[Videocardz] New 1080 Ti rumors

[tajoh111]

I think you are very wrong.

For the vast majority of mainstream i7 owners (quad cores) - they'd see absolutely no gain from a 6 or 8 core CPU, as the software they use doesn't show any benefit from additional cores.

Heck, even dual core CPU's are able to satisfy the needs of the majority. It's only in the last year or two that quad cores have been required for a good gaming experience in AAA titles.

If Intel had made the 6700k a 6 core CPU - it wouldn't have been capable of the same clock speeds, thus it would have actually been slower in most games/everyday tasks, as clock speed is still very important.

TLDR - More cores = less clockspeed. 90% of consumer software doesn't scale beyond 3-4 cores, thus 6 cores are pointless for the majority.

For those that do use software that's multi-threaded beyond 3-4 cores, there's the X99 lineup of 6, 8 and 10 cores, plus the xeon route of 22 cores, you just have to pay for them

You completely missed the point I was trying to make. Seriously, by a kilometer. It has to do with Nvidia and Intel margins and die size.

And on what you posted, developers would focus more on hex a core and up if the costs were ore reasonably, with quadcore starting at 200 vs the 400 they want for hexacores, developers have very little incentive for focusing beyond 6 cores. Also once you go out of games, and start multitasking the gains with extra cores is substantial.

 

[sirmo]

I think you are very wrong.

For the vast majority of mainstream i7 owners (quad cores) - they'd see absolutely no gain from a 6 or 8 core CPU, as the software they use doesn't show any benefit from additional cores.

Heck, even dual core CPU's are able to satisfy the needs of the majority. It's only in the last year or two that quad cores have been required for a good gaming experience in AAA titles.

If Intel had made the 6700k a 6 core CPU - it wouldn't have been capable of the same clock speeds, thus it would have actually been slower in most games/everyday tasks, as clock speed is still very important.

TLDR - More cores = less clockspeed. 90% of consumer software doesn't scale beyond 3-4 cores, thus 6 cores are pointless for the majority.

For those that do use software that's multi-threaded beyond 3-4 cores, there's the X99 lineup of 6, 8 and 10 cores, plus the xeon route of 22 cores, you just have to pay for them

I only game about 10% of my time on the computer. Pretty much everything I use benefits immensely from more cores. A lot of people edit videos as well.. where more cores is a big help. 4 cores I feel are soon about to become like dual cores. Fine for most stuff, but less than optimal.

 

[stahlhart]

Nice job keeping this one on topic.
-- stahlhart