Why are Corefags so concerned about corez when in fact 99.999999%

>>60712853
The ones that don't care are the ones in the 99% that won't use them. That other 1% are the ones who care about more cores because they have a use for them.

>Meanwhile in 2005
Why are Corefags so concerned about corez when in fact 99.9999999% of these degenerates will never use more than 1?

>>60712872
Op here...
I mean I would like cheaper HEDT 8 core CPUs, but 99% of /g/ doesn't need it.

I need it cuz I do intensive tasks every day but I know I'm in the 1%.

This is why Jewtel never pushed 6+ cores into the mainstream.

>>60713118
Like I said, the ones that care are the ones that have a use for them. I never said what percentage of /g/ does or does not have a use for them.

>>60713118
>This is why Jewtel never pushed 6+ cores into the mainstream.
Coffee Lake S is coming soon and has 6 cores mainstream.

Granted, the alternative is to just release another 3-5% faster quad core.

I do research computing. I would use as many cores as possible if I could. I just use the computing resources at my uni, some of the computers have 64 cores.

>>60713131
Then why the fuck do m'core threads keep reaching 300 replies?

>>60713144
Jewtel needs to drop the bullshit "HEDT" thing and just mainstream all of their shit and just keep 1 line instead of X and Z series mobos.

It would be nice to to get All In One computers with 6-12 cores though...like an iMac (inb4 Aplelfag memes) without going full Xeon.

>>60713177
>Then why the fuck do m'core threads keep reaching 300 replies?
Because technology discussion on a technology board. Do you think there are only 300 people on /g/ and that every reply in the thread is a unique poster or something?

File: 1496342224439.jpg (98KB, 1000x800px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 1000x800px

>>60713204
No, I'm just tired of the bullshit that's on /g/ now. It used to be better. It's literally rebbit-tier shitposting now.

>>60713348
Get used to it, it's only going to get worse.

>>60713348
Do you know how a process scheduler works?
And a follow-up, do you know how many processes chrome uses when you have 15+ tabs open?

>>60713398
I don't give a flying fuck about process-schedulers.

I need cores for After Effects for actual work.

Chrome works fine even on a laptop if you use a tab suspender. Don't be a degenerate.

>>60713442
All I'm saying is that normies are using all the cores on their system. That's what the scheduler is for.

>>60713488
I'm not on Windoze so forgive me for not knowing about dat shit.

I'm a Macfag/Linuxfag.

>>60713118
What are some intensive tasks you do, may I ask?
Please answer in quick manner.

>>60713498
Now that's low quality bait.
But in case you're not trying to, all modern OSes have process schedulers.

>>60713538
I've seen idiots on here legit try and argue that no modern OS can schedule tasks correctly and they just all end up piled on one core, a literal version of the strawman image in the OP.

>cpu 0-10
>11 cores
ok

>>60713511
Rendering 800+ layers in After Effects with 128GB of RAM. It doesn't use the GPU at all so I need a good CPU to do number crunching.

>>60712853
I do lots of embarrassingly parallel work, like batch processing videos and music, while simultaneously using my computer for normal stuff.

>>60713607
CPU11 is parked

>>60713638
and none of the others?

>>60712853
I'm worried about cores because I compile code, work with virtual machines, have local database servers for development and occasionally render video.

I also play videogames, which tend to benefit from surplus cores to not have frame drops.

More cores will be more useful once more software is released to take advantage of multiple cores. It takes time for things to actually become common for consumer electronics, 6 core processors still haven't fully 'evolved' yet.

>>60712984
/thread

File: fecfd7229cb4cf7ac80d0a77ed823436d21406ef4424268faecba6f52014b110.gif (127KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 600x600px

>>60712853
Your tears are DELICIOUS :^)

File: Suggestions.jpg (13KB, 350x296px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 350x296px

>>60713348
Says the shitposter shitting up /g/ by whining that people are discussing CPU segments the brand he shills for is getting BTFO'd.

>>60715641
>>60715671
Fuck off already, stop shitting up threads with this "You're an intel shill lol" crap.

I always enjoy this video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFCpf1L37L4

>>60715705
If you don't want to get called a shill, don't go on a technology board and complain that people are actually discussing technology. No other discussion subject on /g/ has to deal with "lel why talk about X, none of you even personally use X" shitposts, so why this topic?