Intel kills 10nm ?? oO

[Panos]

FYI Ice Lake (laptop) still loses 5% perf from Spectre patches alone

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=intel-icelake-mitigations&

never mind the nanometers.When will desktop see magical IPC increase from Sunny Cove?

Depends. With things like Spectre mitigation still culling performance on Ice Lake (see article above)

 

[Panos]

Still, they're aiming for 10nm desktop in 2H 2021. That'll be going up against Ryzen 5000 on TSMC's 5nm process node. They are going to be in a difficult spot for years.

I predict AMD going to gain serious marketshare in desktop and about 25%+ in server by 2021.

heh ironic, given that Zen 4 (Ryzen 5000) comes with new sockets, DDR5, PCIe 5.0 and no CCXs just CCDs. (CCX abolished with Zen 3 next year).

Also already things moving fast. Look at WOT RT benchmarks. 3900X is faster than the 8700K & 9900K Using Intel Embree!!!!!
Or X4 Foundations, using 10 cores (not threads) with 2.6 and promised 16 cores with 3.0

 

[4K8KW10]

The peoblem with that is 14nm has barely no room to improve whereas 7nm to 7nm+ next year (Ryzen 4000) is going to see another comparatively huge leap forward.

Already, compare Ryzen 8-core 3700X and Intel 9700K equivalent. Very similar performance in games yet the Ryzen draws so much less power while doing it, despite 8 more threads. Also, the 3700X wipes the floor with that in multi-threaded perf on top.

i7-9700K is not a Ryzen 7 3700X's equivalent.
Ryzen 7 3700X is i9-9900K equivalent as evident from the performance comparison tests:

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-7-3700x/22.html

 

[MartinPrince]

i7-9700K is not a Ryzen 7 3700X's equivalent.
Ryzen 7 3700X is i9-9900K equivalent as evident from the performance comparison tests:

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-7-3700x/22.html

You've showed the wrong chart. @Boot_Loop, who you quoted, specifically used the term "in games". Here is the 1080p games chart....

 

[humbug]

You've showed the wrong chart. @Boot_Loop, who you quoted, specifically used the term "in games". Here is the 1080p games chart....

Nothing against TPU but when they have a 6 thread 2.9Ghz/4.1Ghz 9400F only 8% behind a 16 thread 3.6Ghz/5Ghz 9900K something is seriously wrong with their testing methodology, what are they doing to be getting results that are, lets face it from the lowest end to the highest end just about the same?

In the real world most game just don't behave like this.

 

[4K8KW10]

More woes for intel

Intel "Rocket Lake" an Adaptation of "Willow Cove" CPU Cores on 14nm?

We know from an older report that the 14 nm "Rocket Lake-S" silicon has up to 8 CPU cores, even as its predecessor, "Comet Lake-S," dials core-counts up to 10. We know now that the lowered core count is a trade-off for big IPC gains. For the desktop platform, "Rocket Lake-S" could herald the first major IPC uplift on the Intel platform since "Skylake."

It seems they are backporting the design from 10nm to 14nm and limiting the quantity of cores on the RL-S to only 8.

 

[LePhuronn]

It seems they are backporting the design from 10nm to 14nm and limiting the quantity of cores on the RL-S to only 8.

Moore's Law Is Dead did a good video called Whispers Of Willow Cove and in it mentioned he's heard suggestions that Intel are going "node agnostic" for their new designs, meaning that they can use whatever process node is available and suitable to produce their chips. So for instance they could use 10nm for the low-power environments like laptops but fall back to 14nm+++++++ (and thermals be damned) for desktop if 10nm yields are still poor.

So this might not be a case of "backporting" Rocket Lake to 14nm, it might be Willow Cove is indeed node agnostic, opting to implement Rocket Lake on 14nm for desktop.

 

[HeX]

thermals be damned) for desktop

Sounds like Prescott all over again!

 

[LePhuronn]

Sounds like Prescott all over again!

Don't remind me, muggins here has bloody got one!

 

[4K8KW10]

Sounds like Prescott all over again!

Yes, this Rocket Lake-S will compete directly with Zen 4, Ryzen 5000 series which will go on 5nm, most likely with DDR5 and PCIe 5.
Good luck with that, intel! lol An 8-core 5GHz with 20% higher IPC at 125W in the best case will have to compete with a 5nm 16-core Ryzen 65-95W.

Comet Lake-S will compete with Zen 3, Ryzen 4000 next year.

Desperate and hardship times for intel in the coming years.

 

[Grim5]

Next years comet lake won't be competing without price cuts - if they try to sell a 9900k plus 2 extra cores at $500 with 180w tdp then they are totally dead in the water.

meanwhile, Zen 3 will have lower latency, higher IPC on 7nm+ next year. Those 2 extra cores won't save Intel from what's coming - total domination by AMD in games!

Intel needs to start pricing their CPUs in a tier below its core count vs AMD that's the only way they will get sales after Zen 3. That means the 10 core 10900k needs to be priced liked the 8 core 4700x, and the 8 core 10700k needs to be priced like the 6 core 4600x etc.

 

[4K8KW10]

Next years comet lake won't be competing without price cuts - if they try to sell a 9900k plus 2 extra cores at $500 with 180w tdp then they are totally dead in the water.

meanwhile, Zen 3 will have lower latency, higher IPC on 7nm+ next year. Those 2 extra cores won't save Intel from what's coming - total domination by AMD in games!

Intel needs to start pricing their CPUs in a tier below its core count vs AMD that's the only way they will get sales after Zen 3. That means the 10 core 10900k needs to be priced liked the 8 core 4700x, and the 8 core 10700k needs to be priced like the 6 core 4600x etc.

Yes, for intel the most viable solution is to dial the TDP down of its chips to real 65-95W, and decrease the prices to max $350-$400 for the top 8-10-core parts.
The point - not to try to compete on absolute top performance grounds with AMD, but instead take the performance tiers below, because the battle is lost, anyways.

 

[Zeed]

heh ironic, given that Zen 4 (Ryzen 5000) comes with new sockets, DDR5, PCIe 5.0 and no CCXs just CCDs. (CCX abolished with Zen 3 next year).

Also already things moving fast. Look at WOT RT benchmarks. 3900X is faster than the 8700K & 9900K Using Intel Embree!!!!!
Or X4 Foundations, using 10 cores (not threads) with 2.6 and promised 16 cores with 3.0

I hope DDR5 addds some nice boost to IF

 

[Sargatanas2511]

Yes, for intel the most viable solution is to dial the TDP down of its chips to real 65-95W, and decrease the prices to max $350-$400 for the top 8-10-core parts.
The point - not to try to compete on absolute top performance grounds with AMD, but instead take the performance tiers below, because the battle is lost, anyways.

Their TDP is nonsense anyway as proven by actual power testing of any chip they have made in the last 2 years. TDP means very little now.

 

[Panos]

I hope DDR5 addds some nice boost to IF

There are DDR5 kits doing 6400Mhz, so we have to see
However what we do know is that quad channel ram greatly improves performance even in gaming so more bandwidth and more channels should be boosting the chips even if they are kept on current architecture and just add DDR5 support.

 

[Grim5]

There are DDR5 kits doing 6400Mhz, so we have to see
However what we do know is that quad channel ram greatly improves performance even in gaming so more bandwidth and more channels should be boosting the chips even if they are kept on current architecture and just add DDR5 support.

From what I last read about 6 months ago, they were targeting 5200mhz as the standard minimum frequency for DDR5.
However bandwidth isn't everything - latency is as if not more important and we don't know what the timings are.

 

[4K8KW10]

From what I last read about 6 months ago, they were targeting 5200mhz as the standard minimum frequency for DDR5.
However bandwidth isn't everything - latency is as if not more important and we don't know what the timings are.

Cadence's prototype had a CAS latency of 42

https://www.techpowerup.com/243907/cadence-and-micron-demo-ddr5-4400-memory-module
https://community.cadence.com/cadence_blogs_8/b/breakfast-bytes/posts/tsmc-micron-ddr5

 

[Panos]

From what I last read about 6 months ago, they were targeting 5200mhz as the standard minimum frequency for DDR5.
However bandwidth isn't everything - latency is as if not more important and we don't know what the timings are.

We shall see how things turn. We are 2y away either way.

 

[Grim5]

https://www.techpowerup.com/243907/cadence-and-micron-demo-ddr5-4400-memory-module
https://community.cadence.com/cadence_blogs_8/b/breakfast-bytes/posts/tsmc-micron-ddr5

I assume things will get better but those timings are very high considering while they are expensive you can get ddr4 4400mhz kits with better timing.

I'm upgrading my PC now and intending to hold for a few years, can't see myself jumping on DDR5 in its first year, just like DDR4 they'll need some time to iron it out.

 

[TrM]

Next years comet lake won't be competing without price cuts - if they try to sell a 9900k plus 2 extra cores at $500 with 180w tdp then they are totally dead in the water.

meanwhile, Zen 3 will have lower latency, higher IPC on 7nm+ next year. Those 2 extra cores won't save Intel from what's coming - total domination by AMD in games!

Intel needs to start pricing their CPUs in a tier below its core count vs AMD that's the only way they will get sales after Zen 3. That means the 10 core 10900k needs to be priced liked the 8 core 4700x, and the 8 core 10700k needs to be priced like the 6 core 4600x etc.

I can't see intel making major price cuts though not across the whole range though, A i9 10 core intel cpu Will still comand a price similar to a 3900x is. Call it part arrogance or brand loyaity and the fact that intel have a stranglehold on the prebuilt system from the likes of dell etc. Until amd really get into the major brands like dell hp etc. looking at dell's lineup there ryzen lineup is pathetic vs intel and even threadripper which lets be honest is kinda in another league then intel's lineup and they have very few systems vs the intel ones. Until Amd makes inroads in to that intel can still charge a premuim.

Yes, this Rocket Lake-S will compete directly with Zen 4, Ryzen 5000 series which will go on 5nm, most likely with DDR5 and PCIe 5.
Good luck with that, intel! lol An 8-core 5GHz with 20% higher IPC at 125W in the best case will have to compete with a 5nm 16-core Ryzen 65-95W.

Comet Lake-S will compete with Zen 3, Ryzen 4000 next year.

Desperate and hardship times for intel in the coming years.

you put way to much stock into tdp. A metric that no-one can decide on. Intel and amd both measure them differnetly and without real understanding and a recognised standard they are just stats on a box.

going to a smaller node or even a more refind node for amd desn't mean there tdp will go down. Amd have shown over 3 generations of cpu with 3 different nodes so far that they have a target envolope for there cpu's and that wont change on the desktop space. eeking out every bit of performance they can within said window for top tier cpu is more imporant then dropping down tdp. within reason for a desktop user tdp and power draw means very little (i did say within reason) and cooling a cpu on desktop is effortless now a days with so much choice for dektop either aio or good air coolers.

Yes, for intel the most viable solution is to dial the TDP down of its chips to real 65-95W, and decrease the prices to max $350-$400 for the top 8-10-core parts.
The point - not to try to compete on absolute top performance grounds with AMD, but instead take the performance tiers below, because the battle is lost, anyways.

i do wonder when you jumped back on the amd bandwagon. you have said in previous posts about intel still being a head in certain markets and linked lots of articles, romours, sales statics and market share over the forums and you know how its only taking small amounts each report. whilst amd are making inraods into intels dominance they can't compete in the areas that truly matter. and until they do intel are still in the driving seat and prices will stay high on the desktop market. The battle is far from lost though intel are still in the lead And still the major force needs to be tooppled.