4 ms·
For a brief time with Ryzen 3000, AMD held the bang for buck. AM5 is a bunch of new tech all at once with the good OR of AND being a multithreaded king. It'll b
by tehbeard 4y ago
For a brief time with Ryzen 3000, AMD held the bang for buck. AM5 is a bunch of new tech all at once with the good OR of AND being a multithreaded king. It'll be interesting to see what there answer to p/e cores is..
I'm curious how much of the swing of pricing for Intel is better "material sourcing/economics of scale", or just digging into the war chest built up after a decade on top to counter the bad PR of locked features and high TDPs (thermals).
- iforgotpassword 4y agoI wonder if the P/E core thing is here to stay. Sure, we had it for a while now on phones, but I'd say they are still a different target when it comes to the desire for power saving. Overall they cause additional complexity for the chip itself, the OS scheduler, and software developers. See the whole AVX512 debacle. It seems like a quick solution, but once the performance race slows down again it might just make more sense to focus on making the fast cores more power efficient when under light load.
- ColonelPhantom 4y agoPower efficiency isn't actually the point on desktop. The point is that a Gracemont cluster is around the same size as a Golden Cove core, while being faster in multithreaded workloads. However, because they're slow at lightly threaded work you still need some really fast cores too. Because Gracemont is so small, a chip can pack more MT performance for the same price.