Speculation: AMD's response to Intel's 8-core i9-9900K

[Batboy88]

Yeah...but do you actually use it? Probably not lol..So yeah just continue with Clocked Quad Core and IPC improvements somehow. That will still work too.

 

[coercitiv]

Guess what, 7900x beats the 6950x clock for clock with only half the cache.

By 1.5 - 2%. Total win indeed. Are you even looking at the numbers?

 

[PeterScott]

By 1.5 - 2%. Total win indeed. Are you even looking at the numbers?

That's only Cinebench.

It's ~12% on Y-Cruncher
It's ~16% faster AES 256 encryption
It's ~91% faster on AVX2 hashing.

And the post I was replying claimed that it suffered IPC deficits vs the 6950x.

So yeah it seems like a total win to show ZERO deficits plus significant wins.

6950X was a great chip, but the 7900x is better in just about every way, including costing less to manufacture, so delivering more to the customer for $700 less.

It may not be a massive improvement of 20%+ at everything clock for clock, but Intel has only shown incremental improvements for many years.

This is a solid set of improvements along with a nice price reduction.

 

[Vattila]

With the recent dramatic price drops it looks like AMD will try to make ThreadRipper mightily tempting to power users that want 8 cores and more:

AMD Threadripper pricing hits new low ahead of next-gen CPU launch​

That said, I am still hoping for a refined 12LP 2800X.

 

[Vattila]

(EDIT: Rendered obsolete with later info.)

 

[Headfoot]

so in essence, Intel will have been refreshing Skylake architecture from 2015 until 2H 2019? Process improvements aside

 

[Vattila]

(EDIT: Rendered obsolete with later info.)

 

[Vattila]

That roadmap leak from XFastest is supposedly outdated. The updated roadmap shows i9-9900K arriving in 2018-Q3, which will give i9-9900K a three quarter window, and hence a bigger problem for AMD.

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=&tl=en&u=https://hk.xfastest.com/11058/intel-new-raodmap-2018-2019-i9-9900k-i7-9700k/

 

[eek2121]

Yeah. By 2019-Q1, assuming AMD is aiming for 2019-Q2 for the launch of the Ryzen 3000 series, they should be able to do a paper launch and/or public performance demos to take the limelight from i9-9900K, should they see the need to. However, they might just stick with Threadripper and pricing.

AMD has stuck with a yearly cadence for their desktop CPUs. I expect a full launch in early-mid April starting with with a 3700x or 3800x. I would be surprised if this this not happen. Rumors of a 10% IPC increase (at least) have been floating around, such an increase along with an increase in clockspeed due to the 7nm process would make Ryzen more than competitive with Intel offerings, even as Intel moves to 8 core.

 

[PeterScott]

That roadmap leak from XFastest is supposedly outdated. The updated roadmap shows i9-9900K arriving in 2018-Q3, which will give i9-9900K a three quarter window, and hence a bigger problem for AMD.


https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=&tl=en&u=https://hk.xfastest.com/11058/intel-new-raodmap-2018-2019-i9-9900k-i7-9700k/

That would be nicer. That means Aug or Sept Launch.

 

[PotatoWithEarsOnSide]

It's August now, so...

 

[PeterScott]

It's August now, so...

It looks like you still have to wait a couple of months:
https://videocardz.com/76929/lastest-roadmap-intel-core-i9-9900k-i7-9700k-and-i5-9600k-to-launch-in-october

 

[PotatoWithEarsOnSide]

Which is Q4
So there's three roadmaps, and each has a different release date.
One of them must be right, surely.

 

[PeterScott]

Which is Q4
So there's three roadmaps, and each has a different release date.
One of them must be right, surely.

The Q1-2019 was just wrong.
I think the Q3 one was a production roadmap. Q4 (October) is the Launch roadmap.

October makes a lot of sense, since they launched 8700K in October last year.

 

[arandomguy]

8000 series was announced end of September (Q3) and was officially available in Oct (Q4).

https://www.anandtech.com/show/11869/intel-announces-8th-generation-coffee-lake-hex-core-desktop-processors

https://www.anandtech.com/show/11859/the-anandtech-coffee-lake-review-8700k-and-8400-initial-numbers

Probably the same thing this time around.

 

[TheGiant]

where can I preorder 9900K ?

it is not a bad buy when I consider total system cost. with 9900K I don't need such a expensive low latency memory as with ryzen so for like 50 USD higher I get 10-15% ipc, 20% more frequency. 50 USD when considering mobo+RAM+CPU cost in this price category is a no brainer.

This time good one intel. Even on the price side-I though I would never give a like to intel for price

 

[dlerious]

where can I preorder 9900K ?

it is not a bad buy when I consider total system cost. with 9900K I don't need such a expensive low latency memory as with ryzen so for like 50 USD higher I get 10-15% ipc, 20% more frequency. 50 USD when considering mobo+RAM+CPU cost in this price category is a no brainer.

This time good one intel. Even on the price side-I though I would never give a like to intel for price

Are you talking about the i9 9900K? That's going to be at least $100 more.

 

[JoeRambo]

it is not a bad buy when I consider total system cost. with 9900K I don't need such a expensive low latency memory as with ryzen so for like 50 USD higher I get 10-15% ipc, 20% more frequency. 50 USD when considering mobo+RAM+CPU cost in this price category is a no brainer.

Yeah, and since Z370 is mature now, board prices are cheaper than at launch, some good deals too. The problem i guess is getting one ready for 8C, with the right (new bios) or having a CPU to borrow.
I really hope Intel won't screw this launch by pricing 9900K out of reach.

 

[Markfw]

where can I preorder 9900K ?

it is not a bad buy when I consider total system cost. with 9900K I don't need such a expensive low latency memory as with ryzen so for like 50 USD higher I get 10-15% ipc, 20% more frequency. 50 USD when considering mobo+RAM+CPU cost in this price category is a no brainer.

This time good one intel. Even on the price side-I though I would never give a like to intel for price

2700x is $330 WITH a good HSF. 9900k will most likely be at least $500 and no HSF, so like $200 more for 10% IPC or less.

 

[JoeRambo]

2700x is $330 WITH a good HSF. 9900k will most likely be at least $500 and no HSF, so like $200 more for 10% IPC or less.

$200 more for ~10% IPC and ~20% higher max clocks does sound fair to me. AMD simply does not have offerings in that performance class. And i the past forum crowd jumped to spending hundreds on new systems that offered maybe 5% performance increase gen over gen.
Having top dog desktop system has value in itself + i am certain that Intel will have a strong 8C/8T for less $$$, that will offer same mid ( 8 Skylake cores is now mid??? lol ) threaded performance, while retaining 95+% of advatages in desktop use.

 

[caswow]

8000 series was announced end of September (Q3) and was officially available in Oct (Q4).

https://www.anandtech.com/show/11869/intel-announces-8th-generation-coffee-lake-hex-core-desktop-processors

https://www.anandtech.com/show/11859/the-anandtech-coffee-lake-review-8700k-and-8400-initial-numbers

Probably the same thing this time around.

more like available january 2018

 

[TheGiant]

2700x is $330 WITH a good HSF. 9900k will most likely be at least $500 and no HSF, so like $200 more for 10% IPC or less.

You definitely buy a new HSF for 2700X for overlocking. The same of choice as for 9900K.
As for the memory, with current prices the high end desktops are really close with price cause other components.

For the price/perf category (~300 USD and ~200 USD) I think AMD will still be the winner, but it will be closer than ever (last 2 years)

It is nice that the monopoly times of 6900K for 1000USD are gone

 

[Charlie22911]

Yes, I held on to my FX 8350 for as long as I could before giving in and trading a kidney for a 6900k. If only I’d been more patient.

I’m genuinely glad things are changing.

 

[epsilon84]

2700x is $330 WITH a good HSF. 9900k will most likely be at least $500 and no HSF, so like $200 more for 10% IPC or less.

It's 'good' for stock frequencies and turbo boosts, but also a bit noisy under load. It's actually a very decent stock HSF but not that suitable for overclocking, not that you can overclock a 2700X much even with upgraded cooling.

Also, how many enthusiasts (the type that would buy a 9900K) actually don't own a half decent HSF or AIO? I have about 3 spare heatsinks that I can run on my 8700K...

Im not sure why you adjusted the 9900K price upwards $50 to 'over $500' when it's been rumoured to cost $450.

You also rounded down AMDs IPC deficit to '10% or less' when stilts testing puts it close to 15%, though without AVX included it is around 10% so I'll give you that.

Ultimately, for enthusiasts at least, what sets the 9900K apart from the 2700X is the clockspeed ceiling. The 2700X averages around 4.2GHz overclocked - the 9900K, with a soldered IHS, could conceivably clock a full 1GHz higher... that's probably worth more for overall performance than the IPC advantage.

This is also the reason I struggle to see how AMD can really counter the 9900K with a '2800X' unless they have drastically improved the 12nm process. It is already running close to its limits even on the 2700X.

It's akin to AMD trying to clock an already power hungry Vega 64 even higher to try to compete with the 1080 Ti - at some point, the power curve just makes it unfeasible to keep adding clockspeed. I think the 2700X is already at that point. Is a 150W+ 2800X possible? Technically, it is. AMD can cherry pick the best dies and add an extra 200MHz perhaps , but it still won't really come close to a 9900K, so what is the point, really?

 

[coercitiv]

with 9900K I don't need such a expensive low latency memory as with ryzen so for like 50 USD higher I get 10-15% ipc

This made my day: people paying a considerable premium for the latest and greatest product from Intel, yet saving a few bucks on memory. The acrobatics are amazing, the savings are real!