Intel CPU - News & Discussion

[kaziishan]

As AMD has actually been able to stir the market a bit to push Intel to do something different, I think there is a need of separate Intel CPU News & Discussion thread. If it already exists (or if it is not necessary), please (admins) take actions accordingly.

Intel's next-gen Core i9 series teased: 12C/24T of power

Well, now it's Intel's turn with yet another HEDT family of processors, with a next-gen Core i9 family on the way. Right now Intel has the Core i3, Core i5 and Core i7 processors - but they will be joined by the high-end Core i9 family led by the Core i9-7920X processor reportedly launching in August. Intel's purported Core i9 processor will come in up to 12C/24T, matching the rumored next-gen Ryzen processors with 12C/24T of power.

Intel's upcoming i9-7900 series processors will support up to 44 PCIe lanes, while the i9-7800 will have 28 lanes, and the i7-7700/7600 have up to 16. We should expect TDPs in the 112-160W range, depending on the chip, while the i9 processors will rock a third clock state that Intel will call Turbo Clock 3.0, something that will allow the new CPUs to reach much higher clock speeds than Broadwell-E is capable of.

Intel will reportedly provide its next-gen Core-X processors with AVX512 extensions, and 1MB of L2 cache. Skylake-X will support quad-channel DDR4 at up to 2666MHz, while the lower-end mainstream Kaby Lake-X will support dual-channel DDR4.

Source: http://www.tweaktown.com/news/57529/...aign=tweaktown



Intel i9-7900X and i9-7920X Benchmarks

Both 10-core and 12-core Skylake-X processors have already appeared at userbenchmark website:




Source: https://videocardz.com/69457/specifi...posedly-leaked

[aayman]

You beat me to it, I was thinking about starting a similar thread with this news.

I hope the price points are as friendly as Ryzen, the faster it takes the market the faster the software adopts multi-threading.

[djrock]

wonder if Core i9 will in one CCX or Multiple like Ryzen

[aayman]

It will probably be Single. Intel has had 10 core processors for a while now. The most important distinction in this release will be the price point.

[chanchalcxi]

wonder if Core i9 will in one CCX or Multiple like Ryzen

These are HEDT processors like x99 platform's i7 6900k/6950x aka premium High End Desktop cpus ... Inel's Xeons use ccx like tech and they are for servers ...

[djrock]

so $1700 6950x perform around 15-20% faster than 1800x in multicore work load & Only 5% faster in Single core work load .,so wonder whats the point of 9 core & what will be their performance level compare to 1800x .

Also what I know that Single CCX mean that CPU Die size will be Bigger mean Less Yield from a Waffer ,So 9 core i9 can't be lower than $1000 as Amd Solve the High Price issue by Making Multiple Little CCX with 4 core ,so Die size remain smaller & Bigger Yield from a Waffer .

[chanchalcxi]

so $1700 6950x perform around 15-20% faster than 1800x in multicore work load & Only 5% faster in Single core work load .,so wonder whats the point of 9 core & what will be their performance level compare to 1800x .

Also what I know that Single CCX mean that CPU Die size will be Bigger mean Less Yield from a Waffer ,So 9 core i9 can't be lower than $1000 as Amd Solve the High Price issue by Making Multiple Little CCX with 4 core ,so Die size remain smaller & Bigger Yield from a Waffer .

these are skylake X and kabylake X cpus not Broadwell ... CCX tech has latency issues which will remain .. AMD added cost cutting technique and for business it's not so great.. AMD's own lower end cpus made their high end cpus obsolete, high end is where profit margin resides...

from this release u can expect i7 7700k performance out of each core...

[djrock]

these are skylake X and kabylake X cpus not Broadwell ... CCX tech has latency issues which will remain .. AMD added cost cutting technique and for business it's not so great.. AMD's own lower end cpus made their high end cpus obsolete, high end is where profit margin resides...

from this release u can expect i7 7700k performance out of each core...

Don't see importance of 7700k in non gaming work as its already defeated by 1700x in Multi thread work load ,Intel should just give a 6 core 7700k .Also Like Gaming Single CCX don't see much benefit on other work load that is why 1800x beat 6900k in Most work load (Even after the Latency) .

So only thing left is if that CPU will perform better than 6950x .But don't think Intel will do that .So my guess maybe 5% faster than 1800x in multi core & maybe 5% faster in single core & price will be double due to single CCX big die CPU

also Amd will release 16 core thread ripper CPU in june which will be based on Napple architect .So that will solve most latency problem with Infinity fabric

[chanchalcxi]

Don't see importance of 7700k in non gaming work as its already defeated by 1700x in Multi thread work load ,Intel should just give a 6 core 7700k .Also Like Gaming Single CCX don't see much benefit on other work load that is why 1800x beat 6900k in Most work load (Even after the Latency) .

So only thing left is if that CPU will perform better than 6950x .But don't think Intel will do that .So my guess maybe 5% faster than 1800x in multi core & maybe 5% faster in single core & price will be double due to single CCX big die CPU

also Amd will release 16 core thread ripper CPU in june which will be based on Napple architect .So that will solve most latency problem with Infinity fabric

AMD beat nothing, just for gaming even cheaper i5s can beat 1600x, it's when u consider productivity/streaming ryzen shows it's value and i7 6900k is faster and better than 1800x, has various features which 1800x don't have but it's priced terribly,

... HEDT segment is intel's productivity segment, only in specific few software ryzen performs better than i7 7700k bcz most multithreaded software still utilize 4 cores effectively beyond that its still hit or miss for now...

from leaks which can definitely be wrong it seems ..

i9 7900x which is replacing i7 6900k (which can boost upto 3.7 ghz) can boost upto 4.5 ghz if this is true Ryzen sadly has no chance in performance department

i9 7920x is a monster based on cores/threads ... at turbo 3.5 ghz its 13% faster than everything intel has released previously, based on leaked userbenchmark result..

so performance wise Intel is safe ... everything now depends on price... Intel is now thinking about selling cheap HEDT products that's why we are seeing products like i7 7640k

Naples is for servers competing with Xeons...

[djrock]

AMD beat nothing, just for gaming even cheaper i5s can beat 1600x, it's when u consider productivity/streaming ryzen shows it's value and i7 6900k is faster and better than 1800x, has various features which 1800x don't have but it's priced terribly,

... HEDT segment is intel's productivity segment, only in specific few software ryzen performs better than i7 7700k bcz most multithreaded software still utilize 4 cores effectively beyond that its still hit or miss for now...

from leaks which can definitely be wrong it seems ..

i9 7900x which is replacing i7 6900k (which can boost upto 3.7 ghz) can boost upto 4.5 ghz if this is true Ryzen sadly has no chance in performance department

so performance wise Intel is safe ... everything now depends on price... Intel is now thinking about selling cheap HEDT products that's why we are seeing products like i7 7640k

Naples is for servers competing with Xeons...

Naple is Same Architect as Ryzen ,Means Amd brought Server tech in HEDT segment .So Amd's Next 16 core HEDT will be based on Naple

7700k is no match with 1700x in Multi core performance ,1700x perform double than 7700k in multi core work load


Even 1600x is better than 7700k in Most heavy work load



LOL even 6900k can't defeat 1800x in Multicore performance (even after added latency,which next Gen 16 core threadripper cpu won't have ,visit My Amd CPU thread for more info )
http://banglagamer.com/showthread.ph...ews-Discussion



Intel won't be able to sell their 9 core Big Die CPU at Amd Price ,As i mentioned the Reason for Low yield in waffer ,so Intel's Single CCX architect is Kind of Doomed in Price Point & Also it don't perform that much better than Cheaper Solution of Ryzen . $1700 6950x is only 15% faster in Multicore performance than $500 1800x/$300 1700x

[aayman]

The CCX latency has proven to be a non-issue. It was speculation by the journalists before they actually benched it.

You two are beating a dead horse. Performance crown is still with Intel with the 7700K and 6900K. But future prospect of the Ryzen is better because it is, at worst, 85% of the performance of a 6900K and 1/3 the price. When the software adapts, the 6900K will be in the lead and the 7700K will be at the very end. This is also NOT the same as Bulldozer and Piledriver because those architectures were severely castrated and never picked up momentum, unlike Ryzen.

A 7700K beats a 6900K in 4 thread applications but for some reason that is never mentioned when comparing Intel vs AMD. Reminds me of iPhones vs Androids, all the best features across several Androids gets compared to a single phone while ignoring the balance in an iPhone.

[djrock]

The CCX latency has proven to be a non-issue. It was speculation by the journalists before they actually benched it.

You two are beating a dead horse. Performance crown is still with Intel with the 7700K and 6900K. But future prospect of the Ryzen is better because it is, at worst, 85% of the performance of a 6900K and 1/3 the price. When the software adapts, the 6900K will be in the lead and the 7700K will be at the very end. This is also NOT the same as Bulldozer and Piledriver because those architectures were severely castrated and never picked up momentum, unlike Ryzen.

A 7700K beats a 6900K in 4 thread applications but for some reason that is never mentioned when comparing Intel vs AMD. Reminds me of iPhones vs Androids, all the best features across several Androids gets compared to a single phone while ignoring the balance in an iPhone.

If any Application run in 4 core then it will have easier path to adopt 6 or 8 core .Yeah it will need few more tweaks .maybe they were not developed well for more than 4 core as Intel's 6-8 CPU were almost out of reach(less popular) for Majority of Consumers .So I will wait for those application to make update for Ryzen .Then see where 7700k stands compare to Ryzen as Ryzen proved that those Application which can use 8 core really runs almost double as Fast as its 4 core counterpart in Multi core performance .

[Trave160]

AMD takes the lead when it comes to fixing stuttering issues from gaming and streaming, FPS drops and smooth transition especially with multi tasking. Cause we know there are people who wants to build multi-monitor setups being able to multi-task while gaming. Let's not forget, streaming is much better with Ryzen thanks to H.264 codec rendering shown by Linus.

- - - Updated - - -

Everything has it's reasons to exist, iOS is well optimized and cause of that Apple never needed mutiple Cores within their phones till now. But they don't need Octa-Core CPUs like Qualcomm does. Where as Android phones do so much stuff, it's like looking for good needles in haystacks. Android has lot of rough edges and cause of that Qualcomm does the job, iOS doesn't have to need Octa-Cores as prerequisite as it is so well encrypted and optimized against any outside resource hungry applications like the ones am seeing in Google Play Store. I used this as an example, what you think is best is based on your judgement and perspective alone, not many people will share that same opinion.

[kaziishan]

MSI Teases X299 GODLIKE GAMING

Four reinforced PCI-Express slots, three shielded M.2 slots, three ethernet connectors, USB 3.1 and two Wi-Fi antennas– that’s MSI’s X299 GODLIKE, which is expected to launch next month along with a new lineup of Intel Core i9 CPUs.

Source: https://videocardz.com/newz/msi-teas...ng-motherboard

[kaziishan]

Intel Core i9 Benchmarks Comparison

I put all of the scores into one of our benchmark templates, so you can see the scores in a much easier to understand way. As you can see the Core i9-7920X really is a monster, with the multi-core test score pushing 1760, leaving the Core i7-6950X in its rear view mirror, and the AMD Ryzen 7 1800X in its dust.

Even the 10C/20T chip in the Core i9-7900X doesn't do too well, with less performance than the current-gen Core i7-6950X @ 3.5GHz. The 7900X might be at its base 3.3GHz frequency, and the 7920X at 3.3GHz, which would explain these scores. The full 4.5GHz clocks on these Core i9 beasts might be scary good.

Source: http://www.tweaktown.com/news/57568/...aign=tweaktown

[djrock]

So Single Core Performance of the Lower End i9 7000 Model is Worse than Ryzen

Quad core performance is only 10 points more than Ryzen ,

Multi core performance maybe due to 8 core Ryzen vs 10 core Intel .So Not that Impressive .Ryzen 16 core will Chew This i9 7000 series without even sweating

So after Long Time Amd is One Step Ahead of Intel in CPU architect .Intel showing its Death Spiral

No way that Large Die Single CCX 10 core i9 can compete with Ryzen's Cheap Price & make any profit for Intel

Good Time for Amd They can Finally Grab the piece of 60 Billion Dollar Profit market of CPU industry & Become Way bigger than Tiny Nvidia company

[furiousTaher]

i think this leaked benchmark is not dependable. i cant blv intel releasing a high price cpu where single core perf is worse than ryzen. i mean... what the hell is going on.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tgbc28A7elU

[kaziishan]

i think this leaked benchmark is not dependable. i cant blv intel releasing a high price cpu where single core perf is worse than ryzen. i mean... what the hell is going on.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tgbc28A7elU

Intel i9 series seems to have a high turbo clock ranging from 4.0 to 4.5 GHz. And, also Intel has a good track record of easily achieving its turbo clock or higher on all cores when overclocked. Even some motherboard actually does it by default. So, I don't think Intel will have a worse single core performance than Ryzen.

On the other hand, Intel could be straining the last bit from their tried and true (so far) architecture and these chips might not perform thermally when overclocked; thus limiting its capability.

But, it is really good to see AMD is actually delivering with Ryzen and forcing Intel to release the i9 series. It will be interesting to see the i9s after its initial rumor at the launch of Bulldozer.

[djrock]

But, it is really good to see AMD is actually delivering with Ryzen and forcing Intel to release the i9 series. It will be interesting to see the i9s after its initial rumor at the launch of Bulldozer.

So Intel literally skipped few generations of i9 just cz Amd wasn't' strong enough .Now they are forced to push for latest generation i9 as Ryzen has become a real threat .Intel fans should thank Amd again

[kaziishan]

So Intel literally skipped few generations of i9 just cz Amd wasn't' strong enough .Now they are forced to push for latest generation i9 as Ryzen has become a real threat .Intel fans should thank Amd again

I think it's just a naming convention. Intel has been releasing HEDT cpus with more than quad cores from its 1st gen core series, and basically demanding absurd amount of price for them. So, in that sense, Intel is changing their naming convention and nothing else.

However, if AMD were game with Bulldozer, we would have seen 6/8 cores in mainstream cpus both from Intel and AMD. And, core i3/i5/i7 would have been as cheap as Ryzen R7/R5/R3 is today if not less.