4 ms·
Workstation users. CAD, raytracing, and video editing people need as much CPU horsepower as they can get, and quad-channel RAM is pretty nice too. ("preview"
by paulmd 10y ago
Workstation users. CAD, raytracing, and video editing people need as much CPU horsepower as they can get, and quad-channel RAM is pretty nice too.
("preview" rendering is done with GPU acceleration - but final encodes are still done on CPU for quality reasons)
Small-business servers, databases, that kind of stuff too.
We'll see where they go with this - but I would caution enthusiasts to tamp down their expectations a little bit because this is not necessarily going to be an ideal product for gaming. I would not be surprised to see lower clocks to keep TDP under control, and some fairly high price tags to go along with these chips.
I'm imagining this as being more of a competitor to the high-end Xeons, with 3.5 GHz boost clocks and 3 GHz base clocks and a $2000 price tag. It would still be a screaming great deal at that price.
In comparison Intel wants $1700+ for most of the high-core-count Xeons, and you're getting fewer cores and lower clocks.
- phkahler 10y agoI hear you. I'm a raytracing guy and I look forward to Ryzen and would love to try Naples. But this intermediate thing sounds like a 3rd platform squarely between those. It even has 16 cores rather than 8 or 32, so if the core count doubled or halved it would be very much be competing with one of the other market segments processor.
- bitL 10y agoIt seems 16c will be clocked at 3.1-3.6GHz, whereas Naples significantly lower (which is OK for servers). I'd go with 16c for sure for movie rendering (ehm, if only ReelSteady could do a multicore image stabilization rendering...?)