Slashdot Mirror


Intel's 8th-Gen 'Coffee Lake' Core CPUs Will Be Revealed During the Great American Eclipse (pcworld.com)

Brad Chacos, writing for PCWorld: Intel's response to AMD's disruptive Ryzen processors is soon to get its time in the sun. Well, sort of. On Tuesday, Intel announced plans to livestream the launch of its 8th-generation "Coffee Lake" processors on August 21 -- the same day that the great American solar eclipse casts its shadow across the United States. Intel's throwing shade. Eighth-gen Coffee Lake chips will be built using a revised version of Intel's 14nm process technology for an unprecedented fourth time, following in the footsteps of Broadwell, Skylake, and Kaby Lake architectures. You'll probably also need a new motherboard to use them. But most notably, Intel claims 8th-gen Core chips will be up to 30 percent faster than today's Kaby Lake processors in some applications. Intel chips haven't seen a performance leap like that in years. Beyond that, little is officially known about Coffee Lake, though the churning internet rumor mill thinks that Intel will up the core counts this time around to combat the threat of Ryzen.

98 comments

  1. That's the one I'm gonna buy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All of 18 sweet cores.

    I was considering the Ryzen but it seems Linux doesn't support that CPU. Hopefully, Coffee-Lake is Linux certified.

    1. Re: That's the one I'm gonna buy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the LHC will be splitting a bunch particles too.
      but don't worry!

    2. Re: That's the one I'm gonna buy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Linux supports it. There's a hardware bug in Ryzen that's easier to reproduce in some workloads in Linux, but it's reproducible in Windows too.

    3. Re:That's the one I'm gonna buy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you haven't bought a Ryzen CPU yet, then it won't have the issue. It only affects the first build.

    4. Re: That's the one I'm gonna buy by Khyber · · Score: 1

      Only Windows 10, not Windows 7.

      Linux kernels 3+ are affected AFAICT, but I can't reproduce the problem on 2.6.39 on my Slackware box.

      Can't trigger it in my Hackintosh but it hits FreeBSD.

      That's not a hardware problem, that's an OS problem, specifically with newer SMT handling code.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    5. Re: That's the one I'm gonna buy by Khyber · · Score: 1

      To boot, it's only Ryzen, not EPYC or Threadripper. HotHardware says a kernel fix is coming. Yea, sounds like software problems to me.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    6. Re:That's the one I'm gonna buy by Mike+Frett · · Score: 1

      That is false sir. There is a Ryzen bug but it only effects HIGH workloads, something average users don't do. The Bug is being investigated and will be repaired. FYI.

  2. The Gandalf CPU... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 4, Funny

    This CPU will deliver phenomenal performance but only during solar eclipses.

    1. Re:The Gandalf CPU... by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately they used an FPU intensive program on a Pentium processor to predict the time for the eclipse. Their reveal is going to be 42.68715972 hours too late.

    2. Re:The Gandalf CPU... by ma1wrbu5tr · · Score: 1

      Intel unveils their newest processor... and darkness falls across the land.

      --
      Why can't we go back to using jumpers to configure slot adapter cards? Why? I say!
    3. Re:The Gandalf CPU... by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      Intel unveils their newest processor... and darkness falls across the land.

      As AMD eclipses Intel's best. Again.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    4. Re:The Gandalf CPU... by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      This CPU will deliver phenomenal performance but only during solar eclipses.

      AMD will counter with a knockoff that works during those more common lunar eclipses.

  3. Code Name by raftpeople · · Score: 4, Funny

    "Coffee Lake" barely beat out "Man Bear Pig"

    1. Re:Code Name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you serial or Super Duper Serial!

    2. Re:Code Name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, its a better name than "Almost as good as Ryzen at twice the price."

    3. Re:Code Name by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 1

      Are you serial or Super Duper Serial!

      I'm pretty sure he's cereal, or maybe parallel.

    4. Re:Code Name by lactose99 · · Score: 1

      With TV's Patrick Duffy for a leg

      --
      Fully licensed blockchain psychiatrist
    5. Re:Code Name by Tablizer · · Score: 2

      They actually chose "Covfefe" but it leaked out at the Whitehouse.

    6. Re: Code Name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Almost as good as Intel with twice the cores!

  4. So you can't see how bad they suck? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    *rimshot* ...i'll be here all week!

  5. More Intel BS by H3lldr0p · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Given that just yesterday, Intel announced a product release for September 25th isn't it a little early to talk about what comes after? We haven't had the chance to see how their current compares to AMD's offering which isn't due until later this month.

    Guess Intel is afraid of something. Maybe AMD has given them some much needed competition.

    1. Re: More Intel BS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow that escalated quickly. You really need to do something else besides bitching about AMD. Life is short to be pissed. Just buy Intel and help my stock along.

    2. Re:More Intel BS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree at some point, I have some AMD Phenom II and the Fx Bulldozer still ticking well, but I have found some AMD C series with an A sticker.
      I used to have Intel but found that most motherboards were not fully compatible, My Pentium 3 at 333Mhz was overclocked and I didn't know.
      My expensive Pentium 4 in my Intel motherboard was using the original fan and heat sink and it burnt, it seemed like the heat sensor failed after 1.2 years of service... Since then I started using AMD because the price and had no more problems.
      There was a time when some programs didn't run in AMD because the Intel compiler "bug": http://www.swallowtail.org/naughty-intel.shtml
      I'm using both AMD Fx 6500 and Intel icore 7 4thGen in my job and is fine as long as never use Intel compiler or Intel optimized code on the AMD.

      Now I'm gonna deprecate and replace all AMD machines with Intel because of the AMD PSP (I think that might hold back the processor speed), at least the equally awful Intel ME can be deactivated.

    3. Re:More Intel BS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now I'm gonna deprecate and replace all AMD machines with Intel because of the AMD PSP (I think that might hold back the processor speed), at least the equally awful Intel ME can be deactivated.

      good luck with your intel ME deactivation. afaik, only the earlier processors with ME can be deactivated, nothing made in the last few years, or in the future, will work for more than 30 minutes without rebooting, if the ME is deactivated.

      good luck using your new pc for 30 minute bursts, maybe you can make a powerplan that reboots in 29 minutes so you don't lose data.

    4. Re:More Intel BS by GuB-42 · · Score: 1

      You shit on AMD, fine. I prefer Intel too.
      But you should be grateful that AMD is coming back, it will stimulate competition and hopefully result in better products from Intel.

      The problem you mentioned was caused by AMD CPUs having no thermal protection and an exposed die, requiring you to be extra careful with your heatsink. So much that most shops had a "we don't take back burnt or chipped CPUs" sign. It is no longer the case. They addressed the issue with the Athlon X2, around 2005.

    5. Re:More Intel BS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you have a bad time building a PC one time then you had a bad time building a PC. If you had a bad building every PC you've ever built then you suck at building PCs.

    6. Re:More Intel BS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're a moronic faggot, lol. Period.

    7. Re:More Intel BS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Intel's socket PIII Coppermines also had exposed dies, so that problem was not exclusive to AMD. Intel didn't start adding heat-spreaders to cover the die until the the Tualatin PIII's and the Williamette PIV's.

    8. Re:More Intel BS by Wootery · · Score: 1

      I was still holding only my anti-Intel angst from my Amiga days

      Right, I mean, only a moron would blindly hold a grudge against a CPU company for years and years, right?

      Presumably the same sort of moron who lacks the ability to regulate their own emotions, or use paragraphs.

  6. Suckky Offering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Great, the rest of the american public will be distracted by what for most will be a once in a life time eclipse, while they announce their suckky offering. While AMD is going to make intel bend over and grab their ankles.

    1. Re:Suckky Offering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For most once in a lifetime? There's another north american eclipse in 2024. What do you know that you aren't sharing with your /. buddies?

    2. Re:Suckky Offering by Rockoon · · Score: 2

      It isnt really AMD that is making Intel bend over.

      Its Samsung and TSMC.

      Intel was a generation ahead on process tech with AMD's last iteration.

      Now Samsung has sold time to AMD for 14nm production (Ryzen)
      and TSMC has sold time to AMD for 10nm production (PlayStation and XBOX console chips)

      AMD has always had the better CPU design. What they didnt have was access to matching process tech for about 8 years or so.

      AMD is not even close to Intels rival. The other fab companies are, and they are ahead and pulling away now.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    3. Re: Suckky Offering by negRo_slim · · Score: 1

      Once in a lifetime for people in the path. Lord I ain't traveling for that shit.

      --
      On the Oregon Cost born and raised, On the beach is where I spent most of my days
    4. Re: Suckky Offering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My understanding is this eclipse should be blocking a good deal of the sun all over the continental US. So no matter where you are, you're going to have a pretty damn good show. Go buy your eclipse viewing glasses.

    5. Re: Suckky Offering by sexconker · · Score: 1

      My understanding is this eclipse should be blocking a good deal of the sun all over the continental US. So no matter where you are, you're going to have a pretty damn good show. Go buy your eclipse viewing glasses.

      Fuck glasses. I just wait until the eclipse happens to look at it.

    6. Re: Suckky Offering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Covering most of the Continental US still misses the majority of the human population.

    7. Re:Suckky Offering by sexconker · · Score: 1

      AMD is still contracted with GlobalFoundries (which was previously completely owned by AMD) for CPU production.
      Hynix makes the HBM2 chips for their Vega GPUs.
      Samsung and TSMC get overflow and second bidding.

      AMD is targeting 7nm with GloFo for 2018 on a "performance" node (the Zen architecture is on the "low power" node). If this pans out, late 2018 and early 2019 will be very interesting.

      Further, Intel doesn't earn money by leasing its manufacturing out to others (I believe they actually do some of this now, but it's a drop in the bucket). Intel makes money by cutting out the middle man (the 3rd party fab) and selling their chips at high prices, keeping all of the profit.

      What's happening now is AMD is coming out with many-core chips that scale perfectly. Intel can't make many-core chips without sacrificing clock speed and throttling to shit. AMD is still at a significant disadvantage when it comes to single threaded performance. But for most people the performance is more than adequate, the price is great, and the multi threaded performance is amazing. You also get the stability of an AMD platform (no need to change motherboards and sockets every 6 weeks), and you don't get the "fuck you"s that Intel loves to dish out (restrictive number of PCIe lanes, heat spreaders with paste instead of solder, anti-overclocking behavior and lockouts, etc.).

    8. Re: Suckky Offering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AMD has had the better architecture at times. But not with Bulldozer. That one was a dud. It was even slower than the older AMD architecture in many workloads.

    9. Re:Suckky Offering by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Intel has long sold spare fab capacity - Reticon relied on Intel. The problem was, if you didn't have a long term contract guaranteeing production of your chip, and Intel's requirements increased, you were screwed.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    10. Re:Suckky Offering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you almost figured it out, yet its IBM. And i throw in a little history IBM was the first to reach 180nm, 130nm, 90nm, 45nm, 16nm, 10nm, and the 7nm microprocessor manufacturing process. Intel first to reach 65nm(halve-node), 22nm. IBM save AMD from sure bankruptcy and helped AMD with (65nm, 45nm and 22nm). IBM helped samsung reach (65nm, 45nm, 22nm, 16nm, 10nm, 7nm, and 5nm). IBM {Big Blue} technology is every where.

    11. Re:Suckky Offering by rrohbeck · · Score: 1

      It's almost as if Moore's law has slowed down. Tick-tock-tock-tock...

  7. Tri-Gates are dead! Long live FinFETs! by Rockoon · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Eighth-gen Coffee Lake chips will be built using a revised version of Intel's 14nm process technology for an unprecedented fourth time

    Intel is switching to complete 14nm FinFET here. The reason is that some of the competing fabs that stayed with FinFET are now manufacturing 10nm FinFET while Intel spent 3 years now trying to make 10nm Tri-Gates economical and have failed miserably. The Tri-Gate lithography is just too expensive: Too many steps, and the yields too poor.

    When Intel beat the world to 14nm it didnt matter so much that Tri-Gate's were not as economical as FinFET because Intel beat the world there by a big margin and didnt have to compete. Now they not only have to complete against 14nm FinFET but also 10nm FinFET and it wont be long until 7nm FinFET is in production by at least the companies that skipped 10nm on purpose (they are not the same fab companies as the ones producing 10nm FinFET's today)

    Companies that beat Intel to 10nm (so far):

    Samsung, TSMC

    Companies that absolutely will beat Intel to 7nm:

    Global Foundries, TSMC, Samsung. I predict that this is the order that it will happen in. GloFlo skipped 10nm on purpose to be the first to 7nm.

    --
    "His name was James Damore."
    1. Re:Tri-Gates are dead! Long live FinFETs! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      Intel manufacturers FinFETs, they don't call it "Tri Gate" anymore, and haven't for a while. Also it's well known that process nodes are meaningless these days, and transistor and metal densities are much higher on Intel processes for the same node name. If you really want to talk about lithography costs, you should look up LELE/LELELE vs. SADP/SAQP (the latter, which Intel uses, is cheaper).

      TSMC had a delayed start to their 10 nm node, in a similar fashion as Intel did with their 14 nm. You can sure bet that 7 nm is going to be difficult.

  8. Not at all unexpected.. by bravecanadian · · Score: 1

    During all the hype about Ryzen I kept telling people that I imagine Intel has something sitting on the shelf they'll bring out now. They just didn't have a reason to until challenged.

    Surely people didn't think their designers were just sitting on their hands while they were milking the the current lines?

    Good to see some competition heating up again though..

    1. Re:Not at all unexpected.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      During all the hype about Ryzen I kept telling people that I imagine Intel has something sitting on the shelf they'll bring out now. They just didn't have a reason to until challenged.

      Surely people didn't think their designers were just sitting on their hands while they were milking the the current lines?

      Good to see some competition heating up again though..

      Based on the prices I've seen announced so far, it looks like Intel is still living in the days when they had no competition, i.e., their prices are double those of AMD.

    2. Re:Not at all unexpected.. by war4peace · · Score: 1

      Surely people didn't think their designers were just sitting on their hands while they were milking the the current lines?

      I'll take that bet.
      After all, I've got Nokia, Blackberry, 3dfx, Voodoo, Via to back me up... (to name a few)

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    3. Re: Not at all unexpected.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You clearly have no idea what your talking about.

    4. Re:Not at all unexpected.. by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      I'll take that bet.
      After all, I've got Nokia, Blackberry, 3dfx, Voodoo, Via to back me up... (to name a few)

      Except those companies weren't dependent on their competitor. Intel needs AMD for several reasons.

      First, AMD is a credible competitor. You may be aware that Intel was under investigation for monopolistic practices that hurt AMD, so Intel's already got a taste of government regulation, You can bet killing AMD is not on Intel's radar - if nothing else, it keeps governments away from Intel. Having AMD weak but credible is a position most companies would love - they're weak enough that they're not really a threat, but credible that they are real competition.

      Second, AMD and Intel have a sweet patent deal going on - lots of patents are cross-licensed between the two for basically free. Should AMD go down, those patents will not go to Intel for competitive reasons - Intel will probably be barred from the asset sale to avoid locking up essential patents. Other companies like ARM and MIPS will probably not enter into any sweetheart deals like what Intel is enjoying now.

      Third, it's likely any government intervention will break up Intel - into fab, design and maybe software groups, That's not a good thing for Intel.

      Intel's goals were to keep AMD propped up until they can sustain themselves - they were in dire straits not too long ago (it's why they spun out their fab business), save for a cash injection by Microsoft and Sony (Intel probably punted Microsoft and Sony to AMD to offer a stable source of income, plus Intel hates consoles).

      The fact that AMD has a competitive architecture I'm sure makes Intel happy - it means Intel will not worry about AMD suddenly going bankrupt and triggering all sorts of anti-trust investigations.

      Intel may have competitive architectures ready - again, they don't want to introduce them to avoid burying AMD.

      Intel is huge - they aren't called ChipZilla for nothing. The fact they can do investments in fabs by basically being self-funded shows that they have tons of money to burn (Intel's fabs are used only by Intel - Altera is owned by Intel). Everyone else's fabs are used by other people as well - TSMC is a fab company like GlobalFoundries, Samsung has Apple to pay for their fabs, etc.

    5. Re: Not at all unexpected.. by sexconker · · Score: 1

      Seems to me he's got it pegged exactly.

    6. Re: Not at all unexpected.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is a minor rehash of their current design. This isn't something that they've been keeping up their sleeves, this is a knee jerk rerelease to flood the market with something new while their actually new architecture is delayed.

    7. Re:Not at all unexpected.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think they were grinding their teeth to move the i5 series to six core. They had their product segmentation and they would have gotten away with it if weren't for that meddling AMD and their stupid Ryzen.

    8. Re:Not at all unexpected.. by JustNiz · · Score: 1

      >> First, AMD is a credible competitor.

      Not in my opinion.They've clearly been the ghetto option for decades.
      If budget isn't as much of an issue as reliability then Intel has always been a better buy.

    9. Re:Not at all unexpected.. by rahvin112 · · Score: 2

      Don't expect much, it's a rework on the same process. Intel has literally stalled out making it to 10nm, they've now redesigned the same cpu on the same process 4 times. The entire Intel advantage of being several process steps ahead of everyone else has evaporated over the course of the last 2 years. Coffee lake will likely be no faster than the generation before it or the 2 more before that.

      They will claim it's 30% faster because it has some new instruction that allows it to perform a single task that much faster, but only if you have the CPU and only if your code supports the instruction. Usually it takes a decade before new instructions a prevalent in software.

    10. Re:Not at all unexpected.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not in my opinion.They've clearly been the ghetto option for decades.

      Ten years ago Intel couldn't come close to AMD performance.

      If budget isn't as much of an issue as reliability then Intel has always been a better buy.

      Why? Intel has had more reliability problems than AMD.

    11. Re:Not at all unexpected.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not in my opinion.They've clearly been the ghetto option for decades.

      Ten years ago Intel couldn't come close to AMD performance.

      You mean more like 12 years, right? Ten years ago AMD was already taking a beating from the lowly Core family. Things only got worse with Core2Duo.

      If budget isn't as much of an issue as reliability then Intel has always been a better buy.

      Why? Intel has had more reliability problems than AMD.

      Just no. Look at the server market, where reliability is a key factor. AMD server market is almost nonexistant.

    12. Re: Not at all unexpected.. by Entrope · · Score: 1

      Actually, the 30% increase is on one particular benchmark when going from a two-core mobile part to the four-core part that sits at the same place in the Coffee Lake lineup. It sounds more like a power efficiency gain than a real throughput gain.

  9. Timing is everything... by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 4, Funny

    Intel's 8th-Gen 'Coffee Lake' Core CPUs Will Be Revealed During the Great American Eclipse

    Quick! While nobody's looking!

    --
    Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
  10. Notably? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But most notably, Intel claims 8th-gen Core chips will be up to 30 percent faster than today's Kaby Lake processors in some applications.

    "Up to" is a marketing term meaning "definitely no more than" and in practice usually means "almost certainly a lot less than", If there was anything genuinely exciting to say about this product then they wouldn't fall back on such an empty expression.

    1. Re:Notably? by war4peace · · Score: 1

      That is so true.
      As of late, Intel has been abusing the "up to" gimmick like there's no tomorrow.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    2. Re:Notably? by sexconker · · Score: 1

      They've even doubled down on the "up to" for clock speeds.
      There's a base clock, TurboBoost 2.0 clock, and a TurboBoost 3.0 clock.

      To be fair, AMD does the same thing now, I believe, with the base clock, all core turbo clock, and max, single core turbo clock.

  11. Why is it always, always, 30%? by TimothyHollins · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Has there ever been a new generation where the promised increase wasn't "up to 30%" ? Because I've never heard any other number used.

    Also, am I the only one that finds Intel a wee bit histrionic this last month or so? They've been throwing everything they can (including the chairs) at the wall, but nothing seems to stick so far.

    1. Re:Why is it always, always, 30%? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "in some applications"

      yawn.

    2. Re:Why is it always, always, 30%? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It would be sad if the 30% figure would come only from the four to six core transition. So sad. Sadder than sad. Saddest.

    3. Re:Why is it always, always, 30%? by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      Usually 30% is approximately the decreased distance between transistors with a node size transition.

      The future for Intel will eventually be: 14nm to 10nm, then 10nm to 7nm, ... see the 30%'s?

      But in this case it is almost certainly just due to an increased core count (making the chips bigger in the process) ..

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    4. Re:Why is it always, always, 30%? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you follow the trail of references it leads back to an ARS article where the 30% improvement is in a 15 watt laptop class CPU and the newer CPU has both twice the cores/threads (4c8t vs 2c4t) and a higher turbo (4ghz vs 3.5ghz). Impressive to see a true quad core in a power limited environment of a laptop but only 30% when you have both a higher turbo speed for single threaded performance AND twice as many cores/threads for well threaded stuff isn't actually that great.

      For desktop cpu's I expect this to be another typical lackluster improvement. Potentially slightly higher clocks or maybe 5-10% improvement at the same clock speed. The biggest thing for desktops might be a change in the # of cores for the standard CPUs if you believe the rumor of 6 core chips. A 2c/4t i3, 4c/8t i5 and 6c,12t i7 would be nice but something tells me intel will keep the i5 as a 4c/4t chip and just add another tier either a i9 like their high end chip or some i7 extreme mega ultra edition.

    5. Re:Why is it always, always, 30%? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Has there ever been a new generation where the promised increase wasn't "up to 30%" ?

      Don't know about Intel, but with Ryzen, AMD originally claimed they were aiming for a 40% IPC improvement over the previous architecture. Then they actually delivered around a 50% improvement, beating their original claims.

    6. Re:Why is it always, always, 30%? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They will just add 30% more cores in each CPU.

    7. Re: Why is it always, always, 30%? by Entrope · · Score: 1

      You gave Intel too much credit. It's actually a two- to four-core transition for a mobile part.

  12. Overthinking it by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 2

    There's part of me that wonders whether Intel knows its offering is going to be underwhelming, and is therefore choosing to release it on a day when a lot of tech/science types will be somewhat distracted.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
    1. Re:Overthinking it by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Given all the data in the summary, it sounds like they've already announced it. What is left to reveal, the non-code name? I'll bet it will be i7, i5, etc......

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    2. Re:Overthinking it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sometimes, I was I was a simpleton like you that never considered reliability to be a factor in any purchasing decision.

    3. Re:Overthinking it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They need the darkness to be able to show off the RGB.

  13. Hero CPUs by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

    They're only manufacturing the CPUs during solar eclipses to give them supernatural powers.

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  14. gasp Intel Blocks Sun! by swschrad · · Score: 1

    I'm gonna buy 10 copies of that tabloid for my muthah

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
  15. Coffee Lake... by sconeu · · Score: 1

    Will there be a decaf version?

    --
    General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    1. Re:Coffee Lake... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's the Celeron.

    2. Re:Coffee Lake... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Will there be a decaf version?

      No, but you won't have to drink the lake.

    3. Re:Coffee Lake... by TeknoHog · · Score: 1

      How about Covfefe Lake to match the recent Newspeak?

      --
      Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
  16. Tick, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    tock, tock...tock.

  17. 10nm != 10nm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Just to clarify, 10nm refers to the "process" and not the actual pitch of any of the resulting elements. Each fab implements it differently which results in different densities for the same "process". For example, the TSMC 10nm process has a gate pitch of 66nm and and interconnect of 44nm while Samsung's 68/51 respectively... the end result being that TSMC 10nm chips are denser than Samsung. Intel's is supposed to be 54/36 which is actually the same pitch as Samsung's proposed 8nm process and slightly smaller than TSMC's and Global Foundaries proposed 7nm processes (54/40 and 56/40). Intel's numbers have to be taken with a grain of salt, Samsung and TSMC both initially fudged their 10nm process pitches and Intel may be doing the same. However, the process size is slowly becoming a marketing gimmick.

    1. Re:10nm != 10nm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And TSMC has developed their 14nm, nope sorry their 16nm, into a smaller "12nm". Unless I'm saying something wrong/silly here.
      But this will be a useful/important node. There's a new "advanced low end" 22nm as well. In the end maybe we should pay attention to the end product anyway since you can design stuff that will overheat and run out of battery or stuff that won't, regardless of the "nanometers" :)

    2. Re:10nm != 10nm by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      And TSMC has developed their 14nm, nope sorry their 16nm, into a smaller "12nm". Unless I'm saying something wrong/silly here.

      I believe TSMC transistor densities on their 14nm is significantly higher than Intels now, yes, but thats because Intel moved back onto FinFET and are late to the game. The other companies have refined their 14nm node. Intel had to scrap theirs and start fresh. Thats a big thing.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
  18. WOW! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yet another CPU I can't afford! Hooray!

  19. It will be up to 1000% faster on some application! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here's an application:


    #include <unistd.h>
    #include "etc.h"

    int main()
    {
            if (get_cpu_vendor() = VENDOR_INTEL &&
                  get_cpu_architecture() == INTEL_CORE &&
                  get_cpu_arch_generation() == 8000) { return 0; }
            sleep(10);
            return 0;
    }

    What a wonderful claim, "some applications".

    Also - "up to 30%". Correct me if I'm wrong here, but I seem to recall "0%" is also "up to 30%".

           

  20. They had to launch during the eclipse ... by ChatHuant · · Score: 1

    ... because their claims can't stand the light of day.

  21. Is Intel embarrassed? by JohnFen · · Score: 1

    I ask because I can't think of any other reason why you'd intentionally introduce a product at a moment when it's guaranteed that almost nobody will be paying attention.

  22. Just bought Kaby Lake by Holi · · Score: 1

    And I'm taking vacation days to go down to the Kentucky/Illinois border to photograph the eclipse.

    --
    Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
  23. Logo mismatch error by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I guess they didn't notice that a solar eclipse looks a lot like the Ryzen logo.

  24. New socket but no added pci-e or faster DMI will t by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    New socket but no added pci-e or faster DMI?

    Will Coffee Lake-X also be 2 ram channels and only 16 pci-e as well?

  25. Don't forget to sacrifice a new born by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...

  26. don't hold your breath for the motherboards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There won't be any motherboards for a while so I wouldn't pay much attention to the launch i.e. no 3rd party boards at launch

  27. intel is totally by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just like the race to 1Ghz.
    Intel Skrewd the Pooch..

    I really think Just like the Athalon/Opteron (ya spelling may be off) AMD will be toppin out for quite some.

  28. Central Penetration Units - right to the core by fyngyrz · · Score: 2

    Covfefe lake processors have only the best cores. Believe me, it's true. And they're fast. They'll drain the process pool for you so quick, you've never seen so quick. No CPU respects threads like Covfefe processors do, it's unpresidented: it grabs them by the stack frame, programs let you do that, you know, when you're a Covfefe multicore CPU. Howe many cores? I'll keep you in suspense. Do Covfefe CPUs support hyperthreading? Yeah, I guess so.

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
  29. Slogan by Translation+Error · · Score: 1

    "It was a dark day when Coffee Lake entered the world."

    --
    When someone says, "Any fool can see ..." they're usually exactly right.