Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

AMD still not making money.

124

Comments

  • Leon1eLeon1e Member UncommonPosts: 791
    edited February 2017
    As I said, if you have a decent PSU and you didn't buy the reference RX480, you own the best bang for your buck in the mid-range market. A friend of mine went with Asus RX480 and can never be happier. Constantly posting 60+ fps in Overwatch on Ultra/EPIC preset. 

    AMD not posting billions in revenue is probably because they don't have "new products". Every new PC currently is bought with Sky/Kaby lake processor due to the DDR4 availability, at least that's how I advice my friends. Since in the future they could easily just upgrade the ram. However I also advice them to wait, since Ryzen is just around the corner, which is what I'm doing. 

    Intel has become so lenient themselves that they release a new generation of CPU that isn't actually better than the previous. On the contrary, in some benches Kaby Lake is slower than Skylake at the same clock. So that's that. 

    Also having to delid your brand new 600$ CPU seems like a stupid thing to do to get decent temps. (Read, at least 10 degrees improvement over stock when properly delided). It's a freaking 600$ CPU that probably cost like 10$ to make. At least put some decent thermals on that shit ... 
  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    edited February 2017
    Yeah, its funny how Skylake runs cooler than "new improved Kaby Lake" lol

    Just remember first Haswell chips with terrible thermals that were tossed away as a fail and Devils Canyon was brought that did nothing else but properly assemble the IHS to fix inherent flaw lol

    Now Intel is going backwards, They moved from Devils Canyon (Skylake) to Haswell (Kaby Lake). Ive never seen so many "delid attempts and tutorials" on the net as with Kaby Lake, i guess Intel should ship delid tools with their -k chips as they dont ship coolers anyway

    Also moving backwards by bringing rebranded 4 core 7700k to "HEDT" as "Kaby Lake X" (its same exact chip with iGPU disabled) instead bringing 6+ cores to mainstream (there are even some rumors about i5 on "HEDT") lol
  • laseritlaserit Member LegendaryPosts: 7,591
    Leon1e said:
    As I said, if you have a decent PSU and you didn't buy the reference RX480, you own the best bang for your buck in the mid-range market. A friend of mine went with Asus RX480 and can never be happier. Constantly posting 60+ fps in Overwatch on Ultra/EPIC preset. 

    AMD not posting billions in revenue is probably because they don't have "new products". Every new PC currently is bought with Sky/Kaby lake processor due to the DDR4 availability, at least that's how I advice my friends. Since in the future they could easily just upgrade the ram. However I also advice them to wait, since Ryzen is just around the corner, which is what I'm doing. 

    Intel has become so lenient themselves that they release a new generation of CPU that isn't actually better than the previous. On the contrary, in some benches Kaby Lake is slower than Skylake at the same clock. So that's that. 

    Also having to delid your brand new 600$ CPU seems like a stupid thing to do to get decent temps. (Read, at least 10 degrees improvement over stock when properly delided). It's a freaking 600$ CPU that probably cost like 10$ to make. At least put some decent thermals on that shit ... 
    Where the heck does a Kabylake cost $600?

    It's not even close to that price in Canuck Bucks.


    It would be interesting to know what a modern cpu does cost per unit to make and what its costs to tool up to manufacture.

    "Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee

  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    edited February 2017
    Uh huh, "Kaby Lake" runs MUCH hotter than Skylake, "deliding videos" are hit on the net.....along with HUGE improvement in thermals when they fix Kaby Lakes inherent flaw....the same flaw initial Haswell had lol
  • RidelynnRidelynn Member EpicPosts: 7,383
    I don't think Intel has changed their IHS installation since they "fixed" it with Devil's Canyon, apart from the fact that the IHS itself became a bit thicker under Skylake (and the PCB thinner). And even that fix was just that they used a different TIM, it wasn't a drastic change.

    Kaby runs hotter, because it's nearly the same chip, manufactured nearly the same way, running 200-300 Mhz faster than Skylake. I know, all you folks that don't believe frequency affects temperature are going to find another reason to believe.

    People delided Skylake and Devils' Canyon too... and got huge improvement in thermals there too. Nothing's changed.
  • laseritlaserit Member LegendaryPosts: 7,591
    Hyper Threading adds 10 degrees

    I've got mine running running just over the 5ghz that I was hoping for, no delidding required. 

    You know that if I want a Hot Rod and boost my horsepower. I'll have to do some significant modifications to a stock automobile or I'm going to break things. The manufacturer will no longer honor any warranty either. 

    "Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee

  • Leon1eLeon1e Member UncommonPosts: 791
    laserit said:
    Leon1e said:
    As I said, if you have a decent PSU and you didn't buy the reference RX480, you own the best bang for your buck in the mid-range market. A friend of mine went with Asus RX480 and can never be happier. Constantly posting 60+ fps in Overwatch on Ultra/EPIC preset. 

    AMD not posting billions in revenue is probably because they don't have "new products". Every new PC currently is bought with Sky/Kaby lake processor due to the DDR4 availability, at least that's how I advice my friends. Since in the future they could easily just upgrade the ram. However I also advice them to wait, since Ryzen is just around the corner, which is what I'm doing. 

    Intel has become so lenient themselves that they release a new generation of CPU that isn't actually better than the previous. On the contrary, in some benches Kaby Lake is slower than Skylake at the same clock. So that's that. 

    Also having to delid your brand new 600$ CPU seems like a stupid thing to do to get decent temps. (Read, at least 10 degrees improvement over stock when properly delided). It's a freaking 600$ CPU that probably cost like 10$ to make. At least put some decent thermals on that shit ... 
    Where the heck does a Kabylake cost $600?

    It's not even close to that price in Canuck Bucks.


    It would be interesting to know what a modern cpu does cost per unit to make and what its costs to tool up to manufacture.
    Still, 350$ is still a lot for a chip with silly thermals. 

    And if you exclude the prices for human labor, building and maintaining factories across the globe, mass production of a chip hasn't gone for more than 40$ per unit in the past 10 years. So depending on the class (Celeron, Pentium, i3, i5, i7) the cost per unit is anywhere between $12 and $40 ... and I only assume the 40$ units are reserved for the 1000$ chips, E.g. Core i7 6900k
  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    edited February 2017
    Ridelynn said:
    I don't think Intel has changed their IHS installation since they "fixed" it with Devil's Canyon, apart from the fact that the IHS itself became a bit thicker under Skylake (and the PCB thinner). And even that fix was just that they used a different TIM, it wasn't a drastic change.

    Kaby runs hotter, because it's nearly the same chip, manufactured nearly the same way, running 200-300 Mhz faster than Skylake. I know, all you folks that don't believe frequency affects temperature are going to find another reason to believe.

    People delided Skylake and Devils' Canyon too... and got huge improvement in thermals there too. Nothing's changed.
    At SAME clocks Kaby Lake runs ~10c hotter. Id say Intel should explain themselves but theyll just unleash this guy



    ....again lol

    and no, people didnt get such huge improvements with Skylake and Devils Canyon where exactly did you get that? making stuff up again?
  • CrusadecrusherCrusadecrusher Member UncommonPosts: 283
    Malabooga said:
    Ridelynn said:
    I don't think Intel has changed their IHS installation since they "fixed" it with Devil's Canyon, apart from the fact that the IHS itself became a bit thicker under Skylake (and the PCB thinner). And even that fix was just that they used a different TIM, it wasn't a drastic change.

    Kaby runs hotter, because it's nearly the same chip, manufactured nearly the same way, running 200-300 Mhz faster than Skylake. I know, all you folks that don't believe frequency affects temperature are going to find another reason to believe.

    People delided Skylake and Devils' Canyon too... and got huge improvement in thermals there too. Nothing's changed.
    At SAME clocks Kaby Lake runs ~10c hotter. Id say Intel should explain themselves but theyll just unleash this guy



    ....again lol

    and no, people didnt get such huge improvements with Skylake and Devils Canyon where exactly did you get that? making stuff up again?
    You know I support AMD, a matter of fact as you can see in this thread I just purchased an AMD The fact there are people like you/scratch that it's only you spamming sites like this with your awkward, weird crusade over Intel, nvidia and anything that's not AMD is making me think about changing my mind.  Oh oops almost forgot the lol
  • laseritlaserit Member LegendaryPosts: 7,591
    Leon1e said:
    laserit said:
    Leon1e said:
    As I said, if you have a decent PSU and you didn't buy the reference RX480, you own the best bang for your buck in the mid-range market. A friend of mine went with Asus RX480 and can never be happier. Constantly posting 60+ fps in Overwatch on Ultra/EPIC preset. 

    AMD not posting billions in revenue is probably because they don't have "new products". Every new PC currently is bought with Sky/Kaby lake processor due to the DDR4 availability, at least that's how I advice my friends. Since in the future they could easily just upgrade the ram. However I also advice them to wait, since Ryzen is just around the corner, which is what I'm doing. 

    Intel has become so lenient themselves that they release a new generation of CPU that isn't actually better than the previous. On the contrary, in some benches Kaby Lake is slower than Skylake at the same clock. So that's that. 

    Also having to delid your brand new 600$ CPU seems like a stupid thing to do to get decent temps. (Read, at least 10 degrees improvement over stock when properly delided). It's a freaking 600$ CPU that probably cost like 10$ to make. At least put some decent thermals on that shit ... 
    Where the heck does a Kabylake cost $600?

    It's not even close to that price in Canuck Bucks.


    It would be interesting to know what a modern cpu does cost per unit to make and what its costs to tool up to manufacture.
    Still, 350$ is still a lot for a chip with silly thermals. 

    And if you exclude the prices for human labor, building and maintaining factories across the globe, mass production of a chip hasn't gone for more than 40$ per unit in the past 10 years. So depending on the class (Celeron, Pentium, i3, i5, i7) the cost per unit is anywhere between $12 and $40 ... and I only assume the 40$ units are reserved for the 1000$ chips, E.g. Core i7 6900k
    You have to add everything into the equation and look at the big picture.

    I have some machines that I charge $500 an hour for. If you watch how fast it will make a part for you and then I give you the bill, you will probably feel that I just stiffed you. But I spent 1.2 million + extra costs on the machine. It will take me 2-3 years to recoup those costs if the economy is real good. After that 2-3 years... is when I just begin to actually turn a profit from the machine. After 5 years or so I'll need to sell it for a fraction of what I paid for it, to replace it with a new model to remain competitive because the technology improves so quickly.

    The company that makes the machines that I buy spends 40% of their profits right back into R&D so they can remain competitive.

    How many chips does it take for a CPU manufacturer to recoup their costs? And then how of that profit that they start making gets funneled right back into R&D.

    Everything in perspective.  

    "Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee

  • RidelynnRidelynn Member EpicPosts: 7,383
    edited February 2017
    Malabooga said:
    Ridelynn said:
    I don't think Intel has changed their IHS installation since they "fixed" it with Devil's Canyon, apart from the fact that the IHS itself became a bit thicker under Skylake (and the PCB thinner). And even that fix was just that they used a different TIM, it wasn't a drastic change.

    Kaby runs hotter, because it's nearly the same chip, manufactured nearly the same way, running 200-300 Mhz faster than Skylake. I know, all you folks that don't believe frequency affects temperature are going to find another reason to believe.

    People delided Skylake and Devils' Canyon too... and got huge improvement in thermals there too. Nothing's changed.
    At SAME clocks Kaby Lake runs ~10c hotter. Id say Intel should explain themselves but theyll just unleash this guy



    ....again lol

    and no, people didnt get such huge improvements with Skylake and Devils Canyon where exactly did you get that? making stuff up again?
    Can you share the testing for that? I've not seen anything that shows clock for clock, same HSF, on Skylake vs Kaby for temperature. I've seen a lot of clock for clock performance (which is nearly identical), and power use (Kaby is slightly lower on average, clock for clock, but not by a significant margin and nothing to write home about) but nothing with temperature shown.

    On the power results alone, I would expect, all things being equal, Kaby temperatures to be same or slightly lower than Skylake. But if there really is data out there that shows the temps are much higher, clock for clock, with same HSF - maybe there is some IHS difference that isn't obvious in everyone's delidding videos.

    *edit* before you accuse me of just embarrassing myself again, yes, I really did try to google for the information, and came up with nothing that shows temps, at least on the first couple of pages of results with the first few search terms my addled brain could comprehend.
  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    edited February 2017
    Ridelynn said:
    Malabooga said:
    Ridelynn said:
    I don't think Intel has changed their IHS installation since they "fixed" it with Devil's Canyon, apart from the fact that the IHS itself became a bit thicker under Skylake (and the PCB thinner). And even that fix was just that they used a different TIM, it wasn't a drastic change.

    Kaby runs hotter, because it's nearly the same chip, manufactured nearly the same way, running 200-300 Mhz faster than Skylake. I know, all you folks that don't believe frequency affects temperature are going to find another reason to believe.

    People delided Skylake and Devils' Canyon too... and got huge improvement in thermals there too. Nothing's changed.
    At SAME clocks Kaby Lake runs ~10c hotter. Id say Intel should explain themselves but theyll just unleash this guy



    ....again lol

    and no, people didnt get such huge improvements with Skylake and Devils Canyon where exactly did you get that? making stuff up again?
    Can you share the testing for that? I've not seen anything that shows clock for clock, same HSF, on Skylake vs Kaby for temperature. I've seen a lot of clock for clock performance (which is nearly identical), and power use (Kaby is slightly lower on average, clock for clock, but not by a significant margin and nothing to write home about) but nothing with temperature shown.

    On the power results alone, I would expect, all things being equal, Kaby temperatures to be same or slightly lower than Skylake. But if there really is data out there that shows the temps are much higher, clock for clock, with same HSF - maybe there is some IHS difference that isn't obvious in everyone's delidding videos.

    *edit* before you accuse me of just embarrassing myself again, yes, I really did try to google for the information, and came up with nothing that shows temps, at least on the first couple of pages of results with the first few search terms my addled brain could comprehend.
    Plenty of tests around the net.





    Post edited by Malabooga on
  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    Torval said:
    Everyone has their troubles including Intel. They're running into a full blown fiasco with hints of an NDA smoke and mirrors ploy. http://www.anandtech.com/show/11110/semi-critical-intel-atom-c2000-flaw-discovered

    Then again they've just announced 8th gen core on 14nm with data centers getting the goodsie first.
    http://www.anandtech.com/show/11115/intel-confirms-8th-gen-core-on-14nm-data-center-first-to-new-nodes

    So Intel is taking a hit on Atom SoCs and hopefully AMD won't let that opportunity slip by. Intel isn't sitting still either. According to the article 8th gen is going to be primarily focused on the Y and U product roadmap. The update interview at the end was an interesting and meaty read and I'm still not sure what to make of it all yet. 

    I took away that AMD has some opportunities here, but that Intel is on the move and the current focus is on servers, mobile, and devices rather than desktop.
    Hmmm, the "official" Intels claim at CES was that Cannon Lake (low powered chips) is coming late this year/early next year on 10nm.

    Their 10nm has been delayed few times so far, if its another delay thats a catastrophe.

    For their desktop "Coffe Lake" chips it has been said for a while now they are slated for Q22018 and STILL on 14 nm

    Also intel is still BSing about their node "being far ahead of others" rofl fact is that both Samsung and TSMC beat them to 10nm lol
  • someforumguysomeforumguy Member RarePosts: 4,088
    If you are not a shareholder, but just a consumer who now and then buys a GPU, then don't act like some fanboy. Then it is in your interest that both AMD and NVIDIA make top products so they are forced to compete in price.

    Shitting on either doesn't get you anywhere except being seen as dumb. It is really weird to identify yourself this way with a big commercial company and wanting them to 'win'.
  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    edited February 2017
    Also, this little slide is very telling that "8th gen" will be as "remamrkable" as "7th gen"



    for refererence:

    6th gen= Skylake
    7th gen= Kaby Lake
    8th gen= "Coffee Lake"

    now, we know that "7th gen" has 0-7% improvement over 6th gen as its straight rebrand with 7% higher clocks and 0 IPC improvement.

    We also know that "7th gen i7" launched in 1Q 2017. NOT 2H 2016.

    https://ark.intel.com/products/97129/Intel-Core-i7-7700K-Processor-8M-Cache-up-to-4_50-GHz


    Now lets step to 8th gen and what does this tell us:

    - 8th gen will still be 14 nm
    - 8th gen will have marginal performace improvement over 6th/7th gen
    - 8th gen will be same architecture as 6th/7th gen

    so i guess were looking at another rebrand with a bit higher clocks in about a year.
    Post edited by Malabooga on
  • RidelynnRidelynn Member EpicPosts: 7,383
    Malabooga said:
    Ridelynn said:
    Malabooga said:
    Ridelynn said:
    I don't think Intel has changed their IHS installation since they "fixed" it with Devil's Canyon, apart from the fact that the IHS itself became a bit thicker under Skylake (and the PCB thinner). And even that fix was just that they used a different TIM, it wasn't a drastic change.

    Kaby runs hotter, because it's nearly the same chip, manufactured nearly the same way, running 200-300 Mhz faster than Skylake. I know, all you folks that don't believe frequency affects temperature are going to find another reason to believe.

    People delided Skylake and Devils' Canyon too... and got huge improvement in thermals there too. Nothing's changed.
    At SAME clocks Kaby Lake runs ~10c hotter. Id say Intel should explain themselves but theyll just unleash this guy



    ....again lol

    and no, people didnt get such huge improvements with Skylake and Devils Canyon where exactly did you get that? making stuff up again?
    Can you share the testing for that? I've not seen anything that shows clock for clock, same HSF, on Skylake vs Kaby for temperature. I've seen a lot of clock for clock performance (which is nearly identical), and power use (Kaby is slightly lower on average, clock for clock, but not by a significant margin and nothing to write home about) but nothing with temperature shown.

    On the power results alone, I would expect, all things being equal, Kaby temperatures to be same or slightly lower than Skylake. But if there really is data out there that shows the temps are much higher, clock for clock, with same HSF - maybe there is some IHS difference that isn't obvious in everyone's delidding videos.

    *edit* before you accuse me of just embarrassing myself again, yes, I really did try to google for the information, and came up with nothing that shows temps, at least on the first couple of pages of results with the first few search terms my addled brain could comprehend.
    Plenty of tests around the net.





    Top graph doesn't say a whole lot - first three results fall in line with the "same to slightly lower" power draw on Kaby that everyone else has been seeing. Not sure what Intel Power Thermal Utility is, if it's stressing IGP, Kaby has a much more capable IGP than Skylake did, and that could be just one reason of many plausible reasons why that one sticks out.

    The bottom chart, however, is interesting. It's also the only chart of this like that I've seen to date. It also follows the same power results everyone else is seeing (Kaby is slightly lower, clock for clock), but does show higher temps. Hard to say exactly, because they aren't using the same motherboard, and they have an overclock on both chips, which may have some influence on the results, but they do appear to be using the same cooler.

    Before you could call it a definite TIM/IHS issue, you'd have to have both running at same clocks, on same motherboard, same cooler, and this test appears to meet that criteria. However, the overclock on both chips brings the silicon lottery into account, and without a lot of testing across a lot of chips, you can't draw a good conclusion. Either need a result with both chips at or under their stock clocks (so you would have to underclock the Kaby to meet Skylake clocks), or find a lot more tests of different chips to make sure it's a repeatable result.

  • laseritlaserit Member LegendaryPosts: 7,591
    Ridelynn said:
    Malabooga said:
    Ridelynn said:
    Malabooga said:
    Ridelynn said:
    I don't think Intel has changed their IHS installation since they "fixed" it with Devil's Canyon, apart from the fact that the IHS itself became a bit thicker under Skylake (and the PCB thinner). And even that fix was just that they used a different TIM, it wasn't a drastic change.

    Kaby runs hotter, because it's nearly the same chip, manufactured nearly the same way, running 200-300 Mhz faster than Skylake. I know, all you folks that don't believe frequency affects temperature are going to find another reason to believe.

    People delided Skylake and Devils' Canyon too... and got huge improvement in thermals there too. Nothing's changed.
    At SAME clocks Kaby Lake runs ~10c hotter. Id say Intel should explain themselves but theyll just unleash this guy



    ....again lol

    and no, people didnt get such huge improvements with Skylake and Devils Canyon where exactly did you get that? making stuff up again?
    Can you share the testing for that? I've not seen anything that shows clock for clock, same HSF, on Skylake vs Kaby for temperature. I've seen a lot of clock for clock performance (which is nearly identical), and power use (Kaby is slightly lower on average, clock for clock, but not by a significant margin and nothing to write home about) but nothing with temperature shown.

    On the power results alone, I would expect, all things being equal, Kaby temperatures to be same or slightly lower than Skylake. But if there really is data out there that shows the temps are much higher, clock for clock, with same HSF - maybe there is some IHS difference that isn't obvious in everyone's delidding videos.

    *edit* before you accuse me of just embarrassing myself again, yes, I really did try to google for the information, and came up with nothing that shows temps, at least on the first couple of pages of results with the first few search terms my addled brain could comprehend.
    Plenty of tests around the net.





    Top graph doesn't say a whole lot - first three results fall in line with the "same to slightly lower" power draw on Kaby that everyone else has been seeing. Not sure what Intel Power Thermal Utility is, if it's stressing IGP, Kaby has a much more capable IGP than Skylake did, and that could be just one reason of many plausible reasons why that one sticks out.

    The bottom chart, however, is interesting. It's also the only chart of this like that I've seen to date. It also follows the same power results everyone else is seeing (Kaby is slightly lower, clock for clock), but does show higher temps. Hard to say exactly, because they aren't using the same motherboard, and they have an overclock on both chips, which may have some influence on the results, but they do appear to be using the same cooler.

    Before you could call it a definite TIM/IHS issue, you'd have to have both running at same clocks, on same motherboard, same cooler, and this test appears to meet that criteria. However, the overclock on both chips brings the silicon lottery into account, and without a lot of testing across a lot of chips, you can't draw a good conclusion. Either need a result with both chips at or under their stock clocks (so you would have to underclock the Kaby to meet Skylake clocks), or find a lot more tests of different chips to make sure it's a repeatable result.

    Temperatures have also declined a bit since release with Bios updates from the motherboard manufactures. 

    Lets see where things sit after another update or two, there could very well be further improvement.

    "Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee

  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    edited February 2017
    At sme voltage it has 10c higher temperatures. Theres noting to wait except except for Intel representative coming to your house to change the TIM lol

    Ridelynn said:

    Top graph doesn't say a whole lot - first three results fall in line with the "same to slightly lower" power draw on Kaby that everyone else has been seeing. Not sure what Intel Power Thermal Utility is, if it's stressing IGP, Kaby has a much more capable IGP than Skylake did, and that could be just one reason of many plausible reasons why that one sticks out.

    The bottom chart, however, is interesting. It's also the only chart of this like that I've seen to date. It also follows the same power results everyone else is seeing (Kaby is slightly lower, clock for clock), but does show higher temps. Hard to say exactly, because they aren't using the same motherboard, and they have an overclock on both chips, which may have some influence on the results, but they do appear to be using the same cooler.

    Before you could call it a definite TIM/IHS issue, you'd have to have both running at same clocks, on same motherboard, same cooler, and this test appears to meet that criteria. However, the overclock on both chips brings the silicon lottery into account, and without a lot of testing across a lot of chips, you can't draw a good conclusion. Either need a result with both chips at or under their stock clocks (so you would have to underclock the Kaby to meet Skylake clocks), or find a lot more tests of different chips to make sure it's a repeatable result.



    Its straight rebrand, IGP is SAME, its SAME exact chip on "14nm+" node lol. Oh no, wait, 7700k can play Netfix in 4k!

     Motherboard has nothing to do with it. Both chips are runiing SAME clocks on SAME voltage, on "auto" and manual undervolt along with everyone who delided it and changed TIM seeing HUGE drops in temperatures.

    As i said, plenty of tests around the net, you being uninformed (as usual but not an excuse) and Intel fanboi is the issue here lol
  • RidelynnRidelynn Member EpicPosts: 7,383
    Two cars driving along. One posts 80MPH, the other posts 140MPH.

    The fact that one is driving on asphalt and the other mud has nothing to do with it. SAME tires, SAME engine, both with "auto" transmissions. Everyone who drops in a supercharger sees a HUGE increase in performance.

    But the fact that I'm uninformed, as usual, isn't an excuse.
  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    edited February 2017
    What youve just written is filmoret level nonsense rofl

    im not sure what the fuss about, its hardly first time intel screwed up by saving few pennies on their already overpriced chips lol

    Ivy Bridge and Haswell were very bad compared to Sandy Bridge, and then they finally fixed it with Devils Canyon, somehow it continued to Skylake and now with Kaby Lake theyre back to relesing worse products than last gen lol

    Everything about Kaby Lake screams rushed product, part of it Ryzen, and part of it Intel aready missing their "2H 2016" and (rush) releasing it in Q1 2017. Most likely they knew about the issue but didnt do anything in they "theyll buy it anyway so who cares" style.


    ....and you end up with thousands of "Kaby Lake astounding delliding results" videos lol
  • RidelynnRidelynn Member EpicPosts: 7,383
    Malabooga said:
    What youve just written is filmoret level nonsense rofl

    /shrug

    Maybe, but I'm not the one claiming that the motherboard doesn't have any influence on the CPU.

    I'm also not the one saying Kaby IGP is the same as Skylake IGP.

    But then again, apparently I'm an Intel Fanboy. All Hail Brian Krzanich
  • filmoretfilmoret Member EpicPosts: 4,906
    Malabooga said:
    What youve just written is filmoret level nonsense rofl


    Coming from you....  Well I don't even need to say anything.
    Are you onto something or just on something?
  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    Ridelynn said:
    Malabooga said:
    What youve just written is filmoret level nonsense rofl

    /shrug

    Maybe, but I'm not the one claiming that the motherboard doesn't have any influence on the CPU.

    I'm also not the one saying Kaby IGP is the same as Skylake IGP.

    But then again, apparently I'm an Intel Fanboy. All Hail Brian Krzanich
    Motherboard doesnt have any influence on CPU and IGP is same as Skylake. Those are facts.

    You want to be on filmoret level of nonsense, thats your choice.
  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    edited February 2017
    Malabooga said:
    Motherboard doesnt have any influence on CPU and IGP is same as Skylake. Those are facts.

    Pulling facts out of where the sun doesn't shine doesn't make then true.

    We could start with the 24 PCIE lanes on Z270 motherboards instead of the 20 on Z170 ones, which also means support for more M.2 x4 slots. And only 270 will support Intel Optane technology, too.

    But yeah that has no influence at all on system performance. You've read it here first, "malabooga" says so so it must be true.

    You can put 6th (6700k) gen on Z270 motherboard, and funny, but motherboard isnt CPU and DMI is THE SAME 3.0 on Z170 and Z270 with SAME bandwidth.

    only 270 will support optane because Intel made it so, Z170 could easily support it too.

    But hey. why bother yourself with FACTS.

    Tell us which is 6700k and which is 7700k ROFL




  • MukeMuke Member RarePosts: 2,614
    All aboard: the Hype Train!

    "going into arguments with idiots is a lost cause, it requires you to stoop down to their level and you can't win"

This discussion has been closed.