Are Intel getting Worried? - 9900KS

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Feb 23, 2017
547
479
106
We already know how fast intel can just add a few more cores to their lineup without changing anything else and be the fastest again.
Nothing wrong with making another boatload of cash from this SKU until then.
Yeah, about 5 years.
Just to be clear, your point was that Intel likes to milk customers, right?
 
Feb 23, 2017
547
479
106
Just because most sites benched the 9900k at full tilt without raining in the TDP power settings doesn't mean it has to run like that.
Locked at 95w TDP the 9900k burns less power than the 2700x in handbrake and blender while getting the same results
while in gaming you could add 15% to the 2700x and it is still behind the 95w TDP 9900k (odyssey/hitman/PC2/sotr) .
https://www.techspot.com/review/1744-core-i9-9900k-round-two/

Obviously the 12core numbers are going to be different but how great are the chances that 50% more cores are going to hit the same clocks at the same TDP?
7700K, 8700K and 9900K all have the same listed TDP as far as I am aware, so Intel would have you believe that its possible to add cores, hit the same frequency, and not have any difference in power needs...
 

Carfax83

Diamond Member
Nov 1, 2010
5,707
22
126
Just because most sites benched the 9900k at full tilt without raining in the TDP power settings doesn't mean it has to run like that.
Locked at 95w TDP the 9900k burns less power than the 2700x in handbrake and blender while getting the same results
while in gaming you could add 15% to the 2700x and it is still behind the 95w TDP 9900k (odyssey/hitman/PC2/sotr) .
https://www.techspot.com/review/1744-core-i9-9900k-round-two/

Obviously the 12core numbers are going to be different but how great are the chances that 50% more cores are going to hit the same clocks at the same TDP?
The increased gaming performance for Ryzen 3000 series isn't just from an increase in IPC though. The doubled L3 cache also has to do with it, as does the enhanced Infinity Fabric I/O and chiplet design. All of these together result in higher bandwidth and lower latency.

Some games will see increases much larger than just 15%, as seen in the presentation:

 

TheELF

Platinum Member
Dec 22, 2012
2,848
122
126
Yeah, about 5 years.
Just to be clear, your point was that Intel likes to milk customers, right?
Yes of course they like to milk customers,why wouldn't they?Wouldn't you?
They also like to make money and adding cores to their 14nm tech increased their income from $60b in 2016 and 2017 to $70b in 2018 intel would love to be able to just stick a couple of cores to their SKUs every year because every "new" gen makes them billions.
https://www.intc.com/investor-relat...h-Quarter-2017-Financial-Results/default.aspx
https://www.intc.com/investor-relat...h-Quarter-2018-Financial-Results/default.aspx
7700K, 8700K and 9900K all have the same listed TDP as far as I am aware, so Intel would have you believe that its possible to add cores, hit the same frequency, and not have any difference in power needs...
7700K 4.2Ghz base 91 tdp
8700K 3.7Ghz base 95 tdp
9900K 3.6Ghz base 95 tdp

Nobody ever said that you would hit the same clocks with the same power,intel clearly states the clocks that you are guaranteed to get for your TDP and they are certainly not the same.
 

TheELF

Platinum Member
Dec 22, 2012
2,848
122
126
The increased gaming performance for Ryzen 3000 series isn't just from an increase in IPC though. The doubled L3 cache also has to do with it, as does the enhanced Infinity Fabric I/O and chiplet design. All of these together result in higher bandwidth and lower latency.

Some games will see increases much larger than just 15%, as seen in the presentation:
All of these games have a feature that records your input and allows you to render them the same way you would render any 3d scene...all except for GTA V that only shows 11% improvement.
 
Feb 23, 2017
547
479
106
You seriously think that going from 4c to 6c (Oct 2017) to 8c (Nov 2018) added $10bn to their annual revenues?
Be serious for one minute.
Their revenue growth was primarily down to "data-centric" expansion. That has zero to do with what they did on the consumer platform. Just how many 8700K, 8086K etc CPUs do you think they actually sold in 2018?
 

lobz

Senior member
Feb 10, 2017
265
98
86
Yes of course they like to milk customers,why wouldn't they?Wouldn't you?
They also like to make money and adding cores to their 14nm tech increased their income from $60b in 2016 and 2017 to $70b in 2018 intel would love to be able to just stick a couple of cores to their SKUs every year because every "new" gen makes them billions.
https://www.intc.com/investor-relat...h-Quarter-2017-Financial-Results/default.aspx
https://www.intc.com/investor-relat...h-Quarter-2018-Financial-Results/default.aspx

7700K 4.2Ghz base 91 tdp
8700K 3.7Ghz base 95 tdp
9900K 3.6Ghz base 95 tdp
You're the second person now with whom I can't decide if you're just want us to be shocked, or laugh out loud. Because you don't seem stupid to me, that's why I'm sure you don't really think that the change from caby lake to coffee lake netted $10bn to intel - so as to what your purpose with this post is, totally puzzles me.
 

lobz

Senior member
Feb 10, 2017
265
98
86
You seriously think that going from 4c to 6c (Oct 2017) to 8c (Nov 2018) added $10bn to their annual revenues?
Be serious for one minute.
Their revenue growth was primarily down to "data-centric" expansion. That has zero to do with what they did on the consumer platform. Just how many 8700K, 8086K etc CPUs do you think they actually sold in 2018?
Ah, you beat me to the punch :)
 

MaikuTech

Junior Member
Dec 3, 2017
16
0
16
I doubt it. AMD has been less than Intel like FOREVER, Even in 2006 before Conroe when they were the fastest, they were cheaper. Thats why I got them. Then after Conroe, I only get Intel. Now back to Ryzen/AMD.

I go for bang/buck, not a follower of either company,
Hmm I think amd will actually run over intel, as long as the current amd engineers keep doing what they do best .
 
Feb 29, 2008
41
36
91
I have a (bad) feeling Intel got something in their pocketses, precious.
A new stepping of hand collected 9900K from wafers chosen by gold finger of Donald Trump !
I was going to say "Any bets on how many of these precious show-stopper wannabe's are actually going to be available? "
However, its possible Intel does have a decent yield rate for a niche product like this.
However its ROTFLMAOBBQWTF! that it reeks of desperation, and its going to cost them a pretty penny compared to what it costs AMD to glue 2 small chiplets together.
Is this Intel's Fermi?
 

Topweasel

Diamond Member
Oct 19, 2000
4,851
453
136
I was going to say "Any bets on how many of these precious show-stopper wannabe's are actually going to be available? "
However, its possible Intel does have a decent yield rate for a niche product like this.
However its ROTFLMAOBBQWTF! that it reeks of desperation, and its going to cost them a pretty penny compared to what it costs AMD to glue 2 small chiplets together.
Is this Intel's Fermi?
No this is going back to an earlier playbook. This is a PIII 1.13 approach. Prescott was their Fermi (as BD was AMD's). At this point Icelake is going to be their Geforce FX.
 

jpiniero

Diamond Member
Oct 1, 2010
6,411
260
126
I was going to say "Any bets on how many of these precious show-stopper wannabe's are actually going to be available? "
However, its possible Intel does have a decent yield rate for a niche product like this.
However its ROTFLMAOBBQWTF! that it reeks of desperation, and its going to cost them a pretty penny compared to what it costs AMD to glue 2 small chiplets together.
It shouldn't really cost them that much... how many they get though...

Silicon Lottery says 38% of their 9900K's can hit 5 Ghz on all cores, but that has an -2 offset on AVX. 8% hit 5.1 with -2 offset.
 

jpiniero

Diamond Member
Oct 1, 2010
6,411
260
126
Just how many 8700K, 8086K etc CPUs do you think they actually sold in 2018?
You'd be surprised. Intel's desktop sales have been on a steady decline but desktop ASP was up 11% last year and was up another 7% in the first quarter this year. Now the shortage is playing a part in it (can't find Pentiums?), but it suggests those who are buying are buying up the stack.
 
Aug 25, 2001
43,799
594
126
You'd be surprised. Intel's desktop sales have been on a steady decline but desktop ASP was up 11% last year and was up another 7% in the first quarter this year. Now the shortage is playing a part in it (can't find Pentiums?), but it suggests those who are buying are buying up the stack.
No-one buying entry-level PCs is buying Desktops any more. They're all buying Laptops, or Tablets, or just doing without, and using their Phone.

The only people buying Desktops any more these days are Enthusiasts, and they tend to want the most powerful machines, which means that they're buying upwards on the product stack.

Sure, there's an "entry-level gamer" contingent too (and kids that their parents buy their "first desktop gaming PC" for), but that's probably where the i5-9400F CPUs are going, etc.

Plus, there's always some "Intel-buying business desktop shops", probably they're buying the i3-8100 CPUs, or i5-8400 CPUs.
 
Nov 1, 2014
36
0
81
Well for my apps AMDs NUMA/Infinity Fabric knocks a fine CPU down in terms of real-time performance.

Single Core performance kings are what my niche group wants.
Id love the 65 watt 3700X to be king and it looks really good in single core performance. But with Intel procs you can take the performance to 95%+, where as in recent Ryzen Threadrippers and APUs it starts dogging out @ 60%, due to the Non-Uniform Memory Access.

I’m praying the extra cache can overcome the NUMA limitations somehow.

I’ve already picked out the 1U Chassis with 2 x Full length PCI slots.
Just waiting for ScanAudio.uk to test the 3700X 65 watt.
Even if it doesn’t work out for me, that sure is an impressive CPU.

Fingers Crossed
 

TheELF

Platinum Member
Dec 22, 2012
2,848
122
126
You're the second person now with whom I can't decide if you're just want us to be shocked, or laugh out loud. Because you don't seem stupid to me, that's why I'm sure you don't really think that the change from caby lake to coffee lake netted $10bn to intel - so as to what your purpose with this post is, totally puzzles me.
The point is that intel is making even more money now that AMD is competing because intel could just add cores to old tech and sell them as new gens and sell them as well as a new gen would sell and better since previous gens where so lackluster,they increased their PC-centric income as well,they made more money across the board ever since AMD is competing because they don't have to fear that a good SKU is going to put amd out of the business.
 

moinmoin

Senior member
Jun 1, 2017
786
297
106
Well for my apps AMDs NUMA/Infinity Fabric knocks a fine CPU down in terms of real-time performance.

Single Core performance kings are what my niche group wants.
Id love the 65 watt 3700X to be king and it looks really good in single core performance. But with Intel procs you can take the performance to 95%+, where as in recent Ryzen Threadrippers and APUs it starts dogging out @ 60%, due to the Non-Uniform Memory Access.

I’m praying the extra cache can overcome the NUMA limitations somehow.

I’ve already picked out the 1U Chassis with 2 x Full length PCI slots.
Just waiting for ScanAudio.uk to test the 3700X 65 watt.
Even if it doesn’t work out for me, that sure is an impressive CPU.

Fingers Crossed
NUMA is only an issue with Threadripper 1 & 2 and Epyc 1. With Zen 2 and its IOC NUMA will be history.
 

lobz

Senior member
Feb 10, 2017
265
98
86
The point is that intel is making even more money now that AMD is competing because intel could just add cores to old tech and sell them as new gens and sell them as well as a new gen would sell and better since previous gens where so lackluster,they increased their PC-centric income as well,they made more money across the board ever since AMD is competing because they don't have to fear that a good SKU is going to put amd out of the business.
I rest my case. You also really should start a market research company.
 
Apr 27, 2000
11,857
1,048
126
intel could just add cores to old tech and sell them as new gens
Then where's 10c Comet Lake? And just how many more cores do you expect them to add? After all, we're talking about desktop (not HEDT) chips here. They all use ring bus. Maybe they'll go for rings of ring busses like the old Broadwell Xeons?
 

jpiniero

Diamond Member
Oct 1, 2010
6,411
260
126
Then where's 10c Comet Lake? And just how many more cores do you expect them to add? After all, we're talking about desktop (not HEDT) chips here. They all use ring bus. Maybe they'll go for rings of ring busses like the old Broadwell Xeons?
They could get pretty generous with the core counts with Cascade Lake-X, since it still seems like it is coming out. The HCC die is really big, don't know if they want to do that.
 

DarthKyrie

Senior member
Jul 11, 2016
686
489
116
They could get pretty generous with the core counts with Cascade Lake-X, since it still seems like it is coming out. The HCC die is really big, don't know if they want to do that.
They could include the chiller that they used at the 28c unveiling.
 
Nov 1, 2014
36
0
81
NUMA is history, good.
 
Last edited:
Apr 27, 2000
11,857
1,048
126
They could get pretty generous with the core counts with Cascade Lake-X, since it still seems like it is coming out. The HCC die is really big, don't know if they want to do that.
That's HEDT though. We're talking consumer socket. Unless Intel wants to kill all their performance consumer chips and move everything to HEDT to compete with AM4. That would be a laugh.
 


ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS