The 8 core Intel thread.

[Mal X]

The consumption seems to be about right:


Above image is from bit-tech. Is the claimed 88w at stock?

i dont see 88w stock

 

[gpuerrilla]

yeh...yet this shouldnt matter since the "MAX" cannot be made further otherwise you'd be able to overclock to infinity...

why would anyone market for 88w if it wasnt the case?

the FX9 is at 220W and the i7 is at 88w

check out the intel arc - no graphs of "claimed" numbers just what it specs are:

http://ark.intel.com/products/80807/Intel-Core-i7-4790K-Processor-8M-Cache-up-to-4_40-GHz

I do not understand you.

If you overclock (to above 4Ghz) the i7 breaches 250w so not sure what your babbling about. Need to start making sense before going on ignore.

why would anyone market for 88w if it wasnt the case?

the FX9 is at 220W and the i7 is at 88w

Who buys the FX9? Let's not put forward worse case scenarios to make your stats appear better. The 8320 is a ton brand new and can go to 4.5 no problem, that eats watts however revving an intel at similar clock speeds does too..

 

[Svyper1]

I do not understand you.

If you overclock (to above 4Ghz) the i7 breaches 250w so not sure what your babbling about. Need to start making sense before going on ignore.



Who buys the FX9? Let's not put forward worse case scenarios to make your stats appear better. The 8320 is a ton brand new and can go to 4.5 no problem, that eats watts however revving an intel at similar clock speeds does too..

dude ffs im trying to talk to you not argue...

anyway we arent communicating the same things...moving on...

 

[Mal X]

I do not understand you.

If you overclock (to above 4Ghz) the i7 breaches 250w so not sure what your babbling about. Need to start making sense before going on ignore.



Who buys the FX9? Let's not put forward worse case scenarios to make your stats appear better. The 8320 is a ton brand new and can go to 4.5 no problem, that eats watts however revving an intel at similar clock speeds does too..

and you're lucky if the HASWELL will reach 4.5 ...... because you usually have to delidd it first before it will.......the i5 was easy yes

 

[Martini1991]

1. TDP ain't power consumption.
2. That's system usage (as in overall, sure they made just be stressing the CPU, but the rest ain't running on air).

An over clocked fx83 against an over clocked i7 uses quite a fair bit more wattage if you're maxing the chips out, let's not pretend it doesn't.

But that isn't representative of game usage.

 

[ALXAndy]

1. TDP ain't power consumption.

Yup, absolutely. As soon as you touch the voltage, clock speeds and FSB that disappears like a fart in the wind.

 

[ALXAndy]

ignored.

****

It's your ignorance that causes you the problems. If you opened your eyes you could actually partake in threads like this instead of just bleating on with "Intel win" comments and the likes.

You know? actually be a part of it rather than just coming in with your comic one liners.

S'OK. I've got lots of lovely data for you to come. I await the fingers in the ears and complete and total denial.

 

[gpuerrilla]

dude ffs im trying to talk to you not argue...

anyway we arent communicating the same things...moving on...

1. TDP ain't power consumption.

As we have cleared up, consumption like I said is about right. The FX consumes more power, again re-iterated this will take years to even be comparable (against an overclocked intel).

No one maxes the cores out 24/7, but in any case you are either overclocking for performance or sit in the stock low voltage camp to actually save energy.

Laptops, tablets and phones require the power saving feature way more than a desktop.