Slashdot Mirror
Intel Announces X299, Skylake-X, and Kaby Lake-X Release Schedule (anandtech.com)
Ian Cutress, writing for AnandTech: At Computex a couple of weeks ago, Intel announced its new Basin Falls platform, consisting of the X299 chipset with motherboards based on it, a pair of Kaby Lake-X processors, and a set of Skylake-X processors going all the way up to eighteen cores, denoting the first use of Intel's enterprise level high core-count silicon in a consumer product. As part of Intel's E3 press release, as well as their presentations at the show, the new Core i9 processors were discussed, along with Intel's continued commitment towards eSports. Intel gave the dates for the new platform as the following: 4, 6, 8 and 10-core parts available for pre-order from June 19th; 4, 6, 8 and 10-core parts shipping to consumers from June 26th; 12-core parts expected to ship in August; and 14, 16 and 18 core parts expected to ship in October.
Those are the options.
Isn't it too bad I'm never buying a fucking backdoored Intel CPU ever again.
core i11, core i13 unlucky? core i15, core iinfinity?
What we really need here is a clear display of how much bang you get for your buck. The prices alone are significantly higher than AMD Zen based chips and you get fewer cores to boot. So the question is, how well do they perform compared to AMD's offerings?
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
IOW, they're going to start making IDENTICAL 18-core parts NOW, and they'll bin them according to how many (4,6,8,10,12,14,16,18) functioning cores pass QA. By October, they hope to have their processes straightened out to the point where they can get maybe a 5-8% yield on the 18-core version.
Meanwhile, you've still got 18 cores sharing the same memory bus, running the same-old, same-old 8086 instruction set. REPNE SCASB forever, baby!
Shhh. You're disturbing the marketing pitch.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Linus from Linus Tech Tips isn't too happy with this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
The 16-core Ryzen will probably not cost more than $1000, while the the top-end Intel will cost anywhere from 50% to 100% more than that. Zen, while not perfect, provides good enough performance for the price and especially where core count is concerned. Intel is in tight spot where it doesn't want to undercut its Xeon market.
Intel is probably going to shit a brick when AMD starts releasing 8-core hyperthreaded laptop CPUs.
Was hoping that the 6-8 core dies had higher clock speeds.
A lot of my current apps utilize around 4 cores. With my 6700k overclocked to 4.7ghz I was hoping for cores closer to 5ghz.
Of course, MS licensing for Windows is per core now...
From what I can find that only appears to be for windows server, not windows desktop.
note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
i thought that is only in a VM enviornment
I'm confused to what is what now in the CPU world. Anyone know? I want to build a DAW, and streaming and auditioning many different virtual instruments quickly requires quad channel RAM. Thanks.
$1000 for 44 pci-e lanes it used to be $300-$400 and then about $400-$550.
AMD will smoke them and on boards that don't have to dumb down to work with cpu's with only dual channel and 16 pci-e lanes.
kaby-lake x is an tacked on joke as well!
That is how far intel is willing to go to rip us off and push OEM's to go to there way.
Seems to me like there is an explosion of chips offering 6+ cores. Now it's over to the programmers.
Progress has been slow on making mainstream software parallel enough to take advantage of all those cores. Yah, spare me the talking points on Amdahl's Law, serial-only algorithms and all the rest. There's no way that I believe the average piece of software is as parallel as it could be. Not even close!
The parallel algorithms exist, the libraries exist, the software exists, the customers exist, and now abundant cores/processes/threads exist. The logjam has been in teaching parallel techniques to coders and making this a priority in software architecture.
Some software will never be able to take advantage of millions of threads or processes, I accept that. When you tell me that every day, bog-standard apps cannot even tap 6 cores/12 threads, I call bullshit. Hell, my Internet Explorer routinely grinds to a complete halt (ALL tabs!) just because one website is slow to respond, again this is bullshit. And no, excuses about IE or Windows don't cut it either, I know all the arguments. The problem is designed into the software and it can be designed out of the software.
Spoken as a programmer myself.
intel just needs 6 cores + HT and 20 or more pci-e (not counting dmi) on the desktop line.
Maybe even 4 DMI maybe (boosted speed pci-e 3.0) + 4 storage + 16 video + 2-4 usb / TB)
On the higher end they are stuck as the Xeon market needs the lower end to have full pci-e. Unless they want to lose the pci-e storage market to amd. Where your storage nodes really don't need to have 16 cores + high clocks. It seams like that don't want to have people buying $400 gamer cpu's in there servers so they cut down the pci-e. Will they have LGA 2066 xeon's?? ones with full pci-e and locked at $200-$500? $500-$900? $1000 min cost for full pci-e is an joke.
AMD will have an gamer system at under $1000 with 64 pci-e lanes. Where will there 64 pci-e and 128 pci-e lane server cpu's fall?? They will likely have some thing at $300-$500 and $500-$700.
Is there much software that is so well multithreaded & multiprocessed that going from, say, 4 cores to 16 would result in a 4 fold increase in processing power? (Not considering here cloud servers that host a boatload of VMs)
Is there something going on that we see 'X' turn up everywhere? Like XboX One X ? X-prize? SpaceX? In the beginning of the space program everything was '7' (even a Star Trek episode had a Gary Seven that they intended to spin off) but I guess 'X' is all the buzz in this decade.
I won't be buying any of those for my business, since Hell will freeze over before I use Windows 10.
Of course, MS licensing for Windows is per core now...
That's not an issue for those that don't use Microsoft Windows.
There ain't no such thing as proprietary standards only proprietary formats. Standards are by definition open.
I remember when it was all 286, 386 and 486 for at least a decade. Now you have to be a fulltime savant with a PhD in hardware to understand whats going on.