Slashdot Mirror
Intel Debuts 9th-Gen Core Chips, Including Core i9 and X-Series Parts, With a Few Twists (pcworld.com)
Intel unveiled its 9th-generation Core desktop chips, with the notable omission of a key feature: Hyper-Threading, at least on all but the most exclusive Core i9-9900K for mainstream PCs. Hyper-Threading has also been reserved for a new iteration of Intel's X-series processors, which includes up to 18 cores and 36 threads. From a report: In a livestream Monday morning from its Fall Launch Event in New York, the company announced just a single Core i9 chip, the $488 Core i9-9900K. Later, the company privately revealed two others in the Core i7 and Core i5 families. Intel also announced a new series of X-class chips, ranging from 8 cores and 16 threads through 18 cores and 36 threads. Prices will range from $589 to $1,979.
It's certainly fair to say that Intel surprised us all with the unexpected shift of its upcoming 28-core chip to the Xeon family, as well as the announcement of the X-series chips, too. And what's the deal with hyperthreading? Intel's announcement certainly adds some new topics to talk about in the months ahead. Part of the confusion was due to what Intel was expected to announce: a family of new 9th-gen chips, from Core i3s up through the Core i9, and how it did so. On the publicly available livestream, the company revealed only the presence of the Core i9-9900K, as well as the presence of the new X-series parts. Later, after the livestream had concluded, Intel fleshed out the remaining members of the K-series parts, and disclosed the price and performance of the X-series parts.
However, Intel didn't even mention what many enthusiasts wanted to know: why only the i9-9900K, out of all of Intel's mainstream parts, boasts the Hyper-Threading feature. Further reading: Intel claims best gaming processor with 9th Gen Core unveiling.
It's certainly fair to say that Intel surprised us all with the unexpected shift of its upcoming 28-core chip to the Xeon family, as well as the announcement of the X-series chips, too. And what's the deal with hyperthreading? Intel's announcement certainly adds some new topics to talk about in the months ahead. Part of the confusion was due to what Intel was expected to announce: a family of new 9th-gen chips, from Core i3s up through the Core i9, and how it did so. On the publicly available livestream, the company revealed only the presence of the Core i9-9900K, as well as the presence of the new X-series parts. Later, after the livestream had concluded, Intel fleshed out the remaining members of the K-series parts, and disclosed the price and performance of the X-series parts.
However, Intel didn't even mention what many enthusiasts wanted to know: why only the i9-9900K, out of all of Intel's mainstream parts, boasts the Hyper-Threading feature. Further reading: Intel claims best gaming processor with 9th Gen Core unveiling.
Hyperthreading is at least partly to blame for the serious security flaws in nearly every processor produced over the last two decades. The 9900K still has it because some people value speed over security. https://www.itnews.com.au/news...
I come here for global warming and trump articles, not tech news.
I got news for you https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
Man, like many slashdotters, I used to be firmly AMD prior to the Core-series of processors. Since then, my last 3 desktops since ~2007 have been Intel.
. The fact is that at this moment, the single thread performance of Intel's chips, and their performance per-core is unmatched. If you're doing anything with multimedia, such as x265 encoding, video editing, whatever, Intel is still the best.
But the fact is that AMD is coming with more cores, and higher clocks, and lower cost. And they are rapidly reaching the tipping point where 24 of their cores for $500 bucks make a lot more sense than 6 of Intel's for $500 bucks.
All I am seeing from Intel's 9th generation is an upward-rebrand of all their parts, eliminating the Celeron. And, a continued artificial scarcity of cores and PCI bandwidth to push customers up into the Xeon lines...
, this coming from a company that apparently can't get to 10nm until next year, and is facing major supply issues....
Well, all these things do not bode well for Intel.
Your gut is wrong and no doubt influenced by marketing and shilling from Intel.
You can buy a Meltdown invulnerable CPU from AMD *today*. These new CPUs from Intel are still vulnerable and it will be years before they sell one that isn't.
Go AMD.
More to the point, which current offering is the i7 2600K of years past (not too expensive and overclocks like crazy?)
Amusingly enough, it's probably the 2nd-gen Ryzen5 2600X.
Lots of cheap machines come with only 32 GB of storage because they get cheaper Windows licenses this way.
Ezekiel 23:20
I just built a ryzen 2600/vega 64 system. There's literally nothing wrong with it. It never crashes. the CPU gets 1300 cinebench, and games better than my i5 haswell did(ryzen has faster single-thread than the i5 too). the vega is rock solid and trades blows with a GTX1080/RTX2070. Witcher 3 runs fluid smooth at 4k max settings. I mostly game at 1440p though so this should last me the next 5-6 years. You may have PTSD from ATI, but AMD has been good for GPU's since the 290x, and good for CPU's since ryzen.