10th gen intel core cpus are going to still be 14nm

Ok Atari Jaguar

>9900k pulls 168w at full load
>intel just slapped on two more cores
This chip seems really out of place. in a 10100k really going to be able to match the clock speed of the 9900k? if so its going to run hot, and if not its going to be really goofy that their flagship CPU is actually not their best silicon. Or is there going to be an i10 series and this is just going to be an HEDT chip that works on cheaper mobos?

Man they must really be worried about ryzen

Attached: housefire.png (650x337, 41K)

BUTIFEL AT EVERY SIZE

Attached: landwhale.jpg (333x499, 26K)

By time Intel moves on to 7nm, everyone else would have moved on to 5nm and under.

>14nm+++++++++++ & 10 cores

housefire confirmed

positive self-image is good, and i don't doubt staying at a healthy size is more difficult for some people, but giving up and trying to normalize an unhealthy body state is absolutely not the way to go

just wondering how hot and how much watts can they consume until someone calls them out on it
but i guess nothng but gaming benchmark matters if you're intel fan

fuck me how many exploits is that thing going to have to have to keep up performance

delid dis

More transistors in the same space.
You get a few benefits from this.
For example if you where to remake a cpu that currently exists it would be a lot cooler and you could add something with all the extra space.

apparently i don't understand cpu wattage. how can a 91w cpu pull 57 watts at full load, and a 95w pull 168 watts?

>t. intel damage control department

the "91w cpu" is said to "dissipate no more than 91w of heat", not how much power it pulls

watts = TDP? so intel/amd don't publish the actual power draw?

Because intel fucking lies about their power draw/thermal output.

idk, something isn't adding up. if an i5-7600k draws 57 watts at full load, but puts off 91w of heat, the performance would be less than zero.

Intel has lied about tdp for 10 years now

they just make up a number, regardless if it's a significant overestimation or underestimation?

Just wait for Intel Meteor Lake apparently it'll be 7nm just wait.

>NANOMETERS DON'T MATTER
>THE EXTRA 5 FPS I PAID $300 FOR MATTERS

Attached: 1441283182957.jpg (200x267, 9K)

Attached: ORSON.jpg (750x925, 171K)

Fuck off AMDrone. That just means they are now done with 14nm, and 10nm is coming in 2028.

7nm isn't the "size" of the transistors. Lithography numbers are pretty much to indicate milestones between nodes.

БЛЯЯЯЯЯЯЯЯЯЯЯЯ, в гoлocинy нa вcю MO пpoигpывaю yжe пpocтo.

Yes pretty much

Attached: 1552387356615.png (1364x767, 52K)

>Thinking that there currently is only a 5 FPS difference between AMD and Intel. Idiot.

Why the fuck do people always downplay how far behind AMD is in gamang? Ryzen is horrific for gaymen.

>9900k pulls 168w at full load
Only if measured by Inturd. And we ALL know how Inturd's """(((TDP)))""" differs from ACTUAL LEGIT (AMD's, for one) TDP.

Attached: f31f6d5e536c497713a2045563e51f16b02d37112e7ddd1ead47ec64f08de534.png (494x440, 205K)

Attached: Raja Poochitecture.jpg (1480x833, 103K)

This chart is silly. It's going by the number in the lithography and not density. Density is what matters. TSMC's "7nm" is comparable to Intel's "10nm".

>how far behind AMD is in--
>Ryzen is horrific for g--

Attached: 155194585845754r5.jpg (1314x1166, 408K)

If they can somehow miraculously manage to get 10nm working before TSMC goes to 5nm, they can still get ahead of AMD because despite the naming, Intel's 10nm is actually smaller than TSMC's 7nm and Intel's processes are known to clock high.

>TSMC's 7nm is comparable to Intel's """""10nm"""""

Attached: 1539237186694.png (400x400, 13K)

he's right though

|
|>
|
|
|

That's an incredibly GPU bound title. In BFV, the 2700X can't achieve high GPU utilisation with that same GPU.

Ryzen 2700X vs 9700K Overclocked BFV Conquest - High Refresh Gaming:

youtube.com/watch?v=XEs7ze0xcRw&t=

Don't expect an AMDrone to admit that what I said was factually correct.

>BFV
Found your problem.

Okay, 6 FPS difference.

There is some truth to what he is saying. Most of it bullshit though. Intel's 10nm is comparable to TSMC's 7nm. The big problem that Intel is going to face is that the 10nm isn't going to be near as refined as 14nm. 10nm will in the beginning perform worse than 14nm

Say you had a giant and a dwarf, both solved math questions for you.
They are equally smart and work equally fast, but the giant has to be fed at least 80kg of food every day. The dwarf only requires 500g.
So in the end, the dwarf is the more efficient employee.
Also, if you happen to have 80kg of food available every day, you can also hire 159 more dwarfs to solve more math questions.

>blaming the game when it's the fault of Ryzen
You didn't watch the video, AMDrone. The difference can be up to 30.

>stating facts makes you and idiot
>stating facts makes you a jew

The absolute state of AMDrones.
That said, Intel sucks ass because they can't deliver so far. And I'm not saying 10nm WILL be better, it's just that on paper it is. And so far same generation process was usually better on Intel's side, at least in terms of performance, not necessarily power efficiency. Both "7"nm and "10"nm are purely marketing terms but TSMC numbering as actually even more deceiving because it has roughly the same feature dimensions as intel and slightly worse density on average (better for SRAM but worse for other components).

AMD is funded and controlled by the Chinese now. Why do you think those Ryzen chips were suddenly so good? Supporting AMD = Supporting Communism

>I have no idea what communism is

Attached: 16e.jpg (903x960, 52K)

Attached: intel suicide watch.jpg (690x388, 45K)

It doesn't matter. It's just another one of those non-performance-related things AMD likes to advertise on this board because they know their target contrarian incel userbase will eat it up.

It's literally "big number better" in reverse with zero context.

>china
>communist

Attached: Opium_merchant.jpg (501x585, 44K)

Attached: 1343964088851.png (1196x676, 1.05M)

Bigger monolithic dies! Even worse yields! Supply shortages! Paper launches! Let's go!

Attached: 1425372403447.jpg (500x501, 57K)

In theory TDP should directly correlate to the amount of power the processor draws, but in practice it's anyone's guess how the manufacturer came up with that number.

> AMD is funded and controlled by the Chinese now.
Wrong South Korea
And intel is controlled by israel which is funding communism and left idealogys in the West, so buying intel is supporting communism to

You're a fucking retard. Back to >>>pol you go.

>NEET poster
>left ideology bad
>pro-corporate bootlicking is good
Hmm, I wonder who is behind this post

>Do less nanometers mean it goes faster? Why should I give a shit?
Faster? No.
Without architectural changes it will be more energy efficient and cooler tho.
BUT CPUSs might have use lower voltages (in case there was no improvement in manufacturing process), so that might hit performance or overclocking ability.
So basically at this point it means that manufacturers are just increasing core count.

Attached: GEpOUZU.jpg (408x345, 26K)

>Faster? No.
So why should I give a shit?

Because it's faster indirectly. Less nanometers means less power draw which mean they can add more transistors and/or increase clock to end up with higher performance at the same power draw.

While that's true, TSMC 7nm is already in mass production phase while Intel 10nm is pretty much never gonna produce in significant quantities. People should really not expect 10nm to produce any desktop parts at this point. Look forward to 7nm EUV though.

In theory, right? Historically, it's been nothing more than a marketing point. Performance is the only thing that matters.

I have zero interest in another Skylake iteration. I hope we get some more Ice Lake / Sunny Cove information soon once we start getting the official Ryzen 3000 specs.

You shouldn't really. If your PC works fine, just enjoy it.
>Less nanometers means less power draw which mean they can add more transistors and/or increase clock to end up with higher performance at the same power draw.
Lower voltage limit due to increased electromigration usually prevents brutal voltage increase.
It happened around 22->14 switch. Average Haswell could hit 4.7 without problems. Broadwell was massively delayed and at release could barely OC to 4.2. They're probably experiencing the same shit with 14->10 switch right now.

Also, it goes against the first law of thermodynamics so... not sure that Intlel is telling the whole story

Wait for Navi

>People should really not expect 10nm to produce any desktop parts at this point.
this. Intel produced UP UNTIL NOW only a 2c mobile chip without iGPU and now aiming to produce a 1c Sunny Cope core for their big.LITTLE mobile config part, 1 (one) fucking core.

Is this the end of Moors' law?

Attached: WE.jpg (600x797, 73K)

Pretty much. They may still try to push MOAR COARS for a while, but that won't carry them very far

Taiwan is also communism, right kike?

It's not quite that nefarious by itself. 95w tdp wi mean a cooler rated to 95w will handle the processor within specification. So while a cpu is idle its cool and has extra thermal head room it can use and turbo clock speeds will use up this extra and when it goes over its set limits (be it power or thermal) it'll clock base closer to base clock. Oem systems tend to stick to these setting so they don't have to spend more money on vrms and colling etc.
The motherboard manufacturers on the other hand throw the limits out of the window to make the processor run out of spec and Intel let's it go because it let's their product look better. Reviewers are in on it and the customer base supports it because they're the ones who will use the processors in that way or even over clock more.
Amd pbo goes above the tdp power limit rating if there's cooling headroom. Intels turbo3 still uses timed extra clocks that are overwritten in the bios settings with mce or other things.

you can't compare 7nm chips to something that doesn't exist

the pentium 4 clock speed of the modern era

Well adding two cores per gen is nice tho but it will probably need a new mobo again.

Completely fair comparison. Intel Sure will sell less then AMD!

How long until 128 5ghz cores?

>faster RAM
>overclocked
>more expensive mobo
Next time let's compare a Athlon 200GE to a i9 9900k at 5Ghz, that will sure be fair.

when heat is not an issue. maybe when 'we' move away from silicon to something else, something more durable at insane clocks

>>faster RAM
RAM prices are in free fall right now

Attached: 1547054263652.jpg (540x720, 33K)

It is, because 2933MHz is Zen+'s minimal spec (outside of APUs).

>faster RAM
See above, you dumb Intbecile fuck.

>overclocked
Both 2600 and 2600X can do 4.2GHz Turbo even on stock cooler. It's "OC" only in a sense that it's stable across all cores with a top tier air/AIO/FCWCL.

>more expensive mobo
Typical Intbecile in a nut, l/a/dies and Jow Forumsentlemen.

>Multi-core doesn't matter!
>Productivity doesn't matter!
>Price/performance doesn't matter!
>Performance per watt doesn't matter!
>Power usage doesn't matter!
>Temperatures don't matter!
>Soldered dies don't matter!
>Stutters don't matter!
>Streaming doesn't matter!
>Data centers don't matter!
>Locked CPUs don't matter!
>OEMs don't matter!
>Hyperscalers don't matter!
>Upgradeability doesn't matter!
>Anti-competitive business practices don't matter!
>Locked platform features don't matter!
>Synthetic loads don't matter!
>PCI-e lanes don't matter!
>Burnt pins don't matter!
>Heat doesn't matter!
>1771w cooler doesn't matter!
>Server space doesn't matter!
>ECC support doesn't matter!
>Free RAID doesn't matter!
>NVMe RAID doesn't matter!
>StoreMI doesn't matter!
>IPC doesn't matter!
>7nm doesn't matter!
>StoreMI doesn't matter!
>HEDT doesn't matter!
>Stock coolers don't matter!
>Security doesn't matter!
>Games don't always matter!
>Enterprise doesn't matter!
>Hyperthreading doesn't matter!
>VMware doesn't matter!
>MySQL doesn't matter!
>Unix doesn't matter!
>Linux doesn't matter!
>Waffer yields don't matter!
>Benchmarks after full patches don't matter!
>Asian markets don't matter!
>Own fabrics doens't matter!
>Chipset lithography doesn't matter!
>Cray doesn't matter!
>Cisco doesn't matter!
>HPE doesn't matter!
>AZURE doesn't matter!
>5nm doesn't matter!
>TDP doens't matter!
>10nm doesn't always matter!
>Cache doesn't matter!
>Integrated graphics doesn't matter!
>PCI-Express 4.0 doesn't matter!
>Germany doesn't matter!
>Processors doesn't matter!
>Custom Foundry Business doesn't matter
>Framerate doesn't matter!
>Amazon sales don't matter!
>Prime95 AVX doesn't matter!
>*NEW* nanometers doesn't matter!

Attached: 6240c8eb7effec6faa6b860a6267bf15.png (256x255, 48K)

>>>NEW!! Performance doesn't matter!!

>>It is, because 2933MHz
Isn't that actually the max officially supported

hahaha was looking for this post!

Not even an actual new gen and yet a new motherboard will be required, pathetic. I'd jump ship and buy the 3850x when it's out but the lack of support for high speed ram beyond 3600mhz upsets me a lot, you get so much more stable frame rate with high speed ram, it's crazy.

You say it's shit, but the new intel GPUs are going to wreck GPUs up to the GT1030 and crush Ryzen Vega graphics utterly.

>I'd jump ship and buy the 3850x when it's out but the lack of support for high speed ram beyond 3600mhz upsets me a lot, you get so much more stable frame rate with high speed ram, it's crazy.

Ryzen 3000 should be less dependant on memory speed. We'll see.

Memory controller is on the CPU

Inb4 15w 6 core 4.3Ghz mobile parts

ayyyyyylmfao

What the fuck is it even called? They've ran out of numbers.

based

They run out of pluses for their generations too.