Intel Core i9-9990XE: Up To 5.0 GHz, Auction Only (anandtech.com)

Ian Cutress, reporting for AnandTech: AnandTech has seen documents and supporting information from multiple sources that show that Intel is planning to release a new high-end desktop processor, the Core i9-9990XE. These documents show that the processors will not be sold at retail; rather they will only be sold to system integrators, and then only through a closed online auction. This new processor will be the highest numbered processor in Intel's high-end desktop line. The current top processor is the i9-9980XE, an 18 core part with a base frequency of 3.5 GHz and a turbo frequency of 4.0 GHz. The i9-9990XE, on the other hand, is not simply the 9980XE with an increase in frequency. The Core i9-9990XE will be a 14 core processor, but with a base frequency of 4.0 GHz and a turbo frequency of 5.0 GHz. This makes it a super-binned 9940X.

Comments

~o~ Intel Core i9-9990XE L@@K RARE!!! ~o~

[Anonymous Coward]

nt

Finally!

[fattmatt]

Now I can play Crysis.

Re:Finally!

[Anonymous Coward]

until windows 10 starts updating, anyway.

Re:Novelty

[Bobrick]

That's pretty much it. If I want a lot of power, instead of showing off the money I don't have, AMD would get my choice from now on.

Errrr SIs only?

[thegarbz]

This is quite the curious move from Intel. Sure SIs have budget to buy in bulk and to auction, but the super enthusiasts who would be the likely target market for this chip aren't usually the type to go out to an SI and say "I want something off the shelf, please build for me".

Re:Why not go with a Xeon?

[DigiShaman]

Because we can't have high-end desktops using ECC, otherwise it's now a server. Intel segments that market intentionally!

Re:Why not go with a Xeon?

[EvilSS]

You mean besides the 2x+ price premium and slower per-core clock speeds for the Xeons?

Re:Novelty

[Targon]

AMD 7nm chips should change that where AMD will also win single threaded as well as multi-threaded workloads. The IPC improvements from the Zen2 cores, combined with the 7nm fab process which will allow for higher clock speeds/lower power draw definitely have the potential to do this. Right now though, we need to wait another 5-6 months to find out if that will be true, but it is very possible. The unconfirmed leaked lineup of Ryzen 3000 series processors has 12 and 16 core parts, including boost that will go to 5GHz. Based on first and second generation Ryzen processors, if boost is listed at a given speed, then with decent cooling, that is what can be gotten on all cores with good cooling(typical 280mm closed loop AIO being enough).

Re:Why not go with a Xeon?

[Greyfox]

Xeons tend to be more cores and slower, although the I9 is kind of blurring those distinctions. When I was shopping around for my gaming rig, I think the most cores I could find in an I7 were 6. You can get more cores on a xeon, but at a lower clock speed. As the clock speed and cores go up, the price also does, on what appears to be an exponential curve. So when I was speccing out my video processing machine at work, I ended up going with a dual-10-core-processor model with a clock speed kind of in the middle of the road. I think the per-processor price on those was neighborhood of 2 grand each, and the next step up was close to 5.

I'm currently considering replacing my desktop at home again, and I'm leaning toward getting a threadripper this time. The top end Intel is marginally faster (~10-15%) but the thread ripper is significantly less expensive. I do a lot of multi-threaded programming, so the idea of having a ton of cores to play with is enticing.

Re:Novelty

[lgw]

A lot of money just to act like a big shot. I suppose it is like people who buy mansions or 100k sports cars.

It's an odd market. There are enthusiasts who push the limits on what's possible for overclocking, building ridiculous systems (e.g., liquid nitrogen cooling) with prices that are crazy, but still way cheaper than cars or photography as a middle-age-man hobby. Thing is, enthusiasts don't buy systems from integrators. Building your on is the entire point.

This is a dangerous marketing move for Intell IMO. These chips will go in systems for kids with rich parents. That could kill the enthusiast market for Intel. Chasing away your hardcore fans is rarely wise.

Re:Why not go with a Xeon?

[lgw]

Intel prices this stuff carefully. You do hit a point where it's cheaper to build a 2-socket server system for the needed performance. I did all the math very carefully before ending up with a 28-core 2-socket Xeon system for video transcoding.

I rather suspect that if this CPU were priced normally, it would mess up the very careful price curve for Xeon, and end up cheaper for some loads that force you to Xeon today. Can't have that.

BTW, the lower per-core clock is all about thermal management, which is fine really if you're not planning to overclock your >$1000 CPUs. (I liked the fact that with heat sinks designed for the OC market, I could build a dead silent system even under full load).

At 255W, systems integrators are required

[guruevi]

I understand they don't want to give this one to the masses. 255W from an area the size of an oversized postal stamp will require some very good cooling and having it destroyed due to just poor installation of your water cooler, they'll probably won't be allowed returns at all.

I know Intel wants to give AMD the finger but this is 1/4 kW in the processor alone. Give it a good GPU and you're looking at a 2kW space heater. This moves makes it obvious they are desperate to increase both profitability and get to a smaller scale.

Re:At 255W, systems integrators are required

[Jahoda]

The RTX 2080 TI is a 250 watt TDP chip (as it the 1080 TI). There's nothing remotely challenging to cool these systems. I don't really think you understand how TDP works. In any case, as several have corrected you, chips self-manage their thermals and have for about 15-20 years now.

Re:Why not go with a Xeon?

[lgw]

Tools for jobs. Single core (and not GPU-bound) is a very narrow problem space these days.