Re:Intel Publishes Microcode Patches, No Benchmarking or Com...
by wruza on Thursday August 23, 2018 @11:54AM
(#17828292)
I don’t get it. You just look at popular apps&games benchmarks and decide your hw stack. You don’t need to synth-bench AVX differences unless you’re writing bleeding edge specialized software that depends on it.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Intel Publishes Microcode Patches, No Benchmarking or Com...
by kllrnohj on Thursday August 23, 2018 @04:09PM
(#17830315)
I just tried to recycle my old i7-4770k from my gaming CPU to a home server. Only guess what? The 4770k doesn't have VT-d. The cheaper 4770 does have VT-d, so why did the more expensive, "upgraded" 4770k not have VT-d? Because Intel's product line is a disaster.
We're not talking minor performance differences in features, we're talking features randomly added and removed for no logical reason from the same generation & tier of CPU model.
Re:Intel Publishes Microcode Patches, No Benchmarking or Com...
by naasking on Thursday August 23, 2018 @04:34PM
(#17830476)
Perfect example of what I was talking about. Their lineup has always seemed customized to maximize the need to buy more CPUs.
"Gamers need these features, but gamers often also setup servers. Let's remove server features from gaming CPUs so they can't reuse them when they upgrade, and so they have to buy new server CPUs!"
Re:Intel Publishes Microcode Patches, No Benchmarking or Com...
by naasking on Thursday August 23, 2018 @12:26PM
(#17828555)
I write all kinds of different types of software. The feature matrix of Intel CPUs has always been remarkably inconsistent, like you get AVX, but don't get virtualization extensions, or vice versa, etc.
Basically, if you don't want the headache you just buy one of the highest end/most expensive CPUs on offer and you're probably fine. With AMD the feature set is pretty consistent, so you have considerably more choice to find a good price point.