Will Threadripper slow down the advancements in CPU manufacturing?

>>61520220
Goy

>>61520220
AMD will be on 7nm while Intel is still struggling with 10nm so I don't really know what you're talking about.

>>61520220
>shortcut
Yes, they can throw obscene amounts of silicon without tanking yields.
>temporary solution
No, 2.5D/3D packaging is the future. It just so happened that AMD is at least few years ahead of everyone.

File: 1494181847364.jpg (55KB, 499x810px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 499x810px

>>61520296
What on earth is 2.5D?

>>61520567
It's 0.5 less than 3D

>>61520632
Does that mean graphics cards are 4d?

>>61520567
Japanese voice actors.

>>61520567
If I remember right, its the trigate was 2.5, whereas 3d would be 2 complete cpus right on top of each other, potentially cutting down latency to an extent we only wish they could now. the problem there is heat, the only real way to stack effectively is if everything either transfers heat that good, or even passively cooled the component would be good to go.

with the massive latency cut, it's possible that lower clocks could be used and still be as fast or faster then non 3d stacked cpus but that would be stacking entire cores on top of themselves, something far far less traditional I cant even begin to imagine the advantages of.

>>61520567
>>61521110
2.d came from the use of 3d stacked dies and regular 2d dies in the same package. Biggest case was Fiji, regular die with HBM being a 3d stacked memory technology. The future desire is for the memory or whatever else to be stacked directly on top of the main die/host giving the true 3d for marketing.

File: Intel-Core-i9-7960X-Geekbench-4.0-Benchmark.jpg (101KB, 932x863px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 932x863px

time to laugh at Intlel again
>2.5Ghz Base on 16 Cores

lmaoooo

>>61521864
>2.5ghz
That's beyond pathetic.

>>61521892
Considering AMDs 16 core can get to 4ghz.

>>61521923
That's single core turbo.
It's 3.5-3.6 all core turbo.

>>61521864
So it looks like Intel won't be cooking up an X299v2 and will instead just be sticking anemic clockspeeds on all their 12+ core CPUs. What a disappointment, I was hoping for housefires that would put the 10 core to shame. I guess we'll just have to settle for pitiful performance instead.

>>61521939
What's to say you can't overclock all the cores

>>61521939
Sure, but if it can be cooled properly there's no reason that Threadripper shouldn't overclock exactly like the 1800X.
16 cores at 4.0-4.1ghz.