• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

CPU market stagnation since June 2013?

V

Vageetasjn

Senior member
I built my home desktop in June 2013 with an i5 4670 purchased from Newegg for $230. Today that part lists for $225. Haswell quad cores are still the mid-range price sweet spot. Is it me or should the market have produced an upgraded product for that price after 27 months?
 
Kinda old news but it's unintuitive unless you keep up with CPU related goings-on. And if you do that, you'll be kinda bummed since the market is a bit stagnated. Even the very newest not-cheap stuff is kinda yawn.
 
Ramses said:
Kinda old news but it's unintuitive unless you keep up with CPU related goings-on. And if you do that, you'll be kinda bummed since the market is a bit stagnated. Even the very newest not-cheap stuff is kinda yawn.
Click to expand...

Even Intel's darling, perf/W, has stagnated since Haswell.
 
since 2011. I built this 2600k rig which I run at 4.6ghz 24x7 with 16gb ddr3 (was super cheap in 2011) I have USB 3 via my motherboard and PCI-e 2.0 x16 doesn't seems to be bottlenecking my 980TI.

I'm literally not missing out on anything 4+ years later.
 
The Pc got stuck since Sandy Bridge and AMD death.

The laptop one got stuck since 2013 due the tablet processors being introduced on laptops.
 
dark zero said:
The laptop one got stuck since 2013 due the tablet processors being introduced on laptops.
Click to expand...
Yup. Tons of people out there saying "why is my new laptop slower than my old one" if you read Celeron N**** reviews. In Intel's defense though, I think AMD started it, putting the C and E processors into huge laptops in around 2011. Before 2013 Intel reserved Atom for 10.1" models, so I guess it was a "monkey see monkey do / if they can do it so can we" type mentality to save money.
 
Unoid said:
since 2011. I built this 2600k rig which I run at 4.6ghz 24x7 with 16gb ddr3 (was super cheap in 2011) I have USB 3 via my motherboard and PCI-e 2.0 x16 doesn't seems to be bottlenecking my 980TI.

I'm literally not missing out on anything 4+ years later.
Click to expand...

Well, if you are bottlenecked by your graphics card, why are you complaining about lack of cpu progress? Since it overclocks fairly consistently to about the same speed as your cpu, and has about 20 to 30 pct better ipc, in a cpu limited game, there would be some improvement going to skylake.

In any case, desktop is not the focus. I have a SB work laptop from around that time (2011), and it runs quite hot and has really terrible battery life. I would say Skylake would be a big improvement there, giving better thermals and battery life for the same performance.

Honestly, not directed at you personally, but all these complaints about lack of gains in desktop Skylake are getting old. It is a mature product, and all the easy gains have been made already. People that are expecting the generation to generation gains anywhere close to what we used to see are simply unrealistic. My only criticism of intel is that they should bring out a mainstream hex core, since they dont seem to be able to wring much more out of the architecture.
 
Vageetasjn said:
I built my home desktop in June 2013 with an i5 4670 purchased from Newegg for $230. Today that part lists for $225.
Click to expand...

This is a major reason why mobile is exploding while PC is shrinking. Intel's market manipulations are not natural. The market can and will find ways around it. The money flows to where the competition is. In the mobile sector you've got half a dozen SoC vendors trying to undercut each other. In the PC sector you have an intel monopoly that holds price and supply in a tight balance . They may succeed with their gross market manipulations, but their market will not grow. The best they will do is barely struggle to hang on to what little they have. For a while. Eventually they will just implode and be forced to stop gouging. Given the pace of technological advancement, a two year old chip should be roughly half the original price at most. Back when Intel desktop segment was actually growing, this used to be true even for their chips.
 
ninaholic37 said:
Yup. Tons of people out there saying "why is my new laptop slower than my old one" if you read Celeron N**** reviews. In Intel's defense though, I think AMD started it, putting the C and E processors into huge laptops in around 2011. Before 2013 Intel reserved Atom for 10.1" models, so I guess it was a "monkey see monkey do / if they can do it so can we" type mentality to save money.
Click to expand...

I also hate the trend to putting atom and cat cores in laptops, especially larger ones. But the purchasers do share some responsibility. It is not like notebook check will not almost instantly give you the relative performance of any processor. Purchasers just look for the cheapest price and get stuck with a small core cpu.

The biggest criticism I have of Intel and AMD, is that they seem to be trying to obfuscate what chip you are really getting by making extremely confusing (deceptive??) naming schemes.
 
Haswell overclocking looks to have improved with time. Seems like the Vietnam 4790k's deliver what Devils Canyon promised. My 4690k from launch seems like a dud. My recent 4790k I've gotten into windows at 5ghz @1.36v's with some stability for benching. 3 day weekend so I'll be able to fully test it. Goal is only 4.8ghz anyways as I'd rather keep it under 1.3v's for 24/7. Probably would need to delid for 5ghz 24/7. Too risky if 4.8ghz pans out.

I just upgrade to tinker around now....That and the quest for 5ghz.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top