Information

Dear forum members,
We are delighted to inform you that our forums are back online. Every single topic and post are now on their places and everything works just as before, only better. Welcome back!



Discussion

Discussion on Article:
Core i7-4960X Extreme Edition, Core i7-4930K and Core i7-4820K Review: The LGA 2011 Refresh

Started by: TAViX | Date 12/12/13 09:15:39 AM
Comments: 11 | Last Comment:  02/09/14 12:20:52 PM

Expand all threads | Collapse all threads

[1-5]

1. 
Nice review.
0 0 [Posted by: TAViX  | Date: 12/12/13 09:15:39 AM]
Reply

2. 
While NOT a advocate of 1000$ chips. i still find it funny that amd's now CANCELED 'fx' ''fake'' 8 core chips don't even come close to a chip with only 6 cores... and cant even beat a chip with only 4 cores most of the time.
1 3 [Posted by: amdzorz  | Date: 12/12/13 10:57:22 AM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
That's just the AMD processors shareing floating point units, and yes they have trouble competing with Intel's 6 core offerings, but they also cost much less, and of course this Intel, CPU, without AMD or Nvidia descrete graphics, is not going to game so well, is it not! Intel has won the high end CPU, and note I say CPU, arms race, and AMD admits this, as AMD stated some time ago. Now where are the 8 core Intel extreme offerings, that highend gamers have been waiting for, and waiting still, again, for more cores! Intel is SKU locked, with their Extreme Editions! They do not want their Extreme Editions editions competiting with their server CPU SKUs. But, If Intel does not, or can not offer the speed/performence improvments, that they have been able to offer previously, up to and including the Sandy Bridge improvments over Intel's previous generations, then Intel is going to have a hard time justifying the cost of Intel's extreme SKUs. If Intel is having problems maintaining the performence improvments via process node shrinks, then Intel is going to have to start offering, the expected from enthusiasts, improvments by adding more cores to its enthusiast SKUs! It's more cores, or gamers will hit the door, WITHOUT new product in hand!
2 1 [Posted by: BigChiefRunAmok  | Date: 12/12/13 01:48:51 PM]
Reply
 
One word, Hyperthreading.
If Intel CPU's didn't have it, would AMD CPU'S be comparable?
And for the record, AMD has said the FX has not been EOL'd.
0 0 [Posted by: caring1  | Date: 12/14/13 06:33:09 PM]
Reply
 
So for the sake of argument you are removing features from Intel to make AMD solution sound competative? Am I misunderstanding something?
0 0 [Posted by: UnbiasedONE  | Date: 12/16/13 08:53:53 AM]
Reply

3. 
Real-time overclocking is a nice new feature. I bet mainboard makers will take note of that. These revisions are far from being game changers tough.
0 0 [Posted by: MHudon  | Date: 12/12/13 11:37:08 AM]
Reply

4. 
Xbit really needs to step up and build a true custom waterloop for testing overclocks. I can tell you my 3770k is limited to 5.2 Ghz where no amount of voltage makes it stable. Can the 4970X reach that with 6 cores?
0 0 [Posted by: AnonymousGuy  | Date: 12/19/13 08:54:54 PM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
And who would build a custom waterloop for a benchmarking build. where you are constantly changing components and have a dead line for when the review is needed..... I think not son!
0 0 [Posted by: Vaughn Plata  | Date: 12/24/13 04:13:53 PM]
Reply

5. 
I don't understand what use is there to have this sysmark benchmark in systems that new.
This suite is using programs very old that doesn't take any advantage of newer hardware.
And since anyone who is willing to pay a good amount for new hardware will most likely pay another good amount for new software, to use this suite to see CPUs performance is completely useless.
0 0 [Posted by: nitro912gr  | Date: 01/03/14 10:16:01 AM]
Reply

[1-5]

Back to the Article

Add your Comment