Core 9000 series

Panos · 4 Jul 2018 at 11:00

orbitalwalsh said:
Will have to check roadmap again, cant remember if its X399 board or like AMD have no need to change the chipset name . Chips would take CFL-K and 8*** naming .
been checking out AMD more as more fun and open

funny enough, was mention of CNL No Z370 Chipset... must have been a very early roadmap, as z390 like B360/H370/H310 and H310C are on a different node to Z370 ..

What AMD X399 has to with Intel X299? There are no new CPUs for X299. X399 will be support until motherboards cannot run 120 core CPU.

New socket for Intel HEDT around October. Except Intel plans to run 2 HEDT platforms.

orbitalwalsh · 4 Jul 2018 at 11:25

The joys of road maps, since amd decides to match Intel's closely , I don't pay much attention haha.
Check my threads and you'll see I've post incoming board release dates but have mixed some up with dates by accident haha .

AMD didn't change name for x399 the boards don't offer any new features, all board vendors have done is created new flagships to accept 32 core thread rippers . Intel it's all about creating PR drive ! If they can name a new Chipset for no reason they will for CPUs that don't need a whole new name scheme haha .

Again, could be wrong , roadmaps are from Feb and 5 months allows for a lot of change ... Like Nvidia

eddiew · 4 Jul 2018 at 12:03

Journey said:
If people can run the 18c 7960XE at 4.4 GHz on a custom loop, then they will be able to run an 8 core desktop part on a 360mm, or maybe even 280mm AIO with zero issue at 5GHz, it all comes down to the voltage needed, the process being used is very mature, yields are very good and I'd imagine that the voltages won't be much worse than that of the 8700K, if at all. CPU TDP will probably be officially <120W once released, depends on how much Intel want to mess about with stupid base vs. boost clocks to make it look better, however if we are just talking the K part then I don't think it would matter that much even if it was 150W.

I have a binned/delidded 8700K on a 280mm AiO and it primes around 80-81 (admittedly that's in the middle of a heatwave - and still cooler than my 2500k @ 4.4!). The 8-cores would have to be down at some seriously low voltages (< 1.2?) to be controllable with anything other than custom loops, imo :S

I could imagine Intel gunning for the 1-core boosts from the 8086K however, or possibly even applying them to 2-core loads. As you say, the process is extremely mature now and it feels like they're fighting heat more than the ability of the silicon to reach those frequencies.

Maybe I'm wrong, maybe Intel will produce something that OC's to 5.2 reliably, or maybe AMD's 7nm next year will bring 5ghz and up to the 8-core arena. Either would be good news

That said, I want at least 6ghz - or 20% IPC boost - to be interested in a new cpu within the next couple of years anyway

humbug · 4 Jul 2018 at 14:29

Renamed Coffeelake with a slight Mhz bump? Check.

NinjaCool · 4 Jul 2018 at 14:50

What a disappointment and here I was thinking Intel might surprise us with a soldered 8 core 16 threads CPU.

EsaT · 4 Jul 2018 at 15:29

Journey said:
CPU TDP will probably be officially <120W once released, depends on how much Intel want to mess about with stupid base vs. boost clocks to make it look better, however if we are just talking the K part then I don't think it would matter that much even if it was 150W.

Well, their marketing is certainly desperate, like shown by that not enough power to demonstrate in operation with cooling system 5GHz 28 core.
And didn't AMD's former marketing director move to Intel?

humbug said:
Renamed Coffeelake with a slight Mhz bump? Check.

Don't you mean renamed Kaby Lake... err Skylake?
I think Intel needs to visit clock repair shop, because their clock hasn't said properly "tick" or "tock" in years.

humbug · 4 Jul 2018 at 16:43

EsaT said:
Don't you mean renamed Kaby Lake... err Skylake?
I think Intel needs to visit clock repair shop, because their clock hasn't said properly "tick" or "tock" in years.

lol

eddiew · 4 Jul 2018 at 17:30

EsaT said:
I think Intel needs to visit clock repair shop, because their clock hasn't said properly "tick" or "tock" in years.

You sir have won a nod of approval.

*nods*

Gerard · 4 Jul 2018 at 22:52

So new cpu's that (likely) again will require a new motherboard due to the "old" chipset "not fully supporting all the new features" or some **** like that.

Gerard · 4 Jul 2018 at 22:53

NinjaCool said:
What a disappointment and here I was thinking Intel might surprise us with a soldered 8 core 16 threads CPU.

Spend money on doing it right? Are you mad!

Legend · 4 Jul 2018 at 22:53

Gerard said:
So new cpu's that (likely) again will require a new motherboard due to the "old" chipset "not fully supporting all the new features" or some **** like that.

There's some discussion that new chips will still work in Z370 boards, but nothing confirmed or denied yet. Could be the higher end chips don't. We'll just have to see.

Gerard · 4 Jul 2018 at 22:55

Legend said:
There's some discussion that new chips will still work in Z370 boards, but nothing confirmed or denied yet. Could be the higher end chips don't. We'll just have to see.

Well seeing as its Intel they're more likely to add or remove a few pins just so a new motherboard is needed. Or maybe because amd landed a large boot into intel's swingers they will actually stop taking the ****.

Legend · 4 Jul 2018 at 22:57

Gerard said:
Well seeing as its Intel they're more likely to add or remove a few pins just so a new motherboard is needed. Or maybe because amd landed a large boot into intel's swingers they will actually stop taking the ****.

Oh yes, I wouldn't put that past them at all ha! But of course they'll have good reason which will be swallowed hook, line and sinker by their legion of worshipers.

Gerard · 4 Jul 2018 at 23:11

Legend said:
Oh yes, I wouldn't put that past them at all ha! But of course they'll have good reason which will be swallowed hook, line and sinker by their legion of worshipers.

To be fair Intel was the preferable cpu (for gaming at least) by necessity for a long time but not anymore. Bulldozer and them iterating on that design for a long time hurt them, but its not like you can pull a brand new cpu architecture out of your ass overnight.

sideways14a · 4 Jul 2018 at 23:57

Sure folk will get 5 big ones out of the expensive 8 core, of course it will likely be needing its top off and bagillions of power plus a proper costly cooling system. not to mention a board change (just fo fun as everyone loves that)
But yeah 5 big ones, and then the showing off and parroting will begin again.

Cant see these chips being at the top of the sales charts for long though

eddiew · 5 Jul 2018 at 00:01

Gerard said:
To be fair Intel was the preferable cpu (for gaming at least) by necessity for a long time but not anymore. Bulldozer and them iterating on that design for a long time hurt them, but its not like you can pull a brand new cpu architecture out of your ass overnight.

What got me with Bulldozer is that the moment that it was mentioned it would share floating point units between cores, every enthusiast everywhere shouted "NOOOOO!" at the same time. Long before it was born, everyone except AMD knew it would suck. And then when it was on shelves and reviewed and it was worse than Phenom II in every respect, AMD still tried to defend the thing and blamed software. I mean, they could have maybe engaged with Microsoft before launch, made sure relevant Windows patches were out on day 1 to avoid the scheduling on weak cores issues... but nah. Launch it and fix it 3 months later is fine. Except when it isn't.

As a company, AMD deserved the hurt that fell out of Bulldozer, Piledriver, etc. Should have binned it on the drawing board and die-shrunk Phenom II x6. Just a shame the result of it was consumers languishing in 4-core-no-progress hell for several years afterwards

We really need a third manufacturer to step in to fill the gap when red or blue takes a year off. Anyone know what VIA's up to these days?

humbug · 5 Jul 2018 at 00:04

eddiew said:
What got me with Bulldozer is that the moment that it was mentioned it would share floating point units between cores, every enthusiast everywhere shouted "NOOOOO!" at the same time. Long before it was born, everyone except AMD knew it would suck. And then when it was on shelves and reviewed and it was worse than Phenom II in every respect, AMD still tried to defend the thing and blamed software. I mean, they could have maybe engaged with Microsoft before launch, made sure relevant Windows patches were out on day 1 to avoid the scheduling on weak cores issues... but nah. Launch it and fix it 3 months later is fine. Except when it isn't.

As a company, AMD deserved the hurt that fell out of Bulldozer, Piledriver, etc. Should have binned it on the drawing board and die-shrunk Phenom II x6. Just a shame the result of it was consumers languishing in 4-core-no-progress hell for several years afterwards We really need a third manufacturer to step in to fill the gap when red or blue takes a year off. Anyone know what VIA's up to these days?

AMD deserved the hurt that fell out of Bulldozer

Do they deserve that indefinitely? a life sentence? or is there a point where we should let history be history?

Gerard · 5 Jul 2018 at 00:04

eddiew said:
What got me with Bulldozer is that the moment that it was mentioned it would share floating point units between cores, every enthusiast everywhere shouted "NOOOOO!" at the same time. Long before it was born, everyone except AMD knew it would suck. And then when it was on shelves and reviewed and it was worse than Phenom II in every respect, AMD still tried to defend the thing and blamed software. I mean, they could have maybe engaged with Microsoft before launch, made sure relevant Windows patches were out on day 1 to avoid the scheduling on weak cores issues... but nah. Launch it and fix it 3 months later is fine. Except when it isn't.

As a company, AMD deserved the hurt that fell out of Bulldozer, Piledriver, etc. Should have binned it on the drawing board and die-shrunk Phenom II x6. Just a shame the result of it was consumers languishing in 4-core-no-progress hell for several years afterwards We really need a third manufacturer to step in to fill the gap when red or blue takes a year off. Anyone know what VIA's up to these days?

Wasn't the highest end one shipped with an aio? First cpu that i can recall needing it out of the box, and it came in the box

Panos · 5 Jul 2018 at 03:01

sideways14a said:
Sure folk will get 5 big ones out of the expensive 8 core, of course it will likely be needing its top off and bagillions of power plus a proper costly cooling system. not to mention a board change (just fo fun as everyone loves that)
But yeah 5 big ones, and then the showing off and parroting will begin again.

Cant see these chips being at the top of the sales charts for long though

On the video posted elsewhere today, hardware unboxed shows that the 8700K @ 5Ghz is burning around 30-34W more than the 2700X @ 4.2Ghz
So a 5Ghz 9900K we are looking 90W over the 8700K, so 60-64W over the 2700X.
Which means bigger cooling solution needed, and definitely deliding and liquid metal.

Nor power consumption neither heat dissipation in the room are the point, if you start overclocking. Trying to remove the heat from the chip is the issue here.
Which would make some AIOs pretty weak on that front, and most Z370 boards unable to deliver that power.

My main concern is that I know right now my 8600K @ 5.1 is using ~260W and 240 at 5Ghz.
Adding 90W on top that could raise it to ~330W. I doubt the Z370-I Strix can handle this with the 6+2 phases. Which means I will keep the 8600K for next year getting a 3700X.

(If we were right now at the graphics forum, and had replaced Nvidia with Intel on the above post, out the pitchforks and torches demanding to be burned alive for saying that AMD is using less power. Which is happening right now there when proved the V64 Nitro+ at factory overclock burns 80W less than the GTX1080Ti Xtreme at factory overclocks.)

sideways14a · 5 Jul 2018 at 08:38

Yup it makes me laugh when all the nvidia fanboys go on about AMD having dubious power usage... which is kind of true until you start undervolting vega which AMD should have bloody well done in the first place.
However its a laugh because most of them are running a stupid amount of power through there cpu for next to no benefit... unless you really can feel a massive difference between 4.9 and 5.1 Ghz