Intel Skylake / Kaby Lake

[itsmydamnation]

You're.

Im dyslexic so sue me .

Anyways, my point is for you to look at title of the thread. Circlejerk over GMI links on CPU that according to you does not exist, let alone related to CPUs this thread is about, is definition of offtopic here.

No it wasn't otherwise you would have said it...........
Also i never said it doesn't exist i said it doesn't exist in a product in Q2, with is 99% correct(epyc launches june 30).

I wasn't even circle jerking just pointing out how the SOC design doesn't seem to give a bandwidth limitation compared to a monolithic soc and these type of workloads tend to not care that much about latency ( 120ns vs 90ns for example). So performance for most workloads between the two (TR and MCC) will come down to clocks.

 

[tamz_msc]

Beating 16C Threadripper (MCM-based, 4 CCXs) that uses a different TR4 socket compared to Naples will be a walk in the park for a competitively clocked 18C Core i9-7980X in almost every scenario, given that a Broadwell-E CPU with the same core count is faster overall at lower clock speeds. As for the other part you ignore, which is gaming, it will be slaugher considering Broadwell-E already leads by 20% in CPU limited testing (per clock, with HT off for both). Not everyone is buying HEDT only for productivity.

Just stop with it already - average out hardware.fr, computerbase.de, pcgh.de, anandtech, and all other reputable and trustworthy reviews and the 1800X is on par with the 6900K, insofar as a random user is concerned who is using these reviews to make a purchasing decision.

And hwbot submissions don't make the 7900X vs 6950X comparison all that impressive in terms of architectural gains.

 

[Zucker2k]

I dont think its a meassure for ipc but as said The Stilt have shown the bandwith and its plenty and we know most of the typical workloads for such type of high core counts hides the latency. Its not dx11 games.
I think they will use the 180w tdp we know the socket is build for. Why not. Its 2x90w. And i think that gives us 3.4/3.5 with a slightly new rev of process plus the ability to bin using the same die all over. Imo it looks elegant and extremely effective from a business perspective.
What is needed to know and what i think is the important unknown that might be a big issue - is motherboard cost. That sp3r2 is serious business and probably there is a serious price to pay. Like serious even for people buying 1000 usd cpu. If its eg 450 vs 250 for sklx mb you can just add 200 usd to the cost. I find cost important...

It says in the Ryzen thread that the Tom's article that broke the 13.04 sec Blender time for TR also referenced a 36 sec time for the 1800x. Doesn't that validate my earlier fears about jumping to conclusions without knowing all the details of the demo run?

 

[krumme]

Beating 16C Threadripper (MCM-based, 4 CCXs) that uses a different TR4 socket compared to Naples will be a walk in the park for a competitively clocked 18C Core i9-7980X in almost every scenario, given that a Broadwell-E CPU with the same core count is faster overall at lower clock speeds. As for the other part you ignore, which is gaming, it will be slaugher considering Broadwell-E already leads by 20% in CPU limited testing (per clock, with HT off for both). Not everyone is buying HEDT only for productivity.

Where is this compettitively clocked sklx 18c?
The fmax is excactly what is needed. Its obviously not there at stock and thats why we are hammering on the tim as enthusiast.
That said certainly it will be faster for gaming in dx9 or dx11 games if that is interesting although i think that is a different corecount and market than 16c cpus. But seeing the blender demo for tr today i dont think at stock it will be the easy victory i thought it would be yesterday. Yesterday i wrote it was an epyc comparison. Today its more lets say ...blended?

 

[lolfail9001]

Is it?

It is because you discuss de facto vaporware.

They adress the same market.

Do they? Does ThreadRipper now overclock to 4.5Ghz reliably? I am only counting reasonable part of that market, the one that seeks both ST performance and MT performance. MT performance junkies with actually serious job to do go for multi socket Xeon workstations and that's what TR frankly should compete with. But well, since those do not yet exist in Skylake line-up, there is nothing for TR to compete with. Ignoring for a second that TR does not actually exist in channel, of course. Bragging rights folks would go for shinier brand and we both know it not to be AMD.

Commenting on one cpu with a certain label and tech gives no sense if it isnt compared to the other.

And making comparisons only makes sense when we have stuff to compare. We don't, frankly.

Eg. Core i5 talk was therefore highly relevant when dicussing 8350 and so was eg. 7700k gaming performance in ryzen thread.

Here, you have even brought examples for me. Precisely: comparisons make sense when we have stuff to compare. We have info on most of Skylake-X SKUs and those are enough to start flaming the hell out of Skylake-X already. I'll only point out that it has same throughput per clock in CB15 as Ryzen, if not greater. Meaning that TR only competes on price and nothing else. In enthusiast market. Losing proposition, if you ask me.

 

[scannall]

I have to say, these discussions get stranger and stranger. Is anyone really going to buy 16 to 18 cores and a ton of other high end parts just to game at 1080? Really? And then talking about delidding a $2000 part? I'm sure some intrepid soul out there will do that. And hopefully get it right the first try... But how is *any* of this relevant to the vast majority of people here?

 

[frozentundra123456]

Is it?
They adress the same market. They adress the same workload. They cost aprox the same. They come to market at the same time. The same people is using it for the same.
For most people this is the definition of same.
Commenting on one cpu with a certain label and tech gives no sense if it isnt compared to the other. Its the differences that constitutes the product. That way we can discuss technology.
Eg. Core i5 talk was therefore highly relevant when dicussing 8350 and so was eg. 7700k gaming performance in ryzen thread.
It was no problem back then except for a few. We can handle it now. Consistency.

Well, you are definitely "consistent" I will give you that.

 

[krumme]

I have to say, these discussions get stranger and stranger. Is anyone really going to buy 16 to 18 cores and a ton of other high end parts just to game at 1080? Really? And then talking about delidding a $2000 part? I'm sure some intrepid soul out there will do that. And hopefully get it right the first try... But how is *any* of this relevant to the vast majority of people here?

Perhaps because outside of avx2 or some extremely branched wide vector fpu code delidding these cpu and oc them to game a major part of the time is the only thing going for them?
As well as price in reality was the only thing in favor of bd?
Tough talk. But now more mem channels and pci is in tr and strangely segmented out of i7 hedt there is not much else to it.

 

[tamz_msc]

MT performance junkies with actually serious job to do go for multi socket Xeon workstations and that's what TR frankly should compete with.

That's not true - there are lots of MT junkies who don't want to be stuck with 2.5GHz Xeons. Multi-socket, assuming 2S, means 4000$ the CPU alone. Are you insinuating that Skylake X HCC only competes with itself?

We have info on most of Skylake-X SKUs and those are enough to start flaming the hell out of Skylake-X already. I'll only point out that it has same throughput per clock in CB15 as Ryzen, if not greater.

We have absolutely no info on 12C and up except for price. Cinebench MT hwbot scores only show a 2-3% performance gap between the 7900X and 6950X. Nothing spectacular.

 

[beginner99]

I agree solder would be a better solution. OTOH, according to silicon lottery, more than half of 7700k chips can reach 5 ghz, so even with six or eight cores, I don't think the use of TIM rules out 4.5 or higher overclock.

At what temps and with what cooler?

 

[nvgpu]

http://www.cpuid.com/softwares/cpu-z.html

Intel X299 (1.79.1).

CPU-Z 1.79.1 now with X299 support.

 

[LTC8K6]

I have to say, these discussions get stranger and stranger. Is anyone really going to buy 16 to 18 cores and a ton of other high end parts just to game at 1080? Really? And then talking about delidding a $2000 part? I'm sure some intrepid soul out there will do that. And hopefully get it right the first try... But how is *any* of this relevant to the vast majority of people here?

Anandtech seems to think the Intel HEDT line was a brisk seller, even at $1,700. I do too. I think a lot of 18 core $2K processors will be sold.

But Intel sells A LOT of its top-end HEDT processor. I wouldn’t be surprised if the 10-core $1721 part was the bestselling Broadwell-E processor.

 

[scannall]

Anandtech seems to think the Intel HEDT line was a brisk seller, even at $1,700. I do too. I think a lot of 18 core $2K processors will be sold.

And they may sell quite a few. Good for them. I guess where I get puzzled is the obsession with 1080 gaming. Particularly with workstation priced and built parts. I'm not going to buy luxury mansion parts to drive a trailer park monitor.

 

[krumme]

It says in the Ryzen thread that the Tom's article that broke the 13.04 sec Blender time for TR also referenced a 36 sec time for the 1800x. Doesn't that validate my earlier fears about jumping to conclusions without knowing all the details of the demo run?

Ofcource we dont know for sure and i therefore never framed it as a fact but an if.
But if eg amd used another case what were they then showing? Nothing. It would be meaningless. I dont -think- they would do that. Especially in the light of the socket beeing 180w. I think it adds up.

But hey. I think the teasing is idiotic for a professional product and not the way they should do it. Either shut up or show the specs is my professional and personal oppinion about it. Like Intel do with their specint 2006 numbers and footnotes. That is the way to inspire confidence for that segment. Not some gamerz crap show.

 

[Shivansps]

If threadripper is scaling like near 2x as shown today i

Again, what version of blender did they use on that presentation? Blender is at 2.78C today, the original Ryzen 1800X presentation ran the 2.78A one that had severe performance problems.

 

[krumme]

Anandtech seems to think the Intel HEDT line was a brisk seller, even at $1,700. I do too. I think a lot of 18 core $2K processors will be sold.

That could very well be the case and i find it most likely too but what does this assumption build on? When i saw the list for one of the biggest german retailers last month that was as i recall defenitively not the case. It was opposite - the 6800 was outselling the 6900.
Have anyone made a survey on it?

 

[Shivansps]

Yeah, if anyone thinks any of this would have happened without Ryzen, they'd be kidding themselves.

What exactly whould not have happen whiout AMD? The only thing that it may have happen is instead of $2000 for the 18C one, it could have been $3000.

AND the again they added a top tier at $2000 increasing the price for the top sku, they cheaped out TIM.

The rest is normal, look at the $1000 SKU tier, at Nehalem-EP it was a 4/8, at SB-E it was 6/12, at HSW-E 8/16 and now 10/20 at SKL-X...

Ivy-E and BDW-E were the only ones that did not increase core count.

 

[lolfail9001]

That's not true - there are lots of MT junkies who don't want to be stuck with 2.5GHz Xeons. Multi-socket, assuming 2S, means 4000$ the CPU alone. Are you insinuating that Skylake X HCC only competes with itself?

Glad to let those particular junkies know that low core count turbo bins are pretty healthy on 2.5Ghz Xeons.

That aside, I insinuate that Skylake-X HCC does not make any sense without solder and delidded it only makes sense if you have the cooling to push it to 4Ghz or something.

We have absolutely no info on 12C and up except for price. Cinebench MT hwbot scores only show a 2-3% performance gap between the 7900X and 6950X. Nothing spectacular.

At same clocks, which 7900X and 6950X won't have overclocked, one way or another.

But if eg amd used another case what were they then showing? Nothing. It would be meaningless

It would be in line with the rest of their presentation. So it should be the running version, not whatever you made up in your mind.

 

[tamz_msc]

Again, what version of blender did they use on that presentation? Blender is at 2.78C today, the original Ryzen 1800X presentation ran the 2.78A one that had severe performance problems.

It's more like version 2.78C improved on the performance of 2.78A, rather than the older version having severe performance problems.

Anyway a post over at r/amd in a thread that discusses these scores links a result where the 1700@3.8 does it in 2.78C in 28.5s, at 150 samples, which is better compared to the 1800X result at 36 seconds with 2.78A.

 

[tamz_msc]

Glad to let those particular junkies know that low core count turbo bins are pretty healthy on 2.5Ghz Xeons.

That aside, I insinuate that Skylake-X HCC does not make any sense without solder and delidded it only makes sense if you have the cooling to push it to 4Ghz or something.

At same clocks, which 7900X and 6950X won't have overclocked, one way or another.

Xeons have turbos in the 3.2-3.6GHz range. There are few that have more but cost substantially higher. All-core turbo is only a few hundred MHz above base. So under 3GHz for a 2.5Ghz 18 core.

6950X can do 4.3GHz@1.3V.

 

[Phynaz]

This quickly turned into an AMD thread.

I guess some people are feeling threatened.

 

[tamz_msc]

This quickly turned into an AMD thread.

I guess some people are feeling threatened.

Starting with your post I have a feeling it will.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

What exactly whould not have happen whiout AMD? The only thing that it may have happen is instead of $2000 for the 18C one, it could have been $3000.

AND the again they added a top tier at $2000 increasing the price for the top sku, they cheaped out TIM.

The rest is normal, look at the $1000 SKU tier, at Nehalem-EP it was a 4/8, at SB-E it was 6/12, at HSW-E 8/16 and now 10/20 at SKL-X...

Ivy-E and BDW-E were the only ones that did not increase core count.

BDW-E had the first 10 core part, so it did increase core count.

 

[Shivansps]

BDW-E had the first 10 core part, so it did increase core count.

I was talking about the $1000 price mark...

 

[lolfail9001]

6950X can do 4.3GHz@1.3V.

At what stability, exactly?