might be something related to resizable BAR, I think Intel's review guide said to use it (think I saw somewhere that Intel said it was required even?).
You aren't going to get 20%, except at unplayable 4K settings. 10-12% is more realistic and you'd be right at 4060 Ti 8GB. A770 is not 33% ahead of A580 for the same reason.Who at Intel was the mastermind behind this genious move to cancel the 24- core 12GB version ?
It would look so much better even at 329$ maybe streach it to 349$. They would deff profit on this vs b580 net-zero
It doesn't make it run faster... It is only relative. The competition has less memory bandwidth with fewer TMU and ROPs so they fall off more rapidly.More pixels should strain their GPUs, not make them run faster.
no, Intel literally just has more FF and more membw on G21.More pixels should strain their GPUs, not make them run faster. Seems the occupancy and scheduling stuff in their architecture is fundamentally broken or just more geared towards compute
It's not that higher resolutions make their GPUs faster. They seem to have more driver overhead. Which means at they run into CPU bottlenecks easier than Nvidia or Radeon GPUs. Lower resolutions are more CPU bottlenecked than higher resolutions are.It's kinda weird the architecture design choice they have gone with. More pixels should strain their GPUs, not make them run faster. Seems the occupancy and scheduling stuff in their architecture is fundamentally broken or just more geared towards compute, which makes sense since Raja seems to be a compute nut.
I wonder if they can undo Raja's damage in Celestial or if it will take one more gen to de-Raja their GPU.
No, it's a driver-related bottleneck, which shows as being "CPU limited". In higher resolutions it doesn't matter as much.It doesn't make it run faster... It is only relative. The competition has less memory bandwidth with fewer TMU and ROPs so they fall off more rapidly.
Nvidia moved to driver based scheduling few generations ago and Intel did the same with the Iris Xe generation. Plus, Nvidia is much better at drivers.It's not that higher resolutions make their GPUs faster. They seem to have more driver overhead. Which means at they run into CPU bottlenecks easier than Nvidia or Radeon GPUs. Lower resolutions are more CPU bottlenecked than higher resolutions are.
My estimate was 12%-20% 65-69 fps over b580. With only 4 more cores same phys/bus/ram/cooler/board i doubt it would be much more then 20-30$ over b580.You aren't going to get 20%, except at unplayable 4K settings. 10-12% is more realistic and you'd be right at 4060 Ti 8GB. A770 is not 33% ahead of A580 for the same reason.
And we don't know how much money they are losing/making per unit. Only that guy that seems to want to derail the thread conclusively believes this.
Possible it's an older BIOS with no support for Ryzen 5000.Obviously no CMOS to reset as no BIOS settings yet.