3 ms·
The intel CPU situation is pretty embarrassing. I built back in 2009 a desktop with the intel i7-920 @2.66GHz (the first real quad core from intel) which I boug
by whatever1 8y ago
The intel CPU situation is pretty embarrassing. I built back in 2009 a desktop with the intel i7-920 @2.66GHz (the first real quad core from intel) which I bought for less than $300. I look today and the cpu I can get for less than $300 is a 6 core i5 9600K @3.7 GHz. According to Passmark [1], this new CPU, is less than 2.5x faster overall, despite the additional 2 cores, and the much higher frequency. Intel just spent 10 years designing sockets and mobos and mocking ARM instead of concentrating on how to push the computing (mobile & desktop) technology forward.
(1) https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/Intel-i5-9600K-vs-Intel-i7-920/3337vs834 https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/Intel-i5-9600K-vs-Intel...
- adrianN 8y agoThe TDP is a lot lower for the newer processor. Performance per Watt has improved quite a bit over the last years. Given that datacenters and mobile applications are increasingly more important than traditional "TDP doesn't matter" desktops, I think this is a positive development.
- effie 8y agoIntel changed their definition of TDP lately, so actual consumption can be higher than TDP. So it is not trivial to compare energy consumption of last year processors with the older ones.