Games

16796 readers

850 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
No humor/memes etc..
No affiliate links
No advertising.
No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
No self promotion.
No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
No politics.

Comments.

No personal attacks.
Obey instance rules.
No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

nanoUFO@sh.itjust.works

Intel can't stay silent for much longer (www.digitaltrends.com)

submitted 4 months ago by nanoUFO@sh.itjust.works to c/games@sh.itjust.works

13 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] patient_tech@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I think it’s interesting to see the guy in the article saying he’ll never buy another launch CPU from Intel again. I would expect that once Intel puts this behind them, they’ll be upping the QC process to catch these type of things. And hopefully AMD learns enough they can test for it too so it never happens to them.

[–] schizo@forum.uncomfortable.business 22 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

The hilarious thing is AMD probably won't need to learn their lesson: their chips are using about half the watts for the same performance. This is firmly an Intel failure and them jucing the silicon past it's ability to cope to win benchmarks.

And their Zen5 cores look to be even more efficient than Zen4, so I'm sure some engineers at AMD are laughing about this whole thing.

[–] aard@kyu.de 6 points 4 months ago (1 children)

One thing I find very amusing about this is that AMD used to have a reputation for pulling too much power and running hot for years (before zen and bulldozer, when they had otherwise competetive CPUs). And now intel has been struggling with this for years - while AMD increases performance and power efficiency with each generation.

[–] Nomecks@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Intel had that rep before AMD back in the P4c days

[–] schizo@forum.uncomfortable.business 1 points 4 months ago

Yeah, the Prescott P4s and the dual-core P4s were both extremely good at being space heaters while also being extremely bad at being a CPU.

The whole P4 era was a suckfest for Intel, and they didn't really shake the slow, hot, power hungry thing until Sandy Bridge (so basically 2000 to 2011 ish). And before anyone mentions them, Core/Core 2 were MUCH more performant and certainly better performance-per-watt than the X2/X4 Athlons, but still not particularly efficient in comparison to Sandy Bridge and later.

I'd also argue Bulldozer wasn't necessarily a bad uArch, but it just had a couple of poor design decisions that made sense historically but did not really work in practice, and had fucking awful timing going up against Sandy Bridge, which was fucking excellent.