text stringlengths 14 502 |
|---|
[414.44 --> 417.40] They can now break the security of iOS 11, including the iPhone 10. |
[417.64 --> 419.88] And what else happened this week? |
[420.28 --> 421.22] Our intro worked. |
[422.00 --> 422.28] Bam. |
[422.28 --> 422.96] Oh, wow. |
[422.96 --> 443.96] Brought to you by Medria's Coffee. |
[445.48 --> 447.18] Brought to you by Synergy 2. |
[448.18 --> 449.30] And brought to you by... |
[449.30 --> 450.70] Honey. |
[450.70 --> 458.96] I mean, anything sounds kind of weird when you say it like that, but honey sounds especially |
[458.96 --> 459.32] weird. |
[459.54 --> 459.64] Honey. |
[459.64 --> 459.92] Honey. |
[461.84 --> 463.92] Apparently the sound is super quiet on the intro. |
[464.14 --> 464.48] You know what? |
[464.54 --> 464.72] Whatever. |
[464.86 --> 465.12] Nice. |
[465.28 --> 465.38] No, that's good. |
[465.38 --> 466.80] Someone says they needed that for bingo. |
[467.44 --> 469.16] So, you know... |
[469.16 --> 469.76] Needed what? |
[469.92 --> 471.80] Your loss is someone else's gain. |
[471.88 --> 472.82] I think it's screwed up intro. |
[473.08 --> 473.46] Nice. |
[473.60 --> 473.88] All right. |
[473.96 --> 474.80] I don't know, man. |
[474.96 --> 475.80] I don't know, man. |
[476.88 --> 477.40] All right. |
[477.40 --> 479.72] Let's jump right into our first topic here. |
[480.06 --> 481.60] How would that be for... |
[481.60 --> 486.06] Someone's going to lose their bingo if we start talking about tech any sooner than like 20 |
[486.06 --> 486.62] minutes into... |
[486.62 --> 487.78] You know, it wouldn't surprise me. |
[488.20 --> 492.12] There's a lot of stuff that happens on this show a lot that probably shouldn't happen on |
[492.12 --> 493.00] this show quite so much. |
[493.02 --> 495.72] You know, the creator of Wancho Bingo tweeted me. |
[495.88 --> 497.16] I felt pretty special. |
[497.22 --> 497.46] Yeah. |
[497.54 --> 497.76] Yeah. |
[497.84 --> 498.28] That's good. |
[498.38 --> 498.84] That's good. |
[498.84 --> 505.12] So, this was posted by Edward the Weeb on the forum. |
[505.88 --> 506.86] Thanks for that, Edward. |
[507.10 --> 509.06] There's the unnecessarily loud laugh tile. |
[509.06 --> 514.92] The original article is from WCCF Tech. |
[515.28 --> 527.98] AMD's second generation Ryzen 7 2700X, rumored to be 8 core, 16 thread, 3.7 gigahertz base, |
[528.12 --> 531.06] up to 4.2 gigahertz boost with XFR. |
[531.06 --> 542.74] So, what this tells us is that second generation Ryzen is looking like a pretty small sort of tweak, |
[542.92 --> 544.52] you know, ironing out a couple wrinkles. |
[544.82 --> 550.36] You know, don't expect all of a sudden to be getting, you know, 48 core versions that are |
[550.36 --> 552.30] clocked at 5 gigahertz or anything like that. |
[552.40 --> 553.86] Evolutionary rather than revolutionary. |
[554.68 --> 557.82] But, let's see. |
[557.98 --> 559.32] 16 megs, level 3 cache. |
[559.88 --> 560.56] 4 megs, level 2. |
[560.56 --> 563.16] It might bring price drops to the previous gen. |
[563.84 --> 565.48] That might even be more interesting than anything. |
[565.62 --> 568.78] I'd be surprised if it does, to be perfectly honest with you. |
[568.78 --> 571.28] Is this going to be priced above then, or do you think they're just going to... |
[571.28 --> 574.46] I think they're going to slot these in above the existing ones. |
[574.52 --> 576.82] Here you can see the spec sheet comparison. |
[577.54 --> 579.28] So, there's the 1700X. |
[579.34 --> 581.16] Here's the replacement 2700X. |
[581.16 --> 586.84] So, we're going down to 12 nanometer, which gets us anywhere from 200 to 300 megahertz, |
[586.84 --> 591.32] higher clock speeds, at the same TDP. |
[592.32 --> 593.12] One year later. |
[594.24 --> 596.18] So, I mean... |
[596.18 --> 596.80] Okay. |
[596.80 --> 596.94] Okay. |
[597.22 --> 599.60] I can see some people being disappointed. |
[600.44 --> 603.68] Because Ryzen was like... |
[603.68 --> 605.46] I forget what AMD was quoting. |
[605.60 --> 612.06] It was like 40% or like 60% better than their previous generation. |
[612.06 --> 613.18] But that's not fair. |
[613.28 --> 619.60] That was because AMD actually hadn't really done a whole lot in the last four to five years |
[619.60 --> 620.44] leading up to it. |
[620.44 --> 627.80] And so, as much as it's easy to harp on Intel for these incremental generational improvements |
[627.80 --> 637.06] in CPU performance, now we're seeing that when all AMD has to work with is a very small |
[637.06 --> 645.08] manufacturing process shrink, it's really hard to do those generational leaps in performance |
[645.08 --> 647.62] the way that they did way back in the day. |
[647.72 --> 651.18] Like when AMD went from the Barton core to... |
[651.18 --> 652.24] What's Ledgehammer? |
[652.40 --> 653.96] Quahammer, I think, were the first... |
[653.96 --> 655.66] Were those the first ETHLON 64s? |
[655.84 --> 657.62] Within minutes of announcing. |
[658.38 --> 658.94] Oh, okay. |
[659.02 --> 659.48] Well, that's fun. |
[660.74 --> 664.94] And like when Intel went from the Netburst family up to Conroe. |
[665.68 --> 668.54] So, that doesn't really happen that often anymore. |
[669.18 --> 673.80] And it's funny, now that I think about it, when Intel did it way back when, |
[673.80 --> 679.08] that was because they had been not necessarily sitting on ass for a few years, |
[679.20 --> 683.04] but they had been barking up the wrong tree for a few years. |
[683.04 --> 683.82] That's for sure. |
[684.06 --> 684.18] Yeah. |
[684.54 --> 686.22] So, hmm. |
[686.36 --> 689.96] I wonder how long it has been since we've seen like a massive improvement. |
[690.14 --> 691.62] Like where could we find the last one? |
[691.68 --> 693.40] Maybe it would be Athlon 64. |
[694.56 --> 695.68] On AMD's side? |
[695.76 --> 695.90] Yeah. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.