Will not be compatible with Windows 8.1/7.
I read the article.
Nowhere does it say that Windows 10 is the only OS that will run on the new chips. In fact, it goes into detail about how they are supporting Windows 7 for compatibility reasons. AMD is dead, their performance isn't even as good as some ARM processors, which is the only legitimate competitor of Intel. Adding compatibility for Windows 7 means it will probably have the same features in place for Linux compatibility, Mac OS X is making the jump to ARM based processors, which are more than 20 times more restrictive and malicious than Intel's.
10 rupees added into your account sanjeep, memes aside I was all yeah boi ARM freedom when I saw what kind of proprietary obscuring locking down bullshit goes in the ARM scene, makes Intel look like stallman's cpu firm
>Intel makes a CPU that can't be used with Linux Server distros
>Only on wangblows, for the low-profit-margin consumer segment
>They go bankrupt
This will never happen, and hasn't. Read your shit before posting retard.
Yes. Stallman himself uses an Intel processor in his custom FOSS laptop, because Intel has always been, and always will be open source about nearly everything. The only truly malicious things they've done is have higher prices, and give into Microsoft's multi-billion dollar push for UEFI.
It seems to be a common pattern in people to set something as evil and bash it endlessly
The ARM instruction set and designs themselves are all open source but the companies producing are greedy power thirsty jews, without knowing these ARM shills are pushing us into an orwellian society lmao.
More like a Huxleian society, but I see your point. Intel has millions pouring into R&D to provide Linux support in a free and open source format. /g/ just wants to pay the least money possible while still being able to compile things in less than a day. Oh, and let us not forget their need for children's entertainment. (vidya)
>Mac OS X is making the jump to ARM based processors
No they are not. People use OS X for actual work; ARM does not cut it and people wouldn't want to lose access to the vast collection of existing professional software.
/g/ is full of useful idiots, it's good that they side with Intel even though the motives are childish and dumb. I personally approve of the ARM architecture itself but some company like Intel should be producing with the full stack open instead, AMD already did opteron a1100 or w.e was it called, it's looking good.
FX CPUs don't actually overheat if you enable CnQ in the BIOS.
I was super retarded and disabled it because /g/ told me so. Enabled it and temps went down by 10 degrees.
Fuck you Intel /g/ shills.
>enables up to 30x better graphics
oh boy, 30x better graphics
i bet it also raises audio goodness value up to 20x
and calculations are at least 5x better as well
An Intel CPU + board with 2 cores and threads costs 3.45 times as much as an AMD CPU + board with 8 cores and threads.
AMD sure is dead...
I will always buy Intel™ because I only play games with Intel Inside™. Intel also pioneers innovative new technologies like Hyper Threading Technology™, Intel Rapid Start Technology™ and the highest quality chipsets to ever grace motherboards.
When I boot up with a brand new Intel™ i7™ with the latest Z chipset, I can enjoy the games the way they where meant to be with Intel Inside™. Intel™ also delivers a far more silkysmooth experience with its Hyper Threading Technology™.
Intel i5™ is also very power efficient. A processor is the most power hungry device in your house. Air conditioners, water heaters, lights, etc all use less power than a processor. Which is why Intel™ puts gamers first by ensuring that their gaming experience is of the highest quality while looking out for gamers by giving them the most value in their electrical bill.
At this point in time, there's really no reasons to consider an AMD processor at all. I tried once, it caused so much heat that it exploded and nearly burnt down my house. It also consumed so much power that it produced an EMP and destroyed not only the rest of my computer but my entire neighborhood.
Intel™ also pioneered how useless MORE CORES is with the i™ series processors. Years ago, everyone thought MORE CORES were the future. Now, Intel™ has debunked that myth entirely and increased efficiency. Now you can save thousands a year in electricity thanks to Intel™ with its powerful IPC. MORE CORES will never be part of Intel's™ line up.
It's quite clear that OPs an AMD shill trying to convince you to settle on something less than the optimal experience with Intel Inside™. Intel™ is the only real way to play games. We have seen recently that they offer incredible libraries for software developers like Intel C++ Compiler. He is probably too poor to afford the Intel Inside™ experience and can not afford to play any games.
Don't be a poor gamer with bad chipsets and a huge power bills. Play games with Intel Inside™
People used to say "the 8350 is future proof because eventually all applications will make use of all 8 cores" and it never really happened. Even when all 8 cores are used, an i5-4690 beats it while producing half the heat and using half the electricity. AMD's tech is just too old now.
The claim was when all 8 cores are used - your chart clearly shows virtually no scaling beyond 4.
> implying this is actually Intel's fault
> not realizing this is up to Windows/MS
Well which is it? Everything is single threaded so in effect the anniversary pentium is the best cpu ever made or does a lot of softwarre scale with threads and thus the fx 8xxx chips are a cheap way to get high performance in certain workloads? Performance often on par with Intel's much newer consumer i7 chips.
it can be beneficial to have a few cores if you use multiple programs, because they can then use a core each
desu there is no reason to ever go beyond quad-core unless you know you will be using something that benefits from it a lot
>it can be beneficial to have a few cores if you use multiple programs, because they can then use a core each
That is still dependant on the OS's ability to correctly schedule tasks to available cpu resources.
>desu there is no reason to ever go beyond quad-core unless you know you will be using something that benefits from it a lot
That depends entirely upon so many factors there is no hard and fast guide. More available cpu resoruces is always a good thing.
Pic unrelated - game give zero fucks about cpu in general.
The article in OP doesnt say that, but i swear a couple of days ago i read another article that stated that, in fact, next gen Intel cpus will only work on Win 10, i couldnt believe it so i read it a couple times and it was stated clearly.
Maybe it was an error on the press release, let me try to find it.
nice try... i wodner whos behind this post.
"Next generation processors, including Intel's "Kaby Lake", Qualcomm's 8996 will only be supported on Windows 10."