Slashdot Mirror
Intel Launches 16 and 18-Core Core i9 Desktop Chips To Take On AMD Threadripper (hothardware.com)
MojoKid writes: Intel has officially launched its Skylake-X processor offering in response to AMD's Ryzen Threadripper series of desktop CPUs. The new Core i9-7980XE and Core i9-7960X are 18 and 16-core configurations respectively, with 2.6GHz and 2.8GHz base clocks and 4.4GHz max boost clocks. Both chips support Intel HyperThreading, with 36 threads of processing for the 7980XE and 32 for the 7960X, while both also have 44 lanes of PCI Express connectivity and support for DDR4-2666MHz memory. Both chips also utilize Intel's X299 chipset platform and are LGA 2066 socket compatible. The Core i9-7980XE has 24.75MB of shared L3 cache, 1MB of L2 cache per core, and a TDP of 165W. The Core i9-7960X's details are essentially same, though two processor cores and the cache associated with them have been lopped off. The Core i9-7960X has a couple of advantages, however, in that its base clock is 200MHz higher than the flagship Core i9-7980XE and it has higher all-core frequency boost to 3.6GHz, while the 7908XE tops out at 3.4GHz on all cores. The new chips are multi-threaded beasts in the benchmarks, posting the highest scores seen to date in heavily threaded workloads. They also offer strong single-threaded performance that outpaces AMD's Ryzen processors. Power consumption is surprisingly good as well and only marginally higher than the 10-core Core i9-7900X. However, at $1999 for the Core i9-7980XE and $1699 for the Core i9-7960X, as usual with Intel high-end chips, they're certainly not cheap.
Throne?
Happily it's not a throne. Maybe you were using the term metaphorically or ironically, but the fact that America is not in the midst of a violent, bloody civil war (or another revolutionary war) as I write this is testament to the resilience of the system we have. Trump is finding out I suspect, just how little ACTUAL power the President wields by himself, without the help or at least acquiescence of a LOT of other people, which being an incompetent asshole, he's completely failed to convince them to give.
As for Hillary rightly deserving it, she and her sycophant followers (sounds like I mean you, doesn't it?) to this day, MONTHS after LOOSING, have failed to understand the most important lesson to be taken away from this experience, and that is this:
It isn't about deserving to be President. You can't deserve to be... the real question is WHOM America NEEDS, or lately, whom it will TOLERATE having that job, and the power that goes with it.
Hillary FAILED to convince enough people, or more importantly, enough of the RIGHT people, (meaning correct, irrespective political affiliation or leaning,) that she should get that job, rather than let it be handed to a CLOWN, which is precisely what happened. If you THINK that you EARNED the title, or the right to be President, or whatever, not only have you NOT earned it, you've demonstrated that you're not ready, and probably never will be.
The very first qualification for the job of President of the United States, (besides the statutory ones of being at least 35 years old, etc.,) is knowing you DIDN'T earn it. It's not something you CAN earn NOR deserve, no matter what you do or did. It's a TRUST the American people place in you, and they voted emphatically, under the LAW, (which you'll note that much like her husband, she wants to pretend don't exist or at least don't apply to her, because she's so god-awful-fucking-smart...) that they did NOT trust her, and that they DID by contrast, trust a reality show CLOWN more. That's just fucking sad.
Hillary should have stayed in the fucking woods. She's NOT welcome, and every thing she's said and done since LOSING the election that she should have been able to win if she were a TENTH as smart as she thinks she is, shows she has learned NOTHING since before the election, which proves that actually, she's FAR from even CLOSE to as smart as she thinks she is.
Now people are probably going to start going on about abolishing the Electoral College system... but that'd be a giant fucking mistake. Abolishing the system would be a bit like if you got in a nasty car crash, and one of your family members was with you and died despite wearing his/her seat-belt, so you decide you're going to cut all the seat belts out of all your cars. STUPID fucking idea, man.
Even if a seat belt failed in that one case, on balance, they're good to have. While you could view the 2016 "election" (hahaha) as evidence of the obsolescence of the Electoral College, if you actually LOOK at what happened, and LEARN from the facts instead of just going by your feelings, you'd realize that where the system would seem to have failed the proximal cause was that it is not being USED in any way like it was intended. Indeed, several of the electors (the people who actually theoretically chose the president,) TRIED to do the right thing, and DISREGARD the obviously flawed voting results in their states, and in either EVERY case, or ALMOST every case, they were compelled to CHANGE THEIR VOTES, or were REPLACED, which means the vaunted "popular vote" everyone keeps on going on about, (which under the LAW I mentioned earlier, doesn't fucking matter,) REALLY doesn't matter because it's actually the individual election authorities, election commissions, secretaries of state of the individual states, or whoever makes those decisions, that ACTUALLY picks the president. The Electoral College system didn't FAIL... the Constitution that SHOULD have been written to ENSURE the independence and power of the electors, once