Intel Cannonlake SoC will have 4-core, 6-core and 8-core versions

[VirtualLarry]

Oh and BTW Shintai, if Intel is so magnanimous as to let us buy their HEDT platform, how do they reward you for purchasing the only chip with close to mainstream pricing? They nerf the PCI-E lanes. Nice. Probably not a problem now, but it could be in the future with more powerful gpus.

Don't forget the PCi-E 3.0 x4 lanes needed for full speed "Ultra M.2 32Gbit/sec" SSDs. Modern rigs would want maybe two, maybe three, in RAID-0. (Since Intel's RAID drivers now support NVMe PCI-E RAID, as crazy as it sounds.)

 

[biostud]

Also the price gap between a i7-6700k system and a 5820K is relatively small, so if you really want +4 cores you can just go for a HEDT setup.

Most HEDT users are not going to be limited by 28 PCIe lanes, and if they are the extra cost of a 5930K is going to be insignificant to the total system cost.

You get 16x/8x for CF/SLI + 4x for an M.2 drive. If you really need more lanes than that, it means you have 3 or 4 video cards or some serious storage setup, and therefore quite a lot of money to spend on your computer.

 

[dark zero]

Also the price gap between a i7-6700k system and a 5820K is relatively small, so if you really want +4 cores you can just go for a HEDT setup.

Most HEDT users are not going to be limited by 28 PCIe lanes, and if they are the extra cost of a 5930K is going to be insignificant to the total system cost.

You get 16x/8x for CF/SLI + 4x for an M.2 drive. If you really need more lanes than that, it means you have 3 or 4 video cards or some serious storage setup, and therefore quite a lot of money to spend on your computer.

The new problem is... That MoBos are hella expensive and scarse.

 

[biostud]

The new problem is... That MoBos are hella expensive and scarse.

Not in Denmark the, cost of a low end z170 board is around 1000dkk and 1500dkk for an low end X99 and the price of 5820k and 6700k are both around 3200dkk. So the price difference would only be 500dkk or $75.

 

[jpiniero]

I have to agree that the LinkedIn post is Xeon D... I was thinking that they would go to 10 cores but 8 makes a lot of sense. Have to figure that the cloud companies would prefer 20-25W instead of 40 not to mention 10 nm is going to be super expensive.

 

[dark zero]

Not in Denmark the, cost of a low end z170 board is around 1000dkk and 1500dkk for an low end X99 and the price of 5820k and 6700k are both around 3200dkk. So the price difference would only be 500dkk or $75.

But... People will go to a low end MoBo for such a high end chip?

 

[Fjodor2001]

Not in Denmark the, cost of a low end z170 board is around 1000dkk and 1500dkk for an low end X99 and the price of 5820k and 6700k are both around 3200dkk. So the price difference would only be 500dkk or $75.

But you can get a low end 1151 motherboard for half that, if you choose another chipset than Z170. Something not possible when chosing a motherboard for 5820k.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Oh and BTW Shintai, if Intel is so magnanimous as to let us buy their HEDT platform, how do they reward you for purchasing the only chip with close to mainstream pricing? They nerf the PCI-E lanes. Nice. Probably not a problem now, but it could be in the future with more powerful gpus.

Considering you ask for more cores on a platform that got x16 plus a shared x4? I would say 28+4 is better.

6 cores, 15MB cache, quad channel and 28(+4) PCIe lanes is still better for someone wanting more. And I dont see the issue with only 28 PCIe lanes. On the other hand I have zero interest in multi GPU solutions. But 28 lanes is enough for both a x16 card and an x8 PCIe SSD. Or you could for the matter have 3 M.2/PCIe 4GB/sec SSDs at full speed without compromising anything else.

 

[ShintaiDK]

But you can get a low end 1151 motherboard for half that, if you choose another chipset than Z170. Something not possible when chosing a motherboard for 5820k.

But you cant overclock, nor split the PCIe. And you start to lose out on other features fast like chipset PCIe lanes. And its not going to be much cheaper. Maybe 20-25$.

And what about your...extreme part. Whats next, your extreme gamer 6/8 core CPU on a H110 with DDR4 2133?

 

[Arachnotronic]

I have to agree that the LinkedIn post is Xeon D... I was thinking that they would go to 10 cores but 8 makes a lot of sense. Have to figure that the cloud companies would prefer 20-25W instead of 40 not to mention 10 nm is going to be super expensive.

They're going to 10 cores with Skylake-DE:

 

[Sweepr]

They're going to 10 cores with Skylake-DE:

Thanks for sharing. The LinkedIn profile specifically mentions a 4, 6 and 8 core SoC (no word about microservers) so I don't think it's another Xeon-D.

Some thoughts:

Just because they might offer 6-8 core mainstream models operating at lower clocks (at some point - maybe Cannonlake) it doesn't mean they can't launch the usual >4GHz quad-cores.

Skylake-EP/EX and the Purley platform will feature up to 28 cores, it will probably crunch any 95W or lower 8C client chip (@ MT).
Some people would pay a premium for an entry-level (higher-clocked) 8-core Skylake-E with more cache and tons of extra platform goodies over a 95W or lower mainstream 8-core. And the more expensive HEDT models could very well feature up to 10 or 12 cores.

 

[Fjodor2001]

And its not going to be much cheaper. Maybe 20-25$

You can get the cheapest 1151 motherboards for half of what biostud indicated for z170 based 1151 motherboards.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Thanks for sharing. The LinkedIn profile specifically mentions a 4, 6 and 8 core SoC (no mention of microservers) so I don't think it's another Xeon-D.

Some thoughts:

Just because they might offer 6-8 core mainstream models operating at lower clocks (at some point - maybe Cannonlake) it doesn't mean they can't launch the usual >4GHz quad-cores.

Skylake-EP/EX and the Purley platform will feature up to 28 cores, it will probably crunch any 95W or lower 8C client chip (@ MT).
Some people would pay a premium for an entry-level (higher-clocked) 8-core Skylake-E with more cache and tons of extra platform goodies over a 95W or lower mainstream 8-core. And the more expensive HEDT models could very well feature up to 10 or 12 cores.

Yeah, and if Intel continues to segment its server CPU cores and its client CPU cores as it did with Skylake, more cores + more robust CPU core features + more memory bandwidth would still be a reason for people to buy HEDT.

That said, I will say that I do look forward to being able to get more than 4 cores on the latest process technology/CPU core architecture.

 

[ShintaiDK]

You can get the cheapest 1151 motherboards for half of what biostud indicated for z170 based 1151 motherboards.

Yes, and you lose a lot of features. Including memory above 2133 and such.

So its pretty pointless for your "extreme gamer" that want 6/8 cores. Now we are over in the budget/mainstream user.

 

[RussianSensation]

So its pretty pointless for your "extreme gamer" that want 6/8 cores. Now we are over in the budget/mainstream user.

Depends. Modern Intel i7 CPUs last 5+ years. Buying 5820K now or BW-E in Q1-Q2 2016 means such a CPU overclocked to 4.3-4.5Ghz could easily last until 2019-2020. What guarantee can you provide that there will be 0 AAA titles from now until September 2020 that will not benefit from a 6-core i7 over a slightly faster clocked i7 6700K? Sounds like a pretty bold prediction.

Taking this further, to say that 6-8 core i7 CPUs are pointless for gaming wrt to 2017 Cannolake is even more questionable because a 2017 6-8 core Cannolake could last until 2022+. Are you seriously suggesting we will have no next games/apps that will use > 4 cores over the next 7 years? By that time the market will be on PS4/XB2 and those consoles will for sure have > 4 CPU cores as well.

The biggest reason to skip 6-8 core 2017 Cannonlake isn't because 6-8 cores are useless for games in 2015 but perhaps because the year after, in 2018, if Intel is on schedule they should introduce the brand new Icelake architecture with new chipsets that could have some cool features.

History repeats itself. For years we heard on forums how dual-core CPUs were a waste of $ for gaming and once games started using 2 threads, single-core CPUs were trash for gaming. Then we heard the exact same thing about Quad-cores and people recommended the inferior E8400-8600 over the superior Q6600-9550 series. Once again, those early C2Duos became crap despite their higher clock speeds than overclocked Q6600/6700/9550 could manage. Then we heard for years how i7 2600K-4790K was a waste of $ for gaming over an i5 2500K-4690K (despite this being proven wrong for the last 4 years). HT clearly helps in some modern games already and it's only a matter of time before a AAA game will benefit from a 6-8 core CPU.

Yet, now we are again hearing how 6-8 core CPUs are going to be a waste even in 2-5 years from now according to you? DX12 should actually expose more benefits for multi-core CPUs and given how long modern Intel CPUs last and how slow the IPC increases now are, all the cards are completely stacked against your prediction. By 2017-2018, it's going to make even more sense to buy a 6-core Intel CPU than it is today because Intel will have squeezed even more diminishing IPC out of Cannolake/Icelake which means the only logical way to significantly improve CPU performance will be to go multi-core for software.

Besides, why would anyone NOT want 6- and 8-core CPU offerings to make it to the mainstream platform? More choices is good for consumers. Not everyone wants the useless iGPU. In particular, high-end PC games couldn't' care less about the extra space being taken up by the Skylake IGPU. I guarantee it that if Intel had a Z170 chipset compatible Core i7 6900K with 6-cores and no IGPU, priced it at $449, people would buy it in 2015, nevermind 2017 and beyond.

The new problem is... That MoBos are hella expensive and scarse.

In what country are X99 motherboards scarce? In the US and Canada, X99 mobos are not much more expensive than good Z170 motherboards. Also, to get full performance out of Skylake i7 6700K requires DDR4 2800-3000 memory which adds another $10-20 on top of DDR4 2400-2666 memory that's good enough for X99. The overall cost of X99 + DDR4 + 5820K today isn't much more expensive than Skylake i7 + DDR4 2800-3000.

Once Intel exhausts most of the IPC improvements, they will want have no choice but to add 6-8 core CPU offerings to provide incentive for software to evolve and consumers to upgrade. Also, hopefully Zen's 8-core CPU offerings provide some competition, which could provide more incentive for Intel to sell 6-core on the mainstream platform. We cannot possibly believe that Intel will continue selling 4-core CPUs forever. Sooner or later they will adopt 6-10 core CPU offerings and prices will continue dropping over time for more cores.

 

[ShintaiDK]

*snip*

Instead of making your text walls and picking something out of context. Try stay on track next time.

 

[cbn]

I think having these Xeon-D style SoCs is going to make more sense as the node shrink for at least two reasons:

1. The LGA 2011 style sockets are lagging too far behind mainstream now. Having the small Xeon-D style die size makes it easier to bring the newest uarch forward for those than want hexcore or octocore.

2. At 10nm, I think the minimum core count for the smallest Xeon E5/E7 die will be much higher than the octocore we have today on 22nm. So instead of harvesting a hexcore from something like a 16 core die, it makes more sense to use a die a smaller core count.

 

[Sabrewings]

Personally, as a primarily gamer with some CPU intensive other tasks, I would love another two cores on my 4790k. I want the IPC and high clock speed of the 4790k, but just two more cores. Games don't need it quite so much, but for video encoding the 50% increase would be quite welcome.

 

[tential]

Show me the documentation.

That's the problem. They're assuming Intel means 4770k+ when they say "Extreme gamer".

We have NO clue what intel means. This is just enthusiasts thinking that everyone is talking specifically to them/about them/etc. and thinking that because Intel says Extreme gamer, it means the bracket THEY BELIEVE is extreme gamer. Especially when they can further shape that into saying that Intel should now provide a hexacore as the new i7 chip, because they want that. Not because it's anything based in reality.

Like I've said before, enthusiasts are completely out of touch with the rest of the market. I've only just returned to enthusiast level purchases, but still I understand that no product is made with me first in mind from intel. They're thinking about mobile first, as they should. I LOVE the strides they make in lowering power consumption and making faster chips fit in smaller and smaller devices.

Most of the tasks people are talking about, if you really care about those tasks, you'd get the HEDT platform and not worry about the tiny incremental improvement in the latest platform. But you don't really need those tasks if you're complaining and don't have the HEDT platform. You just want it cheaper/newer. And of course we all do. But it's not going to happen, and it's perfectly reasonable as to why.

Edit: This whole situation reminds me of the Nintendo employee that got fired while explaining to neogafers that their small userbase wasn't enough to justify Nintendo localizing games for them.

 

[LTC8K6]

Personally, as a primarily gamer with some CPU intensive other tasks, I would love another two cores on my 4790k. I want the IPC and high clock speed of the 4790k, but just two more cores. Games don't need it quite so much, but for video encoding the 50% increase would be quite welcome.

You had 12t/6c options when you bought the 4790K though. Why didn't you buy one. :biggrin:

 

[cbn]

You had 12t/6c options when you bought the 4790K though. Why didn't you buy one. :biggrin:

Haswell-E came out after the i7-4790K.

 

[TechFan1]

Admittedly, I am a lay person, but won't the Cannonlake CPU core size shrink by half. Is it so far fetched they might make a 6-core that would still take up less space than a 4-core on 14nm. The igpu mainly needs to be big enough to be competent at driving 4k monitors. If Intel went crazy with igpu performance I think it would be to coincide with VR and Augmented Reality, and not so much PC gaming.

Out of curiosity, aren't there limitations on how small they can make the die. Can they make a 50mm cpu for example?

 

[myocardia]

Show me the documentation.

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/cpus/

 

[biostud]

But you can get a low end 1151 motherboard for half that, if you choose another chipset than Z170. Something not possible when chosing a motherboard for 5820k.

Not here. The absolute minimum price of a z170 is 800dkk and 1400dkk for a X99 board. I took the prices for a Asus z170-p and an asrock x99 extreme4.

 

[tential]

Admittedly, I am a lay person, but won't the Cannonlake CPU core size shrink by half. Is it so far fetched they might make a 6-core that would still take up less space than a 4-core on 14nm. The igpu mainly needs to be big enough to be competent at driving 4k monitors. If Intel went crazy with igpu performance I think it would be to coincide with VR and Augmented Reality, and not so much PC gaming.

Out of curiosity, aren't there limitations on how small they can make the die. Can they make a 50mm cpu for example?

If intel had enough iGPU performance then a lot of gamers would be happy with their intel chip. If it can handle mobas and triple AAA titles in low/medium details, many gamers are ok with that.

Intel seems deadset on increasing its iGPU performance. I have no idea why, but it's quite interesting. I really am interested as to where it takes us.