• 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.

Question GREATEST CPU OF ALL TIME (DESKTOP >1999)

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

???

  • Total voters
    89
DrMrLordX said:
Kabylake never had a hexcore CPU:

ark.intel.com

Products formerly Kaby Lake

Products formerly Kaby Lake product listing with links to detailed product features and specifications.
ark.intel.com ark.intel.com

The 8600k was Coffee Lake.

Otherwise I overall agree, though the 7700k was technically better than the 6700k, and probably wouldn't be remembered as being a bad CPU were it not for Zen1.
Click to expand...
That was tongue in cheek since there is no real difference in the architecture. I probably should have called it skylake 6 core. That is why it was such BS they broke socket compatibility but expected nonetheless.
 
PingSpike said:
Coffeelake came out 8 months after zen 1, and it wouldn't even existed if zen's presence hadn't forced their hand. And the quick turn around proved how easy it would have been to have just given us some more cores. I agree coffeelake was pretty good, since the prices were much better than kabylake in response to zen and they actually offered some products that had things the previous generation lacked: more cores.
Click to expand...
The best part was it made the MOAR COREZ!!1!!! mockery STFU. 🤣 Now if we can break Intel of the tick tock platform shenanigans, DIY will be in the platinum age. Then, hopefully, we'll get new contenders for GOAT.
 
PingSpike said:
That was tongue in cheek since there is no real difference in the architecture. I probably should have called it skylake 6 core. That is why it was such BS they broke socket compatibility but expected nonetheless.
Click to expand...
Oh okay. Sorry, it's been awhile, and people could have misremembered it.
 
My serious answer would probably be the Pentium, or the Pentium II. Pentium brought us superscalar execution, and then Pentium II brought us Out of Order execution*. Those were huge jumps forward in architecture.

*I know it was in the PPro first, but that wasn't a mainstream CPU. And yes, other server/mainframe/workstation CPUs had these features earlier, not claiming Intel invented them!
 
AdamK47 said:
The list in the poll is sad. No mention of Mendocino, Thunderbird, or Coppermine.
Click to expand...
Maybe they deserve to be included. But I question if there were any "great" CPUs until Dennard scaling died. Before that time there would be constantly improved versions which made buying CPUs rough. You knew you were buying something soon obsolete. And CPU cores were designed with that scaling in mind.
 
Shmee said:
I am surprised that Nehalem wasn't an option. With that came the first i7, as well as the first 6 core CPUs a bit later for the same platform.
Click to expand...
It was a beast at the time and could easily be overclocked. But I wonder if the expensive platform would hurt its greatness, as I don't recall it being affordable.
 
True, the motherboards were on the expensive side a bit. But also the platform was easily upgrade capable for cheap later, with drop in Xeon upgrades from Ebay etc, and adding more DDR3 as more RAM became more important and cheaper in cost.
 
SiliconFly said:
Oh pls. In that case, they should also add Lunar Lake, since it's more closer to Zen 3 than the extinct Sandy/Ivy.
Click to expand...
Those have nothing to do with the filter I suggested.
Everything after Prescott is designed knowing that Dennard scaling is dead.
 
Shmee said:
True, the motherboards were on the expensive side a bit. But also the platform was easily upgrade capable for cheap later, with drop in Xeon upgrades from Ebay etc, and adding more DDR3 as more RAM became more important and cheaper in cost.
Click to expand...
The X99 motherboards were pretty expensive, but my 5820k@4.0Ghz lasted me for 5 years, my dad for another 4 years past my use, and I just sold that combo locally this year; so it's still chugging along most likely. If there was official support for Win11 for it, I would have probably kept those parts in service for my home's file server.
 
Golgatha said:
The X99 motherboards were pretty expensive, but my 5820k@4.0Ghz lasted me for 5 years, my dad for another 4 years past my use, and I just sold that combo locally this year; so it's still chugging along most likely. If there was official support for Win11 for it, I would have probably kept those parts in service for my home's file server.
Click to expand...
Yeah X99 was great as well. Last platform where you could upgrade an i7 to a cheap Xeon from a server pull. Many of the boards also supported ECC RDIMMs. My Asus X99 Deluxe currently has 256GB worth of these, and I use it as a server with a Xeon E5 1660v3.

I know you already sold the system, but honestly you could have kept it for a server/NAS, just running some NAS OS such as Truenas, or Linux and set up SMB shares on it. It doesn't officially support Windows 11, true, but usually for a file server one of the for mentioned OS makes more sense.
 
SiliconFly said:
The poll list is total rubbish. It shows Sandy/Ivy which is 2011/2012. But at the same time, it also shows Zen 3 which is a 2020 product! That like almost a decade apart! It's mind numbingly sad and complete bs.
Click to expand...

You are bs. The Athlon 64 is included, which is many years younger than Sandy/Ivy and crushed it. Think about it as "greatest of their era". At least that's how I took it. Also note I have been a vocal fan of Ivy Bridge here.
 
Tbh regarding longevity, right now most CPUs will last, at least, 5 years. I upgraded from a 6600K to a 10700K because it was thread starved. Had I bought the 6700K I would still be using it. Even an FX-8350 will work fine in most situations.
 
I would have voted for Wolfdale E8400, as its what I upgrade to from an Athlon 64 3000+. It made a hell of an impression on me as MAME emulation of Atari Seattle hardware (Mace, SF Rush, etc) ran at maybe 10fps on the Athlon...MAYBE-- complete with choppy sound. E8400 pushed full 30fps (actual arcade speed) on this emulator making it completely playable / identical to arcade hardware. It was amazingly fast. E6600 predated Wolfdale and was just a few % slower.
 
AdamK47 said:
If we included 1998 the obvious answer would be the Celeron 300A. The thread and poll would become pointless.

Seriously though, I suspect the OP is either too young or simply doesn't remember those years. His thread his rules I suppose.
Click to expand...
Despite Celeron 300A is a jewel, there might be competition.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top