Asus ROG STRIX XG43UQ monitor review
Netduma R2 router review
TerraMaster F5-422 NAS Review
Radeon RX 6600 (Sapphire Pulse) review
Radeon RX 6600 (Gigabyte Eagle 8G) review
PowerColor Radeon RX 6900 XT Red Devil review
Corsair Sabre RGB Pro Wireless mouse review
Far Cry 6: PC graphics performance benchmark review
Colorful GeForce RTX 3060 Bilibili 12G review
ACER Predator GM7000 2TB NVMe PCIe 4.0 SSD review
Intel Core Series 9000 Specifications published - merely 100 and 200 MHz speed bumps
Yesterday we reported that Intel to be releasing Coffee lake based six and eight-core part in the 9000 series with processors like the Core i5-9600(K). We can advance a bit more on that as the specification leaked as well, the procs are a respin of the current ones, with 100 to 200 MHz clock frequency increases.
Intel will house the new procs shared over the Core i5 (6-core) and Core i7 (8-core)line. The processors all will be a series 9000 model and based on Coffee Lake architecture. Intel now shows specifications of the mentioned processors, Hardware info spotted and the 9000 series CPU's are clocked approximately 100 to 200MHz higher than their 8000 series counterparts. A microcode update guidance file reveals Coffee Lake S series featuring whats listed as six and four core configurations, the models listed are:
- Core i5-9600(K)
- Core i5-9500(T)
- Core i3-9100
- Core i3-9000
That means it's confirmed that Intel will be using 8th gen processors in the 9000 lineups.
| Intel | Cores / Threads | Base Clock | Turbo Clock | TDP |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Core i7-8086K | 6C / 12T | 4.0 GHz | 5.0 GHz | 95W |
| Core i7-8700K | 6C / 12T | 3.7 GHz | 4.7 GHz | 95W |
| Core i7-8700 | 6C / 12T | 3.2 GHz | 4.6 GHz | 65W |
| Core i5-9600K | 6C / 6T | 3.7 GHz | 4.5 GHz | 95W |
| Core i5-8600K | 6C / 6T | 3.6 GHz | 4.3 GHz | 95W |
| Core i5-9600 | 6C / 6T | 3.1 GHz | 4.5 GHz | 65W |
| Core i5-8600 | 6C / 6T | 3.1 GHz | 4.3 GHz | 65W |
| Core i5-9500 | 6C / 6T | 3.0 GHz | 4.3 GHz | 65W |
| Core i5-8500 | 6C / 6T | 3.0 GHz | 4.1 GHz | 65W |
| Core i5-9400 | 6C / 6T | 2.9 GHz | 4.1 GHz | 65W |
| Core i5-8400 | 6C / 6T | 2.8 GHz | 4.0 GHz | 65W |
| Core i3-8350K | 4C / 4T | 4.0 GHz | 95W | |
| Core i3-8300 | 4C / 4T | 3.7 GHz | 62W | |
| Core i3-9100 | 4C / 4T | 3.7 GHz | 65W | |
| Core i3-8100 | 4C / 4T | 3.6 GHz | 65W | |
| Core i3-9000 | 4C / 4T | 3.7 GHz | 65W | |
| Core i3-8000 | 4C / 4T | 3.6 GHz | 65W |
Source: Hardware info
Intel Coffee lake Core i9 9900K and other product names leaked? - 06/27/2018 10:03 PM
So much speculation on the Z390 chipset and the 8-core processors that go along with it, the news kind of gets lost in space eh? We talked Z390 for quite a while now. We know it's paired with at l...
Intel confirms it will release their first high-end GPU in 2020 - 06/12/2018 09:18 PM
Pretty much as expected, Intel is working on a dedicated GPU that Intel which is now confirmed to be released in 2020. Intels first real GPU likely will end up as graphics accelerator for artificia...
Intel Core i7-8086K CPU Turbo bins are Close To Similar to 8700K - 06/11/2018 05:20 PM
Over at Computex last week, Intel announced the anniversary edition Core i7-8086K, which they kind of did silently. Probably there was a good reason for that. The processor is advertised as 5 GHz pr...
Intel Core i7-8086K anniversary edition CPU gets listed at retailers (updated) - 05/31/2018 07:47 AM
And yes, it surfaces again. Remember that nostalgic sounding 8086 processor rumor we reported a while ago? Intel could be planning a special processor to be released with the 40th anniversary of the...
Unannounced Intel Core i7 8086K Spotted - 04/15/2018 05:38 PM
Yes, you read that right, an 8086 processor. So then, Intel might be planning a special processor to be released with the 40th anniversary of the 8086 processor?...
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 6156
Joined: 2012-11-10
Senior Member
Posts: 6156
Joined: 2012-11-10
#5562625 Posted on: 07/04/2018 08:31 PM
To my knowledge, the only difference between Coffee Lake vs Haswell (in regards to the CPU itself, maybe not the IGP) is DDR3 support and some die shrinks. For 4 years they have done nothing to improve the architecture, and they're about to go a 5th year. I find it really hard to believe a company with this much money has had no plans for a succeeding architecture in this amount of time. Even if they were doubtful of AMD's recent successes, that's still not an excuse to have no plan B at all.
And sure, they are looking a little bit into things like ASICs, quantum computers, and GPUs, but none of those are replacement products to x86 CPUs.
Intel will be fine, but there's a lot of important factors to take in regarding the last several generations:
* Despite being mostly the same as Haswell, Skylake sold well because AMD still wasn't much of a competitor, and, DDR4 was a selling point.
* To my recollection, Kaby Lake actually had worse IPC than Skylake, but, it sold well because both Skylake and Ryzen had rusty launches. In other words, Kaby Lake had very little redeeming qualities, but it didn't carry any burdens at launch date. Furthermore, Kaby Lake had higher clock speeds to make it look more appealing.
* Coffee Lake was only successful since it gave people something they've been wanting for many years - 6 core i5s and i7s. CL also panned out well since quad and dual cores shifted down a performance tier, resulting in lower prices than the KL counterparts. And, CL once again increased clock speeds.
So, what does the 9000 series have to offer? With all the vulnerability patches, the IPC is going to be worse. To my knowledge, it still won't get 10nm, there's no new Thunderbolt or USB tech, and there won't be another shift in performance tiers.
I don't think there is much they can do. Much like their outdated server solutions, they need a complete overhaul to make meaningful progress. The most they can do is add more cores and try to squeeze out every last bit of MHz from their current lineup. Despite their size and influence, Intel cannot work miracles.
To my knowledge, the only difference between Coffee Lake vs Haswell (in regards to the CPU itself, maybe not the IGP) is DDR3 support and some die shrinks. For 4 years they have done nothing to improve the architecture, and they're about to go a 5th year. I find it really hard to believe a company with this much money has had no plans for a succeeding architecture in this amount of time. Even if they were doubtful of AMD's recent successes, that's still not an excuse to have no plan B at all.
And sure, they are looking a little bit into things like ASICs, quantum computers, and GPUs, but none of those are replacement products to x86 CPUs.
Intel still has an army of loyal fans who will buy anything they make (kind of like Apple sheeple, who buy and praise anything Apple creates). There were scores of people who paid well over MSRP for a binned and delidded 8700K, and these are the same people who Intel will be hoping to sell their 9000-series chips to. Even if the improvement is 2%, there will be mobs of people tripping over themselves to buy the best gaming CPU (whether it makes an actual difference in games is inconsequential). In other words, Intel will be fine.
Intel will be fine, but there's a lot of important factors to take in regarding the last several generations:
* Despite being mostly the same as Haswell, Skylake sold well because AMD still wasn't much of a competitor, and, DDR4 was a selling point.
* To my recollection, Kaby Lake actually had worse IPC than Skylake, but, it sold well because both Skylake and Ryzen had rusty launches. In other words, Kaby Lake had very little redeeming qualities, but it didn't carry any burdens at launch date. Furthermore, Kaby Lake had higher clock speeds to make it look more appealing.
* Coffee Lake was only successful since it gave people something they've been wanting for many years - 6 core i5s and i7s. CL also panned out well since quad and dual cores shifted down a performance tier, resulting in lower prices than the KL counterparts. And, CL once again increased clock speeds.
So, what does the 9000 series have to offer? With all the vulnerability patches, the IPC is going to be worse. To my knowledge, it still won't get 10nm, there's no new Thunderbolt or USB tech, and there won't be another shift in performance tiers.
D3M1G0D
Senior Member
Posts: 2068
Joined: 2017-03-10
Senior Member
Posts: 2068
Joined: 2017-03-10
#5562631 Posted on: 07/04/2018 09:15 PM
To my knowledge, the only difference between Coffee Lake vs Haswell (in regards to the CPU itself, maybe not the IGP) is DDR3 support and some die shrinks. For 4 years they have done nothing to improve the architecture, and they're about to go a 5th year. I find it really hard to believe a company with this much money has had no plans for a succeeding architecture in this amount of time. Even if they were doubtful of AMD's recent successes, that's still not an excuse to have no plan B at all.
And sure, they are looking a little bit into things like ASICs, quantum computers, and GPUs, but none of those are replacement products to x86 CPUs.
Intel will be fine, but there's a lot of important factors to take in regarding the last several generations:
* Despite being mostly the same as Haswell, Skylake sold well because AMD still wasn't much of a competitor, and, DDR4 was a selling point.
* To my recollection, Kaby Lake actually had worse IPC than Skylake, but, it sold well because both Skylake and Ryzen had rusty launches. In other words, Kaby Lake had very little redeeming qualities, but it didn't carry any burdens at launch date. Furthermore, Kaby Lake had higher clock speeds to make it look more appealing.
* Coffee Lake was only successful since it gave people something they've been wanting for many years - 6 core i5s and i7s. CL also panned out well since quad and dual cores shifted down a performance tier, resulting in lower prices than the KL counterparts. And, CL once again increased clock speeds.
So, what does the 9000 series have to offer? With all the vulnerability patches, the IPC is going to be worse. To my knowledge, it still won't get 10nm, there's no new Thunderbolt or USB tech, and there won't be another shift in performance tiers.
I don't think they need a brand new architecture, it's just that the hiccups in their 10nm process has thrown a monkey wrench into their plans. All they can do for now is try to squeeze out the last bit of performance from their existing process until they work out the kinks with 10nm. The 9000-series chips will most likely be a stop-gap measure.
It's certainly a bad position to be in, but historically they've been able to rely on their fab advantage to thwart their competitors so they were most likely relying on it again. Even if they have a plan B, their best chances of success is still plan A so I think they're going to try to make it work before resorting to more drastic measures.
To my knowledge, the only difference between Coffee Lake vs Haswell (in regards to the CPU itself, maybe not the IGP) is DDR3 support and some die shrinks. For 4 years they have done nothing to improve the architecture, and they're about to go a 5th year. I find it really hard to believe a company with this much money has had no plans for a succeeding architecture in this amount of time. Even if they were doubtful of AMD's recent successes, that's still not an excuse to have no plan B at all.
And sure, they are looking a little bit into things like ASICs, quantum computers, and GPUs, but none of those are replacement products to x86 CPUs.
Intel will be fine, but there's a lot of important factors to take in regarding the last several generations:
* Despite being mostly the same as Haswell, Skylake sold well because AMD still wasn't much of a competitor, and, DDR4 was a selling point.
* To my recollection, Kaby Lake actually had worse IPC than Skylake, but, it sold well because both Skylake and Ryzen had rusty launches. In other words, Kaby Lake had very little redeeming qualities, but it didn't carry any burdens at launch date. Furthermore, Kaby Lake had higher clock speeds to make it look more appealing.
* Coffee Lake was only successful since it gave people something they've been wanting for many years - 6 core i5s and i7s. CL also panned out well since quad and dual cores shifted down a performance tier, resulting in lower prices than the KL counterparts. And, CL once again increased clock speeds.
So, what does the 9000 series have to offer? With all the vulnerability patches, the IPC is going to be worse. To my knowledge, it still won't get 10nm, there's no new Thunderbolt or USB tech, and there won't be another shift in performance tiers.
I don't think they need a brand new architecture, it's just that the hiccups in their 10nm process has thrown a monkey wrench into their plans. All they can do for now is try to squeeze out the last bit of performance from their existing process until they work out the kinks with 10nm. The 9000-series chips will most likely be a stop-gap measure.
It's certainly a bad position to be in, but historically they've been able to rely on their fab advantage to thwart their competitors so they were most likely relying on it again. Even if they have a plan B, their best chances of success is still plan A so I think they're going to try to make it work before resorting to more drastic measures.
vazup
Senior Member
Posts: 316
Joined: 2013-09-05
Senior Member
Posts: 316
Joined: 2013-09-05
#5562635 Posted on: 07/04/2018 09:30 PM
I dont know why so many are bashing on intel but it still is the go to CPU if you play on a 144hz monitor. For now it is still noticeable if you want to get the lowest frames as high as you possible can get.
I dont know why so many are bashing on intel but it still is the go to CPU if you play on a 144hz monitor. For now it is still noticeable if you want to get the lowest frames as high as you possible can get.
Irsh
Junior Member
Posts: 16
Joined: 2018-04-08
Junior Member
Posts: 16
Joined: 2018-04-08
#5562637 Posted on: 07/04/2018 09:31 PM
A strong AMD will force Intel to update which is good for all of us consumers/share-holders.
A strong AMD will force Intel to update which is good for all of us consumers/share-holders.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 2068
Joined: 2017-03-10
I don't think there is much they can do. Much like their outdated server solutions, they need a complete overhaul to make meaningful progress. The most they can do is add more cores and try to squeeze out every last bit of MHz from their current lineup. Despite their size and influence, Intel cannot work miracles.
Intel still has an army of loyal fans who will buy anything they make (kind of like Apple sheeple, who buy and praise anything Apple creates). There were scores of people who paid well over MSRP for a binned and delidded 8700K, and these are the same people who Intel will be hoping to sell their 9000-series chips to. Even if the improvement is 2%, there will be mobs of people tripping over themselves to buy the best gaming CPU (whether it makes an actual difference in games is inconsequential). In other words, Intel will be fine.