5 ms·

CPU speed improvements have slowed down compared to the early 00s, but there's still a big difference in performance between 2011 and today. On CPU Benchmark t

CPU speed improvements have slowed down compared to the early 00s, but there's still a big difference in performance between 2011 and today. On CPU Benchmark the i7-2600K scores an 8449 [1], while the i7-8700K scores a 15970 [2]. The i7-8700K is the predecessor to the i7-9700K reviewed in the article. [1] https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-2600K+%40+3.40GHz&id=868 https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-2600K... [2] https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-8700K+%40+3.70GHz&id=3098 https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-8700K...

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
user5994461 8y ago
The real score is 1942 against 2704. Not even a 50% progress in almost a decade. It's disappointing. The score you gave is the multi threaded benchmark that is just higher for having 6 cores rather than 4, that regular applications don't use.
- cix_pkez 8y ago
  Some do. But in those cases, you might be better served with Ryzen. If you're playing games, you'll get better performance with this i9. But if you're playing games, you're probably not CPU-bound anyway. I'd be interested in what niches people here work in and what CPUs they look for because of their unique needs.
  - leetcrew 8y ago
    the people who care the most about frames per second are playing esports titles that don't demand much from the GPU. counterstrike is still CPU bound in most cases.
    - EugeneOZ 8y ago
      Esport is not about graphics quality at all. Try Assassins Creed - it will eat all of your CPU cores.
  - kevindqc 8y ago
    WoW is ST CPU-bound :( until next patch!
  - tracker1 8y ago
    In all the truly multithreaded benchmarks the Ryzen and ThreadRipper chips really punch above their weight (price).
  - hoorayimhelping 8y ago
    >But if you're playing games, you're probably not CPU-bound anyway. We used to say this, but I don't believe it anymore. A lot of games these days make heavy use of simulation and physics engines. Games like KSP that perform continuous physics calculations are absolutely CPU-bound.
    - tomwilson 8y ago
      You will also be cpu bound often when going for extremely high refresh rate 1080p. E.g. 240hz.
- sireat 8y ago
  Another point is that 2600k was good for OC and 4.8GHZ OC were pretty common(not sure about 5Ghz). Newer intel CPUs turbo higher at stock (you could say that OC is sort of built in) so single threaded performance looks better than it really is. Now 32nm at 4.8Ghz would be quite power hungry but that is not the issue here. Pretty much all the progress Intel has achieved in the last 7 years since Sandy Bridge has been in achieving the same performance for less wattage focusing on mobile use cases. (on server side Xeons have increased the core count substantially but again single threaded performance IPC has stagnated) Thus mobile i5-8250U gets to claim that it does about the same in 15W that 2600k did at 95W. Remember we are still on the same Skylake Arch from 3-4 years ago, just a few minor process tweaks on 14++++nm plus obviously 2x the number of cores.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

user5994461 8y ago

The real score is 1942 against 2704. Not even a 50% progress in almost a decade. It's disappointing. The score you gave is the multi threaded benchmark that is just higher for having 6 cores rather than 4, that regular applications don't use.

cix_pkez 8y ago
Some do. But in those cases, you might be better served with Ryzen. If you're playing games, you'll get better performance with this i9. But if you're playing games, you're probably not CPU-bound anyway. I'd be interested in what niches people here work in and what CPUs they look for because of their unique needs.
- leetcrew 8y ago
  the people who care the most about frames per second are playing esports titles that don't demand much from the GPU. counterstrike is still CPU bound in most cases.
  - EugeneOZ 8y ago
    Esport is not about graphics quality at all. Try Assassins Creed - it will eat all of your CPU cores.
- kevindqc 8y ago
  WoW is ST CPU-bound :( until next patch!
- tracker1 8y ago
  In all the truly multithreaded benchmarks the Ryzen and ThreadRipper chips really punch above their weight (price).
- hoorayimhelping 8y ago
  >But if you're playing games, you're probably not CPU-bound anyway. We used to say this, but I don't believe it anymore. A lot of games these days make heavy use of simulation and physics engines. Games like KSP that perform continuous physics calculations are absolutely CPU-bound.
  - tomwilson 8y ago
    You will also be cpu bound often when going for extremely high refresh rate 1080p. E.g. 240hz.
sireat 8y ago
Another point is that 2600k was good for OC and 4.8GHZ OC were pretty common(not sure about 5Ghz). Newer intel CPUs turbo higher at stock (you could say that OC is sort of built in) so single threaded performance looks better than it really is. Now 32nm at 4.8Ghz would be quite power hungry but that is not the issue here. Pretty much all the progress Intel has achieved in the last 7 years since Sandy Bridge has been in achieving the same performance for less wattage focusing on mobile use cases. (on server side Xeons have increased the core count substantially but again single threaded performance IPC has stagnated) Thus mobile i5-8250U gets to claim that it does about the same in 15W that 2600k did at 95W. Remember we are still on the same Skylake Arch from 3-4 years ago, just a few minor process tweaks on 14++++nm plus obviously 2x the number of cores.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]