Intel Flagship Core i9-9990XE has only 14 activated cores (and not 18)
Click here to post a comment for Intel Flagship Core i9-9990XE has only 14 activated cores (and not 18) on our message forum
Witcher29
I just wait for x499 or something once u used to quad channel u never look back again :P
Petr V
Dat is for sure intel new technology.
Intel supa 4/18 core boost :-P
DeskStar
WOW. Still sticking with them 44 on chip PCI-e lanes eh. I'll still stick with my 3930k/3970X for now. Until either AMD or intel get it together. Really its intel who needs to do so....
Just wish these prices would get gouged in our favor as consumers. This is truly ridiculous as I've never seen prices like this in my life of building......ever.
waltc3
It's becoming ever more certain that the only reasonable choice is AMD (Yeah, I know, that sounds like an ad...;)) Ryzen 3k series should be a hoot! I'm already mentally onboard with Zen 2.
RavenMaster
I bought a Threadripper 2920X along with a Asrock X399 Taichi motherboard. I got nothing but high DPC latency. It caused games to micro stutter and audio to snap/crackle/pop. In the end I RMA’d both.
I replaced them with Intel’s i7-9800X and a EVGA Dark X299 motherboard. System runs perfectly fine and gives great performance when gaming.
nizzen
Buy cheap, buy twice 😛
My 1950x is for F@H and rendering only, no gaming. X399 fatality pro MB.
schmidtbag
At first I was going to ask "why don't they just call this the 9940XE?" but perhaps Intel is marketing this based on it's overall performance rather than the theoretical performance if you had LN2. But that gets to be more confusing, because it seems like Intel is basically shooting themselves in the foot by saying "eh, you don't need to spend extra with all those cores, this cheaper model at a higher clock will do just fine". As Hilbert pointed out, you could just get the 9940X and overclock it (or really, the 7940X). Meanwhile, it doesn't look good on their Xeons, which are much more expensive and have much lower clock speeds.
Sticking with the 44 lanes is no surprise. Intel isn't going to restructure the entire socket to fit in a few more. Whenever Intel hurries up and makes a new architecture, that's when I expect more lanes.
Also, I'd say AMD is already "getting it together". They have a lot of room for improvement but if the rumors about Zen2 are true, it looks like those improvements are just around the corner.
These are a bargain compared to their Xeons.
Fox2232
Most of us are of same opinion. But Ryzen 3k series specifications are not confirmed, yet. That leaves a lot of uncertainty. Only thing which is certain is performance per Watt which is not bad at all.
I wonder if 7nm AM4 will be here before 7nm TR4 refresh.
schmidtbag
I would assume so. First, aren't the leaked photos of Zen2 all of AM4 stuff so far? But also, I'm sure AM4 brings in more money than TR4, or at the very least, will give AMD more attention (and as long as that attention is good, that currently matters the most for them right now). Considering AMD's roadmap for AM4, I think it'd be smart of them to get those parts out ASAP while Intel isn't able to respond to them.
H83
Epic fail from Intel. Who´s going to buy a CPU like this???
Undying
2000$ for this crippled chip? No thanks. Ryzen 3000 cant come soon enough.
Aekold
255W TDP?!? With that many cores clocked so high, I guess I shouldn't be surprised. It just feels like I'm looking at a GPU instead of a CPU.
The 12v rails will be working hard if paired with a decent graphics card.
nizzen
255w is nothing in OC world 😛 We have had power usage on cpu's over 250w overclocked in over 10 years 😀
My old delidded 4core 3770k @ 5,2ghz on EK water used more than 250w 🙂
Old AMD FX cpu's was almost stock 150 w LOL
nevcairiel
The 9990XE was originally reported as a high-clocking 14 core CPU. Way to find a reason to further bash Intel, I guess.
holystarlight
I'm running 3 different Threadripper systems at home 1950x, 2950x and 2990WX, on the asus zenith extreme with no high DPC latency issues on either of them. the 2990WX System runs some very high end audio equipment that would be very sensitive to any latency issues. that's unfortunate you experience this issue but I can only imagine it has something to do with the Asrock x399.
fry178
@RavenMaster
buying a semi, and expecting it to turn like a 2 door sports car. ok...
RavenMaster
It may well have been the Asrock mobo causing the probs. I wasn't willing to try another X399 board. I'm happy with my Intel system now though. It cost roughly the same price and works like a charm.
WareTernal
Don't bring facts to this party!
This is last month's 'non-news', and it's pathetic to spin it in to this type of BS.
Who thought it was an 18 core part?
This is simply digging up old stories, and twisting the facts into clickbait!
The quality of info on this site has been in decline for a while now.
It isn't exactly a secret that 'more Mhz' = 'more voltage' = 'more heat'.
It isn't exactly a secret that this affect all CPU's.
It seems like it's more than just the bad English because it's turned in to a consistent bias.
Did AMD give you shares or something?
Do you mean to imply that AMD or anyone else doesn't have this exact same issue?
"The higher the clock speed you want to hit, the higher the voltage typically required to hit it. Higher voltages drive dramatically higher power consumption and temperatures, and because hot spot formation is a critical problem in modern microprocessors, the CPUs maximum frequency is fundamentally limited by the ability to move heat out of the core." - Joel Hruska @ extremetech.com
This isn't much different than the Xeon 8180 stupidity. To put it bluntly, if you actually thought the 28-core/5Ghz wasn't 'overclocked' and using serious cooling, and you were "decieved" by the demonstration, then you are grossly uninformed. I wonder why Ryzen's release made so many hardware review sites, and so-called 'enthusiasts' so systematically ignorant regarding Intel's CPU's.
Kaarme
Intel has difficulties competing with core count (plus Intel hates a high core count anyway), so they try to compete with MHz alone. This leads to a high temp, like you said, which means they couldn't add more cores even if they wanted to.
At least it's easy to answer to the question of what Intel shares: Nothing. Intel even only sends review samples to yes-men.
Now that's actually a good question because when you knew everything about Intel products 10 years ago, you know everything about Intel products today. It's the same old shit, after all, down to the very same security flaws.
schmidtbag
I think you're blowing this a bit out of proportion...
All he was saying is "many cores don't OC very well". That's just simply a fact. If you take that as a jab at Intel, it is you who is biased.
And sure, AMD has clock related issues too, but those occur regardless of the amount of cores you have.
