121–130 of 264 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you get the 5900X at all?
Not to mention, where would you get an adequate GPU to go along with it unless you already have one.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Price is the biggest factor. You can get 10 cores with Intel for cheaper than 8 with AMD, plus with Intel you get integrated graphics as well which is really important right now considering the GPU shortage. Also, Intel allows virtual GPUs for virtualization in QEMU which AMD won't do.
If I wanted more than 8 cores, the 12-core ryzen 5900X is $549, can you really get an intel 10-core cpu for the same price, or within 50 bucks plus or minus, that performs better? I'm seeing the i9-10900K for $467, but in terms of dollars/performance per core I think it's still behind the ryzen which costs $82 more. https://www.techspot.com/review/2132-amd-ryzen-5900x/
The 8-core 5800X is available at MSRP, though (at least, I've seen Newegg stock it).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you get the 5900X at all?
Not to mention, where would you get an adequate GPU to go along with it unless you already have one.
No ECC support means it's totally useless for workstation workloads.
With Ryzen, it's feasible to use ECC in a desktop/gaming PC too; you just need a motherboard that lists ECC support. I'm running DDR4-3200 CL22 ECC overclocked to 3666 CL16 on an ASRock board with a 5800X.
Which ASRock board did you go with?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not to mention, where would you get an adequate GPU to go along with it unless you already have one.
I wouldn't recommend buying a 5900X for gaming; you're going to be bottlenecked on your 3080 GTX even with many fewer CPU cores. 5900X is a workstation-class CPU.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't such a thing necessary as we see US presidents falling for (deep)fake media? Is there a privacy-respecting solution that you prefer?
I'm just going to say, if you don't think this _isn't_ going to be massively abused - take a look at what the CCP, or any authoritarian regime does really, to silence dissent. Don't have a good enough social credit because you shared an opinion somebody doesn't like one too many times? Intel and Microsoft will just remotely brick all your devices. > Is there a privacy-respecting solution that you prefer? Yeah, it's c…
If it's all opt-in (and otherwise anonymous), doesn't that solve the privacy issue?
I'm definitely not advocating for the OP solution, which is why I asked if anyone knew of alternatives.
You have to give whomever came up with 14nm process. Despite being super old it's still somewhat competitive. It's crazy Intel can't fix their process. They make more cash than amd, nvida etc. They make more cash than tsmc.
I would not be surprised if there was a lot of sunk cost fallacy on Intel's 10nm. They couldn't make it work effectively and it was so far behind that they bled out most of their process leadership. But rather than pivot and reset they've just kept hammering away at it. Of course the decision would not be trivial to make; the lead time for a new process node is significant.
But when you're "close" to getting your 10nm fab working, it's hard to start a new design for 14nm. If their 7nm had shown up ready to go, that would have saved them, but it looks troubled too. Maybe they'll be able to work out the kinks faster on 7nm.
Maybe they'll design something out of character for Intel that works for the realities of their 10nm process; from what I can tell, their 10nm process is mobile only because it doesn't clock well, they could turn that into a less negative by doing a design they normally couldn't do because of the need for high clockspeeds. It may look copycat of M1, but something that's a lot wider might be viable with a 3Ghz clock target, but isn't viable for 5Ghz that Intel needs to hit on desktop chips.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't such a thing necessary as we see US presidents falling for (deep)fake media? Is there a privacy-respecting solution that you prefer?
Well, privacy is a fundamental human right. Perhaps not doing anything is better than Adobes likely self serving solution.
I didn't see any benchmarks if the new Xe iGPU. Wonder how good they are... 2x over previous generation wouldn't surprise me.
The particular laptop that I bought is the New Dell XPS 13, and it has an integrated 4K screen that randomly flickers, fails to start after sleep, dims and has a plethora of other issues related to power management bugs in the drivers that Dell have told me are a work-in-progress with the Xe. In the last month or so, there has been a new graphics driver or BIOS nearly every week, and insofar the issues are now nearly all resolved.
As for the CPU, the i7-1185G7 runs really hot on idle but thankfully it doesn't get much hotter under extreme load. It feels absurdly fast, but the battery life is quite lackluster as you'd expect due to the heat produced under idle.
Anyone have any idea when intel's 10nm will hit desktop? Are they making any progress at all? Are they just planning on skipping straight to 7 at this point?
This is half- to full- snark: When they outsource to TSMC. At some point Intel will get their act together and only be one step behind rather than... christ, are they three steps behind? They just have way too much money. But it does look like with the management purges, re-hires of old guard, and other changes it'll be a while before they right ship. There's probably pride to overcome, since a lot of process choices…
They're not really three steps behind. At some point, node measurements became more useless as Intel and TSMC differ on what part of the thing they're measuring. Intel's 14 nm is roughly the same as TSMCs 10, and i10 ~= t7, i7 ~= t5. TSMC is shipping their 5nm chips, and intel is halfway shipping their 10nm chips, so that's somewhere between 1.5 and 2 steps behind.