Leak shows overclocking Intel's Core i9-12900K Alder Lake CPU to 5.2 GHz turns it into...

[scavengerspc]

as you like learnig, the last468 was a dx4 120MHz

I can't find any reference to a 120 MHz 486. Maybe it was an AMD or Cyrix clone? Also, I thought the 100 MHz dx2 and dx4 both came out in late 94.

 

[Nintenboy01]

It’s also a fact that prices of mainstream socket CPUs have nearly tripled since 2017. In 2017 the 7700K was the most expensive chip in Intels mainstream socket and cost $300. Now if you look at Ryzen 5000’s launch last year, the cheapest part in the mainstream socket was $300 - the 5600X and the 5950X was $750.

Im not trying to say that competition is bad, it’s good. But AMDs intentions are just as dishonourable as Intels. These companies are just as bad each other, neither care about you, they just want your money. AMD in particular have massively ramped up pricing the moment they got a performance edge over Intel and Intel cut its prices in the mid to low end to recoup the money. It’s like they just swapped places.

AMD did admit they wanted to become more boutique and no longer be perceived as "the budget choice"

 

[Sausagemeat]

AMD did admit they wanted to become more boutique and no longer be perceived as "the budget choice"

Of course they do there’s more money in that. Nobody wants to be the budget choice but if your chips aren’t as fast as the competition that’s the route you go down to net the max profits from your inferior products.

 

[Nintenboy01]

Of course they do there’s more money in that. Nobody wants to be the budget choice but if your chips aren’t as fast as the competition that’s the route you go down to net the max profits from your inferior products.

and we all know just how inferior the Bulldozer-derived chips were. And Ryzen 1000/2000 had to be cheaper than Intel to build some trust.

 

[StrikerRocket]

No way I'm sacrificing power efficiency for raw performance. In our societies, power efficiency SHOULD and MUST be the primary goal now. I'm perfectly fine with my 3900X and my GTX 1080 running WQHD for now. The power race has to stop someday, one way or another, Earth will not bear with humanity for much longer I'm afraid... Of course, that's just my opinion, and you're free to disagree, but so far, I think evidence supports this point of view, unfortunately...

 

[Daniele 00]

No way I'm sacrificing power efficiency for raw performance. In our societies, power efficiency SHOULD and MUST be the primary goal now. I'm perfectly fine with my 3900X and my GTX 1080 running WQHD for now. The power race has to stop someday, one way or another, Earth will not bear with humanity for much longer I'm afraid... Of course, that's just my opinion, and you're free to disagree, but so far, I think evidence supports this point of view, unfortunately...

I think you should provide some evidence for your assumption. I hope you are not referring to the soo much exploited "climate change".
Anyway I'm with you. Humans have to take better care of their enveironment, respect nature since we are also part of it, and do "economy" of each resources nature give to us.

 

[captaincranky]

It does seem to me that we get smaller jumps in performance these days. I remember back then you’d buy a new video card and it would be often more than double the speed of the old one. And everything was beige.

This exposes the fallacy, errant belief system, hoax, that "Moore's Law" presents.

As with everything else in the world, CPU performance escalates in a linear fashion, while price increases exponentially. Moore's law is exponential in nature. In the case of Moore's law, the difficulty and expense of producing ever narrowing pathways., supersedes Moore's projections.

An (admittedly extreme) demonstration of this concept is, I'll work for you for a penny a day, doubled for a month".

Explained n a more literal manner, "there's a lot of bullsh!t in this world, that's taken as gospel".

 

[Roboyt0]

It’s also a fact that prices of mainstream socket CPUs have nearly tripled since 2017. In 2017 the 7700K was the most expensive chip in Intels mainstream socket and cost $300. Now if you look at Ryzen 5000’s launch last year, the cheapest part in the mainstream socket was $300 - the 5600X and the 5950X was $750.

Im not trying to say that competition is bad, it’s good. But AMDs intentions are just as dishonourable as Intels. These companies are just as bad each other, neither care about you, they just want your money. AMD in particular have massively ramped up pricing the moment they got a performance edge over Intel and Intel cut its prices in the mid to low end to recoup the money. It’s like they just swapped places.

7700k was closer to 340-350 I'm pretty sure; at least from googling a couple launch reviews. If you shop at Microcenter than you probably could have gotten one closer to $300 I reckon. Anyway, we can still use your argument of $300 for a 4C/8T. This comes to $37.50 per thread. 5950X is 16C/32T for $750. That is $23.43 per thread which is 37% cheaper per thread.

If you are doing things that leverage all of the potential of the 5950X, your performance is in another galaxy compared to the 7700K and it costs a bit over 2X as much.

There is now the 5600G that is cheaper than the X. You are also not taking into consideration all the problems caused by covid which has done nothing but drive prices up. The 5600X may cost approx the same as the 7700K did, but it outperforms it in literally everything. If you don't like that, then just buy Intel.

You can still get 4C/8T parts now for ~$150+ and that increase is due to shortages...they should be closer to $100. The i3 10100 is in the ballpark of the 7700K, and a 3300X literally bests it in every category of Techspot's review.

You are getting more for your money.

 

[Kuifje]

It’s also a fact that prices of mainstream socket CPUs have nearly tripled since 2017. In 2017 the 7700K was the most expensive chip in Intels mainstream socket and cost $300. Now if you look at Ryzen 5000’s launch last year, the cheapest part in the mainstream socket was $300 - the 5600X and the 5950X was $750.

Im not trying to say that competition is bad, it’s good. But AMDs intentions are just as dishonourable as Intels. These companies are just as bad each other, neither care about you, they just want your money. AMD in particular have massively ramped up pricing the moment they got a performance edge over Intel and Intel cut its prices in the mid to low end to recoup the money. It’s like they just swapped places.

I whole heartedly agree with your statement, the price did increase, but looking at the price in context is just as important.

a 5950x is a 16core, 32 thread CPU, for 750$ Is still competitive in price and performance againts an intel x99 10core 6950x for 1700$ or x299 18core 7980xe for 1700$ this is not taking into account the type of mobo you need and its cost.

tech is a heavy R&D and manufacturer industry ofcourse companies want to make money, but the truth is intel went beyond what is reasonable to stagnate and milk the DIY mainstream and environments. AMD made chiplets for the main reason to reduce end product cost and allowed them to scale core counts so that these processors are accessible to a broader market base while still being profitable for AMD.

 

[Roboyt0]

I whole heartedly agree with your statement, the price did increase, but looking at the price in context is just as important.

a 5950x is a 16core, 32 thread CPU, for 750$ Is still competitive in price and performance againts an intel x99 10core 6950x for 1700$ or x299 18core 7980xe for 1700$ this is not taking into account the type of mobo you need and its cost.

tech is a heavy R&D and manufacturer industry ofcourse companies want to make money, but the truth is intel went beyond what is reasonable to stagnate and milk the DIY mainstream and environments. AMD made chiplets for the main reason to reduce end product cost and allowed them to scale core counts so that these processors are accessible to a broader market base while still being profitable for AMD.

This guy gets it ^ ^