Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
Software doesn't just magically "become more parallel". The programmers have to put in the work. It is a chore and probably not going to be profitable beyond a certain point.
I wouldn't wait for Sky-E.
...look what thread title says! If Broadwell-E ups the core count you may as well switch then, I don't think they will increase it again unless AMD decide to start selling odd-number (salvage) manycores as well.
I know what the thread title says I originally posted it.
Nah I'll wait till Skylake-E. Broadwell-E is interesting but I'd feel like I was getting old tech with the X99 chipset at the moment. As long as Skylake-E comes with 10 cores and is faster IPC than my i7 3930k I'll be happy.
I can't see Intel dropping performance that much on their high end enthusiast grade platforms. Maybe on their standard i7 chips for mainstream consumers but not the high enthusiast grade chips.
And well if I'm wrong I'll just have to live with my decision.
Hopefully this won't kick in before Skylake-E is released as that is what I have set my eyes on for my next upgrade for new motherboard features and hopefully some extra cores for a reasonable price.
Or rather let's hope VISC can do what it says on the tin for X86 gaming workloads.
40 cores will be useless if parallelism is left up to the developer.
Ditto.
Would it be safe to say this is partly why AMD bombed?
They put all their chips on multiple cores and the the gaming industry just did not "get with it".
Single thread speed is still king as far as I am aware?
Games can't even utilize 4 cores properly yet. Newer architecture and higher clocks > budget build. My motherboard for my 920 is as budget as it gets. It's time for a new one.
As with everything, opinions depend on circumstance. I want something totally new but I'm sure there are others who would choose a £60 cpu over a completely new computer. I'll drop a couple hundred and get something that will make me feel warm, fuzzy and last longer.
Your reading comprehension seems to have failed. I am arguing FOR buying hex-core. I am saying people should just WAIT for the BEST hex core since nothing worth playing will be coming out that can utilize the extra cores until broadwell-e anyway.
The upgrade from an older bloomfield I7 9xx chips to one of the Westmere-EP x56xx chips actually makes sense for a lot of people that wanted a bit of an upgrade to their aging PC's (6-7 years old). But this was only for people waiting for newer platforms a while ago, now that it's so close to the release of the new chips then it may not be worth the upgrade.
I bought a x5670 for about £80 which for me at the time was a bargin for a better perfoming CPU in the stopgap until I upgrade when something worthwile comes out. For the cost of less than £100 you get a lower wattage chip with more cores that runs cooler, performs better and overclocks better than the I7 bloomfield chips.
It may not make sense to people who don't have the upgrade itch to spend any money on upgrades and only wants to build an entirely new PC, but I think it was recommended as a stop gap if you really wanted something to tweak at the moment for a cheap upgrade.
You're a bit wrong in thinking that you are going to get a Skylake-E system for a couple of hundred pounds though. The price for the current Hasswell-E processors is over £300 so for the processor, motherboard and memory you are going to be looking at about £500 if not more. As Skylake-E is not far away though, for you it's probably better holding off as you don't seem like you want any small upgrades.
Broadwell-e
Yes, that is what I meant by dropping a couple hundred. A new computer, mobo and ram costs a few hundred, so broadwell-e will cost a couple hundred more than that. I want new, not a stopgap on an aging budget motherboard. Something with a pretty boot up screen![]()
I'm quite happy sitting on my i7 3770K to be honest.
I imagine Intel's new CPUs won't get any slower than they are now per-se, clockspeed may get lower and they may get more efficient and performance increases will lessen.
@ setter, may I ask why you bothered upgrading from an i7 4770K to a 4790K? That upgrade sounds pointless to me. Did you get one ultra-cheap or something?
You wish 10%!But what do we know is coming from Intel this year? Anything interesting other than a 7770k with a 10% increase in IPC...![]()