Tech preview: Intel Core i9 Skylake-X processors
Click here to post a comment for Tech preview: Intel Core i9 Skylake-X processors on our message forum
GeniusPr0
HUGEEEE PASS. Avoid X299 at all costs. No pun intended.:D
Undying
What is that redisigned cache in Skylake-X? You mean that cut down L3 cache in favor of larger L2? I wonder how that will turn out, lol.
As for higher clocks out of the box yes but i Broadwell-E had not problems overclocking and reaching those clocks.
Denial
You can't compare TDP from Intel to AMD. Intel lists the TDP at the highest wattage, AMD doesn't. Intel chips now have AVX-512, which are extremely dense units and use a lot of power. AMD is down at AVX-128.
The L3 cache is operating as a semi-victim cache now, it's a hybrid between Intel's Old(new) design and AMD's design. Intel's old design is better suited for race to sleep energy savings, while the new one is better suited to workstation workloads.
nevcairiel
They did that, because cache takes a lot of space. But L2 cache is substantially faster then L3 cache, and there is still a decent amount of L3 left. Benchmarks will show the real picture, but CPU experts seem to expect an IPC increase due to that.
Undying
What happened with L4 cache and why did they drop it? It showed some very nice improvements in gaming.
5775c was crappy overclocker but it was beating 6700k.
Loophole35
Geekbench 3 leaks
7800x
http://kalen2utech.com/wp-content/plugins/RSSPoster_PRO/cache/ac124_Intel-Core-i7-7800X_Geekbench_Stock-366x410.png
Vs.
1800x
http://kalen2utech.com/wp-content/plugins/RSSPoster_PRO/cache/41b6e_AMD-Ryzen-7-1800X_Geekbench-3_4.12-GHz-366x410.png
This is just one bench and I'm not too familiar with it myself. But in this bench IF these numbers are true 7800x will trade blows with 1800x. Small sample size agreeded. Just ready for the whole picture.
b101uk
isn't the currant RCP price based on you buying 1000 units as a wholesaler at that price, which is NOT the price the end user will end up paying based on buying in the main just 1 unit.
so to get an I9-7900X for $999 USD, you would have to spend $999000 USD on buying 1000 of them, keep one and sell the other 999 of them.
Loophole35
Pretty sure this will be MSRP. That is the price the consumer pays. Intel would be suicidle to price higher.
schmidtbag
Stuff like the extra PCIe lanes is what you're paying for. When you look at the Xeon series, pretty much the only thing that separates a $300 model from ones that are $1000+ are the PCIe lanes. And yet, people buy into it anyway. Remember - Intel doesn't want to cannibalize their Xeon sales.
People are going to buy i9 simply because it's Intel and "hurr durr moar corez!" I've seen pretty often people ogling over i9, totally unaware (or intentionally ignorant) that Threadripper exists and was obviously the inspiration to i9. Despite the confusing and asinine approach to the i9 lineup, Intel is going to make a lot of money from it. However, Intel is going to lose a serious amount of sales from any real hardcore enthusiasts. Threadripper is going to have very similar performance, but aside from costing a lot less, all Threadrippers will offer the same amount of PCIe lanes - 64. That is where people are really going to start looking favorably toward AMD.
Well for one thing, none of these are gaming CPUs. Knowing Intel, they probably dropped it because it was too expensive.
Denial
Sure, if they ignore general IPC, AVX performance and core frequency.. all of which are better on the Intel parts. I don't know if that makes up the cost difference - but pretending i9 offers nothing over Threadripper but 2 cores at the high end is misleading.
Enticles
this.
IPC wise it seems like ThreadRipper and i9's will go toe to toe, but if the i9 has a higher clock speed out of the box (before overclocking) then it will likely be the performance champ.
if you make a trip into the GPU section of any forum, you'll learn pretty quickly that performance is what the enthusiast cares about the most - price comes second.
i9's will sell, and they will sell well most likely. My hope is that ThreadRipper doesn't tank, AMD needs this.
b101uk
note:
RCP pricing (USD 1K), where USD tells you that the $ is USD and the 1K implies based on 1000 units purchased at that price each.
http://static.trustedreviews.com/94/00003e57c/1dad_orh616w616/intel-core-x.jpg
schmidtbag
Kaby Lake's IPC and AVX performance isn't that much better than Ryzen's. Exclude gaming benchmarks (which these CPUs aren't designed for in the first place) and the performance gap closes quite a bit. When you have 10+ cores, frequency isn't the top priority. Notice how the i9's frequencies drop as the core count goes up - this isn't because the CPU can't go higher (I'm confident that any of the i9s can easily exceed 4GHz) but they're trying to keep wattage and thermals under control. Breaching 144W means 8-pin CPU connectors will be mandatory. That being said, if you've got an 18-core i9 that you intend to overclock to 4.5GHz... good luck cooling that. Though Threadripper will likely never be able to reach that high, it would be impractical for it to anyway.
I'm not saying i9 doesn't offer anything over Threadripper, but when you factor in core count, IPC, wattage, price, PCIe lanes, and anything else that Intel intentionally disables, i9 setups are objectively worse. The extra 2 cores are great, but the price won't be. The higher clock speeds are great, but only in theory.
Loophole35
I understood what you were getting at but was pointing out that this is likely the MSRP. This may be a mistake on Intel's side as this launch is very much a rush job and they repurposed a slide and didn't change the column header.
b101uk
that sound like very wishful thinking on your part, given when intel normally launches something new the first prices that normally appear are the 1000 unit prices which are of interest to the smaller independent trade wholesaler, rather than the likes of major manufactures of PC who buy tens of thousands of units and deal higher up the chain, given Computex is a tradeshow not aimed at plebs who just think in MSRP based on buying 1 unit.
PrMinisterGR
Do we have anything on Threadripper clocks? Or how Ryzen works with the quad channel memory? That could change a lot of the perception of both platforms.
It would also help if Intel wasn't charging extra for RAID beyond 0,1.
BigMaMaInHouse
I think Intel has big problems since they use single silicone die for their "up-to" 22 core that is over X2 the size of the ZEN- so they have more chancse to bi defected unlike AMD who is using 4 "small" chips to make the ThreadRipper .
More over- AMD got much larger contact area to cool it's ~150W CPU then Intel that all cores are squeezed into small silicone and without expensive cooling the Core temps will spike like crazy! - just remember 7700K before deliding and now squeeze extra 14 cores -OMG Intel Is Toasted (Or thermal limited)!.
Which one will be yeasier to cool and cheaper to produce? AMD made smart choise and in next update they will offer full 32C/64T on the X399 🙂
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/06zzSSeJr70/maxresdefault.jpg
https://pics.computerbase.de/7/8/2/2/8/article-630x354.90c8d2d6.jpg
schmidtbag
Assuming TR is also unlocked cores, I don't think it really matters what the shipped clocks are - it's still probably going to have the same ~4GHz limit that Ryzen has, and Intel is still going to get higher clock speeds. I'm assuming AMD is going to take the same route as Intel and lower clocks in order to stay below 144W.
As for going to quad channel, that will only sometimes make a difference. I've seen some charts of single vs dual for Ryzen and generally speaking, the higher the FPS, the more dual-channel helps. There are also some situations where dual channel doesn't help much at all. Keep in mind too, i9 will also have quad. Intels don't seem to benefit as much from more memory channels, but they'll still get a performance boost.
slyphnier
this year cpu is really good... after pretty much stagnant for years
glad amd bring the challenge back
now just take good time and see..
if amd threadripper much more better than intel prediction plus priced at aggressively
i guess intel will be forced to drop price their i9 prices
except they admit lose and try win back on their next gen, some people will keep buying intel even there are better value product anyway
if i9 still winning the performance good enough, then well things will be same for now
amd like always win as "value" product
Yogi
Was just thinking the same thing. I can't imagine the 18 core chip running a 4.0Ghz Turbo without throttling almost immediately. Or melting through the bottom of your case :-P
