Skylake vs Broadwell-E PC Hardware


Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Username:   Password:

Hosted in the Cloud RSS

Recent Topics

Gallery Latest


796 Views
0 comment(s)

774 Views
0 comment(s)


1127 Views
0 comment(s)

991 Views
0 comment(s)


861 Views
0 comment(s)

877 Views
1 comment(s)

Search The Gallery

User Info

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
October 22, 2017, 01:43:59 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Forum
Web
Gallery

   

DatahopaForumComputer RelatedPC HardwareSkylake vs Broadwell-E



Pages: [1]

Skylake vs Broadwell-E

Viewing: 0 Members and 1 Guest       Total Views: 1508

Offline Data Topic starter
United Kingdom Administrator
Posts: 4684
Rank: Certified

This guy nails it, I think. Very good video.

Posted September 22, 2016, 13:23:25 PM Logged

Offline DaveMorton
United States WWW Global Moderator
Posts: 2538
Rank: Certified
Comfort the Disturbed! Disturb the Comfortable!

Great vid, Data. It's clear, concise, and gives some good info. It seems that I fall squarely into category #2. Sadly, my computer budget falls squarely into category #-1 Tongue
Posted September 22, 2016, 13:53:43 PM Logged
Safe, Reliable Insanity, Since 1961!
Chat With Morti!

CAPTCHA4us

Offline Carl2
United States Posts: 743
Rank: Baron

  He could be right but according to him the i core 7 Skylake is a waste of money I don't care, I always liked the idea of hyper threading.
Carl2
Posted September 22, 2016, 20:13:17 PM Logged

Offline Data Topic starter
United Kingdom Administrator
Posts: 4684
Rank: Certified

The main reason I don't care for hyper threading is it's single core performance, a virtual core is slower than a real core, you can't get something for nothing in this world, so splitting a core into 2 isn't going to make two virtual cores as fast as two real cores.

That means that each virtual core must be slower.

That's how I see it, being on a budget I would rather save the cash and put it towards a larger SSD or better graphics card.

I firmly fall into  category #-1

It's good to have the choice though  Cool
Posted September 23, 2016, 12:39:19 PM Logged

Offline DaveMorton
United States WWW Global Moderator
Posts: 2538
Rank: Certified
Comfort the Disturbed! Disturb the Comfortable!

Given that I've had my computer for several years now, and have seen first-hand the "benefits" of hyper-threading, I have to agree with Data. There isn't any real-world benefit to me to have it enabled. not only are the virtual cores slower, they also make the actual cores slower as well, and the overhead involved takes away from the overall total, slowing everything down in the applications I use. Granted the difference isn't perceptible under most conditions, but it's there. I turned hyper-threading off a while ago, and frankly don't regret it.
Posted September 23, 2016, 15:00:36 PM Logged
Safe, Reliable Insanity, Since 1961!
Chat With Morti!

CAPTCHA4us

Offline Carl2
United States Posts: 743
Rank: Baron

  I just reviewed hyper threading, it has good points and bad points.  Intel seems to have put time and effort into it which is good enough for me. I'm not going to get into it.
Carl2
Posted September 24, 2016, 00:31:23 AM Logged

Offline Data Topic starter
United Kingdom Administrator
Posts: 4684
Rank: Certified

  I just reviewed hyper threading, it has good points and bad points.

I agree Carl Smiley

To sum it up then - the reason to go Broadwell-E is for the quad channel RAM and more CPU cores.

It is understandable that more cores could require faster memory access as they all fight for data down the RAM bus.
Posted September 24, 2016, 10:55:43 AM Logged
Pages: [1]
Jump to:  

Site Activity
Most Online Today: 166
148 Guests, 2 Users
Freddy, Urania