Intel launches Core-X series with up to 18-cores for 1999 USD

Chuk_Chuk · 4 Jun 2017 at 13:31

TheF34RChannel said:
Value - do elaborate please

I prefer independent reviews and neither trust demos from AMD, Intel or whichever company because they will always show a perfect product.

If your talking value in core count its not great. Twice the price of an R7 but your not getting twice the cores or twice the multithreaded performance. If your talking single core performance its not great, a 7700k is far better and cheaper. If your talking PCIE lanes then AMD TR is a better choice admittedly we don't know the price but i doubt its going to cost 45% more. Its average in every metric i can think of to score value on. I guess if you only buy intel then it is good value for money.

Fair enough but its quite hard to fake a cycles rendering demo. You can tell the setting they used by simply looking at the image and you can see the time in the top left.

TheF34RChannel · 4 Jun 2017 at 14:09

Chuk_Chuk said:
If your talking value in core count its not great. Twice the price of an R7 but your not getting twice the cores or twice the multithreaded performance. If your talking single core performance its not great, a 7700k is far better and cheaper. If your talking PCIE lanes then AMD TR is a better choice admittedly we don't know the price but i doubt its going to cost 45% more. Its average in every metric i can think of to score value on. I guess if you only buy intel then it is good value for money.

Fair enough but its quite hard to fake a cycles rendering demo. You can tell the setting they used by simply looking at the image and you can see the time in the top left.

Yeah wasn't comparing to AMD, only to Intel its last gen.

Oh absolutely, not saying it's fake; they just present a (near) perfect scenario that's been pre-tested.

Chuk_Chuk · 4 Jun 2017 at 14:10

Okay, fair enough.

Out of curiosity why do you think it is a near perfect scenario?

Erik13 · 4 Jun 2017 at 15:16

If everything goes right Amd will prolly have field day with Threadripper line. Seems Intel has underestimated Amd too much ...

humbug · 4 Jun 2017 at 18:11

Its about $999 too much.

Panos · 4 Jun 2017 at 20:08

humbug said:
Its about $999 too much.

And for the price of the 6900K alone, someone could buy today a R7 1700, B350 board, 3200mhz Ram and a GTX1080, or 2 x RX580s.
While adding £65 more, can get the GTX1080Ti.

Talking about value for money....

And if rumour is correct and the R9 9800 lands at $850 mark (16c/32t), it undercuts the whole i9 Intel lineup by a big margin. (18c/36t will for for $2000).

RavenXXX2 · 4 Jun 2017 at 20:14

Intel are delusional. AMD are back face up to it.

Panos · 4 Jun 2017 at 21:08

RavenXXX2 said:
Intel are delusional. AMD are back face up to it.

Unfortunately many will buy their products. See how many are expecting 6core Coffee Lake, with their new motherboard ofc, and pretty bad overclock compared to the 4 core Kaby Lake.
While there are 8 core CPUs right now to be had at cheaper prices than the 7700K. Let alone 6c/12t like the 1600 going very cheaply

TheF34RChannel · 5 Jun 2017 at 00:17

Chuk_Chuk said:
Okay, fair enough.

Out of curiosity why do you think it is a near perfect scenario?

Because they need to show the world how great their new product is so the demo better be near perfect

I have yet to see a company showing a crappy demo and saying "Yeah, this is sh*te"

Loving all the speculation on unreleased and unknown products being passed off as factual in this thread lol oh dear. If one favours the competition for whatever reason, why waste your time in an Intel thread

DragonQ · 5 Jun 2017 at 07:55

TheF34RChannel said:
Because they need to show the world how great their new product is so the demo better be near perfect I have yet to see a company showing a crappy demo and saying "Yeah, this is sh*te"

Loving all the speculation on unreleased and unknown products being passed off as factual in this thread lol oh dear. If one favours the competition for whatever reason, why waste your time in an Intel thread

I think you'll find most reasonable people favour the superior product (using various metrics). A lot of people who were interested in Ryzen are equally interested in Coffee Lake, Threadripper, and X299. It's an enthusiast forum; it's always nice to see what's going on in the platform/CPU landscape, especially when one is considering upgrading. Right now X299 looks like a mess, IMO. With 8 cores available on a mainstream platform and having no intention of going multi-GPU, I probably won't get either HEDT platform right now, but if I was, X299 would have to bring something pretty special before launch (e.g. serious performance delta) to be worth considering over Threadripper.

TheF34RChannel · 5 Jun 2017 at 15:54

DragonQ said:
I think you'll find most reasonable people favour the superior product (using various metrics). A lot of people who were interested in Ryzen are equally interested in Coffee Lake, Threadripper, and X299. It's an enthusiast forum; it's always nice to see what's going on in the platform/CPU landscape, especially when one is considering upgrading. Right now X299 looks like a mess, IMO. With 8 cores available on a mainstream platform and having no intention of going multi-GPU, I probably won't get either HEDT platform right now, but if I was, X299 would have to bring something pretty special before launch (e.g. serious performance delta) to be worth considering over Threadripper.

Fair enough

I'm not going SLI (and never ever will) however the Intel HEDT platform speaks to me because of:

1. More cores (8+) ready for future usage (games) with very nice frequencies;
2. Upgrade options (Coffee Lake-X / Cannonlake-X (can't recall which));
3. No iGPU.

DragonQ · 5 Jun 2017 at 16:10

TheF34RChannel said:
Fair enough

I'm not going SLI (and never ever will) however the Intel HEDT platform speaks to me because of:

1. More cores (8+) ready for future usage (games) with very nice frequencies;
2. Upgrade options (Coffee Lake-X / Cannonlake-X (can't recall which));
3. No iGPU.

More cores (although getting more than AM4 provides will cost a fair bit I imagine) and higher frequencies is definitely nice. No iGPU isn't an advantage though, surely? It's just a consequence of more cores taking up die space. I also wouldn't necessarily count on having an upgrade path either the way Intel releases new chipsets. Everyone assumes that Coffee Lake will be compatible with Z170/Z270 but we don't even know that yet.

TheF34RChannel · 5 Jun 2017 at 16:15

DragonQ said:
More cores (although getting more than AM4 provides will cost a fair bit I imagine) and higher frequencies is definitely nice. No iGPU isn't an advantage though, surely? It's just a consequence of more cores taking up die space. I also wouldn't necessarily count on having an upgrade path either the way Intel releases new chipsets. Everyone assumes that Coffee Lake will be compatible with Z170/Z270 but we don't even know that yet.

Actually we do know that CFL requires a new board; 1151-v2. Yeah the iGPU isn't an issue at all; since I don't use it I rather see that space filled with cores, which I do use. Every chipset does see 2 CPU series so it's be fine. Qua costs, I'm not opting for the top tier but rather 8-10C.

Chuk_Chuk · 5 Jun 2017 at 17:42

TheF34RChannel said:
Because they need to show the world how great their new product is so the demo better be near perfect I have yet to see a company showing a crappy demo and saying "Yeah, this is sh*te"

Loving all the speculation on unreleased and unknown products being passed off as factual in this thread lol oh dear. If one favours the competition for whatever reason, why waste your time in an Intel thread

You raise a good point, fair enough.

Journey · 5 Jun 2017 at 18:22

TheF34RChannel said:
Fair enough

I'm not going SLI (and never ever will) however the Intel HEDT platform speaks to me because of:

1. More cores (8+) ready for future usage (games) with very nice frequencies;
2. Upgrade options (Coffee Lake-X / Cannonlake-X (can't recall which));
3. No iGPU.

I know this is a bit weird, but if the release prices are correct e.g. $999 for the 10 core CPU, and then a huge wedge on an X299 motherboard, lets say £250, you'd be spending around £1100 for two parts. Now if you don't need 8+ cores right now, and are looking at trying to future proof, then an 8 core CPU at half the price, and a motherboard at half the price, would then leave you with £500+ in your pocket, at which point in two years time you could spend the same again, and get a 10/12/14/16 core CPU when it *might* be needed.

DragonQ · 5 Jun 2017 at 18:29

TheF34RChannel said:
Actually we do know that CFL requires a new board; 1151-v2. Yeah the iGPU isn't an issue at all; since I don't use it I rather see that space filled with cores, which I do use. Every chipset does see 2 CPU series so it's be fine. Qua costs, I'm not opting for the top tier but rather 8-10C.

Thanks for clarifying a new board is required, had not seen that news yet. Although every Intel chipset for a while now has been compatible with two CPU generations, Kaby Lake was the first time (IIRC) that a new chipset was released with very minor improvements despite the previous chipset being compatible. I'd be wary of every single new feature of a CPU being available on the previous chipset even if it is technically compatible, going forward.

TheF34RChannel · 5 Jun 2017 at 18:46

Journey said:
I know this is a bit weird, but if the release prices are correct e.g. $999 for the 10 core CPU, and then a huge wedge on an X299 motherboard, lets say £250, you'd be spending around £1100 for two parts. Now if you don't need 8+ cores right now, and are looking at trying to future proof, then an 8 core CPU at half the price, and a motherboard at half the price, would then leave you with £500+ in your pocket, at which point in two years time you could spend the same again, and get a 10/12/14/16 core CPU when it *might* be needed.

Except that I absolutely do not want AMD

I'll be eyeing the 7820X before the 7900X of course, after all, we're going to have a nice hefty 21% VAT applied and whatever else

Journey · 5 Jun 2017 at 18:58

TheF34RChannel said:
Except that I absolutely do not want AMD I'll be eyeing the 7820X before the 7900X of course, after all, we're going to have a nice hefty 21% VAT applied and whatever else

Why the winky smiley thing?
Don't forget, you'll only get 28 PCI-E lanes with the 7820X, which is why I could never consider it seriously (I don't use HEDT for games) I'm frustrated that they didn't price the 12 core model at the old 6900K pricing or less.

TheF34RChannel · 5 Jun 2017 at 19:02

Journey said:
Why the winky smiley thing?
Don't forget, you'll only get 28 PCI-E lanes with the 7820X, which is why I could never consider it seriously (I don't use HEDT for games) I'm frustrated that they didn't price the 12 core model at the old 6900K pricing or less.

Because I thought you were hinting at AMD but I wasn't sure; hence the

- no hate.

28 lanes is more than enough for me; no dual GPU for me (too often not supported and when it is, often problematic). Instead we get 10C for the price of the previous 8C, not too bad all in all.

=XDC=FluphyBunny · 5 Jun 2017 at 19:20

TheF34RChannel said:
Because I thought you were hinting at AMD but I wasn't sure; hence the - no hate.

28 lanes is more than enough for me; no dual GPU for me (too often not supported and when it is, often problematic). Instead we get 10C for the price of the previous 8C, not too bad all in all.

But it could be terrible price / performance compared to AMD?