Ohh yah, I wouldn't fault him for it honestly(though apparently he doesn't do it). I just thought it was kind of odd.
Lol, a lot of people fall into this. Just because you have money to throw away doesn't mean you won't save a penny wherever humanly possible.
Have you not seen the many many ways company's/those with wealth cheat the system to save a nickel?
Ohh yah, I wouldn't fault him for it honestly(though apparently he doesn't do it). I just thought it was kind of odd.
Those that want more cores/Threads than what Intel S Series (Socket 1151 and future) will offer, will opt for the iGPU-less ZEN up to 8x Cores 16x Threads.
edit: Im only talking about Desktop Socket AM4.
But aren't those people that need more cores/threads the crowd targeted by intel's HEDT platform anyway? I can see it myself, 6700k is not enough for what I am planning to do, so it will either be broadwell-E or Zen.
You might be right, if AMD wants to add cores or iGPU performance w/o adding their already researched L4 HBM cache to mitigate the 2 mem channel bandwidth bottleneck.It will also be just as limited with dual channel. This should tell you a lot about its actual performance.
And I see AMD is essentially going to be the pro bono company again. Meaning Zen wont have any impact on their negative income.
You just marketed Zen CPU and APU as the same failures the current CPU and APUs are.
It will also be just as limited with dual channel. This should tell you a lot about its actual performance.
One expects that Raven Ridge will have some HBM2 going for it.
My view: The FP performance for most legacy codes should be OK. HPC on CPU cores will be behind Intel. Server code does a lot of integer and memory stuff. For integer -> 4 ALUs, for memory -> improved cache subsystem and SMT.So according to you basically in terms of raw performance it's a very long shot, and in terms of efficiency they do have a shot because of the trade offs Intel made in terms of FP performance. Still doesn't put AMD in a good place on the server market, does it?
From what you are saying here they will not be able to get much, if anything on servers but at least will move to being badly beaten on desktop, an improvement from the utterly ruinous situation they are now.
Really, Zen as a product family is looking more and more like Bulldozer for me. Server optimized IP being sold on the consumer market, but at least this time they are not going against fundamental markets trends (efficiency), meaning that it won't be such an unmitigated failure.
Also I don't remember seeing complaints about dual channel in the ASRock X99E-ITX reviews I read.
And in both cases you seem to forget about power. Let's assume, AMD only achieves HSW integer and IB FP performance per clock. If thanks to a smaller core and lower static power they might manage to do that for example at 3/5 (FP) to 4/5 (int) the power of a SB core doing the same tasks. That means with lots of server threads, they could stay at higher clocks at the same TDP budgets.
Lol, ABWX claims to know about Intel's manufacturing processes, yet doesn't even know their name.
Priceless.
It's Paul Demone's fault that AMD decided to name one of their processors after an International Harvester product? An informed author, such as Paul Demone, would be remiss to write an article about an upcoming CPU named after a tractor company's product, and not mention it.I remember shortly before P4 launched, Paul Demone called K7 a tractor.
Intel current HEDT platform (socket 2011-V3) is very expensive and all of the CPUs are at 140W TDP with Quad Memory Channel.
AM4 platform will be much cheaper due to dual memory and 95W TDP ZEN CPUs and APUs.
You might also want to have a look at your signature.
I remember shortly before P4 launched, Paul Demone called K7 a tractor.
You see people sometimes makes mistakes. The people that say something unlike all your post where you add nothing.
What's your point here?
That people who are cluless use cluless arguments as well, i mean, who needs Intel s denomination of a process to know if it s good or not when the voltage of the CPU provide all the necessary info..
It s telling about the intellectual poorness of some "commentators" that should better keep mum that displaying evEN more incompetence about processes...
Whatever you say, Abwx.
At this point, if you're pirating TV shows/Movies when it's so easy to watch them on Hulu/Netflix/etc. then really, you never were going to accept the traditional way media is disseminated.
Piracy paved the way for realizing that media needed to be easier to obtain in order for people to purchase it again.
Laws of physics are what they are, whatever the saying of the fanboizs, a transistor A that need 1.1x higher voltage than a transistor B to switch at a same frequency will have inherently 1.21x higher power comsumption, and that s the ratio between GF s and Intel s process used for BDW.
It could be even worse than that as SKL seems to necessitate more voltage than BDW although this could be due to high dispersion of the process, but whatever AMD will not be handicapped by a less efficient process, to the contrary, up to 3GHz+ they could have the upper hand independently of the uarch efficency.
Whatever you say, Abwx.
I should point out that you tried to sell the idea that 14nm was a regression from 22nm when this was clearly false, and you have been trying to sell the notion that Intel's products are actually worse than AMD's, when this is also clearly false.