Windows 10: Intel should be very worried about AMD's Ryzen 7 processors

Page 15 of 18 FirstFirst ... 51314151617 ... LastLast
  1.    09 Mar 2017 #140

    bobad said: View Post
    Absolutely right, I love competition. Intel has been well ahead, and all they have to do is lay back and counter punch. If Ryzen is really good, AMD will force them to fight harder. Intel will soon wake up and re-take the lead in price/performance.
    Well, Intel's tick or tock is not coming until next year at least. I hear they are having problems wit 10 nano-meter tech which is their next goal.
      My ComputersSystem Spec

  2. essenbe's Avatar
    Posts : 11,130
    Windows 10 Pro and Windows 10 Pro Insider
       09 Mar 2017 #141

    CountMike said: View Post
    Well, Intel's tick or tock is not coming until next year at least. I hear they are having problems wit 10 nano-meter tech which is their next goal.
    Mike, I guess you missed this. Intel will release 8th-gen Coffee Lake chips this year - still 14nm

    To be released in the 2nd half of this year
    at least 1 6 Core chip for mainstream platform
    a 15% increase over Kaby Lake.
      My ComputersSystem Spec

  3.    09 Mar 2017 #142

    Intel seems very anti-progression when it comes to the consumer market and very quick to decide what they think people should have.

    Before AMD launched the athlon64 lineup, Intel claimed that there was no benefit to adding 64-bit capability. Now they've been reluctant to launch anything affordable with more than 4 cores. AMD will once again show them the way, even if they're not going to be the best as they were in the Athlon64 era.

    I can't help but wonder what the CPU market would be like if Nvidia or some other company could produce x86 CPUs.
      My ComputersSystem Spec

  4.    09 Mar 2017 #143

    vram said: View Post
    Before AMD launched the athlon64 lineup, Intel claimed that there was no benefit to adding 64-bit capability. Now they've been reluctant to launch anything affordable with more than 4 cores. AMD will once again show them the way, even if they're not going to be the best as they were in the Athlon64 era.
    Well I've always felt tech firms could put out more than they do. But why run the well dry quickly when you can gain more by slow dripping. In this instance AMD is merely forcing Intel to put out more sooner rather than later.
      My ComputerSystem Spec

  5. essenbe's Avatar
    Posts : 11,130
    Windows 10 Pro and Windows 10 Pro Insider
       09 Mar 2017 #144

    vram said: View Post
    Before AMD launched the athlon64 lineup, Intel claimed that there was no benefit to adding 64-bit capability. Now they've been reluctant to launch anything affordable with more than 4 cores. AMD will once again show them the way, even if they're not going to be the best as they were in the Athlon64 era.
    That's not totally true. A Kaby Lake i7-7700K cost $349 A 6 core i7-6800K cost $400. That's not an unreasonable difference in a 4 core and a 6 core CPU.
      My ComputersSystem Spec

  6.    09 Mar 2017 #145

    vram said: View Post
    Before AMD launched the athlon64 lineup, Intel claimed that there was no benefit to adding 64-bit capability. Now they've been reluctant to launch anything affordable with more than 4 cores. AMD will once again show them the way, even if they're not going to be the best as they were in the Athlon64 era.
    To be fair, there really was no benefit to 64-bit at the time. There were no OS's that could take advantage of it, and memory was significantly more expensive. Getting more than 4GB was out of reach of most people. Intel had the Itanium which was 64-bit, and it wasn't particularly popular even in its niche market.

    The real benefits of 64-bit (when it finally came with the athlon64 was with the added registers and instructions that improved performance, not so much the "64-bitness" of it. It wasn't until much later that > 4GB memory became reasonable.
      My ComputerSystem Spec

  7.    09 Mar 2017 #146

    essenbe said: View Post
    That's not totally true. A Kaby Lake i7-7700K cost $349 A 6 core i7-6800K cost $400. That's not an unreasonable difference in a 4 core and a 6 core CPU.
    The 6800k while only $400, runs on the enthusiast 2011-3 socket and those motherboards aren't the cheapest. Its not just the CPU that must be factored in, its the entire platform.

    LGA 2011-v3, Intel Motherboards, Motherboards, Components - Newegg.com

    AMD's 6-8 core CPUs will run on an average joe platform.

    Mystere said: View Post
    To be fair, there really was no benefit to 64-bit at the time. There were no OS's that could take advantage of it, and memory was significantly more expensive. Getting more than 4GB was out of reach of most people. Intel had the Itanium which was 64-bit, and it wasn't particularly popular even in its niche market.

    The real benefits of 64-bit (when it finally came with the athlon64 was with the added registers and instructions that improved performance, not so much the "64-bitness" of it. It wasn't until much later that > 4GB memory became reasonable.
    There were performance benefits in AMD's Athlon64 CPU at the time even without running more than 4GB of RAM or a 64-bit capable OS. I moved from and Northwood core P4 to and A64 and there was a noticeable difference in everyday tasks. The added registers were the direct result of having a full 64-bit architecture.

    Windows XP had a 64-bit variant at the time but it was actually Server 2003 at the core. I ran 32-bit XP on up to 7 at which time I moved to 64-bit.

    Even though it would take a few more years for users to see most of the benefits of 64-bit computing, I'd argue that if AMD had not gone 64-bit when it did, Intel would've stuck with 32-bit far longer and we wouldn't be as far along as a result.

    Just to clarify, I'm not an AMD fanboy. I'll go where the performance is. My main rig is an i5 6500 along with an RX480. My HTPC is an Phenom II x4 paired with a 1050Ti.
      My ComputersSystem Spec

  8.    09 Mar 2017 #147

    vram said: View Post
    The 6800k while only $400, runs on the enthusiast 2011-3 socket and those motherboards aren't the cheapest. Its not just the CPU that must be factored in, its the entire platform.
    I could pay just as much if not more for a Skylake board as I could for a Broadwell-E board. So that's not saying anything. That's not a valid argument. Sorry.

    You don't need all the added bells & whistles (which drives up the cost of MB's) to get the a CPU to run on it. You could just get a bare essentials board for say a hundred bucks and run any chip on it - whether it be a $1000 dollar chip or a $300 dollar chip.

    MB costs rise as features rise. The chip is prices are fixed at a given performance rating.
      My ComputerSystem Spec

  9.    09 Mar 2017 #148

    sygnus21 said: View Post
    I could pay just as much if not more for a Skylake board as I could for a Broadwell-E board. So that's not saying anything. That's not a valid argument. Sorry.
    Uh huh, but the point is, you don't have to pay the higher prices for a regular 1151 board, so yeah, it kinda is a valid argument. 2011-3 isn't a mainstream offering.
      My ComputersSystem Spec

  10.    09 Mar 2017 #149

    vram said: View Post
    AMD's 6-8 core CPUs will run on an average joe platform.
    And while doing so, will perform at an average Joe level. If you have specific software that takes advantage of multiple cores and threads...great. But many have average software which just doesn't excel in the multi core and multi thread level.
      My ComputerSystem Spec


 
Page 15 of 18 FirstFirst ... 51314151617 ... LastLast

Related Threads
Keep reading! MSI unleashes more than 30 new Kaby Lake and AMD Ryzen motherboards | PCWorld
Keep reading! AMD reveals an army of Ryzen PCs and AM4 motherboards | PCWorld See also: AMD Showcases High-Performance Ecosystem Ready for Ryzen™ Including PCs and AM4 Motherboards from Technology Partners
Source: Intel Atom Processor E3900 Series | Intel Newsroom See also: Intel Atom Processor E3900 Series
Read more: Intel launches 7th generation processors to push 4K UHD to the masses | ZDNet See also: 7th Gen Intel Core | Intel Newsroom New 7th Gen Intel Core Processor: Built for the Immersive Internet | Intel Newsroom
Read more: Intel launches 5th-generation 'Broadwell' processors | Windows Central
Our Sites
Site Links
About Us
Windows 10 Forums is an independent web site and has not been authorized, sponsored, or otherwise approved by Microsoft Corporation. "Windows 10" and related materials are trademarks of Microsoft Corp.

© Designer Media Ltd
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 21:32.
Find Us