- Nov 14, 2011
- 10,232
- 5,013
- 136
In the first five generations we went through Nehalem, Sandy Bridge, Ivy Bridge, Haswell and Broadwell. The following five generations have been... Skylake. Crazy.
I would say they really aren't gens, just skylake, skylake+, skylake++, skylake+++, skylake++++.In the first five generations we went through Nehalem, Sandy Bridge, Ivy Bridge, Haswell and Broadwell. The following five generations have been... Skylake. Crazy.
I would say they really aren't gens, just skylake, skylake+, skylake++, skylake+++, skylake++++.
But I am sure I am a little off, just seems that way,
Anandtech even said the 10700k was skylake.....So its Skylake++++I was referring to the marketing that calls the latest power guzzler as 10th generation.
Nehalem is perhaps more of a bridge design than a core product.In the first five generations we went through Nehalem, Sandy Bridge, Ivy Bridge, Haswell and Broadwell. The following five generations have been... Skylake. Crazy.
Well, I would not say "held well enough" exactly. They are power hungry and don't perform that well, and don't have all the hardware fixes for the security flaws. AMD just keeps getting farther away.Which reminds me, if all went according to plan what was intended to release today? Like even with a full year of delay Cannon and Ice would still have been 2017 and 2018 products, what about late 2020? If Golden Cove was a thing for 2020 (and 7nm) there must be some serious build-up, notwithstanding security issues and all the work to fix them.
That's more like two nodes screw up followed by poor substitutes for years looking from the consumers side, it's indeed amazing Skylake held well enough to this point.
I'm mostly speaking about the architecture point of view, certainly even Skylake would fare decently power consumption wise if it were on 7nm with maybe a few 100 mhz less. It would compete also on performance being a good deal smaller so possibly featuring more cores than today 10, like die shrink of it and MCM for 16+ cores aren't far fetched. Security wise there's no excuse of course, there newer arch might have helped by nature of being well, new, with different flaws maybe but still undiscovered.Well, I would not say "held well enough" exactly. They are power hungry and don't perform that well, and don't have all the hardware fixes for the security flaws. AMD just keeps getting farther away.
I don't think what you're saying is actually true.I'm mostly speaking about the architecture point of view, certainly even Skylake would fare decently power consumption wise if it were on 7nm with maybe a few 100 mhz less. It would compete also on performance being a good deal smaller so possibly featuring more cores than today 10, like die shrink of it and MCM for 16+ cores aren't far fetched. Security wise there's no excuse of course, there newer arch might have helped by nature of being well, new, with different flaws maybe but still undiscovered.
Which reminds me, if all went according to plan what was intended to release today?
Cannonlake 2017
IceLake 2018
TigerLake 2019
Alder Lake 2020
Meteor Lake 2021
That would be my guess.
So would Meteor Lake be 5nm, in the original plan?
I think they're probably feeling more frustrated that their new designs have been unable to make it to market due to 10nm.Pretty sue the skylake engineers are quite proud as their core is on huge chunk of the X86 market and will be for the next 4-5 years (My 8700 wont need replacing anytime soon)
So would Meteor Lake be 5nm, in the original plan?
I was referring to the marketing that calls the latest power guzzler as 10th generation.
That's right, Skylake was roughly 5% faster than Haswell. It was not even a good generational leap.Skylake sucks. It was OK back in late 2015, but that's about it. I thought the CPU was nothing special back then. Now add 5 years on top of that.
If anything there have been regressions for all the security issues.@senttoschool There's zero IPC gains in Skylake cores. They are all same.
Oh yeah they certainly thought that they would be getting more than only almost double...I think they're probably feeling more frustrated that their new designs have been unable to make it to market due to 10nm.
Keep in mind that these engineers are usually given company stock. They probably feel like their stock compensation would have been a lot more if the company didn't screw up 10nm.