Intel Shows Off 28 Core, 56 Thread Core-X HEDT Processor For Enthusiasts, In Market Q4 ’18

[WingZero30]

Dont you think they are just going to replace 2066 with that bigger socket? Then perhaps use HCC dies in the same manner the Kaby Lake X was implemented for 2066?

Yeah this is what I am thinking too. They can use all three LCC, HCC and XCC dies on the socket 3647.

Iirc they already have a quad core xeon on 3647.

Edit: Xeon Platinum 8156 quad core on 3647.

 

[Edrick]

It has nothing to do with "manufacturing". That's the only thing Intel still does well, at all. Their manufacturing prowess is probably the only reason they can still sell CPUs. It certainly isn't their "architecture" . We can see that by how easily a company a fraction of the size and R&D levels beat them at their own game.

I'll break it down for you:

One company has a small market cap, but it innovates. Brings all sorts of new technology to the market and consumers (HBM, Infinity Fabric, Etc.). Doubles the amount of cores on consumer CPUs for the same price.


The other company has a huge market cap, 10x the number of employees. It sits on its laurels, rakes in cash, does not innovate. Spends most of its money on PR stunts like "5Ghz" chilled-water 28 core CPUs and "wearables". Has no roadmap, no plan to introduce new technology... and instead of trying to develop one it engages in anticompetitive actions.


Which company is "great"?

I do not think I have read a post that was this inaccurate or this bias in a very long time.

 

[FIVR]

I do not think I have read a post that was this inaccurate or this bias in a very long time.

What is inaccurate about my post? Seems like you have no actual observations and are just using ad-hominem attacks. As usual.

 

[IEC]

Apparently its a repackaged Skylake with a new cooling solution. (Air Conditioned Chiller that uses a 1000 watts).

Worse than that. It's a 1000W (1HP) chiller which means it can draw 1600W+ at the wall, easily. The HC1000A I thought it was based on the profile would be ever so slightly more efficient due to the input voltage. The fact that it was an HC1000B changes nothing about the fact that they had to use exotic sub-ambient cooling.

As GamersNexus' Steve pointed out, a delidded, Liquid Metal TIM i9-7980XE @ 4.9GHz uses north of 600W at 18 cores.

Even assuming perfect scaling (reality is worse) you would have 28/18 * 600W = 933W+. And that's the conservative estimate of the power consumption. In reality it was probably over 1000W to hit 5GHz on the "new" 28-core part (probably Xeon 8176 Platinum).

This is a PR stunt, and nothing more.

 

[LTC8K6]

Chiller label says 9.6A so about 1100W max from the wall socket.

 

[LTC8K6]

Base clock was apparently 2.7, which doesn't match 8180 or 8176.

 

[Timmah!]

Worse than that. It's a 1000W (1HP) chiller which means it can draw 1600W+ at the wall, easily. The HC1000A I thought it was based on the profile would be ever so slightly more efficient due to the input voltage. The fact that it was an HC1000B changes nothing about the fact that they had to use exotic sub-ambient cooling.

As GamersNexus' Steve pointed out, a delidded, Liquid Metal TIM i9-7980XE @ 4.9GHz uses north of 600W at 18 cores.

Even assuming perfect scaling (reality is worse) you would have 28/18 * 600W = 933W+. And that's the conservative estimate of the power consumption. In reality it was probably over 1000W to hit 5GHz on the "new" 28-core part (probably Xeon 8176 Platinum).

This is a PR stunt, and nothing more.

So you think they are not gonna sell it as i9?

 

[Paratus]

Worse than that. It's a 1000W (1HP) chiller which means it can draw 1600W+ at the wall, easily. The HC1000A I thought it was based on the profile would be ever so slightly more efficient due to the input voltage. The fact that it was an HC1000B changes nothing about the fact that they had to use exotic sub-ambient cooling.

As GamersNexus' Steve pointed out, a delidded, Liquid Metal TIM i9-7980XE @ 4.9GHz uses north of 600W at 18 cores.

Even assuming perfect scaling (reality is worse) you would have 28/18 * 600W = 933W+. And that's the conservative estimate of the power consumption. In reality it was probably over 1000W to hit 5GHz on the "new" 28-core part (probably Xeon 8176 Platinum).

This is a PR stunt, and nothing more.

Found a link to a test of a 1950X under LN2 @ 5.37GHZ and it scored 4500+ pts in Cinebench R15.

https://www.pcgamer.com/overclocker-pushes-threadripper-1950x-to-537ghz-using-liquid-nitrogen/

So even if we treat the Intel demo as an epeen demo instead of the blatant publicity stunt to trip up AMDs announcement of Threadripper 2 that it was, I’d expect the 32 core TR2 to beat the Intel 28 core in Cinebench R15 under exotic cooling.

 

[Dayman1225]

Linus got to run the Asus Dominus system with the 28 core (no chiller) that was water cooled and it scored 6154~, so sounds like 4-4.2 ghz~ which is more realistic than 5ghz

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NXZHLYtBi8

 

[Paratus]

So you think they are not gonna sell it as i9?

I think they will sell it as an i9.

I think under stock conditions max boost will be well under 5GHZ and likely under 4.0. At best single core between 4-5GHz and all core no higher than 4.0

I also don’t see this as a drop in price replacement for the 7980XE. It’ll be priced quite a bit higher in my opinion.

 

[Timmah!]

I think they will sell it as an i9.

I think under stock conditions max boost will be well under 5GHZ and likely under 4.0. At best single core between 4-5GHz and all core no higher than 4.0

I also don’t see this as a drop in price replacement for the 7980XE. It’ll be priced quite a bit higher in my opinion.

Yeah, thats very probable outcome. I guess it depends lot on how AMD will price their chips, but i would be not surprised to see Intel to stick to the same prices as with current gen (2000 for 18-core) and above that release said 28 core part and maybe one more cut-down XCC part, say 22 core for example - to combat both 24C and 32C Threadripper - although at some exorbitant price. We shall see.

 

[Fir]

Found a link to a test of a 1950X under LN2 @ 5.37GHZ and it scored 4500+ pts in Cinebench R15.

https://www.pcgamer.com/overclocker-pushes-threadripper-1950x-to-537ghz-using-liquid-nitrogen/

So even if we treat the Intel demo as an epeen demo instead of the blatant publicity stunt to trip up AMDs announcement of Threadripper 2 that it was, I’d expect the 32 core TR2 to beat the Intel 28 core in Cinebench R15 under exotic cooling.

Perhaps, but my 7980XE is close to breaking 5K CB in its every day form, no exotic cooling. It wasn't easy to get 4.8GHz stable across all cores for sure (nor cheap!) but do-able. It will certainly be interesting to see what a 32 core TR can do no doubt. But > 4GHz on all 32 cores is going to require LC and not some AIO junk either. (perhaps for benching but not for long term, 24/7 use)

 

[StefanR5R]

I also don’t see this as a drop in price replacement for the 7980XE. It’ll be priced quite a bit higher in my opinion.

Yeah, thats very probable outcome. I guess it depends lot on how AMD will price their chips, but i would be not surprised to see Intel to stick to the same prices as with current gen (2000 for 18-core) and above that release said 28 core part and maybe one more cut-down XCC part, say 22 core for example - to combat both 24C and 32C Threadripper - although at some exorbitant price. We shall see.

Intel's HEDT CPU pricing is not so much about competing with AMD's HEDT CPU pricing.
Rather, it's very much about not competing with Intel's server and workstation CPU pricing.
(This is in combination with anti-features on the CPUs, chipsets, and BIOSes.)

 

[Bouowmx]

Found a link to a test of a 1950X under LN2 @ 5.37GHZ and it scored 4500+ pts in Cinebench R15.

https://www.pcgamer.com/overclocker-pushes-threadripper-1950x-to-537ghz-using-liquid-nitrogen/

So even if we treat the Intel demo as an epeen demo instead of the blatant publicity stunt to trip up AMDs announcement of Threadripper 2 that it was, I’d expect the 32 core TR2 to beat the Intel 28 core in Cinebench R15 under exotic cooling.

Intel Core i9-7980XE hardware record: 5828 cb
Cinebench R15 does not scale 1:1 with additional cores. 7900X: 3343 cb (334.3 cb/core). 7980XE: 5828 cb (323.8 cb/core, or 0.97 of 7900X).
5828 * (28/18) * 0.97 = 8794

AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X hardware record: 4514 cb
1800X: 2470 cb (308.75 cb/core). 1950X: 4514 cb (282.125 cb/core, or 0.91 of 1800X). Potential further sub-linear scaling from the fact that half the cores have to jump through internal buses to another die to access memory. But, there is some frequency gain with GlobalFoundries 12 nm. Ignore this fact for now.
4514 * (32/16) * 0.91 = 8215

 

[LTC8K6]

I think they will sell it as an i9.

I think under stock conditions max boost will be well under 5GHZ and likely under 4.0. At best single core between 4-5GHz and all core no higher than 4.0

I also don’t see this as a drop in price replacement for the 7980XE. It’ll be priced quite a bit higher in my opinion.

I'll guess all core 4.0 and single core 5.0 with decent cooling.

 

[FIVR]

LOL


"LOL" not found,
but I did find a heaping pile
of trolling. This is not allowed
in technical discussions.

AT Mod Usandthem

 

[William Gaatjes]

This funny joke about it was placed in the comments from the Anandtech article.


Just like the post before yours,
this is not allowed in technical
discussions.

For any one else, do not post
a YouTube video that features
an Intel "interview".

AT Mod Usandthem

 

[Abwx]

Cinebench R15 does not scale 1:1 with additional cores.

It scale at 99% even with 16 cores, that s close, IIRC it can use up to 64T if not more..

 

[William Gaatjes]

Is it ok to post it in ATOT hume thread instead then ?

Yes, that video can be posted in the social forums.

The CPU forum is too heated (both camps) to allow
any type of parody. It would quickly turn into a
blitzkrieg of insults.

AT Mod Usandthem

 

[plopke]

Next thing we know , xeon socket is going to be used as high-end consumer platform and you can pop in cheap xeons if you like , aaah deja vu!

 

[Fir]

It scale at 99% even with 16 cores, that s close, IIRC it can use up to 64T if not more..

How about 192 threads?

https://youtu.be/5GCqSP-ZHbk?t=94

Cheap and Xeon don't go in the same sentence UNLESS you have an older one. In 2011 my X5690 chips cost $1590 each. Today they can be had for around $200 or so on the used market. A pair of them OC to 4.5GHz still makes a decent 12 core 24 thread system but isn't very power friendly!

 

[coercitiv]

Intel Core i9-7980XE hardware record: 5828 cb
Cinebench R15 does not scale 1:1 with additional cores. 7900X: 3343 cb (334.3 cb/core). 7980XE: 5828 cb (323.8 cb/core, or 0.97 of 7900X).
5828 * (28/18) * 0.97 = 8794

Did you take into account the ~100Mhz difference between the two CPUs?

 

[wahdangun]

So will intel change socket again ? Or maintain 2 different socket?

 

[Sable]

The CPU forum is too heated (both camps) to allow
any type of parody. It would quickly turn into a
blitzkrieg of insults.

AT Mod Usandthem

It hasn't already?

Although I'm noticing little to zero (basically zero) defence for the Intel "performance". I'm guessing due to the fact that there basically isn;t any.

The Intel demo was a complete hack job trying to one up AMD before the threadripper 2 demo and has completely backfired. I actually want to buy a completely pointless (for me) 32 core system just because of that ludicrous Intel stunt.

 

[Sable]

So will intel change socket again ? Or maintain 2 different socket?

that's the question you're asking after all this?!

well. short answer, if Intel want to release their $10k Xeon as an i9 HEDT then yes, it will require new motherboard at the least. and if you want it at 5Ghz you'll require a new separate cooling station, a whole new world of PSU and probably a new dedicated high voltage circuit breaker in your home. But yeah, maybe a new socket.