Article New Intel 28 core unlocked Fire breathing monster review !

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

TheELF

Platinum Member
Dec 22, 2012
2,665
61
106
#51
Maybe there are some oddball circumstances where you need 28 cores localized to one socket running at relatively-high clockspeeds. A lot of software that's sufficiently-parallel to run over 28 cores, regardless of the socket config, can be made to run acceptably well on multisocket systems or even on small, cheap clusters.
Oh?! in today's world of multitasking,oh sorry, super extreme hyper heavy multitasking,you don't see somebody needing a certain amount of parallel compute for one sufficiently-parallel software but then also needs 6-7-8 cores of very fast compute because the CPU is also controlling some machines or running some old school softwares on the side?
And what if those two scenarios are actually from the same software and has to "trade" data between them?!

There is need for anything and everything out there,just because it seems stupid to us doesn't mean it is stupid.
 
Jul 13, 2000
180
3
81
#52
Take that Polar Vortex!!!

Good to see Intel playing the long game. Thanks to global warming this will become the de facto chip to own in North America during the coming winters. AMD is doomed with their upcoming energy efficient cool running 7nm Threadrippers. :D
 

Markfw

CPU Moderator, VC&G Moderator, Elite Member
Super Moderator
May 16, 2002
17,084
530
136
#53
I don't have specifics on what he had in this particular system but, judging by the "150W to the rest of the system", i'd say he's not using 2 video cards: you'd have to ask him for more details.

der8auer used 1225W on the CPU alone for the W-3175X, in this video:


Ofc, he used LN2 and the board is much more beefier than "regular" boards, so there's that ...
It went fast, but towards the end it looked like they compared to the 2900wx, and this chip clocked higher and won some, but the 2990wx won one or two also. I think the 2990wx was at 5.7 ghz ??
 

IEC

Super Moderator
Super Moderator
Jun 10, 2004
13,483
213
136
#54
Intel is making 1500 of these, and apparently not even for retail sale.

Arguing about the need or use cases for a system you will never own (and probably never be able to own) is pointless. This is even more niche than a 2990WX, which was already niche to begin with.

I say this as someone who is already in that tiny niche of users who purchase inordinate amounts of hardware a year.
 
Nov 7, 2018
41
25
51
#55
It went fast, but towards the end it looked like they compared to the 2900wx, and this chip clocked higher and won some, but the 2990wx won one or two also. I think the 2990wx was at 5.7 ghz ??
Current World records for both W-3175X and 2990WX are as follows, according to the video i linked in my earlier post:

CPU-Z max frequency:

W-3175X - 6.5 GHz
2990WX - 5.955 GHz

Obviously, they can't run benches @ these speeds so those were made @ lower speeds.

Geekbench:

W-3175X @ 5.7 GHz - 133201
2990WX @ 5.2 GHz - 115579

Cinebench R15:

W-3175X @ 5.7 GHz - 8379
2990WX @ 5.484 GHz - 8543
 
Jan 17, 2019
34
84
46
#56
Of course Intel paid them - no way would 1500 sales cover the cost.
On the other hand, they make and sell server motherboards too, some of them probably do not ship in high quantities. Perhaps they have some processes in place so that they can develop and sell low volume products for some "reasonable price".

If you imagine Intel really paying something for the development or even production of the motherboards, possibly lenghty selection/qualification process of the CPUs , selling these processors much cheaper than their server counterparts, etc., this all seems like a HIGH LOSS VENTURE. The number of processors will be low so the REAL IMPACT will be low. If this all is just a "PR thing", would not it be better to invest just in some advertising to sell some normal stuff? They must be able to make something that would still be somehow usable and sellable even after new AMD products come.

This all seems just like a waste of money and frankly an embarrassment.
 

Markfw

CPU Moderator, VC&G Moderator, Elite Member
Super Moderator
May 16, 2002
17,084
530
136
#57
Current World records for both W-3175X and 2990WX are as follows, according to the video i linked in my earlier post:

CPU-Z max frequency:

W-3175X - 6.5 GHz
2990WX - 5.955 GHz

Obviously, they can't run benches @ these speeds so those were made @ lower speeds.

Geekbench:

W-3175X @ 5.7 GHz - 133201
2990WX @ 5.2 GHz - 115579

Cinebench R15:

W-3175X @ 5.7 GHz - 8379
2990WX @ 5.484 GHz - 8543
Thanks, I stand corrected, it went by fast, but the 2990wx did win Cinebench (if course with 4 more cores and 8 more threads....) at a lower speed.
 
Apr 27, 2000
10,781
528
126
#58
Oh?! in today's world of multitasking,oh sorry, super extreme hyper heavy multitasking,you don't see somebody needing a certain amount of parallel compute for one sufficiently-parallel software but then also needs 6-7-8 cores of very fast compute because the CPU is also controlling some machines or running some old school softwares on the side?
And what if those two scenarios are actually from the same software and has to "trade" data between them?!

There is need for anything and everything out there,just because it seems stupid to us doesn't mean it is stupid.
You don't have to have all that running on the same box.
 

Markfw

CPU Moderator, VC&G Moderator, Elite Member
Super Moderator
May 16, 2002
17,084
530
136
#59
You don't have to have all that running on the same box.
Even if you did have to have it running on the same box, 2 sockets would do fine. If you needed single threaded speed, then a second box would be the way to go. But this solution is ridiculous.
 

krumme

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 2009
5,672
56
136
#60
I don't care to oc my processors any more, and the enthusiast community is shrinking as we get old men, so it's nice to see Intel take up the enthusiasm from us oldies.
For a moment I thought this was a marketing move from the 90ties but I take it as a positive move. We need all the juice we can get. Now we need a all core 4.3 GHz zen 3 64 core on 600watt to.
And some army3 benchmarks.
 

TheELF

Platinum Member
Dec 22, 2012
2,665
61
106
#62
Even if you did have to have it running on the same box, 2 sockets would do fine. If you needed single threaded speed, then a second box would be the way to go. But this solution is ridiculous.
Yes that's why threadripper needs coreprio to keep the 2 numas separated...
If you need your threads/apps to share info a cross socket lag is going to kill you.
 

TheGiant

Senior member
Jun 12, 2017
286
18
76
#63
can someone show a benchmark of this monster which shows an advantage of monolithic design?
workstation benchmark please, not server
 
Apr 27, 2000
10,781
528
126
#64
Yes that's why threadripper needs coreprio to keep the 2 numas separated...
If you need your threads/apps to share info a cross socket lag is going to kill you.
Realistically-speaking, that's not true. Threadripper has special issues since it has multiple NUMA nodes per socket, and the 2990WX in particular is a goofy arrangement (though it does work). In the real world, applications that can spawn 56 threads (or more) have been running on multi-socket Intel systems without so much as a hitch. Programmers know to expect this arrangement, and know how to take advantage of the hardware.
 

TheELF

Platinum Member
Dec 22, 2012
2,665
61
106
#65
Realistically-speaking, that's not true. Threadripper has special issues since it has multiple NUMA nodes per socket, and the 2990WX in particular is a goofy arrangement (though it does work). In the real world, applications that can spawn 56 threads (or more) have been running on multi-socket Intel systems without so much as a hitch. Programmers know to expect this arrangement, and know how to take advantage of the hardware.
Yes we covered this a bunch of times already,if you only run one app and this one app only does one single thing (per thread) then this CPU doesn't make much sense.
Anybody with this kind of needs already moved on to GPUs and ARMs and knight landings and so on.
 

TheGiant

Senior member
Jun 12, 2017
286
18
76
#66
for me this round Intel wins, despite the more power and price
this 28C from the reviews looks good, no real weakness there
if someone accepts the price and of the power gets paid by the income from this machine its ok

ofc the cinebench forum score posters won't buy it :)

but the victory will be short lived IMO and this is just a marketing move by intel until ryzen 3 comes

waiting for the cascade lake 48C review
 

rbk123

Senior member
Aug 22, 2006
566
39
106
#67
Would be cool to watch a Handbrake run of a BR rip complete in 9.4 seconds - while the rest of my neighbors on my block have to endure a brownout.
 

Markfw

CPU Moderator, VC&G Moderator, Elite Member
Super Moderator
May 16, 2002
17,084
530
136
#68
for me this round Intel wins, despite the more power and price
this 28C from the reviews looks good, no real weakness there
if someone accepts the price and of the power gets paid by the income from this machine its ok

ofc the cinebench forum score posters won't buy it :)

but the victory will be short lived IMO and this is just a marketing move by intel until ryzen 3 comes

waiting for the cascade lake 48C review
But you can't even buy one... Just a pure PR stunt. Thats a win ????
 

Topweasel

Diamond Member
Oct 19, 2000
4,624
289
136
#69
But you can't even buy one... Just a pure PR stunt. Thats a win ????
Still a lot better than the last stunt like this. At least they are still shipping this one. The PIII 1.13GHz didn't make it much farther then the press before it was recalled.
 

TheGiant

Senior member
Jun 12, 2017
286
18
76
#70
But you can't even buy one... Just a pure PR stunt. Thats a win ????
sure you can, just ask the better shops if they can get one and they can....
I would buy one, if the power wasn't so big (the 6CH ECC, 28C and mainly ability to clock HIGH for lighter threaded workloads) but in my country it gets hot in the summer and I don't want to buy another cooling
I have a 14C BDW Xeon and I am looking for a new CFD machine (mainly memory bandwitch and per thread performance is important, EPYC and classic Xeon are clocked too low)
halo Intel where is your 10nm.....!
 

Markfw

CPU Moderator, VC&G Moderator, Elite Member
Super Moderator
May 16, 2002
17,084
530
136
#71
sure you can, just ask the better shops if they can get one and they can....
I would buy one, if the power wasn't so big (the 6CH ECC, 28C and mainly ability to clock HIGH for lighter threaded workloads) but in my country it gets hot in the summer and I don't want to buy another cooling
I have a 14C BDW Xeon and I am looking for a new CFD machine (mainly memory bandwitch and per thread performance is important, EPYC and classic Xeon are clocked too low)
halo Intel where is your 10nm.....!
Threadripper ?
 

TheGiant

Senior member
Jun 12, 2017
286
18
76
#72
Threadripper has low (5year old single/low thread count performance), not better mem bandwitch with like 256 GB ECC memory so buying threadripper is simply a sidegrade

unless you need pure core count TR isn't as a big win as it looks like
 

maddie

Platinum Member
Jul 18, 2010
2,317
285
136
#73
sure you can, just ask the better shops if they can get one and they can....
I would buy one, if the power wasn't so big (the 6CH ECC, 28C and mainly ability to clock HIGH for lighter threaded workloads) but in my country it gets hot in the summer and I don't want to buy another cooling
I have a 14C BDW Xeon and I am looking for a new CFD machine (mainly memory bandwitch and per thread performance is important, EPYC and classic Xeon are clocked too low)
halo Intel where is your 10nm.....!
How many threads can your CFD software spawn to solve the problems assigned?
 
Apr 27, 2000
10,781
528
126
#74
Yes we covered this a bunch of times already,if you only run one app and this one app only does one single thing (per thread) then this CPU doesn't make much sense.
Even if you are running multiple applications, the case still stands: programmers have figured out how to do this on multisocket Intel systems years ago. Look at any server room with multiple VMs and see how they handle things. They don't need a CPU like this. I think the only possible application here would be some incredibly intensive audio editing software . . . the kinds of software that might require Xeon Golds or what have you.

can someone show a benchmark of this monster which shows an advantage of monolithic design?
workstation benchmark please, not server
That's a good question. I'm not sure that they can.
 
Last edited:
Apr 30, 2012
937
9
91
#75
Is this pin compatible with the server version? The premium on a Dell R740 for the 28 core version is over $10K, be nice if you can drop the $3,000 chip as a replacment.
 


ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS