Someone tell me why this doesn’t matter

This is regularly checking single-core-only performance (multi-core boost is regularly lower than that. Multi-core is what is normally used under most loads nowadays), it is on intel's flagship "KS" processor so it will be extremely expensive, and the amount of power required for this is extremely inefficient in most cases.

It will still be fast, but it will be very difficult for a normal person to tell the difference between this inefficient monster and putting it in eco mode to save 20% of your power budget for something like 2% performance.

[deleted]

It's a modern-day Pentium 4.

First off, it's a processor that nobody in their right mind would pay for.

Secondly, clock speed isn't the most important thing when it comes to actual processor speed, or the work it does.

Good ol netburst.

Because the graphics card is usually the main bottleneck for the overwhelming majority of consumer related performance issues, not the CPU.

And the new CPU requires 150W of power! All they’ve done is made the existing Intel hardware more tolerant to overclocking. The architecture appears to be unchanged.

At 350 watts for just the two cores. It's a toaster. I mean, bragging rights. Fine. Kill the planet.

Ah. Rambus RDRAM. Those were the days. Not.

The price per watt on this is going to be ridiculously high. Not to mention the cost of running it, plus the cost of air conditioning your computer room. It's basically a room heater that also does computing.

Wow Intel. Sounds hot.

Literally.

Reaches that for .3 seconds before thermal throttling back to 2.5

Autocad is still single core process.

We have simulation environments at work which are single core. The next state requires knowledge of the previous one. Can’t pipeline. This might work for us.

Having the right tool is so much more important than having the best tool.

Lol "without overclocking". They just do it for you at the factory now.

If a processor use light to transter data, what's the theorical clock speed it can achieve?

Whats the power consumption though ?

Aint gonna touch that..

Lol, the KS skus are just them cherry picking golden samples and charging an absurd premium. Wouldn't be surprised if the 5800x3D still beats this in single core tasks.

last years variant could do 5.8GHz. So its an incremental upgrade at best.

Ah Intel, seems like you've forgotten what you knew and you'll never learn again

I don’t think this is a terribly useful question to examine, because you have to decide what you mean by “theoretical”, and because clock speed isn’t typically a goal unto itself unless you work in CPU marketing. Under some definitions, we’re nowhere close to the fastest theoretical clock speed you can achieve with electronics, even though we might be getting there as far as the materials we know about are concerned.

[removed]

I still question if this is a better option than the non-S version. You’re spending a ton of power and likely running into thermal problems without excellent cooling for a very small improvement in single core performance

most processing can be run in run in parallel meaning that most problems can be split up and solved on several processors at once. Some problems can only done in series meaning they have to solved one math problem at a time in a sequence. You use the faster processor for the problems that have to run in sequence and the rest can be sent to the slower ones to be run in parallel. (simplified explaination)

You should see the cost of what we did otherwise. We water cooled a bunch of gaming machines and that worked well until the ac broke and the machines got soaked. Still cheaper than time.

Most if not all processors from series 3 through 13 are multicore. The 13th Gen Intel Core I9 processor family advances performance hybrid architecture with up to 8 P-cores and up to 16 E-cores for a total of 24 cores.

depends on what tool you are using and if that tool is for the purpose intended