Intel Announces i9

pcper.com/reviews/Processors/Intel-Core-i9-Announced-18-core-Skylake-X-Kaby-Lake-X-and-X299

Although I concur that Intel has some very nice CPUs, they can fuck right off due to their shady industry schemes and how it fucked AMD.

Why would I need these meme CPUs that are probably going to cost close to a thousand if I can run TW Warhammer (TW is one of the most CPU intensive series of games out there) perfectly fine on a R5 1600 that costs $200?

Now i feel good about pushing my upgrade till later this year.

If AMDs products in the last 6-8 years weren't mediocre they wouldn't have had issues with intel's douchebaggery.

Not defending intel, but this is how business works nowadays.

>all innovation has moved from production to marketing
wew

Ryzen was good though.

We X-men now.

What about i8?

Yeah and that's great.

Hope whatever they produce next is just as good or better so intel get forced to actually develop some better shit than what they do currently.

>If AMDs products in the last 6-8 years weren't mediocre they wouldn't have had issues with intel's douchebaggery.

They were never mediocre, only dumb fucks like you believe that shit because it's all you hear on Sup Forums so you just believed it like another sheep.

That fair, I guess. I just meant that industry shenanigans are off putting me as a customer, since competition is what beneficial for me. But I actually liked Ryzen, though.

>moar cores
>frm intel
Is this bizarro Sup Forums

They were decent in their own right but compared to anything Nvidia put out they were completely mediocre. Face it user AMD has always been the budget option. Hopefully that'll change.

Yes, they were, stop being contrarian.

If AMD has been dishing out good products, then intel couldn't have gotten away with giving 2-3-5% power increase per generation.

Just look at Ryzen, the first really good product they've had in a long time.

Intel has been reacting ever since Ryzen launched.

This is how you know someone made a good product - when their competition actually starts doing smtn rather than just sit back and reheat some old CPUs.

>lga 2066

enjoy your 300 dollars motherboard

>FOR A GREAT VR EXPERIENCE

I'm no tech guru but how the fuck does that work?

Instead of adding a billion dumb cores why not improve cores so you don't need 19. Make 1 core as good as 19 its getting to the point where instead of like building a better car engine they're just Mad Max stacking 19 engines on top of eachother in some autistic shit.

The only really bad thing they've put out is Bulldozer. Everything else has been pretty good.

18 CORES BITCHSLAPPING AYYMD LIKE THE BITCH IT IS

fucking kek is that a new fucking socket?
fucking DOA

Because WITNESS HIM!

Intel already tried that in ye auld pentium days and we all know how it ended

>18 cores

For what purpose?

AMD IS FINISHED!!!!!

Gee whiz, it's almost like they've hit a dead end with their architecture or something.

Newfag here.
How did it end?

Looks like they skip even numbers

That's odd.

Crysis

I will say it this way.
It started the housefire meme when it comes to CPUs.

Nvidia did it related to GPUs.

user please

pic happended

...

>Instead of adding a billion dumb cores why not improve cores so you don't need 19.

Multitasking, motherfucker, have you heard of it?

they tried to ramp up the frequency

Ended with an insane power consuption and severe overheating problems

>im retarded: the post

that is what intel have been doing for like the past 10 years
its time increase core numbers

only AMD has been adding cores and cores each and also failing big time each time

how many fucking sockets have these kikes put out in the recent years

AMD obliterated them with chips that were cooler, cheaper, and clocked slower.

But why not make 1 core better than 19 and then add 18 more?

AMD paid the devs to make the games run shit on Intel CPUs

Intel
>18 cores
>2.2ghz

AMD
>16 cores
>4.1ghz

AMD is going to shit all over it. Intel is literally in desperation mode and are developing whatever the hell they can to compete.

so whats the point of these when modern games are trash and mostly just console ports?

That matter:
3.

Soldered sockets(Atom and celeron sockets for laptops and AIO desktops):
13.

>I don't know my history
Intel collided with OEMs way back in the day to push AMDs superior CPUs out of the OEM market. That's why everything had a fucking Pentium in it growing up. AMD eventually won their lawsuit against Intel for that but the damage was done in the minds of the average consumer. Following was several years of mismanagement causing a massive bleed of quality engineers and we are only just now seeing AMD get itself back on track.

Not to mention AMD's SMT is better than Intel's HT

>AMD is going to shit all over it

is that why even i3s at 3ghz can outperform AMD CPUs running at 5ghz? lmao

>AMD has always been the budget option
Athlon 64 would like to speak with you.

No AYYMD CPUs run at 4.1GHz without HOUSEFIRES

>i9
Can't wait for the benchmarks revealing the glorious 2 fps improvements over the i7 models.

>But why not make 1 core better than 19 and then add 18 more?

There's only so far you can shrink transistors before the size gets in the way of reliable function, and furthermore, that sort of R&D is expensive as fuck. Makes a lot more sense to just add more cores in the meantime and let coders learn to juggle them.

nice , now developers wont even try to optimize shit (not like they optimized anything in the last 17 years besides crysis and doom3)

Not anymore they can't. And those same i3s got annihilated on multithreaded applications.

except those cores are more for multitasking and data processing than gaming you fucknut.

While gaming performance is moslty tied to core frequency, multithreaded process like video encoding and such actually take nearly full advantage of additionnal cores

and guess what?

those 2 fps will justify it's purchase for hardcore autists

Does this mean that i5s and i7s will drop in price?

actually thats AMD getting shat all over

Intel has better IPC which is why AMD has been getting BTFO for the past 10 years,
Now Intel has more cores too.

literally no chance for AMD

Its called intel hyperboost.

How does any of this disprove his statement of their products in the last decade being pretty ehh?

Yes, Intel are cunts, we get it. But at the end of the day you buy the product you need/want and is better for your needs. If AMD had that product thats what people would've been buying.

Just like how Athlon 64 were selling like hot cakes because they were great products.

You guys are talking about the last generation. Clock speeds on Ryzen are almost perfectly comparable with Intel's now. If AMD is running clock speeds of 4ghz that's as effective as an Intel chip running at 4ghz. In terms of IPC, Ryzen is at about a Broadwell level of performance compared to Kaby lake which makes it only about 10% less in performance.

Intel's had 18 core CPU's since Haswell

Link me to some good femdon h manga of them. You know you have em

actually this

What fucking Ryzen chip reaches 5ghz without liquid nitrogen?

...

>You guys are talking about the last generation. Clock speeds on Ryzen are almost perfectly comparable with Intel's now.

What is that graph even measuring?

for the wery low low price of one of your kidneys and half you liver

No.

This. Everyone upgrade to i9 so I can find myself a cheap i7.

>passmark

It's the benchmark score. PassMark Software.

>AMD pulls moar coars
flops
>AMD makes a decent processor
>intel
MOARS COARS

Intel does have slightly better IPC, which doesn't immediately lead to better performance with their clock speed is only 2.2ghz compared to AMD's 4.1ghz. Ryzen does not have terrible IPC at all, it's just slightly slower than Kaby Lake. Intel's 18 cores don't really mean shit when they can't run them at a comparable clock speed.

So whats the difference now? $700? The fucking thing still costs $2000 USD

No

This is for ethusiasists who were buying CPUs worth the price of your whole rig. This will drop the price of used high-end i7s and that's about it. The people who currently have regular i7s aren't as likely to upgrade to an entirely new chipset so prices at that point and below won't be affected.

But it wont flop because retards will buy it for $1000.

Same architecture, it doesn't matter.

its almost like intel will do it right or something.

How long until big.LITTLE for x86?

Ram frequency is important for AMD'S Infinity Fabric, so many retards don't realize this
Can't wait for AMD to shit Nvidia when they have a successful IF MCM GPU

shit was around 4.5K so that's more than twice the price

I wouldn't get your hopes up. The 1800x embarrasses the fuck out of the 6900k and that isn't even AMD's HEDT line.

Single Threaded performance I would say

~1500 is Bulldozer
Haswell was around 2100
Skylake/kabylake went down to 1900-2000

it means buying a quad core is poor fag tier now
it's all about 6 cores or higher

That's what you'd hope at least

Everyone fucking knows they were shit, why do you think their marketshare has dropped? You think everyone but you is an idiot that doesn't understand a thing about CPUs and that's why they buy Intel?

Retarded AMDrones can only resort to "EVERYONE BUT AMD BUYERS ARE RETARDED".

>If AMD is running clock speeds of 4ghz that's as effective as an Intel chip running at 4ghz
Let's just assume they're otherwise same processors with same instructions, same registers and caches. Allright, no difference there.

they're showing their new shit at Computex, right?

Something about that seems off. I don't know which test that was but here's the scores my 1600X got. I don't think those numbers are accurate.

Different tests and benchmarks.

Use userbenchmark to give you a simple idea.

IF is fucking legit, it's their secret sauce.
I'm excited to see what they will reveal today

That's not what I meant. I mean in the other guys graph it looks like it's the result for the single-threaded scores but he didn't include what it was measuring so I'm not sure. I'm scoring over 20% higher than what that's reporting and I'm not even overclocked.

Can games use shitloads of cores yet? Last time I checked there was only a few games that could use 4 cores at once? Has this been solved or is the more cores pointless for gaming still?

for you but not for 99% of people who PLAYS GAMES

Another "JUST WAIT FOR X" by AMDfags. It's been like this for a decade.

> They were decent in their own right but compared to anything Nvidia put out they were completely mediocre.

What? Nvidia drivers have been bad since the 600 series.

I got fucked right over by paying 400 bucks for a card which is now obsolete as fuck.

Got Ryzen as a main upgrade a while back together with a RX 470 which performs pretty fucking good. Really surprised me especially for a 175 EU card.

Yes and no. It's surprising which games ended up being able to use extra cores. Overwatch uses six cores it turns out and Skyrim SE was optimized to make use of multiple threads. There's instructions in DX12 and Vulkan to make use of more cores and threads, and with the R5 chips being popular with gamers I'm sure more games will support it soon. Keep in mind Ryzen's performance is pretty good already, and when games support more cores like Overwatch you get more FPS and minimum frame times than you would with a 7700k. Shit will age like wine.

Post prices too user, it's even more hilarious when you see a $300 months old Intel CPU beating a $500 brand new AMD CPU.

Oddly enough Ryzen performs worse with Nvidia cards but sees a boost with AMD cards.