hate these ads?, log in or register to hide them
Page 70 of 79 FirstFirst ... 206067686970717273 ... LastLast
Results 1,381 to 1,400 of 1572

Thread: Zekk Pacus' I am not good at naming these hardware thread, Feb '15

  1. #1381
    root's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 26, 2011
    Location
    The Camel Empire
    Posts
    2,931
    Quote Originally Posted by 56k Lagman View Post
    Aren't newer intel chips rated for 70C maximum? I know older Q6600/9550s could get quite hot with no problem but my current i5 was listed at a maximum load temperature of 70C from intels specs
    I found this:
    http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/answer...html#r14890994

    Standard ambient is 22C, upon which Intel's Thermal Specification "Tcase" is based. Tcase for your i7 5820K is 66C - http://ark.intel.com/products/82932/...up-to-3_60-GHz

    Tcase is CPU temperature, not Core temperature. Core temperature runs 5C higher than CPU temperature due to sensor location. Tcase +5 makes the corresponding Core temperature 71C. Throttle temperature is 100C.

    When you put it all together it looks like this:

    Standard Ambient = 22C
    Tcase (CPU temp) = 66C
    CPU / Core offset + 5C
    Tjunction (Core temp) = 71C
    Tj Max (Throttle temp) = 100C

    Mid-70's are fine for everyday real-world workloads.

    Maximum recommended core voltage for 22 nanometer processors with respect to "electromigration" is 1.300.
    The Rapier is my love boat
    ~lowsec smallscale pvp 'n stuff~

  2. #1382
    Cosmin's Avatar
    Join Date
    March 14, 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    5,221
    4930K came back from RMA. Apparently it's the motherboard that's fucked. GG.
    Guns make the news, science doesn't.
    Six shooters ruined PvP.
    What are you doing with your life?İDoomchinchilla 2015

  3. #1383
    Mallet Head Donor 56k Lagman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 5, 2011
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    4,335
    Who RMAs a cpu lmao

    Quote Originally Posted by Duckslayer View Post
    I should be home.now but I keep stopping to post. I'm in need of a mega poo. so much so that I'm tempted to leave slurry across one of these gardens and deal with the wiping later. gonna toss a coin

    phoneposting

  4. #1384
    Cosmin's Avatar
    Join Date
    March 14, 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    5,221
    I did and it was no questions asked warranty directly from Intel

    Symptoms showed RAM unable to run as before and the sticks are all healthy, so it was CPU or motherboard, guess which one is easier to remove from the whole mess.
    Guns make the news, science doesn't.
    Six shooters ruined PvP.
    What are you doing with your life?İDoomchinchilla 2015

  5. #1385
    theBlind's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    1,911
    So gather round children and let uncle Blind tell you the story about whether or not you should buy the new Ryzen processor.

    In order to understand that, we need to explain one thing first. Ryzen is a HUGE upset in the CPU market. Let me put this into perspective in some ways.
    First, let's try this view:
    For the better part of the last decade, there was only one viable CPU vendor for gamers, and that was Intel. Intel had a lineup of CPUs, the i3/i5/i7 line that were all more (i5/i7) or less (i3) relevant to performance seeking gamers.
    The usual advice was to get an i5 for gaming since they covered the nice middle ground between price and performance. Performance was always "good enough" (keep that in mind, we'll need that line later on)
    Since the Ryzen launch, the only Intel CPU that is still better for current games is the i7 7700K, the top of the line super high clockspeed i7 version. All other Intel CPUs are matched. We're talking about something like 10-15 relevant performance segment CPUs being relegated to the budget segment!
    That's one huge upset, isn't it?

    Let's try another view:
    The Ryzen launch currently has problems with software support. The architecture is different from what Intel build their 8 core CPUs like and as a result, Windows 10 doesn't know how to handle it properly. Also, the CPUs were pushed to market and mainboard manufacturers were scrambling to get their UEFIs up and running.
    Basically, Ryzen is 2x4 core CPUs on one chip and whenever Windows 10 moves a tread (something for the CPU to do) from one "core" to the "other", there's a huge performance penalty. Windows 10 does that all the time, btw.
    Reportedly there was an UEFI update a week before the official launch date that increased performance by 25%. Re-read that number. That's in the ballpark of the performance increase of the last several Intel CPU generations!
    On top of that, there are performance differences between motherboard vendors. That was a thing back in the olden days of the late 1990s and early 2000s but for the last 10 years or so, you bought your mainboard on features, not performance. This will probably also go away, but I'm mentioning it in order to further illustrate the huge upset that Ryzen created.
    Also, that Windows 10 issue I talked about above? Windows 7 doesn't have it (because 7 was build with different Intel CPU architectures in mind, those were much more like the current Ryzen architecture) and the performance gap between Win7 and Win10 is somewhere around 15%. This is fixable, by the way. And MS is already working on it.

    Now, you might have somewhat guessed it above, but of course current software (games is what we care about in this context of course) is optimized for Intel CPUs. Because Intel CPUs were the only competitive gaming CPUs over the better part of the last decade and of course almost everybody wants their games to run well, so they optimize. And they do it for the prevalent architecture, so Intel.
    Many of those games will not receive a Ryzen patch. Some might, but I'd guess most won't. So for old games, the current performance is what you'll get. That of course does not include performance increases because of better UEFI and better Windows support, those you will get for all games.

    So, now that we've got a decent overview of the current situation and why Ryzen is performing the way it does (remember that we're talking about Ryzen matching or outperforming all but the very very best Intel CPU!), here's my story for you if you want to buy a Ryzen CPU now.

    Don't buy now, wait for at least another 2 months.


    > But uncle Blind, that's a horrible story and telling us to wait is super boring advice! Surely you, with your knowledge and wisdom can show us a glimpse of the future to come? Please uncle Blind?

    Well then, let's try to take a glimpse into the future.

    Let me preface that with the disclaimer that I'll tell you what I think will happen. No guarantees.

    First, the performance level of Ryzen will ryse (top bants!) by at least about another 10-15% in practical situations. By then, it'll beat most Intel CPUs in price/performance and beat or match all but the 7700k in pure performance.
    The performance gamer Ryzen to get will be the 1700 since it's at the best point regarding price / performance.
    The r5 and r3 versions that will come out with 4 or 6 cores should be regarded as budget solutions and will probably be priced as such.
    The 6 core version will suffer from the same basic issues as the 8 core version (it'll still be two cores in different combinations). This might become the best midpoint between futureproof and budget, assuming something of a 200$-ish pricepoint.
    The 4 core version will be one to watch, if it clocks significantly higher.
    However, it will suffer from the same basic issue that the 7700K will suffer from and that is that games are already moving towards better utilization of multiple cores (8 specifically because the consoles have 8 cores) and real cores are simply better that logical cores though Simultaneous MultiThreading (SMT, the generic name for what Intel calls Hypertreading).
    By the way, forget the crap AMD fanboys are shouting about streaming or content creation while gaming. What percentage of gamers actually stream? Or in other words, if it concerns you, you'll know.
    That's not the reason to get more cores for future proofing, console changes are. And it's going to be console titles that will be most demanding on your hardware, so those are the ones to watch for.
    Oh and yes, that tune was sung by AMD the last time around when they introduced their bulldozer (crapdozer? bullshit?) architecture. The issue back then was the AMD basically guessed that multitreading would be king and they guessed wrong/early by like 5 years. The difference today is that the change is already happening.

    And that's where we'll be in half a year: Assuming that the r3 matches the 7700K both of them will still be suboptimal choices for futureproof systems because while they (or just the 7700K) will be best for current games, they will max out and be overtaken by the true 8 core CPUs maybe even within 2017 but surely within 2018.
    Using a Ryzen r7 CPU you'll get maybe 15% FPS less than a 7700K. But we're still talking well above 60 FPS, usually in the ~100 range. Oh and yes, if you want above 100 FPS on ultra settings you're a special snowflake and will pay through the nose for the privilege. It'll mean getting a 7700K now and another CPU+mobo in 1-2 years time max instead of getting one that will keep for 4+ years.

    As always, if your system is still good enough, then waiting on the upgrade will always get you a better deal. Buy the system that's good enough for your needs. If all you play is <GAME>, then search for a <GAME> benchmark (actually, search for several). If you want/need 144 FPS@ultra details, open your wallet (no, you're probably not a competitive CSGO player and 200+ FPS won't affect your score). And if you want 4k resolution and ultra details before 2018, open your ...wallet. Wide.

    And as such, it all comes down to this: The Ryzen r7 CPUs will be good enough for current games and better for future ones. Wait for the teething issues the platform has to actually settle so we can see if my short-term predictions come true. Alas, storytime is over. You may have one last shitpost in General and then it's off to bed with you.
    Last edited by theBlind; March 9 2017 at 03:56:59 PM. Reason: r8 -> r7
    Tanks: theBlind[URBAD] (in my heart there will always be a place for [FAIL])
    Planetside2: [UBAD]theAngelic

  6. #1386
    root's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 26, 2011
    Location
    The Camel Empire
    Posts
    2,931
    neat writeup, mate.

    Is there any reason for me not to buy a Intel Pentium + micro ATX board (6x Sata, 1 - 2x PCI-E) for NAS / Multimedia system?
    Because the Pentium are quite nice with AES-NI, all kind of virtual thingies, HVEC decoding and only ~120 EUR for Mobo + CPU

    Do we even know if AMD r3 will have an GPU build in?
    The Rapier is my love boat
    ~lowsec smallscale pvp 'n stuff~

  7. #1387
    Cosmin's Avatar
    Join Date
    March 14, 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    5,221

    Zekk Pacus' I am not good at naming these hardware thread, Feb '15

    Depends on what you plan to run on the NAS, if it's freenas you should go for ecc ram and I'm p sure the Pentium can't into it.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Guns make the news, science doesn't.
    Six shooters ruined PvP.
    What are you doing with your life?İDoomchinchilla 2015

  8. #1388
    root's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 26, 2011
    Location
    The Camel Empire
    Posts
    2,931
    Neh, probably Open Media Vault (Debian). Not sure if and what raid or filesystem, but probably not zfs. I just want something super silent and low powered, but that also can do media playback. Not dual Xeon with 32 disks :P

    Maybe even Snapraid http://www.snapraid.it
    The Rapier is my love boat
    ~lowsec smallscale pvp 'n stuff~

  9. #1389
    theBlind's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    1,911
    Quote Originally Posted by root View Post
    neat writeup, mate.

    Is there any reason for me not to buy a Intel Pentium + micro ATX board (6x Sata, 1 - 2x PCI-E) for NAS / Multimedia system?
    Because the Pentium are quite nice with AES-NI, all kind of virtual thingies, HVEC decoding and only ~120 EUR for Mobo + CPU

    Do we even know if AMD r3 will have an GPU build in?
    I don't think the r3 will have an iGPU since that will be part of the Ravenridge line (which will be basically Laptop-targeted Ryzens with a VEGA based iGPU, scheduled for 2nd half of 2017). Now it's possible that the lines will be blurry between those and the r3 will come with an iGPU, but it's at least not what AMD is currently telling.

    That said, the ryzens performance in undervolted scenarios is pretty impressive and it seems as if the r3 or the small ravenridge version might be extremely good for a small homeserver.
    This of course is your typical if you wait you might get something better issue. If the current system you envision fulfills your criteria, go for it. Intels lineup (especially in the lower price segments) didn't suddenly turn bad. There are still a number of very mature CPUs and boards that will offer good value for the money. And for something like a "build it and it sits there for 10 years homeserver" mature is exactly what you want.
    Tanks: theBlind[URBAD] (in my heart there will always be a place for [FAIL])
    Planetside2: [UBAD]theAngelic

  10. #1390

    Join Date
    April 18, 2011
    Posts
    2,398
    Nice writeup, it matches the impressions I've been gathering the last couple of days.

    Luckily or sadly depending on mood/wallet I shouldn't need to upgrade for another 2-3 years but it's really nice to see AMD releasing some cracking CPU's again.

  11. #1391
    Donor
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    1,313
    Quote Originally Posted by theBlind View Post
    The issue back then was the AMD basically guessed that multitreading would be king and they guessed wrong/early by like 5 years. The difference today is that the change is already happening.
    This is always AMD's problem. They're one of the very few innovative companies left in semiconductor design so they often develop products that are a long way ahead of what the market is expecting. But history usually proves them right, and it will this time too.

    tbh, I think very few people understand just how disruptive Ryzen is going to be. Two years from now the CPU market will be radically different, with lower prices, bigger core counts and much less product segmentation. Intel is going to have to push it's best parts down to mainstream prices, compressing the product stack and killing off shitty filler parts like the Celeron, Pentium and i3. I expect there will still be a mainstream/HEDT split but with the high end going back to the old days of being Workstation grade stuff - ie, re-badged server CPUs and chipsets with huge memory bandwidth and swarms of PCIe lanes. A single-socket Naples platform would sell very well to people who buy Intel's HEDT stuff now.

    The big unknown is how Intel deals with AMD's attack on its core business model. Intel spends vast amounts on R&D and keeping a dozen fabs running, and traditionally this has given them an almost unbeatable edge. Yet AMD has managed to match (and arguably exceed) Intel's products on a tiny budget and while being completely fabless. Investors will start asking difficult questions about what good all that spending is doing.

    And to add to Intel's woes AMD is no longer capacity constrained. In the days of the K6-2, Athlon and Athlon 64 AMD couldn't get much above 30% of the market because their fabs couldn't keep up with demand. I remember how bad it was in in the K6/K6-2 era, AMD could easily have doubled their sales if the fab capacity had been available. But this time GloFo and Samsung can pump out wafers at a huge clip, so Intel has lost that crucial advantage.

    One final thing occurs to me; Ryzen is bad news for Intel, but will be deeply worrying for NVidia too. A resurgent CPU business means lots of funding for AMD's resource-starved GPU division, and Raven Ridge should kill off a big chunk of NV's very lucrative mobile GPU business.

  12. #1392
    Donor Pattern's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    6,310
    I thought intel all but tapped out of the desktop CPU market due to dollar signs from embedded computing in everything else?

    Happy for AMD and I hope there competitiveness continues as intel was really taking the piss with the i7 k line.

  13. #1393
    Daneel Trevize's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    T L A
    Posts
    12,067
    Intel are in embedded? ARM yes, Intel idk but I've not been paying attention...
    Unless you mean controllers for things like SSDs, rather than CPUs/SOCs.

    Intel have previously also tried to innovate with long-term thinking, but they ended up with the far-too-long-for-x86 pipeline of the Pentium4 (though it did spur/necessitate branch predictor improvments) and the Itanium VLIW ISA to try tackle the same anticipated future but this time having the compilers & code forced to work with the ISA rather than be lazy/ignorant of it.
    Maybe they just got unlucky twice, or maybe they're not applying enough practical thinking, because AMD's innovations of first-to-1GHz, to-64bit, to-true-multi-core iirc have all been much more inevitable and mechanical than trying to fix or replace x86 by assuming significant changes to single-threaded ops patterns. And RISC clearly works well enough for all these ARM devices (and POWER in supercomputers).
    God, x86 is such a shit, backwards-compat-hobbled CISC. Itanium ISA would have been so nice to have but just wasn't practical to expect people to port enough code to get critical mass. At least we're almost able to accept x86-64 chips that have no 32bit backwards compatibility bloat SoonTM. IIRC there's benefits that simplify & improve cache and RAM interaction, as well as using all the additional registers, at the "cost" of emulated 16bit and 32bit support being at less-than-native speed.
    Last edited by Daneel Trevize; March 10 2017 at 10:48:10 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by QuackBot View Post
    Idk about that, and i'm fucking stupid.

  14. #1394
    Donor
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    1,313
    Quote Originally Posted by Daneel Trevize View Post
    Intel are in embedded? ARM yes, Intel idk but I've not been paying attention...
    Intel's embedded efforts aren't worth shit. They've been trying to use Atom parts in the embedded space, and while sales are ok-ish they got most of them by selling chips below cost. And now certain Atom models have been found to be defective due to a clock output that degrades rapidly and ultimately dies, bricking the device.

    Itanium was a stupid, stupid, stupid idea. The whole point of it was to transition the industry to an architecture AMD couldn't legally use. But Intel never seemed to grasp that the whole damn point of x86 was compatibility and anything that didn't offer 100% compatibility with decent performance just wouldn't sell at all. And even ignoring the x86 compatibility issue, Itanium never worked as intended. It depended completely on the compiler to optimise code and Intel's compiler just never got anywhere near the efficiency it needed to beat x86 performance. And every time a new generation of Itaniums came out software needed re-compiling for maximum performance. In a fantasy land where everyone compiled their software from source it might have worked, but not in reality.

    x86-64 was a genius move by comparison. Fully compatible, all the benefits of a 64-bit architecture and a (somewhat) nicer ISA than x86. It must have burned Intel horribly to have to adopt an AMD developed ISA.

  15. #1395
    Daneel Trevize's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    T L A
    Posts
    12,067
    Quote Originally Posted by Bombcrater View Post
    In a fantasy land where everyone compiled their software from source it might have worked, but not in reality.
    You say that, but Linux was & still is the biggest server OS, look how ARM + Android took off, Macs were still using POWER CPUs, a significant use-case of Windows is gaming yet only the first XBox was x86, and everyone was staring down the shift to 64bit+increasingly useful SIMD & VM extensions, so they weren't so crazy to offer a chip for those wanting the best performance for a little work. Anything unable to be recompiled cost-effectively was probably legacy stuff that didn't need more performance (or had been put off for far too long).
    Yes the compiler & even languages would need to be up to scratch very promptly though.
    Last edited by Daneel Trevize; March 11 2017 at 10:06:35 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by QuackBot View Post
    Idk about that, and i'm fucking stupid.

  16. #1396
    root's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 26, 2011
    Location
    The Camel Empire
    Posts
    2,931
    New nvidia driver has some nice improvements for selected games:

    13% in my test with Hitman.


    (Ignore minimum)
    The Rapier is my love boat
    ~lowsec smallscale pvp 'n stuff~

  17. #1397
    Donor
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    1,313
    Quote Originally Posted by Daneel Trevize View Post
    You say that, but Linux was & still is the biggest server OS, look how ARM + Android took off, Macs were still using POWER CPUs, a significant use-case of Windows is gaming yet only the first XBox was x86, and everyone was staring down the shift to 64bit+increasingly useful SIMD & VM extensions, so they weren't so crazy to offer a chip for those wanting the best performance for a little work. Anything unable to be recompiled cost-effectively was probably legacy stuff that didn't need more performance (or had been put off for far too long).
    It's not a coincidence that Intel pushed Itanium into the server market first since, as you say, recompiling wasn't always a deal breaker there. But Itanium first hit the market in 2001, at that time the server market was side show compared to desktops. Success in servers was not, at that point, going to be enough to make an architecture viable long-term. And Itanium wasn't a success there because the idea behind it was flawed; Intel seemed to have a line in their Itanium strategy that read 'and then write magic compiler'. But the magic compiler never happened. In order to get the kind of performance Intel promised from the original Itaniums you needed code written specifically for that architecture's strengths, by coders who had a low-level understanding of how the both the chip and Intel's compiler worked. Just recompiling existing unmodified code wasn't enough to make Itanium look better than competing architectures.

  18. #1398
    root's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 26, 2011
    Location
    The Camel Empire
    Posts
    2,931
    Here is a good video that shows how bad ryzen is at videogames. Would not buy.

    The Rapier is my love boat
    ~lowsec smallscale pvp 'n stuff~

  19. #1399

    Join Date
    November 5, 2011
    Posts
    9,185
    Quake 2 is now somehow relevant?

  20. #1400
    root's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 26, 2011
    Location
    The Camel Empire
    Posts
    2,931
    It's a shitpost you new fag. Have you not watched the video?
    The Rapier is my love boat
    ~lowsec smallscale pvp 'n stuff~

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •