Hacker News Reader

Comment by mrmondo | Hacker News Reader

That title... while I'm not disagreeing with the intent or the message that has to be classed as clickbait. Like come on, that's one well of an optioned title for an article that links to an article with a completely different title. Just, you know - even without any research I'm quite confident that the company in question (intel) hasn't 'stopped trying', perhaps they've undervalued a product line or had a lacklustre release but I'm sure there's a lot of engineers 'trying', again, click bate titles - grr!

View on HN

Like the guidelines ask, since there's nothing wrong with the article's title we've reverted the submission title from “The Intel Core i7-7700K is what happens when a company stops trying”.

Like come on, that's one well of an optioned title for an article that links to an article with a completely different title.

The very first sentence of the article is, "The Intel Core i7-7700K is what happens when a chip company stops trying."

Noted.

However,

Title: Intel Core i7-7700K Kaby Lake review: Is the desktop CPU dead?

Subtitle: With identical performance to Skylake, Intel brings desktop performance to a standstill.

*edit: while I'm not in any way sticking up for intel (I love RISC architecture personally) I do wonder if this cycle is just aligning technologies such as DDR4 / PCIe bus speeds, chipset smarts such as NVMe pass through to bypass the SCSI subsystem etc... more than it was outrun / be directly faster than the previous generation. I might be wrong (again no research done here!) but it wouldn't surprise me if it was a feature alignment cycle. IMO - what we need is ECC on the desktop i7 range, that would be a killer.

I'm all for ECC, but honestly you can just buy Xeon E3 and cheap motherboards supporting it. I would also prefer that ECC is deployed everywhere (including on portable devices), but if it is not going to happen, I will just continue to buy chips that supports it (on markets where they exist...)

So what annoys me is not that Core i7 do not support ECC. What annoys me are markets where ECC does not exist at all, like ultra portable devices, and to a slightly lesser measure laptops (I've recently seen at least a workstation laptop featuring ECC, although the price was insane IIRC)

Dell and Lenovo at least offer ECC on their top-of-the-line mobile workstations. Mobile Xeons too.

That title (and first sentence) is a pretty good encapsulation on what's been happening with their CPU line and why most people will keep their good enough 2-5 year-old CPUs and just overclock them occasionally. Too bad there's no real competition to Intel in the desktop CPU marker.

We're in unprecedented territory right now where the best price/performance for an Intel chip is found via overclocking something obsolete from Ebay and then hanging a fast modern GPU on it.

I'm partial to the 2500k myself.

I disagree.

With AMD no longer contentious, Intel has, quite literally, stopped trying.

Look at Netburst era Intel vs modern Intel. Behind the 8-ball Intel can show you what Intel looks like when it's trying.

Or maybe Intel is having trouble moving to 10nm and there's little it can do at this point? I have no idea why when it comes to Intel people feel the need to phrase engineering problems in moralistic terms (and conversely, when it comes to politics people often want to turn moralistic problems into engineering ones).

If that were the case they wouldn't release a mediocre interim product that fails to significantly build-upon any existing performance and features of the existing product. If you do decide to build that mediocre chip, you don't price it like a top-shelf one.

We're not talking about when Saab had to keep their new models secret to sell the rest of the old ones for survival. This is Intel. They control their market and have no competition. Selling crappier products than you're capable of is a moralistic problem. And it's one that the industry is complacent with. Just ask Apple.

If all remaining Intel competition were to disappear tomorrow Intel wouldn't stop selling chips. They would just stop making them any better. Cost reduction is just business. If a business doesn't have to spend on research to stay afloat it shouldn't and it won't.

Or they tried and failed. Unless you have inside information you can't know what happened. And as no one else seems to be able to produce 10nm CPUs, it's not unlikely that Intel had problems shifting to it as well.

Intel has done very well in the past by always being one step ahead of the competition. I'm sure that they didn't stop doing so.

First sentence of article: "The Intel Core i7-7700K is what happens when a chip company stops trying."

Reply on news.ycombinator.com