Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Intel’s 11th Gen Core Tiger Lake SoC Detailed

anandtech.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 163 posts

Re: Intel’s 11th Gen Core Tiger Lake SoC Detailed

#31

Post by AgloeDreams »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #23
rwmj wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It will be competing against the AMD Ryzen 4000, and most likely losing that competition.

I'd take the other side of that bet. According to the article and other related ones, both the Xe graphics architecture and the 10++ nodes are substantial bumps. But it'll be a close race, which is a piece of awesomeness we've never had in laptops before. The Ryzen 4000 is a 2019 vintage. Slightly losing against Intel's 2021 design is no shame. Comparing Tiger Lake against the Ryzen 5000 is a fairer comparison. And t…

AMD has little stopping them from moving to 5nm or 6nm TSMC next year, possibly sooner than Intel can ship this. AMD could do a small run to win on both paper and ground.

The real factor here is the third competitor, Apple, walking in with what is expected to be a 5nm 'no cost limits' CPU that they will ship on every machine based on A14 architecture. Because they own the design and just have TSMC do Fab it's likely that Apple will intentionally put what would be a $500-$1000+ monster core-count cpu spec in every base product, stealing the war. and possibly deflating the market for victors here.

Re: Intel’s 11th Gen Core Tiger Lake SoC Detailed

#32

Post by [deleted] »

alfiedotwtf wrote: post #6
xyst wrote: post #2

I won't be buying Intel CPUs for years to come. Haven't upgraded since 2016. Years of "incremental" improvements while still advertising $1000+ CPU prices has deterred me for quite some time. Intel fanboys might eat it up though. Given their history of significant delays in the current roadmap, how does this compare to their competition who is quickly advancing on 10nm? Also what is this internal naming schema? > The…

Everyone I know, including myself, have gone AMD 39xx. Damn what a beast at a reasonable price.

[deleted]

Re: Intel’s 11th Gen Core Tiger Lake SoC Detailed

#33

Post by SloopJon »

alfiedotwtf wrote: post #6
xyst wrote: post #2

I won't be buying Intel CPUs for years to come. Haven't upgraded since 2016. Years of "incremental" improvements while still advertising $1000+ CPU prices has deterred me for quite some time. Intel fanboys might eat it up though. Given their history of significant delays in the current roadmap, how does this compare to their competition who is quickly advancing on 10nm? Also what is this internal naming schema? > The…

Everyone I know, including myself, have gone AMD 39xx. Damn what a beast at a reasonable price.

If I build a new computer to replace my Ivy Bridge hackintosh, the only thing that would keep me on Intel at this point is the desire to build one last hackintosh before Apple goes full ARM. At the middle level, say Ryzen 3700X vs i7-9700, they're pretty close.

Re: Intel’s 11th Gen Core Tiger Lake SoC Detailed

#34

Post by jimbobimbo »

alfiedotwtf wrote: post #6
xyst wrote: post #2

I won't be buying Intel CPUs for years to come. Haven't upgraded since 2016. Years of "incremental" improvements while still advertising $1000+ CPU prices has deterred me for quite some time. Intel fanboys might eat it up though. Given their history of significant delays in the current roadmap, how does this compare to their competition who is quickly advancing on 10nm? Also what is this internal naming schema? > The…

Everyone I know, including myself, have gone AMD 39xx. Damn what a beast at a reasonable price.

I was upgrading a year or so ago, after the Spectre and Meltdown were discovered and patched by essentially slowing down CPUs. Went with AMD and never looked back.

Re: Intel’s 11th Gen Core Tiger Lake SoC Detailed

#35

Post by elorant »

tyingq wrote: post #21

Aside from the pressure from AMD, I think there's another force at play here. There are quite a lot of people now that just use a web browser on their desktop or laptop. For them, a 5 year old (or older?) CPU is good enough that they don't know they are missing anything. Especially if they have enough memory and an SSD.

I built a desktop rig for my dad back in 2013 with an i3-3220. Seven years later it still works just fine for his needs. The only thing I changed over the years was to add a bit more RAM. I don't plan on updating it unless the CPU/mobo dies.

Re: Intel’s 11th Gen Core Tiger Lake SoC Detailed

#36

Post by vnorilo »

elorant wrote: post #35
tyingq wrote: post #21

Aside from the pressure from AMD, I think there's another force at play here. There are quite a lot of people now that just use a web browser on their desktop or laptop. For them, a 5 year old (or older?) CPU is good enough that they don't know they are missing anything. Especially if they have enough memory and an SSD.

I built a desktop rig for my dad back in 2013 with an i3-3220. Seven years later it still works just fine for his needs. The only thing I changed over the years was to add a bit more RAM. I don't plan on updating it unless the CPU/mobo dies.

Yeah - it's great. I'm rocking a 2008 Nehalem at home, having since doubled the memory to 12GB, upgraded the GPU and replaced a failed PSU. It runs like a champ and my non-techie friends think I'm kidding when I say it's more than 10 years old.

Re: Intel’s 11th Gen Core Tiger Lake SoC Detailed

#37

Post by ip26 »

apotecaryman wrote: post #9
xyst wrote: post #2

I won't be buying Intel CPUs for years to come. Haven't upgraded since 2016. Years of "incremental" improvements while still advertising $1000+ CPU prices has deterred me for quite some time. Intel fanboys might eat it up though. Given their history of significant delays in the current roadmap, how does this compare to their competition who is quickly advancing on 10nm? Also what is this internal naming schema? > The…

I never understood this idea that someone feels sleighted for something out of their price range that they perceive should be valued lower for their benefit while complaining that the company is setting up prices for their benefit too. Is it grounded on facts or mostly an emotional response?

Exorbitant prices on warmed-over revisions of yesterday's product in a market devoid of competition broadcasts "we've stopped trying because we own the market".

Yes, that can trigger an emotional response in people.

Re: Intel’s 11th Gen Core Tiger Lake SoC Detailed

#38

Post by Symmetry »

nimish wrote: post #19

Intel advertised a bunch of fancy transistors and process improvements well after it was clear 10nm as a whole was a bust (COAG, Single Diffusion Break, probably more) Color me skeptical.

Charlie, the arch Intel skeptic, was convinced and if he thinks they managed to fix their problems with 10nm I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt.

https://semiaccurate.com/2020/08/13/intel-talks-about-10nm-s...

Re: Intel’s 11th Gen Core Tiger Lake SoC Detailed

#39

Post by jrott »

tyingq wrote: post #21

Aside from the pressure from AMD, I think there's another force at play here. There are quite a lot of people now that just use a web browser on their desktop or laptop. For them, a 5 year old (or older?) CPU is good enough that they don't know they are missing anything. Especially if they have enough memory and an SSD.

Yeah this absolutely makes a huge difference. The upgrade cycle for laptops and desktops has gotten long. When things have been slow for me at least it almost always memory bound and not cpu bound at this point as well.

Re: Intel’s 11th Gen Core Tiger Lake SoC Detailed

#40

Post by SaltySolomon »

SloopJon wrote: post #33
alfiedotwtf wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone I know, including myself, have gone AMD 39xx. Damn what a beast at a reasonable price.

If I build a new computer to replace my Ivy Bridge hackintosh, the only thing that would keep me on Intel at this point is the desire to build one last hackintosh before Apple goes full ARM. At the middle level, say Ryzen 3700X vs i7-9700, they're pretty close.

Its quite possible to build an AMD-Hackintosh, its quite in stlye really.
Post reply on HN