Associate
- Joined
- 12 Jul 2015
- Posts
- 1,694
I believe Cannonlake for desktops was scrapped and is only for mobile now? Making the next line Ice Lake - a completely new designed arch; promising!
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
Intel to launch 6 core Coffee Lake-S CPUs & Z370 chipset 5 October 2017
- Thread starter AthlonXP1800
- Start date
I believe Cannonlake for desktops was scrapped and is only for mobile now? Making the next line Ice Lake - a completely new designed arch; promising!
unfortunately that's the issue we face in modern times, smaller nodes are getting harder and harder to manufacture. I mean put it like this IBM has announced their 5nm node, but it'll he a minimum of 5 years before it's ready for production.
and that 5nm is actually the same size as Intel's 7nm, same as how samsung/gloflo 7nm is actually the same size as Intel's 10nm, the sizing they announce don't mean jack.
Technically Coffee Lake is Cannon Lake, just on 14nm instead. And they're both really refreshed Kaby Lake, which itself is Skylake.
Intel haven't actually launched a new architecture since Skylake, and won't till Ice Lake (the first actually new arch).
Everything else is refreshes, shrinks, and minor tweaks to Skylake.
Add to that the fact that Skylake was barely better than Broadwell to begin with. Haswell was the last worthwhile improvement IMO.
Ryzen was released in February. I'm guessing coffee lake is a response to this. So if the target is August then that leaves 6 months to get this out the door, along with a new chipset. The only way that seems like its going to work is if they are reusing another chip, as the base to make this CPU. Considering how much intel likes to segment their products, I wonder how they will stop this CPU from eating into the HEDT market.
There's also a need for MB manufacturers to get onboard with this but potentially they will want to focus on the high margin stuff. A.K.A threadripper and skylake. So potentially boards may be lacking for this once released (or really buggy). Will be interesting to see how much polish they come out with. Judging by other rumors MB manufacturers will need to work on a MB for high core count skylake.
I think Intel rushing these plans will hamper the final quality of the products.
No need to guess. Coffee Lake was announced long before Ryzen was released.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
You do understand it was announced long after Zen was announced for 2017 though, right?
Sure but he specifically mentioned Ryzen's launch in February. There's probably more than one reason Coffee Lake exists, including AMD and their 10 nm process not able to reach the high clock speeds needed for desktop parts.
Ah, I wasn't aware.
Caporegime
Associate
I'm sorry if this has already been asked but, is this article true? is Covefefe lake really delayed untill next year? If so I give up on intel 
http://wccftech.com/intel-coffee-lake-delayed-2018-8th-gen-kaby-lake-refresh/
http://wccftech.com/intel-coffee-lake-delayed-2018-8th-gen-kaby-lake-refresh/
Did Intel confirm coffee lake to come out in August? I thought it was a rumour.I'm sorry if this has already been asked but, is this article true? is Covefefe lake really delayed untill next year? If so I give up on intel
http://wccftech.com/intel-coffee-lake-delayed-2018-8th-gen-kaby-lake-refresh/
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Mar 2013
- Posts
- 5,502
I'm sorry if this has already been asked but, is this article true? is Covefefe lake really delayed untill next year? If so I give up on intel
http://wccftech.com/intel-coffee-lake-delayed-2018-8th-gen-kaby-lake-refresh/
I hear releasing next year is wrong. I don't have the article in front of me, if you google it you'll find the info that say it's still coming for Aug-Sep time
Never believe Wccftech
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
The issue is, it just doesn't matter does it? Ultimately if you want to go for a good gaming chip and you want more than 4 cores, you are gaming with a discrete card, the igpu is pointless, paying for the igpu is pointless and when there are cheap and widely available 8 core chips competing with the clock speed on quad core Kaby, then the likely slightly lower clocks of a hex core isn't going to do better against the 8 cores is it.
I said this 6 months ago, 6 core APU changes exceptionally little because if you're gaming on the iGPU, you don't need 6 cores, if you're gaming with a decent discrete card, the cost of an APU isn't worthwhile and getting only 6 cores for a higher cost than now widely available 8 cores isn't a great option.
If you want pure CPU performance for something outside of gaming, rendering, anything else, 8 core Zen in mainstream or anything 10+ cores on HEDT is the better option. So August, Sept, 2 months ago or 6 months from now, for which user is a 6 core lets say £350-400 chip a better option than either a cheaper quad core APU or a cheaper 8 core CPU?
At some point starting it seems maybe early next year, you'll have a lets say £250 Intel quad core APU, a £350 6 core APU or a £350 6 core CPU on the x299 platform. AMD will have £200 quad core APUs with likely 2.5-3x the gpu performance of either of Intel's APUs, then they have the 4-8 core mainstream chips with 8 core chips being likely £250 by then for the cheapest, maybe getting a 10 core CPU on x399 platform around the £450-500 mark. I'm not sure for what workload and in what situation any of the Intel chips make sense. I still think Intel's pentium, and an i3(if cheap) are really good chips.
If you're a budget user, non gamer, non power user then price is more important than absolute performance, surprisingly, this may be where Intel has an advantage, tiny chips and they make a dual core specific die meaning it's going to be much smaller than AMD selling a quad core with 2 cores disabled. If you are a gamer for laptop of deskop, small system or just budget conscious and want an all in one chip then Raven Ridge is going to absolutely destroy Intel. Intel with 14nm chips is barely competing with 28nm AMD APUs on a very old architecture. If you are a power user then at least till at some point next year, AMD will offer more cores and at a lower price than Intel across the range with more pci-e. SO for rendering, any io heavy, 3+ gpus.
I just can't see where a 6 core APU improves things for Intel. The thing is, they wouldn't have to kill margins, only reduce the number of chips on the HEDT platform, if they just like AMD will, offer both CPU and APU on the mainstream. Intel should have moved 6/8 core CPUs to mainstream to match AMD and kept x299 as 10-18 core... instead they offer a 6 core APU with no real user base against much better suited chips AND they extended x299 to include utterly worthless quad core Kabylakes which can't even use the x299 mobo you're paying through the teeth for. Intel honestly couldn't have got their plans more wrong intentionally.
I said this 6 months ago, 6 core APU changes exceptionally little because if you're gaming on the iGPU, you don't need 6 cores, if you're gaming with a decent discrete card, the cost of an APU isn't worthwhile and getting only 6 cores for a higher cost than now widely available 8 cores isn't a great option.
If you want pure CPU performance for something outside of gaming, rendering, anything else, 8 core Zen in mainstream or anything 10+ cores on HEDT is the better option. So August, Sept, 2 months ago or 6 months from now, for which user is a 6 core lets say £350-400 chip a better option than either a cheaper quad core APU or a cheaper 8 core CPU?
At some point starting it seems maybe early next year, you'll have a lets say £250 Intel quad core APU, a £350 6 core APU or a £350 6 core CPU on the x299 platform. AMD will have £200 quad core APUs with likely 2.5-3x the gpu performance of either of Intel's APUs, then they have the 4-8 core mainstream chips with 8 core chips being likely £250 by then for the cheapest, maybe getting a 10 core CPU on x399 platform around the £450-500 mark. I'm not sure for what workload and in what situation any of the Intel chips make sense. I still think Intel's pentium, and an i3(if cheap) are really good chips.
If you're a budget user, non gamer, non power user then price is more important than absolute performance, surprisingly, this may be where Intel has an advantage, tiny chips and they make a dual core specific die meaning it's going to be much smaller than AMD selling a quad core with 2 cores disabled. If you are a gamer for laptop of deskop, small system or just budget conscious and want an all in one chip then Raven Ridge is going to absolutely destroy Intel. Intel with 14nm chips is barely competing with 28nm AMD APUs on a very old architecture. If you are a power user then at least till at some point next year, AMD will offer more cores and at a lower price than Intel across the range with more pci-e. SO for rendering, any io heavy, 3+ gpus.
I just can't see where a 6 core APU improves things for Intel. The thing is, they wouldn't have to kill margins, only reduce the number of chips on the HEDT platform, if they just like AMD will, offer both CPU and APU on the mainstream. Intel should have moved 6/8 core CPUs to mainstream to match AMD and kept x299 as 10-18 core... instead they offer a 6 core APU with no real user base against much better suited chips AND they extended x299 to include utterly worthless quad core Kabylakes which can't even use the x299 mobo you're paying through the teeth for. Intel honestly couldn't have got their plans more wrong intentionally.
Took the words right out of my mouth. The only place I can see a 6 core APU working is with some laptops where the manufactures don't give a dedicated GPU. Even then that's becoming rare enough, and I think AMD's APUs will be far better options there given their graphics performance.
The last bastion that might use those Intel IGPs chips might be Apple; but who knows if they'll stick with Apple if AMD manages to improve IPC a bit, and their IGPs are superior by a significant amount.
Apple would much rather save money on a cheaper GPU like the 555 or 560 by using an IGP that can manage it all on their Macbooks, and low end iMacs.
So even there Intel's days might be numbered unless their next IGP manages to at least match AMD's Vega APU solution.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
The problem there is, 4 cores will easily max out the igpu on Intel chips, let alone a 6 core then inherently being a igpu any extra power to the cpu means less power to the gpu.
This year is somewhat too soon for Apple to take AMD cpus, they need a more proven and ready supply and need chips ready and available by a certain date. I wouldn't be surprised if Raven Ridge turns up in Apple devices next year though and if EPYC/Threadripper turns up in a couple of Mac Pros as well.
I have said, if by some miracle it turns out the 6 core is without an igpu(nothing seems to point that way that I've seen) then if they price it well they could actually hurt AMDs plans pretty massively as a 6 core Intel chip at a lower price would be a great new chip on the mainstream platform. But their whole 4/6 core Kaby/Skylake-x's suggest that isn't in their plans at all.
This year is somewhat too soon for Apple to take AMD cpus, they need a more proven and ready supply and need chips ready and available by a certain date. I wouldn't be surprised if Raven Ridge turns up in Apple devices next year though and if EPYC/Threadripper turns up in a couple of Mac Pros as well.
I have said, if by some miracle it turns out the 6 core is without an igpu(nothing seems to point that way that I've seen) then if they price it well they could actually hurt AMDs plans pretty massively as a 6 core Intel chip at a lower price would be a great new chip on the mainstream platform. But their whole 4/6 core Kaby/Skylake-x's suggest that isn't in their plans at all.
the longer this discussion goes on and the longer intel dont release any info i feel intels going to be on the back foot until they drop down to 7nm in a year or two and just dont have the cpu's planned (or at least designed) now to do much of anything UNLESS they sell them at a loss. but the problem is am4 is here until 2020 for new cpu's we know come coffee lake x370 takes them and il bet my left testicle come the die shrink down to 7nm there will be yet another new socket and its upgrade time all over again, im sat here looking at a new mobo whoever i go with at the moment long term the am4 platform is winning that argument for future upgrades.
Soldato
Is covfefe lake only to be six core? If so I don't think it will be a winner. I'd still sooner have the ryzen 1700. A well priced and high IPC 8 core consumer Intel though... My attention is grabbed. I'd probably pay an extra £70 for dat IPC over Ryzen. But I'll bet the above chip would be a lot more than that.