this post was submitted on 13 Nov 2023
1 points (100.0% liked)

Hardware

33 readers
1 users here now

A place for quality hardware news, reviews, and intelligent discussion.

founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (10 children)

From what I'm seeing, even with APO enabled, only 4 E-Cores are actually doing anything. The rest of the cluster is parked, doing absolutely nothing.

Actually, that's false. They're actually consuming power, how miniscule it may be!

And that's one of the many reasons I don't understand why Intel is stuffing so many E-Cores into their CPUs. Their practicality in real-world scenarios is mostly academic from the perspective of most users.

A quad-core or - at most - an octa-core cluster of E-Cores should be more than enough for handling 'mundane' background activity while the P-Cores are busy doing all the heavy-lifting.

Frankly, I just can't help but feel like the purpose of these plethora of little cores it to artificially boost scores in multi-core synthetic benchmarks! After all, there are only a handful of 'consumer-grade' programs which are parallel enough to actually make use of a CPU with 32 threads.

Anyhow, fingers crossed for Intel's mythical 'Royal Core.' A tile-based CPU architecture sans hyper-threading sounds pretty interesting... at least on paper.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (2 children)

The 10900K was the last best designed intel CPU. Just straight up 10 powerful cores. That's how a CPU should be.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

ah yes who could forget the absolute TRIUMPH of the same tired architecture recycled for the 4th time in a row, on the same tired process recycled for the 5th time in a row.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

Yeah just don't run Minecraft bro

load more comments (7 replies)