Daily reminder that a 4 core desktop CPU is already nearly obsolete, and buying one new is a complete waste of money

Daily reminder that a 4 core desktop CPU is already nearly obsolete, and buying one new is a complete waste of money.

Other urls found in this thread:

cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html
gamasutra.com/view/feature/132254/performance_scaling_with_cores_.php
twitter.com/AnonBabble

But the vast majority of software doesnt even take advantage of multiple cores yet

>being this stupid

-2/10 bait. Your hook is similar to that of a curved paperclip

I'm so hyped for the 1600X, it's going to be the perfect middle ground for vidya gaems and productivity/multitasking.

tfw phone have more cores than pc

this

And it never uses all of them at once.

A vast majority of the software that I use is limited by single-threaded performance.

(I wish that wasn't the case, but then there's not really much I can do about it, is there?)

Well, it turns out that the high-end 4-core CPUs are usually the fastest at single threaded performance. (Example: i7-7700K.) I buy CPUs exclusively based on their single-threaded performance. That means I will continue to buy 4-core CPUs until they are no longer the king of single-threaded performance.

Match the CPU to the software. Any other approach is illogical.

>>being this stupid

So you claim that a vast majority of software takes advantage of multiple cores?

Prove it.

this
makes me wish I didn't buy a 6600k two months ago

Phenom II X6 master race.

...

This may come as a surprise for you but some people use their computers for more things than playing video games on

yea, and they use xeon, not ryzen

>Using a server CPU for content creation/3D rendering/data processing/multimedia/anything that requires multithreaded performance and more than 4 cores
What?

>meanwhile in the real world, 7700k wipes the floor with 1800x

4k gaming isn't the norm yet, and won't be for some years now. when the time comes that octas will have a gaming market, intel will just lower prices and still be the more valid option

i seriously had high hopes for ryzen, but once again amd proves to be a shit company

Thing is Intel is also going to wipe Ryzen in 4k once you get something like a 1180 Ti and those CPU bottlenecks hit once again. Unless devs start optimizing games for 8 cores/16t jumping from 1080p to 1440p and 4k with more powerful GPUs will give you same results.

See

>enjoy your idle cores

I remember this being told to people buying Q6600

oh nooo D: ??!?

Enjoy your idle cores.

Your n0sc0pe edits in piratebay adobe cc are not serious work.
Real world workstations are xeons with ecc ram and quadros.

By the time NVidia's next generation comes out, Zen+ should be out as well. Plenty of time inbetween.

>I- I don't need more than 4 cores, like EVER!

Daily reminder that moar cores has diminishing returns, and software that can be coded to take advantage of 16 threads can most likely be coded to run even faster on the GPU. Four bigger, more powerful, higher clocked cores will always perform better than 8 smaller, less powerful, lower clocked cores outside of a few special snowflake instances because of how software works. Getting nine women pregnant won't get you a baby in one month.

5 cores enough

But that's for a reason. Phones have specialized cores to handle certain tasks more efficiently, and they also combine more an less powerful cores so that more demanding tasks run on the higher power cores, and less demanding tasks run on the lower power cores. It doesn't actually use all the cores at the same time, and software can't be coded to take advantage of all the cores at the same time.

99% of non gamers don't benefit from moar coares.

Daily reminder that multi-core was based on a lie. It does not increase power efficiency, it reduces it.

laptop cpus are dual core only. you can get one with celeron or i7 and they will both be dual core.

suuuuuuuuure m8

A lot of bentium 4 fans ITT.

say what you will but i am quite happy with my 4790k(tm) from intel(tm) and i have no need fro more cores that generate heat(amd)(tm)

>tfw my 10 year old Q6600 still has enough power even for gay men

...

That's not even funny, though. It's just Sup Forumstier racism.

>Will be obselete within a year or two
Let's see how your 4 core stands up in 2019. Or even as early as 2018.

> Implying Intel won't release 8c/16t within the next 2 years

k, pham

Kek, you pathetic AMDrones have been saying that quad cores are dead for about 6 years now. Fact is, your tiny curry company simply cannot make the industry adapt.

Oh for fucks sake, 99% of the time, AMDrones are hating on Intel/Nvidia for being "Jewish". But making a poo loo joke is too far?

Considering that I'm often using only a core duo for lurking, I dont think that system will have too much trouble
I don't game much anymore

Can you deny selling an 8c/16t for $1000 and then AMD dropping a similar performance CPU for half the price is jewey as fuck?

i will still use my 2500k then

You can "lurk" on a single core Bentium 4, or even an Intel Atom. Doesn't make it a worthwhile CPU to use for anything more than a spaceheater/paperweight.

Yes. I don't see where in the Torah that it says to sell over priced processors. Intel wasn't pricing things right, but they weren't being Jewish.

No, it's called having no competition and pricing shit as you wish. Now that we do have some alternative, intel will price accordingly or simply release CPU's that will stomp Ryzen in terms of price/performance.

As I said, I don't care about modern games

most of the hype was about vidya though, no one denied that an octa workstation that's 800$ cheaper is a good thing

Why should I feed 8 cores with electricy when I hardly use 4. I am buying Kabe Lake 7700K.

Yes, for vidya, which is what the R5 and R3 is for. If you spend $500 on an 8 core CPU that excels in multithreading just to play video games on, when AMD will release CPUs that cost between $100-200 that will do just as well in games and lets you spend that money on a GPU instead, then you're an idiot and deserve to lose your money.

the jew stuff isn't funny either

>There's no middle ground between quad core i5's and literal server CPUs

Ok

Return to reddit.

cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html
Stay mad with your obsolete IPC

But where does 6c/6t fall in this?

t. phenom or faildozer cuck

7700k is still better for 4k !!!! this is what people don't understand. If you put GPU from a year or two from now in a rig today, the 7700k would out perform the 1800x.

>yfw I went from a slow-ass FX-6300 to an i5-4690K and literally everything is much faster
No regrets, muh coars is a meme.

>2010
>a 4 core desktop CPU is already nearly obsolete
>2017
> a 4 core desktop CPU is already nearly obsolete
>2024
> a 4 core desktop CPU is already nearly obsolete

gamasutra.com/view/feature/132254/performance_scaling_with_cores_.php
>2008
>even Intel was shilling the multicore saying programmers just aren't trying hard enough
>according to intel you make a game scale to as many cores as you want
>2017 nothing like this exists or is even close to existing

>tfw no 6.3GHz CPU

>tfw 16c/32t and 2c/4t

Guess I'll never be optimal according to Sup Forums.

You should never feed 8 cores, nor 4 cores with electricy.

There are, they are the single socket E5s. Maybe E3s.

>tfw, 6c/12t intel master race
feels good man.

Vulkan. DX12. More games are coming that will use both.

Then why are you even discussing enthusiast tier CPUs? Why are you even on a tech board if all you ever do is normalfag shit with your hardware?

It's pretty much true today. I upgraded from a quad core to a server CPU and it's so much better for normal computer usage. With quad core it's like you're playing games on a console where you get to choose between playing a game and doing something else - no multi-tasking.

>gaymen
>not the single most normalfag to do with your hardware besides shitposting on social media