CORELETS CONTINUE TO GET BLOWN THE FUCK OUT https://videocar

>>/g/

>>378414203
It involves /v/ too.

>>378414118
I doubt there's any significant difference between 4C8T and 8C for games. And anything above 8 threads is absolutely pointless.

>>378414385
>I doubt there's any significant difference between 4C8T and 8C for games.

There is actually, just only at massive resolutions like 4K/5K

>>378414385
>>378414521
This, draw calls are a cunt

>>378414521
4K is still not mainstream

File: speccytemps.png (32KB, 823x452px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 823x452px

I think I have a dual core

>>378414521
This is just wrong though, our gpu are still and will still be the biggest bottleneck for 4k.

>>378414385
>>378414521
Post some benchmark results if you have any

>>378414883
Draw calls

>>378414118
It's funny to see Intel suddenly joining core race after years of incremental improvements as soon as AMD offered a competitive product. And yet idiots still defend monopolies

>>378414118

>doesn't support Windows 7

Irrelevant tech that will never be used by anyone.

>>378415364
There could be two problems basically: scheduler artificially limiting the amount of cores but it in itself can scale up to 256 cores on desktop OS. 256 cores is a maximum, server OS use totally different load balancing algorithms for more than this amount. So it shouldn't be problem to patch in the limit removal. The main problem is a support for extended registers and commands and some architecture tweaks like Ryzen core groups which could potentially improve system performance. Nothing could be really done with it except recompiling the OS core. But it still should work, the performance hit would be overshadowed by gains from the new chip itself.

Also, Intel can't decide what to do with extended registers (like AVX-512) and keeps alternating between adding and removing those. Their support isn't critical on a home PC. Can't imagine a software would stop working because of lack of their support.

Intel won't radically change their architecture. Their current scope of changes could be easily made working on W7. MS obviously won't do it even though it's very easy for them to, but judging by global popularity of W7 you can bet someone else would

>>378414642
DX12 really helps with it, but it's not magic.

>>378414778
Hence why I said "massive resolutions"

As someone that has a delidded 7700K at 5GHz 1.37V with a Noctua D15, fuck no.

If I actually needed that many cores I would choose AMD because they're so much cheaper. That one from Intel will probably be $2500.