This is included in the general understanding of "progress". Improving scientific and technological progress and civilization as a whole is the growth of the "power supply" (in every sense) of the individual.

The more complex the scientific and technical progress, the higher the level of entry to a certain level of development and production. This serves as a natural protective barrier for large corporations against new "upstarts" - they simply don't have the money to make it. You need to do something really outstanding, literally killing old corporations on the spot, so that rivers of funding and the necessary human capital will flow to you, believing in your success in the future. But such breakthroughs are becoming increasingly rare due to the increasing complexity of both science and technology. And the human brain, no matter how skilled an instrument created by nature it may be, is still finite in its capabilities. The time of loners is long gone, and it is becoming increasingly difficult to assemble an effective team and obtain the necessary tools for research and development. Therefore, the world is gradually pupating into megacorporations, which, having huge amounts of money, buy up all potentially successful startups, because their creators, aware of all the upcoming risks in competition with them, prefer to leave the race at an early stage, being content with a certain amount. A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.

Several of the largest companies already practically own the world of technology and science. And their beneficiaries, partly secretly, partly openly, own states and human society as a whole.

I have previously proposed more than once to prohibit megacorporations from holding patents for more than about 7 years. And leave 15-20 for startups. But who will listen to me in a world of total corruption?

Sure but I have meant tensor, RT, neural cores and such.

Quote from: RobertJasiek on November 11, 2023, 11:42:50As a consequence, every manufacturer develops its own proprietary chip cores and universal advanced software cannot exist.

In fact, we have been living with a unified x86 and Windows OS family (win32) for almost 30 years. Globally. The share of Apple and the rest is negligible compared to them, especially outside the US. This is one of the powerful means of the United States to control the world.

But when the hegemon itself rots through and through, new times come. And we have come close to this (yesterday, the rating agency Moody's, the last of the three largest ones, warned that the outlook for the US rating has now become negative), whether anyone wants it or not, this is inevitable. Empires rise and fall. Nothing lasts forever. Human life is shorter than such large-scale events, but they are inevitable.

Innovations (such as light bulb, bike, car, radio, TV, telephone) used to be licensed for a few years then available to every manufacturer. Nowadays, licensing is eternal and nothing becomes freely available to every manufacturer. As a consequence, every manufacturer develops its own proprietary chip cores and universal advanced software cannot exist.

Quote from: RobertJasiek on November 11, 2023, 06:50:54Uh, but what about CUDA and Tensor? We need such SoCs with them...

The meaning of real, true progress is that all valuable and necessary technologies remain in chips and are faster and faster, but the overall consumption of chips falls or remains at a stable acceptable level. But the last few years, everything was exactly the opposite and look where it took us in the end - to a monstrous 250-300W in "gaming" laptops.

Now Intel, having finally gotten to the technical process that it couldn't do for more than 5 years, will tell us tales of how everything has become cool with energy efficiency, but people and especially experts are bored, because they have already seen all these numbers from AMD and Apple for several years. Intel has nothing to offer the market except a monopoly created, in fact, by non-market methods. If it existed in market conditions, it would no longer exist - it is, in fact, bankrupt.

Only an overwhelming market share in a ratio of 5:1 compared to AMD, which does not have factories, allowed it to calmly sell the moldy same product to consumers for several years in a row, increasing consumption to monstrous amounts over and over again up to the 13th line .

You will be surprised - what about the market? After all, if another company(s) has a more advanced product, it should automatically become the main one. Right? But it's all about the nuances and cost of entry. But we live in an era of imperialism (the deliberate use of artificially created monopolies/oligopolies for geopolitical purposes), not capitalism. Real capitalism and market relations have never existed on the planet. This is all fiction for stupid, naive schoolchildren and students, whose brains are filled with stereotyped thinking, knowingly hammering into them false data.

Quote from: ArsLoginName on November 10, 2023, 23:15:56Entry level dGPUs days are nearing the end hopefully. Looking forward to a laptop being < 65 W for everything again and no worries of having to open nVidia control panel to manually have to shut off the dGPU for everything else but the programs that really need it.

Uh, but what about CUDA and Tensor? We need such SoCs with them...

Quote from: Hotz on November 10, 2023, 19:02:56I'm tired of these boring CPU benchmarks... what's the performance of the new iGPUs???

They target to get RTX 3050 laptop level of sustained performance with much better efficiency, and they are pretty close to it as they say. Soon we'll see, a couple of months away.

Quote from: Hotz on November 10, 2023, 19:02:56I'm tired of these boring CPU benchmarks... what's the performance of the new iGPUs???

I hear ya. Entry level dGPUs days are nearing the end hopefully. Looking forward to a laptop being < 65 W for everything again and no worries of having to open nVidia control panel to manually have to shut off the dGPU for everything else but the programs that really need it.

I'm tired of these boring CPU benchmarks... what's the performance of the new iGPUs???

I have already written many times before - it is necessary to legally prohibit laptops with a consumption of more than 80W (much like what happened with incandescent light bulbs) - and then it was very funny to look at Intel's attempts, especially over the last 5-7 years. Only Intel's furry paw in governments allows them to still do wild things with consumption even in laptops. Just like NVidia cheating.

With an increasingly flat graph of productivity growth per 1W of consumption, it will be increasingly difficult for all IT chip manufacturers to demonstrate "progress" to end customers, the public. After all, it is impossible to increase consumption indefinitely. You can feed "energy efficiency" after wild consumption earlier (as now) only once or twice. And what will happen next?

They will sell you "rhinestones" instead of progress. Apple has almost hit the ceiling, although it has access to the latest technical processes and has begun selling rhinestones in the iPhone - the same "titanium" case.

It will be even funnier next (sadder, then a scarf for tears) - stock up on a bucket of popcorn...

It really is a nice step forward for Intel. 65-95 W is much more amenable to notebooks than >125 W. Maybe someday 'U/H' ratings will actually mean 28 W/45 W again.

Bonus is about 10% gain over RPL. This also means MTL could perform about 10% better than Phoenix (Asus G14 7940HS at 80 W Turbo mode review here) at a similar power draw. However, the same review states than Phoenix only loses about 30% performance when running at 32 W. Think about that. 80 W to 32 W (40% of the power) and still about 70% of the performance.

It will be interesting to see how well Intel does in the lower power end (U/P class) but I'd imagine Intel will win idle/light media/light work due to the media engine and 2 low E cores on the I/O die so that all other tiles/dies can be shut down.

Zen 5 is supposed to be up to 25% better performance but Zen 5 laptops are no longer expected in 2024 other than 'ultra premium' 12 core Strix Point starting in "late July-August." So Intel could be 'laptop king' for the 1st half of 2024.

Great result from Intel. Same or slightly better performance than cRaptor Lake at > 35% less power is something the media would be wetting their pants over if Apple announced it. Can't wait for Panther Lake in 2 years as we should see further equally large reductions in power. Apple can't go much lower, so AMD and Intel will easily catch up by 2026 at far lower price points

Performance is good enough for most users, battery life and efficiency is the key for Intel to catch up on Apple silicon.

Good. Everything that help us avoid burn our fingers while typing while mantain enough speed is fine.