Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Intel Finally Unleashes Broadwell-E: Top End CPU Will Cost You $1723 USD

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #41
    Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
    read this http://www.zdnet.com/article/compute...-max-3-0-mode/

    God I'm laughing so hard. To fit within sane thermal limits the frequencies (= IPC per core) of that processor are lower than less-cored skylake processors.

    They had to add a new Turbo Boost version for this chip (that currently does not work on Linux but who the fuck cares anyway) to have it boost the frequencies by a higher margin than earlier Turbo Boost versions, to reach similar frequencies than the other processors when in Turbo Boost.

    For all those that buy a 10-core processor and load it with programs that use at most 4 cores.
    I've never measured the slightest hint of stability improvement from turbo. In my experience the max stable frequencies are identical regardless of number of loaded cores provided there's adequate cooling. Turbo is useful for keeping within thermal constraints (especially on laptops) and nothing else.

    I don't see why the turbo feature needs revising at all. It does exactly what it's meant to do already AFAICT.

    Comment


    • #42
      Originally posted by ormaaj View Post

      I've never measured the slightest hint of stability improvement from turbo. In my experience the max stable frequencies are identical regardless of number of loaded cores provided there's adequate cooling. Turbo is useful for keeping within thermal constraints (especially on laptops) and nothing else.

      I don't see why the turbo feature needs revising at all. It does exactly what it's meant to do already AFAICT.
      ​AVX optimization makes Intel CPUs run hotter. Which means they have to down clock. Which leads to completely ridiculous things like overclockers asking game companies to remove AVX code. I hope they're ignored and mocked.

      Comment


      • #43
        Originally posted by ormaaj View Post
        I don't see why the turbo feature needs revising at all. It does exactly what it's meant to do already AFAICT.
        In this case, they had to keep stock frequencies lower already = less IPC to stay withing TDP limits (since there are 10 cores instead of 4), so this Turbo gimmick was altered to give a bigger frequency boost (and disable more cores than 3) to compensate and avoid getting this CPU totally destroyed in benches of real-world scenarios where most programs/games won't EVER use more than 4 cores anyway.

        Comment

        Working...
        X