# Alleged Leaked Details on Intel Comet Lake-S Platform Require... You Guessed It... A New Platform



## Raevenlord (Aug 23, 2019)

Intel's development of their Core architecture in the post-Ryzen world has been slow, with solutions slowly creeping up in core counts with every new CPU release - but much slowly than rival AMD's efforts. Before Intel can capitalize on a new, more scalable and power-efficient architecture, though, it has to deliver performance and core count increases across its product line to stay as relevant as possible against a much revitalized rival. Enter Comet Lake-S: the desktop parts of Intel's new round of consumer CPUs, which will reportedly see an increase in the maximum core count to a 10-core design. This 10-core design, however, comes with an increase in power consumption (up to 135 W), and the need, once again, for beefier power delivery systems in a new, LGA 1200 package (with 9 more pins that the current LGA 1151).

The move to a new socket and the more stringent power requirements give Intel the opportunity to refresh its chipset offerings once again. If everything stays the same (and there's no reason it should change), new Z470 and Z490 chipsets should be some of the higher tier offerings for builders to pair with their motherboards. The new Comet Lake-S CPUs will still be built in the now extremely refined 14 nm process, and allegedly keep the same 16 PCIe 3.0 lanes as current Coffee Lake Refresh offerings. The new CPU offerings from Intel are expected to roll out in Q1 2020.



 



*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## Aquinus (Aug 23, 2019)

Raevenlord said:


> This 10-core design, however, comes with an increase in power consumption (*up to 135 W*)


How the mighty have fallen.


----------



## juiseman (Aug 23, 2019)

No PCIE 4.0?...hmmmm


----------



## AnarchoPrimitiv (Aug 23, 2019)

Aquinus said:


> How the mighty have fallen.



Today's empires are tomorrow's ashes...


----------



## Gungar (Aug 23, 2019)

juiseman said:


> No PCIE 4.0?...hmmmm



They already told us they will go directly to PCIE 5.0 in 2021.


----------



## Crackong (Aug 23, 2019)

10 cores 135W ?
we knew the 9900k is 95W and eats > 170W when overclocking
so this 10 core will eat 240W ?


----------



## Octavean (Aug 23, 2019)

In all fairness, can we even call it a leak when they clearly wanted us to know,.....?


----------



## juiseman (Aug 23, 2019)

Gungar said:


> They already told us they will go directly to PCIE 5.0 in 2021.



Right, cuz 10nm was on schedule also.


----------



## trparky (Aug 23, 2019)

Raevenlord said:


> keep the same *16* PCIe 3.0 lanes as current Coffee Lake Refresh offerings


*What the hell Intel?!?!*

Intel is really cheating us here. I'm not really pissed about the fact that it's still PCIe Gen 3 but more pissed about the limited number of lanes especially when AMD offers 24 of them. Again... *What the hell Intel?!?!*


----------



## GlacierNine (Aug 23, 2019)

juiseman said:


> Right, cuz 10nm was on schedule also.


Please don't confuse Intel's personal manufacturing process upgrade, with their desire to utilise a general standard created and maintained by over 900 companies.

10nm is:
1 - A manufacturing process
2 - Specced out by Intel
3 - Developed by Intel in Intel labs
4 - To make Intel hardware at Intel facilities using Intel-designed equipment. 
Intel are are the only party responsible for their 10nm processes success or failure. 

In comparison, PCI-E is:
1 - A specification
2 - Specced out by PCI-SIG
3 - Developed with their partners across the entire computing industry, in their facilities, using collaborative expertise
4 - To make industry-standard hardware at the facilities of anyone who wants to make that hardware. 

There are over 900 companies in PCI-SIG and when that many businesses are involved, and rely on, the correct engineering of an upcoming standard, you can bet your ass that none of them are going to let a specification or a standard out of the door that they aren't able to practically guarantee will actually work and can actually be built.


----------



## kapone32 (Aug 23, 2019)

Gungar said:


> They already told us they will go directly to PCIE 5.0 in 2021.



For the data centre not consumer level

10 cores with 16 PCI_E lanes. Dare i say whelmed


----------



## john_ (Aug 23, 2019)

A new platform in 2020 with PCIe 3.0 support. Nice.

The fun part will be next year when cheap PCIe 4.0 *x2* SSD models will be offering the speeds of more expensive PCIe 3.0 *x4* models.


----------



## Turmania (Aug 23, 2019)

I said it before and I say it again, The TDP and Turbo Boost ratings for both CPU manufacturers are false and misleading and I'm using the most politically correct wordings to express it. And to AMD well yeah they have upped their game after many years but guess what they are still behind at both CPU and GPU even after using the 7nm die shrink process and considering the others have not one can only imagine how far they are actually behind.I must say I like the new ryzen 3600 CPU at least it does 4.2 boost on all cores.


----------



## Frick (Aug 23, 2019)

Mah FPSess will explode!



Turmania said:


> I said it before and I say it again, The TDP and Turbo Boost ratings for both CPU manufacturers are false and misleading and I'm using the most politically correct wordings to express it. And to AMD well yeah they have upped their game after many years but guess what they are still behind at both CPU and GPU even after using the 7nm die shrink process and considering the others have not one can only imagine how far they are actually behind.I must say I like the new ryzen 3600 CPU at least it does 4.2 boost on all cores.



Behind ... in games.


----------



## Berfs1 (Aug 23, 2019)

Crackong said:


> 10 cores 135W ?
> we knew the 9900k is 95W and eats > 170W when overclocking
> so this 10 core will eat 240W ?


Keep in mind, the 9900K stock is rated for 210W under turbo. 240W is a pretty good estimate.


----------



## fynxer (Aug 23, 2019)

GlacierNine said:


> There are over 900 companies in PCI-SIG and when that many businesses are involved, and rely on, the correct engineering of an upcoming standard, you can bet your ass that none of them are going to let a specification or a standard out of the door that they aren't able to practically guarantee will actually work and can actually be built.



Don't get it, what are you saying. You trying to say that PCIe 4.0 standard is not ready to be released.

Been ready for a while now, other companies already using it since a year back, only Intel dragging their asses.

Intel just thought they where safe from competition so why hurry developing cpus with PCIe 4.0, now they are paying for it.


----------



## r.h.p (Aug 23, 2019)

My two cents , these names are just getting better  coffee lake , comet lake- s , Icey lake , shiny river , …...

anyway they are still awesome cpus  but they cost a lot more than AMD


----------



## Fabio Bologna (Aug 23, 2019)

Raevenlord said:


> LGA 1200 package (with 9 more pins that the current LGA 1151).



So either the LGA 1200 is in reality a 1160 pins socket or there is an error


----------



## GlacierNine (Aug 23, 2019)

fynxer said:


> Don't get it, what are you saying. You trying to say that PCIe 4.0 standard is not ready to be released.
> 
> Been ready for a while now, other companies already using it since a year back, only Intel dragging their asses.
> 
> Intel just thought they where safe from competition so why hurry developing cpus with PCIe 4.0, now they are paying for it.


What @juiseman was implying with THEIR post, was that because Intel couldn't do 10nm on time, he didn't trust Intel to implement PCI-E 5.0 when they said they were going to. 

My point was that Intel controls when 10nm is ready. They screwed up by announcing it long before they were ready to ship it, and they got hurt by that.

But Intel doesn't control when PCI-E 5.0 is ready. PCI-SIG does that. And if Intel announces (or leaks) that they're going to implement PCI-E 5.0 in future, then that means they (and PCI-SIG) are both sure that PCI-E 5.0 will be ready to go at that time. 

Why am I sure of that? Because there are 900 other companies all involved in the decision making here, and the announcement of PCI-E 5.0 being ready to go, would have only happened after those 900 companies all agreed that PCI-E 5.0 was ready to launch and could be delivered on time.


----------



## Divide Overflow (Aug 23, 2019)

Intel is really embarrassing themselves.  This news only makes me more confident in my decision to go with a 3900X for my recent upgrade.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Aug 23, 2019)

GlacierNine said:


> What @juiseman was implying with THEIR post, was that because Intel couldn't do 10nm on time, he didn't trust Intel to implement PCI-E 5.0 when they said they were going to.
> 
> My point was that Intel controls when 10nm is ready. They screwed up by announcing it long before they were ready to ship it, and they got hurt by that.
> 
> ...


Intel does control their design of the Phy pciex controller and lane assignments , for all your assurances that intel are On their game they are not showing products to back that up Imho.
Their are Gpus and Ssds that can use pciex4 and owners who want to use it too.
Intel just sent those customers elsewhere for two years.


----------



## juiseman (Aug 23, 2019)

I guess I rustled some feathers; sorry

I be trollin', trollin', trollin' again


----------



## GlacierNine (Aug 23, 2019)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> Intel does control their design of the Phy pciex controller and lane assignments , for all your assurances that intel are On their game they are not showing products to back that up Imho.
> Their are Gpus and Ssds that can use pciex4 and owners who want to use it too.
> Intel just sent those customers elsewhere for two years.


All of this is true, but, again, @juiseman was implying that because Intel fucked up the engineering of 10nm, that intel would therefore be incapable of implementing PCI-E 5.0 on time.

Would you, @theoneandonlymrk, please like to explain to me, exactly how juiseman's point is true, bearing in mind that:

1 - designing a controller to implement an existing standard is nowhere near as complicated as building a new semiconductor manufacturing process from scratch
2 - PCI-SIG doesn't release standards that aren't ready to be implemented, whereas Intel *did* announce a 10nm technology that was nowhere near implementation.


----------



## TheGuruStud (Aug 23, 2019)

Gungar said:


> They already told us they will go directly to PCIE 5.0 in 2021.



So...another new platform to buy? Lol


----------



## Deleted member 158293 (Aug 23, 2019)

This release will need impressive Intel Marketing PR spin.  Sad part is just throwing enough money into Marketing will confuse consumers enough to still be quite profitable.


----------



## kapone32 (Aug 23, 2019)

yakk said:


> This release will need impressive Intel Marketing PR spin.  Sad part is just throwing enough money into Marketing will confuse consumers enough to still be quite profitable.



That's why they hired people from the online tech channels mostly editors.


----------



## TheLostSwede (Aug 23, 2019)

Gungar said:


> They already told us they will go directly to PCIE 5.0 in 2021.



Uhm, not. That's for servers and possibly some workstation platforms, not consumer products.



trparky said:


> *What the hell Intel?!?!*
> 
> Intel is really cheating us here. I'm not really pissed about the fact that it's still PCIe Gen 3 but more pissed about the limited number of lanes especially when AMD offers 24 of them. Again... *What the hell Intel?!?!*


Technically Intel has 20, as four is for the chipset interconnect, they just call them DMI.


----------



## trparky (Aug 23, 2019)

TheLostSwede said:


> Technically Intel has 20, as four is for the chipset interconnect, they just call them DMI.


True, but that's four PCIe lanes that are inaccessible to the user.


----------



## TheLostSwede (Aug 23, 2019)

trparky said:


> True, but that's four PCIe lanes that are inaccessible to the user.


Well, four of AMD's 24 lanes goes to the chipset as well...


----------



## Kissamies (Aug 23, 2019)

Who wouldn't have guessed that it's time for a new motherboard once again


----------



## kapone32 (Aug 23, 2019)

TheLostSwede said:


> Well, four of AMD's 24 lanes goes to the chipset as well...



I am thinking that we will still see the southbridge with some extra PCI_E lanes on the nest Intel platform


----------



## trparky (Aug 23, 2019)

OK, so here we have it.

*Intel:* Twenty PCIe lanes from the CPU, four of them connect to the chipset leaving the user with just *sixteen* PCIe lanes to work with to connect GPUs and NVMe SSDs.
*AMD: *Twenty-four PCIe lanes from the CPU, four of them connect to the chipset leaving the user with just *twenty* PCIe lanes to work with to connect GPUs and NVMe SSDs.

AMD gives you *four more* PCIe lanes. Now that may not seem like much but that's four more PCIe lanes to be dedicated to your system's boot NVMe SSD thus not leaving you hoping that your GPU doesn't bottleneck the NVMe SSD.



kapone32 said:


> I am thinking that we will still see the southbridge with some extra PCI_E lanes on the nest Intel platform


It doesn't matter, it's still shared and that sucks. You have to share the four PCIe lanes connecting to the chipset with things like SATA, Ethernet, USB, etc.

Yes, lane sharing does happen on AMD; this I understand.


----------



## Deleted member 158293 (Aug 23, 2019)

Yup, timing lines up when they probably were organizing the specs and launch...


----------



## kapone32 (Aug 23, 2019)

trparky said:


> OK, so here we have it.
> 
> *Intel:* Twenty PCIe lanes from the CPU, four of them connect to the chipset leaving the user with just *sixteen* PCIe lanes to work with to connect GPUs and NVMe SSDs.
> *AMD: *Twenty-four PCIe lanes from the CPU, four of them connect to the chipset leaving the user with just *twenty* PCIe lanes to work with to connect GPUs and NVMe SSDs.
> ...



This is the reason why I went with Threadripper and have no interest in AM4 or this new platform.


----------



## Tomgang (Aug 23, 2019)

I never thought the day would come that I would prefer AMD over intel. But that day has truly come today it seems.

TDP intel 125 watts and that is at base clock. Boost clock watt use will be a lot higher. AMD 7 NM ryzen even the 16 core is only 105 watt TDP. I am not sure about AMD TDP rating if that is for base or boost clock. But other says AMD TDP is for boost ratings. So 125 watt base clock for 10 cores vs. 105 watt (maybe boost clock rating) 16 cores for AMD. That's truly 14 NM vs. 7 NM right there for you. A clear win for AMD.

Intels still on PCIe gen 3 vs. AMD is on PCIe gen 4. AMD wins again.

Core counts. Intel 10 cores vs. AMD 16 cores. Well yeah AMD wins again.

Memory support: Intel still only 2666 MHz vs. AMD 3200 MHz out of box. Sure they can run with faster memory, but here we talk stock. AMD wins again.

Productivity well yeah I think AMD wins yet again.

Game performance this one Intel will win, but not by that much.

Sorry if I sounds like an AMD fanboy now, but intels releases has been a joke lately. I just feel AMD has been way more innovative. Specially with ryzen 3000. Intel has gone from overwhelming to underwhelming in just a few years. There 14 NM releases one after another has become a joke.

No douts that i stick with my choise of getting the Ryzen 9 3950X with a X570 mobo.


----------



## Octavean (Aug 23, 2019)

kapone32 said:


> This is the reason why I went with Threadripper and have no interest in AM4 or this new platform.



Indeed,......

And Threadripper pricing isn't half bad currently.  Microcenter has the 2920X for under $300 USD plus something like ~$30 off when bundled with a qualifying motherboard.  Threadripper 2950X is ~$599 wih the same $30 off offer. 

I'm trying to wait for the Threadripper refresh hopefully some time later this year (October???). I'd rather do that then just jump on the RyZen 9 3900X or 3950X.


----------



## thesmokingman (Aug 23, 2019)

kapone32 said:


> This is the reason why I went with Threadripper and have no interest in AM4 or this new platform.



That's good for you, but for the other 99% of users those 20 PCIE 4.0 lanes hits the sweet spot.

That said, really guys there's a debate about this 20 PCIE 4.0 vs 16 PCIE 3.0 lanes. The 4.0 has not only more lanes but twice the bandwidth.



Gungar said:


> They already told us they will go directly to PCIE 5.0 in 2021.



Lmao, they must be whipping Jim Keller to work overtime  times 10 for that to happen in time.


----------



## TheLostSwede (Aug 23, 2019)

thesmokingman said:


> Lmao, they must be whipping Jim Keller to work overtime  times 10 for that to happen in time.



I thought he was hired to help them with their new GPU, not CPUs...


----------



## kapone32 (Aug 23, 2019)

Octavean said:


> Indeed,......
> 
> And Threadripper pricing isn't half bad currently.  Microcenter has the 2920X for under $300 USD plus something like ~$30 off when bundled with a qualifying motherboard.  Threadripper 2950X is ~$599 wih the same $30 off offer.
> 
> I'm trying to wait for the Threadripper refresh hopefully some time later this year (October???). I'd rather do that then just jump on the RyZen 9 3900X or 3950X.



Exactly prices in Canada suck but the allure of threadripper is stronger than ever. The 1900X is currently $286.97 on Amazon. The 2920X for under $300 would be just short of $375 CAD. The 3900X lists for $699 CAD vs the 1920X for $349.99. To me that makes TR4 an academic choice. Yes the X570 boards have more but other than PCI_E 4.0 TR4 offers the user way more of everything else.



TheLostSwede said:


> I thought he was hired to help them with their new GPU, not CPUs...



No you are thinking of Ravi. Keller was hired away from Tesla after the 2nd gen of Ryzen launched


----------



## TheLostSwede (Aug 23, 2019)

kapone32 said:


> No you are thinking of Ravi. Keller was hired away from Tesla after the 2nd gen of Ryzen launched



_Keller isn’t saying what he’s working on yet, and maybe he won’t for years. 

Here we’re going to make the best possible server, the best possible client. We’re going to build great graphics. We’re participating heavily in the AI revolution. There’s a bunch of interesting problems there. We’re going to do some interesting stuff in that space. _








						Why rock star chip architect Jim Keller finally decided to work for Intel
					

Check out all the on-demand sessions from the Intelligent Security Summit here. In Silicon Valley, we take things like faster chips and Moore’s law for granted. It seems like progress is always inevitable, given the history of semiconductors and the accomplishments of chip makers such as Intel...




					venturebeat.com


----------



## kapone32 (Aug 23, 2019)

TheLostSwede said:


> _Keller isn’t saying what he’s working on yet, and maybe he won’t for years. _
> 
> 
> 
> ...



He is probably leading their move to 10nm and just like Ryzen keeping everything close to the vest.


----------



## Octavean (Aug 23, 2019)

One would expect that when the Threadripper refresh is launched the new motherboards will rival the features of the X570 boards.

In addition to that one can hope that a current 2000 series Threadripper will run fine on those new upcoming Threadripper boards.  I say this because its likely that 3000 series Threadripper processors will be considerably more expensive then their predecessors currently are.

I'd still probably go for a 12 core 3000 series Threadripper over the RyZen 3900X but I would have to see the performance numbers.

The one thing that is of increasingly less interest to me is what Intel has cooking.   Maybe if Intel lowers the price of a 28 Core Xeon W-3175X to that of a 24 Core Threadripper 2970WX it would spark some interest    Not a fair comparison to be sure but I can buy the Threadripper 2970WX for ~$799 USD whereas the Xeon W-3175X  would cost me somewhere near ~$3000 USD.


----------



## jaggerwild (Aug 23, 2019)

GlacierNine said:


> Please don't confuse Intel's personal manufacturing process upgrade, with their desire to utilise a general standard created and maintained by over 900 companies.
> 
> 10nm is:
> 1 - A manufacturing process
> ...



PCI-E is owned by Broadcom Inc . PCI-SIG is an "electronics industry consortium" responsible for specifying the Peripheral Component Interconnect, PCI-X, and PCI Express computer buses.


----------



## Vayra86 (Aug 23, 2019)

Intel:  "Look we may not have 10nm. But we dó have 10 cores!"

They also went over 9000. Maybe that's the selling point? As far as Im concerned they can keep this molten swiss cheese.



kapone32 said:


> He is probably leading their move to 10nm and just like Ryzen keeping everything close to the vest.



Interesting interview there, thx, didn't see that at the time.


----------



## thesmokingman (Aug 23, 2019)

TheLostSwede said:


> _Keller isn’t saying what he’s working on yet, and maybe he won’t for years. _[/URL]



You _KNOW_ why he's there right, especially since no one will say exactly what he's doing?


----------



## Darmok N Jalad (Aug 23, 2019)

Intel really is hurting in the process department. All their confidence still seems to lie in 14nm. Margins will be lousy on 10 core chips when AMD might be pushing out more than 16 cores by then. And I can’t see Intel squeezing any more clockspeed out of 14nm. It may even go backward with Sunnycove.


----------



## HD64G (Aug 23, 2019)

Their 10-core will pale compared to the 16-core monster of AMD. They try hard to remain relevant in desktop and server but Zen2 made on 7nm is very far for them to reach both in efficiency and performance.


----------



## thesmokingman (Aug 23, 2019)

HD64G said:


> Their 10-core will pale compared to the 16-core monster of AMD. They try hard to remain relevant in desktop and server but Zen2 made on 7nm is very far for them to reach both in efficiency and performance.



The other negative is that everything they sell from now until Keller finishes redesigning their whole architecture, especially moving away from monolithic design will be flawed security wise. It's stupendous when we put it in that context.


----------



## trparky (Aug 23, 2019)

And just think, AMD has Zen 3 coming out next year. AMD has their foot firmly planted on the gas pedal and they're showing no signs of letting up.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Aug 23, 2019)

Darmok N Jalad said:


> Intel really is hurting in the process department. All their confidence still seems to lie in 14nm. Margins will be lousy on 10 core chips when AMD might be pushing out more than 16 cores by then. And I can’t see Intel squeezing any more clockspeed out of 14nm. It may even go backward with Sunnycove.



Their arrogance is leading to their fall


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Aug 23, 2019)

GlacierNine said:


> All of this is true, but, again, @juiseman was implying that because Intel fucked up the engineering of 10nm, that intel would therefore be incapable of implementing PCI-E 5.0 on time.
> 
> Would you, @theoneandonlymrk, please like to explain to me, exactly how juiseman's point is true, bearing in mind that:
> 
> ...


Im not here to back his word on it ,i get you and him, I was just adding my opinion.
Which was that Intel's reluctance to advance their architecture is clear to see and detrimental to their profit line.
But why, ask that question, they have not even upped lane count though they are changing the designs ,adding cores , security and even increasing the Gpu capabilities.
Amd did a lot of work to get to zen, The pciex 4 support work should have been mirrored by intel, probably lead by, but no ,they NEED the die space to get anywhere near competitive on core counts which likely has constrained their design, I think 2022 is a pipe dream though because they're going to be too busy and constrained to bring pciex5 to consumer's.

ImHo it will take Intel's new Arch on 7nm euv to make room for that and I don't see that coming before 2023-4.

Just my opinion though feel free to disagree.


----------



## Dave65 (Aug 23, 2019)

This is just SAD  
It is like a new car dealer trying to sell a 14 year old car as new yelling hey, look what I can do


----------



## Vayra86 (Aug 23, 2019)

Dave65 said:


> This is just SAD
> It is like a new car dealer trying to sell a 14 year old car as new yelling hey, look what I can do



Maybe that's an idea. They have to push the nostalgia button! 'Remember Sandy Bridge'...

'Intel Vintage Series'
"For 10th gen, we went for a blast from the past, because hey, its all the same anyway!"


----------



## TheinsanegamerN (Aug 23, 2019)

eidairaman1 said:


> Their arrogance is leading to their fall


Personally, I LOVE it. 

For one thing, AMD's stocks will climb higher as they steal more and more of intel's shares, pay off debts, and increase R+D spending (which is great for me, I can finally sell my stocks and build a whole new gaming PC).

If AMD CPUs get enough marketshare, the sheer revenue increase should also mean RTG gets the much needed shot int he arm it needs to compete with nvidia again. We may yet see another HD5000 series of GPUs. 

And it makes intel compete again, which regardless of which CPU you have spells great news for consumers. 

The only thing I hope is intel takes another 2-3 years to get their heads on straight, perhaps get close to a 50% market share, so we have a few nice years of intense competition to enjoy, without being so incompetent that AMD gets complacent and rests on their laurels on the CPU side.


----------



## awesomesauce (Aug 23, 2019)

hopefully it will come with fixed security

nothing really new here, intel always need new chipset for new processor


----------



## eidairaman1 (Aug 23, 2019)

awesomesauce said:


> hopefully it will come with fixed security
> 
> nothing really new here, intel always need new chipset for new processor



It's just not a new chipset for new processor. It's a new socket and motherboard every 6 months to a year for them.


----------



## Tomgang (Aug 23, 2019)

For those talking PCIe gen 4 vs. gen 5. Here is a question for you.

If PCIe gen 4.0 requires a fan, does that mean Intel will bring out the chiller next round for PCIe gen 5?


----------



## Vya Domus (Aug 23, 2019)

So the rumors were true, no 10nm high-performance part for desktop anytime soon. I can no longer see how Intel is going to ever have the process lead again, the more they dedicate resources and products towards this old node the bigger the gap is going to get between them and AMD. Sunny Cove is literally their last bastion of performance, after that it's over, without a good node there is nothing more that they can squeeze. However, AMD will also be on another node by then, one that will provably work.


----------



## Wavetrex (Aug 23, 2019)

PCIe 4.0 to Intel: _Am I A Joke To You ?_


----------



## Deleted member 67555 (Aug 23, 2019)

This has happened before and it will happen again (creepy Cylon Basestar pilot in a slime tub skin job voice)
13 years ago but instead of socket it was chipset..
Pay no attention to AMD's FX-60...You heard about Conroe, right? But before we give you that check out this $1000 Pentium D 965 EE...
Same thing...same


----------



## puma99dk| (Aug 23, 2019)

No supports Intel is gonna have to spending more money on a new motherboard with a new CPU it's all in their tick tock system.


----------



## S4BRE (Aug 23, 2019)

I hope the board partners (ASUS, MSI, et al) at least make some decent mATX boards for this platform... the last few iterations have been quite lackluster at best, or missing from entire markets altogether (like the Maximus Gene series not being officially available in the US). Then again there aren't too many good boards on the AMD side either; tough spot to be in as an mATX fan  .


----------



## Manoa (Aug 23, 2019)

waste of cpu's, and waste of mobo's for them, intel is a waste


----------



## puma99dk| (Aug 23, 2019)

S4BRE said:


> I hope the board partners (ASUS, MSI, et al) at least make some decent mATX boards for this platform... the last few iterations have been quite lackluster at best, or missing from entire markets altogether (like the Maximus Gene series not being officially available in the US). Then again there aren't too many good boards on the AMD side either; tough spot to be in as an mATX fan  .



Don't get your hopes up even AsRock demoted their m-atx motherboards to their Pro series instead of the Extreme.

Their last really oc formula m-atx board was their Z170M OC Formula so if you are looking for a high-end m-atx there is only Asus' Gene board left if they choose to keep it bcs ram oc has moved to ITX.


----------



## Alexandrus (Aug 23, 2019)

"LGA 1200 package (with 9 more pins that the current LGA 1151)."

Serisouly ? Are you THAT bad at math ? What a joke, sorry, but this is elementary school algebra.
Just to clarify, for those "journalists" that don't really get it, but 1200-1151=49, NOT 9.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Aug 23, 2019)

Alexandrus said:


> "LGA 1200 package (with 9 more pins that the current LGA 1151)."
> 
> Serisouly ? Are you THAT bad at math ? What a joke, sorry, but this is elementary school algebra.
> Just to clarify, for those "journalists" that don't really get it, but 1200-1151=49, NOT 9.


So there Are 49 pins extra in use for deffinite, proven?.

Oh I Definitely think the socket will change but are they seriously telling us that when they specced up the 3xx boards they didn't expect to have to put more cores in a year later, I think they did but don't mind those chipset sales,  And yet again Need more power and ground pins, really.


----------



## dyonoctis (Aug 23, 2019)

Alexandrus said:


> "LGA 1200 package (with 9 more pins that the current LGA 1151)."
> 
> Serisouly ? Are you THAT bad at math ? What a joke, sorry, but this is elementary school algebra.
> Just to clarify, for those "journalists" that don't really get it, but 1200-1151=49, NOT 9.


It might just be a typo, you don't have to assassinate him like that. The article linked as the source does say that it's 49 more pins.


----------



## Metroid (Aug 24, 2019)

Thankgod I went ryzen 3xxx, now I will upgrade my platform only when ddr5 is required.


----------



## Aquinus (Aug 24, 2019)

trparky said:


> AMD gives you *four more* PCIe lanes. Now that may not seem like much but that's four more PCIe lanes to be dedicated to your system's boot NVMe SSD thus not leaving you hoping that your GPU doesn't bottleneck the NVMe SSD.


You know what also should seem like a lot? The X570 chipset having 4 PCIe *4.0* lanes, or the equivalent of 8 lanes of PCIe 3.0. Even with NVMe cards running at PCIe 3.0 off the chipset, twice as much bandwidth to the chipset is a big win. That means a single good NVMe card isn't going to even come close to saturating the bus with AMD and you probably could comfortably run two good NVMe cards off the chipset, but it could be really close with Intel with just a single NVMe card.

Let's put this in perspective though. I'm using a SBe 3930k which launched in Q4 of *2011* and I'm running a Vega 64 and NVMe card at PCIe 3.0.


----------



## voltage (Aug 24, 2019)

Oh no, we have to buy another mother board, oh no, its time to constantly complain... I say Big Deal... the 3 series has had its run, bring on the next. And while your at it Intel, hurry at something, and bring DDR5, and PCIE-5 out, soon. like in 2021 at the latest.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Aug 24, 2019)

voltage said:


> Oh no, we have to buy another mother board, oh no, its time to constantly complain... I say Big Deal... the 3 series has had its run, bring on the next. And while your at it Intel, hurry at something, and bring DDR5, and PCIE-5 out, soon. like in 2021 at the latest.



Silverspoon syndrom?

I remember skt 7/super 7 being the platform to go with, easy cpu upgrades, not having to rip the board out every year...

AM4/TR4 have taken its place.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Aug 24, 2019)

juiseman said:


> No PCIE 4.0?...hmmmm


Why does it matter? No device in existence currently requires the maximum bandwidth of PCIe 3, let alone PCIe 4. Your implied complaint is a shallow one.


----------



## Totally (Aug 24, 2019)

TheLostSwede said:


> _Keller isn’t saying what he’s working on yet, and maybe he won’t for years.
> 
> Here we’re going to make the best possible server, the best possible client. We’re going to build great graphics. We’re participating heavily in the AI revolution. There’s a bunch of interesting problems there. We’re going to do some interesting stuff in that space. _
> 
> ...



Probably referring to the gpu on the cpu die. He's always been a CPU guy and only a CPU guy.


----------



## Dave65 (Aug 24, 2019)

Frick said:


> Mah FPSess will explode!
> 
> 
> 
> Behind ... in games.



Yeah 5 fps really matter... Grow up!


----------



## lexluthermiester (Aug 24, 2019)

eidairaman1 said:


> Silverspoon syndrom?
> 
> I remember skt 7/super 7 being the platform to go with, easy cpu upgrades, not having to rip the board out every year...
> 
> AM4/TR4 have taken its place.


That's a fair assessment.


----------



## jaggerwild (Aug 24, 2019)

I hate to tell you all but there is built in back doors on ALL CPU'S, I find it funny though AMD fans have to post how great there CPU'S R! NO overclocking needed lolz! RYZEN FALL............Here you go AMD lolz! ENJOY!https://www.gamersnexus.net/news-pc/3500-hw-news-lots-of-insecure-bios-drivers-ryzen-3000-binning
OH  max boost clcok Nun will do the ADVERTISED 4.75MHz lolz!


----------



## eidairaman1 (Aug 24, 2019)

jaggerwild said:


> I hate to tell you all but there is built in back doors on ALL CPU'S, I find it funny though AMD fans have to post how great there CPU'S R! NO overclocking needed lolz! RYZEN FALL............Here you go AMD lolz! ENJOY!https://www.gamersnexus.net/news-pc/3500-hw-news-lots-of-insecure-bios-drivers-ryzen-3000-binning



Hiding under a rock I see.

including every major BIOS vendor, as well as hardware vendors like ASUS, Toshiba, NVIDIA, and Huawei. However, the widespread nature of these vulnerabilities highlights a more fundamental issue – all the vulnerable drivers we discovered have been certified by Microsoft. Since the presence of a vulnerable driver on a device can provide a user (or attacker) with improperly elevated privileges, we have engaged Microsoft to support solutions to better protect against this class of vulnerabilities, such as blacklisting known bad drivers,” says Eclypsium.
Eclypsium also notes that this issue affects all modern versions of Windows, and that there is currently “no universal mechanism to keep a Windows machine from loading one of these known bad drivers.”


----------



## lexluthermiester (Aug 24, 2019)

jaggerwild said:


> I hate to tell you all but there is built in back doors on ALL CPU'S, I find it funny though AMD fans have to post how great there CPU'S R! NO overclocking needed lolz! RYZEN FALL............Here you go AMD lolz! ENJOY!https://www.gamersnexus.net/news-pc/3500-hw-news-lots-of-insecure-bios-drivers-ryzen-3000-binning
> OH  max boost clcok Nun will do the ADVERTISED 4.75MHz lolz!


Um, I hate to break it to you, however all but one of those alleged "backdoors" REQUIRE physical access to the system to exploit. The one that doesn't is easily defeated by disabling all Remote Desktop services and features, assuming you haven't applied the patch from MS.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Aug 24, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> Um, I hate to break it to you, however all but one of those alleged "backdoors" REQUIRES physical access to the system to exploit. The one that doesn't is easily defeated by disabling all Remote Desktop services and features.



Remote services are meant to be used behind a firewall in an intranet, not really for a WLAN/internet.

Ive been disabling remote since WXP had it


----------



## player-x (Aug 24, 2019)

Crackong said:


> 10 cores 135W ?
> we knew the 9900k is 95W and eats > 170W when overclocking
> so this 10 core will eat 240W ?


Properly, but so what, that's only if you load up all the core's doing OCed video encoding or so, my 9700K@5GHz dose do that to, but if i am gaming my whole system 'only' uses 360W including a slight OCed 1080Ti.

The only important Nr is performance per Watt, and that ratio is still good with a Intel CPU, luckely AMD is doing a whole lot better in that department now to, whit the 3000 series.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Aug 24, 2019)

eidairaman1 said:


> Remote services are meant to be used behind a firewall in an intranet, not really for a WLAN/internet.
> 
> Ive been disabling remote since WXP had it


I take it a step further by deleting all three associated services instead of just disabling them, but that's just me.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Aug 24, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> I take it a step further by deleting all three associated services instead of just disabling them, but that's just me.



How do you remove them completely? Let me know So I can do it in 7 etc


----------



## lexluthermiester (Aug 24, 2019)

eidairaman1 said:


> How do you remove them completely? Let me know So I can do it in 7 etc


Open a CLI in admin and type in
SC delete ServiceNameHere
You should have already disabled the services you wish to delete.

*Word of caution!* Careful what you delete as restoring deleted services can be very difficult and in certain cases requires a fresh install of the OS.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Aug 24, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> Open a CLI in admin and type in
> SC delete ServiceNameHere
> You should have already disabled the services you wish to delete.



No no i know how to disable services via services.msc, before i do that though i uncheck it in gui means then use services.msc



lexluthermiester said:


> Open a CLI in admin and type in
> SC delete ServiceNameHere
> You should have already disabled the services you wish to delete.



I guess in dos it's easier to remove services than go through regedit.

I use cmd to force defrag my velociraptor.


----------



## Fatalfury (Aug 24, 2019)

i feel sorry for motherboard manafactures.
z370 and z390 too quick and now this...

huge losses and unsold inventory of mobo manufactures incoming..


----------



## eidairaman1 (Aug 24, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> Open a CLI in admin and type in
> SC delete ServiceNameHere
> You should have already disabled the services you wish to delete.
> 
> *Word of caution!* Careful what you delete as restoring deleted services can be very difficult and in certain cases requires a fresh install of the OS.



Oh I back up the registry, Also I use System Restore for drivers.


----------



## R0H1T (Aug 24, 2019)

Gungar said:


> They already told us they will go directly to PCIE 5.0 in 2021.


Not for consumer chips, no they didn't.


----------



## _Flare (Aug 24, 2019)

Skylake 5.0 on the grown up Broadwell process in 2020.


----------



## qoonik (Aug 24, 2019)

> AMD hi there


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 24, 2019)

Keep shooting yourself in the arse, Intel. I approve.


----------



## ypsylon (Aug 24, 2019)

At this moment in time Intel really lost the plot. Being loyal Blue customer for years I raise my hand and say it loud: Intel has nothing worth investing. Whatever segment you pick they are soundly beaten by AMD or ARM. Unless radical new architecture is released in 2020 AMD can easily dominate whole market by end of next year. 

This kind of stunt with yet another new socket for clearly inferior silicone vs closest competitor is obvious example of losing capacity to think logically.  Even cliche, shooting in the foot, backside and so on don't cut it anymore. There is nothing left to shoot. Now AMD has at least 2 years to milk the market.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Aug 24, 2019)

Octopuss said:


> Keep shooting yourself in the arse, Intel. I approve.





ypsylon said:


> At this moment in time Intel really lost the plot. Being loyal Blue customer for years I raise my hand and say it loud: Intel has nothing worth investing. Whatever segment you pick they are soundly beaten by AMD or ARM. Unless radical new architecture is released in 2020 AMD can easily dominate whole market by end of next year.
> 
> This kind of stunt with yet another new socket for clearly inferior silicone vs closest competitor is obvious example of losing capacity to think logically.  Even cliche, shooting in the foot, backside and so on don't cut it anymore. There is nothing left to shoot. Now AMD has at least 2 years to milk the market.


Wow, the fanboying never ends.


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 24, 2019)

What fanboying? Last time I had AMD-based PC was in 2003 with Athlon XP 1700 or something like that.

Let me specifically quote the part that made me post my comment:
*new, LGA 1200 package *

Only a mentally deficient person would be happy with Intel doing this crap over and over again.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Aug 24, 2019)

Octopuss said:


> Let me specifically quote the part that made me post my comment:
> *new, LGA 1200 package *


What's wrong with progress? I mean yeah it would great if Intel stuck with a socket for more than 2 generations of CPU's, but you don't own or run the company.


----------



## efikkan (Aug 24, 2019)

jaggerwild said:


> I hate to tell you all but there is built in back doors on ALL CPU'S, I find it funny though AMD fans have to post how great there CPU'S R!


If you're worried about backdoors, then there are bigger things to worry about. Windows had have one since the mid 90s, and EFI have a remote patching ability which can be used to add one.

I wouldn't worry about about AMD's BIOS flashing bug, or the various CPU bugs like Spectre, Meltdown and all their siblings. These are all bugs which require you to have direct access or even administrative privileges already (for the BIOS flash). Spectre, Meltdown etc. is basically irrelevant for end users, they require someone to execute their code on your CPU, find something useful, and then somehow extract that data out of your computer. So it basically needs at least one or two other vulnerabilities to even be theoretically feasible. Don't get me wrong; every bug should be addressed, but that doesn't mean it's a big deal for end users. Bugs like this is also why in IT all good security practices are done by doing security in layers, since bugs in applications/services/libraries, drivers, operating systems, BIOS/EFI or hardware level, or of course user error are bound to happen sooner or later.

These bugs are primarily a concern for cloud hosting providers, where any random virtual machine may execute the next code on the same CPU. In theory people could extract tiny fragments of memory, and by luck find something useful. But in practice, dumping a hypervisor's 100s of GB of memory at up to a few kB/s, finding and dumping the all-important (and constantly changing) page table of the VM and then assembling continuous application memory page by page, let's just say that the memory you're dumping will change at a much higher rate than your dumping it.

TLDR; You shouldn't care about these bugs. But Intel and AMD should learn from it.


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 24, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> What's wrong with progress? I mean yeah it would great if Intel stuck with a socket for more than 2 generations of CPU's, but you don't own or run the company.


Your arguments are like from an alternative universe or something. Globally, not just here.


----------



## FinneousPJ (Aug 24, 2019)

Well, I'm not impressed. Still waiting for Ryzen 4000 next year.


----------



## zlobby (Aug 24, 2019)

Oh, the comments already started? Anyhow...





P.S. I really hate the image size restriction...


----------



## Tomgang (Aug 24, 2019)

So intel the joke is on you, now prove me wrong. So far 14 NM since 2014 and still counting.


----------



## dont whant to set it"' (Aug 24, 2019)

It's still a warm comment section, don't have worry , be happy.


----------



## CityCultivator (Aug 24, 2019)

efikkan said:


> Spectre, Meltdown etc. is basically irrelevant for end users, they require someone to execute their code on your CPU, find something useful, and then somehow extract that data out of your computer.


Though most end-users are not worth to exploit, all end users who browse the Web execute other people code.
Browsers do know this and did some work to further mitigate the risk of Spectre.
But running other people's code is done everyday. Ad networks and other such third parties are examples of code end users do not explicitly consent for, but do run.


----------



## Tomgang (Aug 24, 2019)

dont whant to set it"' said:


> It's still a warm comment section, don't have worry , be happy.



Well as an intel man overall. I am worried for Intels near future CPU´s. But even i this round will go AMD ryzen 3000 as intel´s offer is just not apealing to me and i am even starts joking on intel. That shut say a lot after i have been voting for intel the past 10-15 years. But the latest few years, Intel has been a joke. Not only with the 14 NM, but some of there releases before like
Intel® Core™ i5-7640X and Intel® Core™ i7-7740X on there HEDT platform, there prices on there HEDT CPU is a joke as well. There latest laptop releases on 10 and 14 NM cpu´s is gonna make a confusion or consumers as well. For not to forget there rushed lauch of 14, 16 ad 18 core cpu with there 7000 serie cpu´s. Intel lately has been a big mess. While AMD winning ground, intel is losing ground. That makes me sad, but it is the hard real story and you tell me to not worry...


----------



## efikkan (Aug 24, 2019)

Moderators, please clean up all the trolling posts in this thread.



CityCultivator said:


> Though most end-users are not worth to exploit, all end users who browse the Web execute other people code.
> Browsers do know this and did some work to further mitigate the risk of Spectre.
> But running other people's code is done everyday. Ad networks and other such third parties are examples of code end users do not explicitly consent for, but do run.


What you can achieve in lab environments, and what you can achieve in practice are two different things. There are even proof-of-concept examples where people have guessed the encryption key from a laptop by analyzing the electromagnetic noise and knowing exactly which instruction the CPU is executing at the same time. But in real life, attacks like this are just a theoretical possibility.

Browsers do indirectly run untrusted code on your CPU when interpreting the JavaScript from web pages. If someone were actually able to effectively dump targeted memory addresses this way, it would be of course very bad. But you have to remember that the vulnerabilities we are talking about here are not a bypass of security, it's information leakage with very sensitive timing. You may have to do many attempts to read a single memory address, and when it's read you can't be really sure if you got the right few bytes or not, so assembling anything from this will be not only time consuming, but be in many cases impossible since you can't verify that something is correct, unless it's plain text.

Low-level timing attacks should not be possible through JavaScript, but just to be sure Chrome and Firefox are patched to make it even harder, so anything that causes system calls is intentionally unpredictable.

I think you should worry about more relevant things, like having an updated and patched router with no known vulnerabilities.


----------



## Vya Domus (Aug 24, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> What's wrong with progress?



New CPUs are progress, new sockets are not, they are a hindrance.

There are two possibilities here, either Intel are inept and can't make future proof sockets or they are intentionally changing sockets for some other reason beyond a technical one. None of these two options could be called progress.


----------



## CityCultivator (Aug 24, 2019)

efikkan said:


> What you can achieve in lab environments, and what you can achieve in practice are two different things. There are even proof-of-concept examples where people have guessed the encryption key from a laptop by analyzing the electromagnetic noise and knowing exactly which instruction the CPU is executing at the same time. But in real life, attacks like this are just a theoretical possibility.
> 
> Browsers do indirectly run untrusted code on your CPU when interpreting the JavaScript from web pages. If someone were actually able to effectively dump targeted memory addresses this way, it would be of course very bad. But you have to remember that the vulnerabilities we are talking about here are not a bypass of security, it's information leakage with very sensitive timing. You may have to do many attempts to read a single memory address, and when it's read you can't be really sure if you got the right few bytes or not, so assembling anything from this will be not only time consuming, but be in many cases impossible since you can't verify that something is correct, unless it's plain text.
> 
> ...


Though this is fully exact, running random people's code is something most end users do; it's not something that a select few does. You underlined "their code on your CPU", so I'm pointing that that is no rare situation.
Still, random attacks will try to break browsers security first before trying Spectre attack.


----------



## ZoneDymo (Aug 24, 2019)

Vya Domus said:


> New CPUs are progress, new sockets are not, they are a hindrance.



right? I dont even get it, if you need more pins...why not make socket 2066 the standard...


----------



## eidairaman1 (Aug 24, 2019)

Vya Domus said:


> New CPUs are progress, new sockets are not, they are a hindrance.
> 
> There are two possibilities here, either Intel are inept and can't make future proof sockets or they are intentionally changing sockets for some other reason beyond a technical one. None of these two options could be called progress.



Its additional money to force end users to switch.


----------



## efikkan (Aug 24, 2019)

CityCultivator said:


> Though this is fully exact, running random people's code is something most end users do; it's not something that a select few does. You underlined "their code on your CPU", so I'm pointing that that is no rare situation.
> Still, random attacks will try to break browsers security first before trying Spectre attack.


Well, JavaScript is an interpreted language, and while it ends up as machine code running on your CPU, it's up to the JavaScript engine of your browser to generate this machine code. There have been hundreds if not thousands of nasty JavaScript engine bugs over the years, including many leading to accessing things outside the sandboxing. These are logical bugs where security is bypassed, and is of course a serious problem.

But as I said the CPU bugs we are talking about here are not bypassing security, but an information leak leveraged by a timing attack. Timing attacks become much harder when you can't directly control the machine code. These attacks work by tricking the privileged kernel code to read the data you want into a register, and then somehow accessing the CPU register from your unprivileged code within a few clock cycles later before something else overwrites it. I don't have time to teach you machine code, but in essence, CPU registers are mostly overwritten every few instructions, and high-level languages like JavaScript don't have any control over them, and just a few lines of high-level code may take hundreds of clock cycles to execute. So the only way to achieve this would require you to exploit undefined behavior of the JavaScript engine and somehow generate machine code where you end up reading a specific CPU register you are not supposed to at just the right time.
*Edit:* To make matters harder, modern JavaScript engines executes most functions async, so timing anything outside a few lines of dense code is very hard.


----------



## Hardware Geek (Aug 24, 2019)

kapone32 said:


> This is the reason why I went with Threadripper and have no interest in AM4 or this new platform.


Precisely this. I'm planning to get the next threadripper.  I want to be able to put a ton of SSD storage with the ability to add more as needed and not have to rely on slower sata speeds.


----------



## jaggerwild (Aug 24, 2019)

Tomgang said:


> Well as an intel man overall. I am worried for Intels near future CPU´s. But even i this round will go AMD ryzen 3000 as intel´s offer is just not apealing to me and i am even starts joking on intel. That shut say a lot after i have been voting for intel the past 10-15 years. But the latest few years, Intel has been a joke. Not only with the 14 NM, but some of there releases before like
> Intel® Core™ i5-7640X and Intel® Core™ i7-7740X on there HEDT platform, there prices on there HEDT CPU is a joke as well. There latest laptop releases on 10 and 14 NM cpu´s is gonna make a confusion or consumers as well. For not to forget there rushed lauch of 14, 16 ad 18 core cpu with there 7000 serie cpu´s. Intel lately has been a big mess. While AMD winning ground, intel is losing ground. That makes me sad, but it is the hard real story and you tell me to not worry...



 dude you got an 11 year old system, Smmh!


----------



## Tomgang (Aug 24, 2019)

jaggerwild said:


> dude you got an 11 year old system, Smmh!



Yeah i am well aware of that. Thats also why its time for an upgrade. My original plan is to get a intel 10 NM CPU, but given Intels 10 Nm problems and i am tired of waiting. I will be upgrading to Ryzen 3000 (waiting for ryzen 9 3950X to come out). Intels 14 NM release one after another is a joke and i will not finance Intels old 14 NM tech after so many years. They have used 14 NM for way to long.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Aug 24, 2019)

Vya Domus said:


> New CPUs are progress, new sockets are not, they are a hindrance.


Opinion not supported by historical evidence.


Vya Domus said:


> There are two possibilities here, either Intel are inept and can't make future proof sockets or they are intentionally changing sockets for some other reason beyond a technical one. None of these two options could be called progress.


Opinion clearly based on feelings and bias instead of objectivity and fact.


efikkan said:


> Moderators, please clean up all the trolling posts in this thread.


I'll second this.


----------



## phanbuey (Aug 24, 2019)

efikkan said:


> *Edit:* To make matters harder, modern JavaScript engines executes most functions async, so timing anything outside a few lines of dense code is very hard.



+1 -  This is one of the trickiest things to understand about node.js/js and how it executes.  You have to structure your code around async/await or promises but even then, anyone who successfully pulls of a real life hack using this exploit :


----------



## Vya Domus (Aug 24, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> Opinion not supported by historical evidence.



Fair enough, could you present said historical evidence against this ?



lexluthermiester said:


> Opinion clearly based on feelings



If you need to put out a new socket, is not logical to assume that this happens either because of some technical limitation or because you seek to artificially kill existing platforms ? Explain how this is untrue.

You know, by just saying that I am wrong without providing any explanations, you're the one that looks 100% biased and driven solely by feelings. Don't shot yourself in the foot.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Aug 24, 2019)

Vya Domus said:


> Fair enough, could you present said historical evidence against this ?


How about the release of every CPU generation made by AMD or Intel for the last two decades?


Vya Domus said:


> If you need to put out a new socket, is not logical to assume that this happens either because of some technical limitation or because you seek to artificially kill existing platforms ? Explain how this is untrue.


I don't need to. Those are assumptions made by YOU. They are factless, meritless accusations.


Vya Domus said:


> You know, by just saying that I am wrong without providing any explanations, you're the one that looks 100% biased and driven solely by feelings. Don't shot yourself in the foot.


Except that YOU made the accusations. YOU need to prove up, not me or even Intel. 

If Intel is releasing a new line on CPU's that needs more data lines, requiring the need for a new socket type, that is their business plan. If you don't like it, don't buy it. Whining about your dis-satisfaction will not change their minds and assuming them of shady dealing without a shred of logic or evidence to back it up only makes YOU look like a fool.


----------



## Vya Domus (Aug 24, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> I don't need to.



Then don't reply if you feel like you shouldn't explain yourself, or are incapable of doing so depending on the situation. This is not how this works, if you a problem with something, you state what you want to state and back up your reasoning. If you don't I have to assume you simply can't and I see no point in continuing the discussion. 

If I made certain remarks and you feel like I haven't provided any proof then you don't get to say that I am wrong and claim that the burden of proof is still on me. Seriously, I would expect this level of argumentation from a 4th grader not a grown adult.


----------



## Wavetrex (Aug 24, 2019)

Most attacks on the internet are in the shape of:

_Click here to download video of {insert female celebrity name here} naked !_

And what do you know, it works !
CPU is vulnerable indeed... the CPU inside user's head.


----------



## Th3pwn3r (Aug 24, 2019)

Ah well, sometimes news isn't really news at all. Intel just likes to make new junk I guess, necessary or not they make new stuff...

Maybe it's good and they'll drive their own prices down on the stuff they started selling...last week.


----------



## TheMadDutchDude (Aug 24, 2019)

Ahhh, another new socket. Well, to be fair, we've had our two "generations" on the same socket, so it's time for a new one. 

I wonder if it will still ultimately be the same socket but with different pin outs, just like 1151 on Z170/Z270 was going to Z370/Z390. It'll be interesting to see what Roman comes up with for this.


----------



## yotano211 (Aug 24, 2019)

My retirement account thanks all for buying AMD processors.


----------



## ZoneDymo (Aug 24, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> How about the release of every CPU generation made by AMD or Intel for the last two decades?
> 
> I don't need to. Those are assumptions made by YOU. They are factless, meritless accusations.
> 
> ...



and how does that proof new sockets are needed? AMD is doing fine improving while sticking to socket AM4.
Intel made plenty of processors on good old 775 that showed plenty of progress.

Soo you are wrong.

and on the last part, if that is truly your vision on how this all works then...why are you here? why are you trying to silence people with the argument that everyone should be silent while not being silent yourself so you can spread that message....
really you are just asking to have a comment section removed and lets be honest, you are only doing that because you are sad people arnt happy with the "progress" Intel seems to be making.
Just...take a look at yourself man.

(Also the EU has put down a pretty hefty fine on Intel for shady dealing so idk what evidence you want, heck you will probably just deny that as well as just being greedy EU or something. Just as long as your image of the world stays intact right? for what reason I dont know though, you are not Intel, you are not linked with the company, nothing bad the company does reflects poorly on you so why are you so hellbend on this fanboy act?)


----------



## bogmali (Aug 24, 2019)

Deleted a lot of low quality posts...if you happen to notice your post/s being gone, it means I removed it and consider it as a warning


----------



## K!NG_OF- NOTH1NG (Aug 24, 2019)

Frick said:


> Mah FPSess will explode!
> 
> 
> 
> Behind ... in games.


Which, when you look at every modern game and essentially every game engine being built and coded on Intel CPU's that shouldnt be surprising.Although, unless you have 144, 240hz monitor therenothing more youre gonna gain.  The AMD CPU's are the more impressive hardware and the more powerful. Even surpassing intel in a lot of single threaded workloads. I'm still on my 8700K. (I bought at launch and lucked out with it being able to do 5.2ghz daily) but I'm switching over to AMD if not with the 7 refresh, then with the release after. Not to mention using intel hardware at this point is a security hazard.


----------



## dj-electric (Aug 24, 2019)

AMD good intel bad, now in theaters.


----------



## efikkan (Aug 24, 2019)

K!NG_OF- NOTH1NG said:


> Which, when you look at every modern game and essentially every game engine being built and coded on Intel CPU's that shouldnt be surprising.


That's nonsense. There is nothing to optimize for, they use the same ISA. Intel just happens to have a better CPU front-end and some lower latencies.

The good news for gaming is that the CPU only needs to be _fast enough_ not to bottleneck the GPU. Intel is already past the point where current games gain any substantial average FPS, and while Intel will still hold the records, Zen 2 is getting close enough for most gamers.



K!NG_OF- NOTH1NG said:


> I'm still on my 8700K. (I bought at launch and lucked out with it being able to do 5.2ghz daily) but I'm switching over to AMD if not with the 7 refresh, then with the release after.


Well, if your use case is gaming, there is no reason to replace your current CPU until it causes problems for you. An i7-8700K is going to be plenty for gaming for several years, unless you're doing heavy stream encoding etc. while playing. Save your money until you _need_ an upgrade.



K!NG_OF- NOTH1NG said:


> Not to mention using intel hardware at this point is a security hazard.


No more than AMD.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Aug 24, 2019)

Vya Domus said:


> Then don't reply if you feel like you shouldn't explain yourself, or are incapable of doing so depending on the situation. This is not how this works, if you a problem with something, you state what you want to state and back up your reasoning. If you don't I have to assume you simply can't and I see no point in continuing the discussion.


The problem with your logic is that you are the one making accusations that Intel is doing something nefarious with the release of this new line of CPU's and sockets instead of simply making a technological advance. That means that YOU are the one that needs to provide evidence(which you are clearly not going to or you would have by now) because that's how that works. "Prove up or shut up" is what I believe the term is. Please do so.


ZoneDymo said:


> Soo you are wrong.


See above. I am not and I don't need to do anything at all. Neither does Intel. Their making an advance, just like AMD did with the AM4 socket. It's a technological advance(are you people sensing a theme yet?) that supports another technological advance. The people bemoaning the new socket seem to forget that you don't own Intel, you not the engineers involved with the product advancement and you do not get to decide how the technology advances. See how that works?


----------



## Tartaros (Aug 24, 2019)

Vya Domus said:


> There are two possibilities here, either Intel are inept and can't make future proof sockets or they are intentionally changing sockets for some other reason beyond a technical one. None of these two options could be called progress.



The answer relies on socket 775. The last 2 strokes of netburst and the entire core 2 lineup on a single socket. You could have bought a cheap 945 mobo and have it for years before the cpu line up was dead, now imagine all the mobo makers giving heat to intel because cheap bastards who dared to be money wise almost didn't spent a penny for their cheap but effective pcs.

But with all the shit we are having on intel's part lately we could get some reparations. Come on, my 8700k was hit hard by the fucking exploits, at least a discount or an exchange with the fixes on hardware would be nice on their part, they have been amassing money like the little greedy goblins they are for more than 10 years and that would help me economically and them in PR. But no, let's roll another cliffhanger of the 10nm with a different socket, don't dare to think you can save your mobo.

I should have gone with amd this one.


----------



## Vya Domus (Aug 24, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> making accusations that Intel is doing something nefarious



I did not, you are making stuff up. I simply stated they may have other reasons besides technical ones and I was always adamant to mention this is a possibility not a certainty. Point me to the comment where I claim with absolute conviction that *they must be doing some nefarious*.

As I said, don't let your feelings get the better of you. I know you're here to protect your favorite company and that my remarks made you uncomfortable but at the very least don't put words in my mouth.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Aug 24, 2019)

Vya Domus said:


> I did not, you are making stuff up.


Anyone who can read and understand context can see what you directly implied.


Vya Domus said:


> I simply stated they may have other reasons besides technical ones and I was always adamant to mention this is a possibility not a certainty.


And here's you admitting it, in the very same statement no less.


Vya Domus said:


> As I said, don't let your feelings get the better of you.


Ok.


Vya Domus said:


> I know you're here to protect your favorite company and that my remarks made you uncomfortable but at the very least don't put words in my mouth.


Oh yes, because you know me soo well. 

We're done here. If you think Intel is doing something "iffy" with this new product release, prove it. Otherwise..


----------



## Vya Domus (Aug 24, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> And here's you admitting it, in the very same statement no less.



Because stating a possibility must mean I am also making an accusation ? I must say, you are really revolutionizing the English language here and the meaning of it's words. And there you were talking about people who can read and understand context, you're a walking oxymoron buddy.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Aug 25, 2019)

Vya Domus said:


> Because stating a possibility must mean I am also making an accusation ?


That's the general idea. But more importantly it was the vocabulary you used earlier in the thread.


Vya Domus said:


> I must say, you are really revolutionizing the English language here and the meaning of it's words.


Ad Hominem hyperbole.


Vya Domus said:


> And there you were talking about people who can read and understand context, you're a walking oxymoron buddy.


Here's an idea, go back to your earlier statements and re-read, stepping outside your own head while you do it.

We're now off topic and I'm out.


----------



## Vya Domus (Aug 25, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> Here's an idea, go back to your earlier statements and re-read



I am definitely not the one who needs to do the reading here. English classes and dictionaries, those are needed here and not for me. No matter how much you'd like it to be the case you can't make stuff up on the spot and reinterpret things until they fit with your narrative, that's just straight up denial.

Or rather, you can, but it's worthless, as is any other attempt to question my understanding afterwards. I warned you to not shot yourself in the foot, you insisted to do just that.



lexluthermiester said:


> I'm out.



About time.


----------



## Nkd (Aug 25, 2019)

lol Q1 2020, and then AMD is suppose to release zen 3 mid next year as drop in upgrade? Hmm. 

Plus is intel including a chiller with that CPU? I can only imagine the heat coming out of it given how hot the 9900ks already got.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Aug 25, 2019)

Vya Domus said:


> About time.


Like I said...


lexluthermiester said:


> "Prove up or shut up" is what I believe the term is. Please do so.


...still waiting..


----------



## Vya Domus (Aug 25, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> ...still waiting..



And you shall wait indeed until you can properly understand what is being said. So don't get ahead of yourself asking for proofs of any kind when you showed you couldn't even comprehend what was going on.


----------



## chodaboy19 (Aug 25, 2019)

Even if they stay PCIe 3.0, intel should increase the number of lanes at minimum... It's yet another generation that I will skip while my aging 4770K tries its best to keep my wallet shut... lol


----------



## 1d10t (Aug 25, 2019)

I don't see any new logo for i9,sooo...
- these new CPU  "up to 10 core" are i7 ?
- perform slightly better than 9900K with 2 extra cores, so no room left for i9 in the mainstream?
- send back i9 to HEDT?
- such a short lifespan for best gaming CPU.

Congratulation Intel, you now entering full bulldozer mode


----------



## dj-electric (Aug 25, 2019)

1d10t said:


> I don't see any new logo for i9,sooo...
> - these new CPU  "up to 10 core" are i7 ?
> - perform slightly better than 9900K with 2 extra cores, so no room left for i9 in the mainstream?
> - send back i9 to HEDT?
> ...



or maybe this picture is just a part of Comet-Lake-S PR photos? maybe?
(yes, it is)

Stop taking everything you see in media too literally. for f&*k's sake.


----------



## dyonoctis (Aug 25, 2019)

To be fair, with the way that Intel managed their socket, it's easy to think that they keep the number of pins on the edge on purpose, and isn't at all interested in making a platform that would work on several generation. They went from 1556 to 1555 to 1550 but then realised again that they needed one more pin and 1551 was born. Now they want to make a 10 core cpu, wich apparently needs 49 more pins, when AMD got enough leeway with their 1331 pins to make a transition from 8 core to 16 cores.


----------



## 1d10t (Aug 25, 2019)

dj-electric said:


> or maybe this picture is just a part of Comet-Lake-S PR photos? maybe?
> (yes, it is)
> Stop taking everything you see in media too literally. for f&*k's sake.



Indeed, conceivably. I handle leaks, rumour as its suppose to be, assumption.
So new badge actually for Ice Lake, no love for these Comet Lakes ? Are you not baffled by these stunts, marketing 2 different uArch under the same 10th Gen flag? 
Either there's no i9 from Ice Lake or i9 from Comet Lake are on par with i7 Ice Lake


----------



## 1d10t (Aug 25, 2019)

jaggerwild said:


> Go enjoy your non overclockable Ryzen Fail! 4.75mhz lolz!



Actually I am 
No need to fiddling all days, delidding hundred dollar CPU and voiding warranty in process, put extra dollar for cooling, mambo jambo with "AVX offset", just plugged in let auto do the rest. I don't need more headache while running virtual machine.
Just come into my mind, if i7 8700K 6c12t had 3.7Ghz base, i7 9700K 8c 8t had 3.6Ghz base, could that be future i7 Comet Lake would be 10c10t 3.5Ghz base?


----------



## RainingTacco (Aug 25, 2019)

From a consumer standpoint Intel should allow at least two generations[no refresh!] on same chipset, maybe even three, like the AMD did with ryzen series. That's a sweet spot of upgrade possibility with still bringing an up to date chipsets.


----------



## efikkan (Aug 25, 2019)

I really hope Comet Lake will regain some base clocks. I believe the reclining base clocks is a result of increasing core count while retaining TDP and node, and the node refinements haven't been enough to keep the base clocks up.

There have been engineering samples of Cascade Lake-X running at 4.0 GHz base, and I do believe it would be possible for Comet Lake-S as well if the cores are a little realigned.

Personally, I don't think the mainstream market needs more than 8 cores for now, even though AMD offers 12 and soon 16 cores. Making faster cores which scales well across fewer cores are more important for most real workloads. i9-9900K today struggles with throttling due to thermal density. With some tweaks, increased TDP to 125W, a sustained 4 GHz under multithreaded AVX load and sustained ~4.7 GHz under non-AVX loads could yield a ~5-10% performance increase without going beyond 5 GHz max boost, and that's without changing the architecture.


----------



## ZoneDymo (Aug 25, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> snip
> 
> See above. I am not and I don't need to do anything at all. Neither does Intel. Their making an advance, just like AMD did with the AM4 socket. It's a technological advance(are you people sensing a theme yet?) that supports another technological advance. The people bemoaning the new socket seem to forget that you don't own Intel, you not the engineers involved with the product advancement and you do not get to decide how the technology advances. See how that works?



Honestly man.... I dont know what has gotten into you, maybe you have always been this way.
I dont mean to insult but the back and forths you are having in this thread, its like you are 12 years old, again, really not trying to insult here.

Take a step back and read it all again.


Now I dont really expect you to read all this, in fact I expect you to reply maybe with a retort on the "12 year old" thing and thats it, but Im going to try anyway, if only for the others here.

We dont own/control Intel, no.
If we did we would not be "bemoaning" as we would just change what they are doing....
Bemoaning obviously comes from a place of lesser power.

However:
This is a tech website, you know this.
This is the comment section of said tech website, you know this.
We are here to comment on the news the website reports, you know this.
These comments are often opinions we share about choices a company makes, you know this.
These opinions might be positive or negative towards the company, you know this.

In this case, I and many others here feel its ridiculous for Intel to (among other things) release yet another new socket, we are allowed to feel that way and express that as that is the sole purpose of the comment section, you know this.
We, the consumers Intel is making these products for, are not happy with this choice, we feel its not needed (again, what is wrong with just adapted socket 2066 that already exists?) and are probably not going to buy an Intel cpu for our next upgrade if they keep this up.
Its best for both us and the company to be aware of that.

Now Im not going to repeat what I typed in the previous comment I dont think you even read entirely, much like this one probably, but I will say again, your defense towards Intel is just really strange.
Its not objective, its not playing devils advocate, its more like a mother who does not really understand what is going on, trying to protect her child or something.


----------



## DeathtoGnomes (Aug 25, 2019)

new socket, why am i not surprised? and without other "advancements",  again a real shocker,  no doubt saving those additions for a rainy day.

There's a party in your pants all you Intel Fanbois from around the globe over this.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Aug 25, 2019)

ZoneDymo said:


> Honestly man.... I dont know what has gotten into you, maybe you have always been this way.


 I'm not the problem here.


ZoneDymo said:


> I dont mean to insult but the back and forths you are having in this thread, its like you are 12 years old, again, really not trying to insult here.


You don't mean to insult, but you're going to anyway?


ZoneDymo said:


> Take a step back and read it all again.


Way ahead of you..


ZoneDymo said:


> Now I dont really expect you to read all this, in fact I expect you to reply maybe with a retort on the "12 year old" thing and thats it, but Im going to try anyway, if only for the others here.


OH, I'm with you. So far that 12 year old thing is going well.


ZoneDymo said:


> We dont own/control Intel, no.
> If we did we would not be "bemoaning" as we would just change what they are doing....
> Bemoaning obviously comes from a place of *zero* power.


Fixed that for you.


ZoneDymo said:


> However:
> This is a tech website, you know this.
> This is the comment section of said tech website, you know this.


With you so far, yes.


ZoneDymo said:


> We are here to comment on the news the website reports, you know this.
> These comments are often opinions we share about choices a company makes, you know this.


Commenting is one thing. Whining and bemoaning technological advances because YOU don't understand them is completely another.


ZoneDymo said:


> These opinions might be positive or negative towards the company, you know this.


Hmm..


ZoneDymo said:


> In this case, I and many others here feel its ridiculous for Intel to (among other things) release yet another new socket, we are allowed to feel that way and express that as that is the sole purpose of the comment section, you know this.


Feelings on this matter are as irrelevant as they are misinformed. Intel does not listen to the feelings of the general public. They care about providing a product line that is a measurable advancement from their previous product line. A new socket allows for that advance. This is how technology advancement works, has always worked and will continue to work.


ZoneDymo said:


> We, the consumers Intel is making these products for, are not happy with this choice


Don't like it? That's your choice, but feelings aren't going to change anything.


ZoneDymo said:


> we feel its not needed


That is because the need for the extra 49 pins is not understood by you.


ZoneDymo said:


> (again, what is wrong with just adapted socket 2066 that already exists?)


Different product line and if you want one, go buy it. No one is stopping you.


ZoneDymo said:


> and are probably not going to buy an Intel cpu for our next upgrade if they keep this up.


And there it is, your true voice. Vote with your wallet.


ZoneDymo said:


> Its best for both us and the company to be aware of that.


Surely, Intel will take note...


ZoneDymo said:


> Now Im not going to repeat what I typed in the previous comment I dont think you even read entirely, much like this one probably,


How we doing on that, eh?


ZoneDymo said:


> but I will say again, your defense towards Intel is just really strange.


I'm not defending Intel any more or less than I would defend AMD(or anyone else). No one whined and complained when AMD introduced socket AM4 and TR4. So why are you all complaining about a socket 1200 from Intel? Maybe instead of barking at me for pointing a commonly known attribute of the computer technology industry you all should go do some research and actually look at how often AMD/Intel have released new sockets. Just throwing it out there.


----------



## DeathtoGnomes (Aug 25, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> I'm not defending Intel any more or less than I would defend AMD(or anyone else). No one whined and complained when AMD introduced socket AM4 and TR4. So why are you all complaining about a socket 1200 from Intel? Maybe instead of barking at me for pointing a commonly known attribute of the computer technology industry you all should go do some research and actually look at how often AMD/Intel have released new sockets. Just throwing it out there.


so, uhh, how loooonnnggggg has it been since Intel's last socket? 6 months? 9 months? I forgot what I had for lunch yesterday.


----------



## dyonoctis (Aug 25, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> I'm not defending Intel any more or less than I would defend AMD(or anyone else). No one whined and complained when AMD introduced socket AM4 and TR4. So why are you all complaining about a socket 1200 from Intel? Maybe instead of barking at me for pointing a commonly known attribute of the computer technology industry you all should go do some research and actually look at how often AMD/Intel have released new sockets. Just throwing it out there.


In the case of am4/tr4, am3+ was not only a very old platform using old standards, AM4/TR4 was also accompanied by the launch of cpu that had nothing to do with the old product and was noticeably better on all aspect.

Here it looks like a quick fix for something Intel wasn't prepared for...
I guess people are just tired of yet another 14nm++++ refinement, and want sunny cove already. I feel that this beomoning wouldn't have happened if comet lake was something really new.


----------



## DeathtoGnomes (Aug 25, 2019)

dyonoctis said:


> In the case of am4/tr4, am3+ was not only a very old platform using old standards, AM4/TR4 it was also accompanied by the launch of cpu that had nothing to do with the old product and was noticeably better on all aspect.
> 
> Here it looks like a quick fix for something Intel wasn't prepared for...


what  old standards here? if they work as needed, its not old.


----------



## dyonoctis (Aug 25, 2019)

DeathtoGnomes said:


> what  old standards here? if they work as needed, its not old.


The lack of nvme, pci 3.0, native usb 3.0 support... am3+ was stuck in the past for a long time, I doubt that people would have wanted to stay on their old boards even if there were somehow  compatible with ryzen.


----------



## 64K (Aug 25, 2019)

It doesn't bother me in the slightest if Intel changed the socket every month. I build a new rig around every 4 years and buy a new CPU and MOBO. What Intel does in between doesn't affect me at all.

If you want to upgrade every time Intel drops a new CPU then I guess you have reason to be displeased.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Aug 25, 2019)

DeathtoGnomes said:


> so, uhh, how loooonnnggggg has it been since Intel's last socket? 6 months? 9 months? I forgot what I had for lunch yesterday.


Here's a good place to look;








						CPU socket - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				



Socket 1151 has been going for 5 years. It had one major transition, from DDR3 to DDR4.
The longest AMD has gone between new socket introductions is 3 years(Socket A -> Socket 754)

So does anyone want to continue whining about Intel making a new advancement?


----------



## Vya Domus (Aug 25, 2019)

Yeah because we all know that the socket format is the only thing that matters, pin outs, CPU compatibility, features, etc mean jack shit. The 4th grader level arguments continue.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Aug 25, 2019)

Vya Domus said:


> Yeah because we all know that the socket format is the only thing that matters, pin outs, CPU compatibility, features, etc *mean jack shit. The 4th grader level arguments continue.*


Are you done? Or do we need to ask the mods to jump in again?


----------



## Vya Domus (Aug 25, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> Are you done? Or do we need to ask the mods to jump in again?



Did you recognize yourself in that description or what ? Sorry buddy, that's your business if you thought that's the case not mine. Don't reply if you're done, it's as simple as that, I didn't address you in anyway.


----------



## ZoneDymo (Aug 25, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> snip



Let me ask you this, why are you whining about our whining?
Why are you on the one hand so convinced intel does not care for its consumers (and somehow you see this as a good thing) and on the other hand are trying to stop us from complaining?
If you feel its pointless because Intel wont listen, ok...move on? you understand what a comment section is for, if you dont like it, then dont be here.
Not to be impolite but nobody needs you here and certainly not because you come here telling us what we should or should not have a problem with and acting like we dont know what we are talking about but you somehow do.

I already mentioned, intel had a long stretch with socket 775, after that it changed all the time and iirc even some same sockets arent really the same.

Meanwhile AMD has made socket AM4 and is just going forward with that.
That, we feel, is better and again, Intel can do whatever they want, we just wont be interested in their products.
AND with your roll eyes stuff, clearly you feel we are just a minority that have no influence on the massive sales Intel will make, then AGAIN, why are you here...why are you so hellbent on this with broken arguments when you are so convinced we, the people you are fighting so hard against, do not matter?


----------



## 1d10t (Aug 25, 2019)

efikkan said:


> I really hope Comet Lake will regain some base clocks. I believe the reclining base clocks is a result of increasing core count while retaining TDP and node, and the node refinements haven't been enough to keep the base clocks up.
> 
> There have been engineering samples of Cascade Lake-X running at 4.0 GHz base, and I do believe it would be possible for Comet Lake-S as well if the cores are a little realigned.
> 
> Personally, I don't think the mainstream market needs more than 8 cores for now, even though AMD offers 12 and soon 16 cores. Making faster cores which scales well across fewer cores are more important for most real workloads. i9-9900K today struggles with throttling due to thermal density. With some tweaks, increased TDP to 125W, a sustained 4 GHz under multithreaded AVX load and sustained ~4.7 GHz under non-AVX loads could yield a ~5-10% performance increase without going beyond 5 GHz max boost, and that's without changing the architecture.



I recall earlier these year there's some leaks, or sort of , a 4Ghz based with fewer core and whooping TDP. Unless Intel managed to refined that, I'm highly doubt they can pull even 3.8Ghz based on 10 core 
While I partially agree on that "mainstream market needs more than 8 cores for now", is it nice to have an option? I mean in dark ages you need 2 rigs for same task, now it can be done faster in just 1 rig. 12 core on mainstream is a god send for us "budget professional"  
On core part, I believe we already reaching peak single core MIPS, don't see any big leap since Athlon64 FX-53, thus adding more core or another threads is more feasible.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Aug 25, 2019)

@Vya Domus @ZoneDymo 
See PM.


----------



## efikkan (Aug 25, 2019)

64K said:


> It doesn't bother me in the slightest if Intel changed the socket every month. I build a new rig around every 4 years and buy a new CPU and MOBO. What Intel does in between doesn't affect me at all.
> 
> If you want to upgrade every time Intel drops a new CPU then I guess you have reason to be displeased.


New sockets is mainly a "problem" for the selection of motherboards. Probably around ~1% of PC builders ever upgrade to a new CPU within the same architecture, and there are very few reasons to do so.

I think the ideal would be to have one socket per architecture. I think Intel switches a little too often, but AMD switches too rarely and promises backwards and forward compatibility they can't deliver on.
Almost no motherboard maker offer proper support for any motherboard beyond 2 years anyway.



1d10t said:


> While I partially agree on that "mainstream market needs more than 8 cores for now", is it nice to have an option? I mean in dark ages you need 2 rigs for same task, now it can be done faster in just 1 rig. 12 core on mainstream is a god send for us "budget professional"


Options are always good, especially when user's needs are different 
But the fact remains, that for many non-synthetic workstation tasks a faster 8-core will often beat a 12-core. A good workstation CPU needs to strike the balance between core speed and core count.


----------



## DeathtoGnomes (Aug 25, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> Here's a good place to look;
> 
> 
> 
> ...


you mean 2066 from 2017 right? ( its right in that chart. ) We are counting ALL cpu/sockets combos, not just PC, that would be biased dont ya think?


----------



## lexluthermiester (Aug 25, 2019)

DeathtoGnomes said:


> you mean 2066 from 2017 right? ( its right in that chart. ) We are counting ALL cpu/sockets combos, not just PC, that would be biased dont ya think?


I was implying more Socket 1151 that Socket 1200 is replacing. In the mainstream desktop arena, it been since 2015 with the DDR4 revision in 2017. So it kinda depends on your perspective.


----------



## Rares (Aug 25, 2019)

Just: LOL ! Intel is pathetic !


----------



## Ahhzz (Aug 25, 2019)

Stay on topic. If someone has an issue with a member, take it to PM's and keep it civil, ignore them, or bring it to a mod.


----------



## Turmania (Aug 25, 2019)

Newest cpu's from both companies mislead us consumers in terms of tdp. A 65W said to be CPU consumes double that when boosts without overclocking it.now if Intel does bring 135w cpu and it stays within that range at stock boosts i see no problem with it in fact I think it is the ethical way.


----------



## bogmali (Aug 25, 2019)

Ahhzz said:


> Stay on topic. If someone has an issue with a member, take it to PM's and keep it civil, ignore them, or bring it to a mod.



I guess my earlier warning went for nothing......thread bans and perma bans issued to those that have one thing in mind-to troll and bait


----------



## goodeedidid (Aug 25, 2019)

People are so silly, 98% of you don't need in any way PCIe 4, and people are getting angry over this.


----------



## Smartcom5 (Aug 25, 2019)

GlacierNine said:


> […]
> My point was that Intel controls when 10nm is ready. They screwed up by announcing it long before they were ready to ship it, and they got hurt by that.
> 
> But Intel doesn't control when PCI-E 5.0 is ready. PCI-SIG does that. And if Intel announces (or leaks) that they're going to implement PCI-E 5.0 in future, then that means they (and PCI-SIG) are both sure that PCI-E 5.0 will be ready to go at that time.
> ...


I still don't get it and I'm same as confused as @fynxer here. I just don't get the correlation you're trying to make.
Where's the connection between Intel announcing to feature PCI-E 5.0 anytime in the future _and_ Intel releasing actual hardware supporting even _at least_ its predecessor?

Are you implying the standard _isn't_ there yet or _wouldn't_ be finished? _PCI-E *4*.0_ was completed already in '17!
And we even have had the surprising situation that PCI-E 5.0 even already saw completion well prior to its actual predecessor reaching the consumer-market. PCI-E 4.0 is complete and ready to manufacture since a while now – and so is PCI-E 5.0. So what are you trying to say?



GlacierNine said:


> All of this is true, but, again, @juiseman was implying that because Intel fucked up the engineering of 10nm, that intel would therefore be incapable of implementing PCI-E 5.0 on time.


To be honest and being fair towards their (recent) history with announcements and sporting no actual products following them afterwards, I would doubt that too.
For instance, I wouldn't want to bet even a single dime that Intel is bringing actual hardware supporting anything beyond PCI-E 3.0 prior to nVidia feature PCI-E 4.0 on their cards.



GlacierNine said:


> Would you, @theoneandonlymrk, please like to explain to me, exactly how juiseman's point is true, bearing in mind that:
> 
> 1 - designing a controller to implement an existing standard is nowhere near as complicated as building a new semiconductor manufacturing process from scratch
> 2 - PCI-SIG doesn't release standards that aren't ready to be implemented, whereas Intel *did* announce a 10nm technology that was nowhere near implementation.


Well, given how Intel managed to fuck up virtually everything the last couple of years (not just after Ryzen but even well before that) …

There's no proper competition-products against anything Ryzen from them with a _new_ approach instead of just warming up their age-old Core-µArch for the next half of a decade. Like getting flexible and sport some bright new ideas and approaches, like get a new mask and just copying AMD with their design. Or even this as some quick-and-dirty-approach. No will to change of their old, filthy corporate habits and behaviour but relying on age-old grey-ish to straight-out illegal practices to stay _trying_ to stay atop at all costs.

See, they've literally fucked up _every_ entry into another lucrative market since the Sandy bridge-era. Their second trying to enter the mobile-market to create a sound sales market for their low-cost Atoms (and competing against ARM) was a flaming desaster from start to finish. Their wireless approach with 3G, 4G and 5G was also a flamign desaster from start to finish. … and given how much they pumped into their dedicated graphics-department to establish any dominance in graphics – and eventually had to end up to just compulsively bound it to other products by implement is as some embedded graphics as their iGPU (Hint: no-one would've bought or featured their graphics within their products unless they were focred to do). Well … Thing is, you can go on and on with so many examples.

Thing is, hey were just plain unable to bring any greater innovative _competitive_ products whatsoever (apart from their CoreµArch; and given Meltdown and alike, even that was cheated on) to enter a new market on their own – like AMD did by bringing Threadripper which wasn't at any road-map nor planned just a few month prior to hit the market with an actual product (and _re_-define the HEDT-space altogether in one sweep).

So having said that, I would dare to say that chances are that they're also will fuck up that too, yes.
Thing is, *their corporate character hasn't changed* *a bit* since the Pentium (4) times and they (just as always) trying to get dirty if there's some competitor which came up with a innovative product they weren't prepared for (Hint: They never were and most likely never will be). They ain't innovating _at all_.

Smart


----------



## trparky (Aug 25, 2019)

goodeedidid said:


> People are so silly, 98% of you don't need in any way PCIe 4, and people are getting angry over this.


Exactly, I don't need PCIe4; I just want a few more lanes to be dedicated to things like NVMe SSDs. I'm not asking for much. Right?


----------



## jaggerwild (Aug 25, 2019)

1d10t said:


> Actually I am
> No need to fiddling all days, delidding hundred dollar CPU and voiding warranty in process, put extra dollar for cooling, mambo jambo with "AVX offset", just plugged in let auto do the rest. I don't need more headache while running virtual machine.
> Just come into my mind, if i7 8700K 6c12t had 3.7Ghz base, i7 9700K 8c 8t had 3.6Ghz base, could that be future i7 Comet Lake would be 10c10t 3.5Ghz base?





I noticed you don't post any screen shoot, with your 1 core boost. Go ahead post a screen shoot of the awesome "advertised" 4.75 mhz that your Cheery Picked CPU can do!   Probably cause u can't hummm........Did you join cause yer getting paid to flame threads?


----------



## EsaT (Aug 25, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> Socket 1151 has been going for 5 years.


Only after hacking and modding BIOS to circumvent Intel's artificial limitations devised for making more money from selling new chipsets for rebranded CPUs.

Not much of people runnning "9th" gens on "6th" gen mobos...








						Core i9-9900K Achieves 5.50 GHz Overclock on a Z170 Chipset Motherboard
					

It is already established that the incompatibility between Intel's 8th and 9th generation Core socket LGA1151 processors and Intel's 100-series and 200-series chipset motherboards is artificial, and that with the right BIOS modding, you can get the newer processors to work on the older...




					www.techpowerup.com
				




And now there's third socket for Skylake arch...

And I'm sure Intel will come out with yet another socket when DDR5 comes out.
Only question is will they do that great innovation by pulling one pin out or sticking in one new pin.
Or cheap out and add incompatibility in firmware...



goodeedidid said:


> People are so silly, 98% of you don't need in any way PCIe 4, and people are getting angry over this.


While little use at the moment, what about three or four years from now?
I think we both agree that good eight (/+) core CPU will easily last that time.
And pretty sure that at that point for example GPUs are quite more advanced than currently.


----------



## Crackong (Aug 26, 2019)

Wow this post is HOT.

Personal opinion,
I don't really care about LGA1200 because the mass majority almost concluded why Intel keep changing sockets / chipsets.
Just factor that into the cost and , well , cost / performance tells everything.

My concern is, how much thermal density this 10-core has ?
Are we finally getting a portable nuclear reactor ?


----------



## Midland Dog (Aug 26, 2019)

LGA 1200 package (with 9 more pins that the current LGA 1151)  do you even math?


----------



## phanbuey (Aug 26, 2019)

Crackong said:


> Wow this post is HOT.
> 
> Personal opinion,
> I don't really care about LGA1200 because the mass majority almost concluded why Intel keep changing sockets / chipsets.
> ...



for real... a 7900x for the masses.

As long as the performance is there and it can handle 32GB across 4 dimms at max OC im sold tho so...

then again i might wait out 10/7nm from intel or the zen 3.  With my current OC im sitting at 3700x performance, and I don't need 12 cores so this 2 year old chip in my system looks like it can hang out for another year or so. 

Honestly not a great time for CPU buying for the foreseeable unless you're dropping in a 3900x or replacing an old ryzen.


----------



## 1d10t (Aug 26, 2019)

efikkan said:


> Options are always good, especially when user's needs are different
> But the fact remains, that for many non-synthetic workstation tasks a faster 8-core will often beat a 12-core. A good workstation CPU needs to strike the balance between core speed and core count.



Remember when Intel introduced hyper-threading and multi core to counter Athon64 FX-53? We already reaching pinnacle of MIPS on single core. Bumping clocks and adding performance doesn't instantly translate to "better" performance. What i'm trying to say is 2 core =/ 2 x 1 core, or 2Ghz =/ 2 x 1Ghz, on top of that 1 core multi threading =/ 2 core. Faster core are doable, by reducing some instruction set  or making greater L1. Former solution was less attractive as software development grows and more demanding instruction needed and keeping legacy to ensure backward compability ( but seriously, who still use MMX or SSE these days? ). While latter solution would be expensive as greater L1 require more pipelines so bigger fetch and decode is needed.But what do I know, Intel had Jim Keller, he hasn't show his magic yet, it would be great feat in the dawn of monolithic CPU 



jaggerwild said:


> I noticed you don't post any screen shoot, with your 1 core boost. Go ahead post a screen shoot of the awesome "advertised" 4.75 mhz that your Cheery Picked CPU can do!   Probably cause u can't hummm........Did you join cause yer getting paid to flame threads?



Why should I bragging my puny CPU? You already knew better, or should  I say hotter and inefficient ? 
Funny, i was gonna asked the same thing to other member who posted here 

========

While "majority" wouldn't mind about socket change, a gentle reminder,this is still Kaby Lake...erm...Comet Lake uArch. Intel yet implement their module core with omni path and PCH on die with Ice Lake uArch, so prepare for another socket change


----------



## Crackong (Aug 26, 2019)

phanbuey said:


> for real... a 7900x for the masses.



7900x uses a different architecture and the die is muccccccch larger.
The die size of 7900x is 322 mm² 
Source : https://www.anandtech.com/show/1155...-core-i9-7900x-i7-7820x-and-i7-7800x-tested/6

The die sizes of 8700k and 9900k are 150 mm² and 174 mm²  respectively. 
Source : https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/intel/microarchitectures/coffee_lake

Now , if this comet lake 10 core is a re-re-refresh.
The die size is expected to be 200mm²

The 7900x is a 140W TDP Chip , 140 / 322 = 0.435W / mm²
10 core comet lake is 135W , 135 / 200 = 0.675W / mm²

So in-terms of heat density, 10 core comet lake is 55% more than an 7900x.

Then , thermal conduction is directly proportional to surface area.
So the 10 core comet lake has 38% less surface area than the 7900x
Means the rate of conduction of 10 core comet lake is at least 38% lower than the 7900x

So this thing has 55% more heat density and 38% less thermal conductivity than a regular old 7900x .

Maybe change to "Nuclear Inside" .


----------



## DeathtoGnomes (Aug 26, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> I was implying more Socket 1151 that Socket 1200 is replacing. In the mainstream desktop arena, it been since 2015 with the DDR4 revision in 2017. So it kinda depends on your perspective.


yes I was referring to intel as a whole, 'perspectively' speaking.


----------



## E-curbi (Aug 26, 2019)

I thought these (2) slides leaked 6weeks ago in the middle of July.









						Rumor Outlines Intel Comet Lake Features, Specifications, and Launch Window
					

Rumors surface about the long-awaited Comet Lake architecture from Intel.




					www.tomshardware.com
				




Why are they suddenly NEWS again?
No fault to TPU - Every tech news group is running this story as "brand new".  

*Did the story simply move from rumor status to leak status?* 


...looks like I'm late to the party - again.


----------



## JB_Gamer (Aug 26, 2019)

Could next generation be the "Death Lake"


----------



## _JP_ (Aug 27, 2019)

I was heaving a sort of déja vu...


----------



## Chrispy_ (Aug 27, 2019)

r.h.p said:


> My two cents , these names are just getting better  coffee lake , comet lake- s , Icey lake , shiny river , …...
> 
> anyway they are still awesome cpus  but they cost a lot more than AMD



I'm not sure they will be awesome CPUs actually. Intel's *only* advantage at 14nm is gaming, where more than about 6-8 threads becomes pointless. Comet lake doesn't really bring anything new to the table other than more cores that games don't use - so a 9700K will still be the default gaming chip for those who only care about gaming - specifically when not streaming because then AMD wins all the benchmarks, not just most of them.

If you want new process and new architecture, Comet Lake isn't it. It's still 14nm and it's still just a minor tweak of the same Skylake architecture from four years ago - with the downside of having to shell out for a new motherboard.

What Intel need to do to compete is sort out their process tech so that they can compete with TSMC, because Ryzen on TSMC's 7nm at 65W (actual) is matching Intel at 125W (claimed), 180W actual. It's kind of embarassing for Big Blue.


----------



## kapone32 (Aug 27, 2019)

Chrispy_ said:


> I'm not sure they will be awesome CPUs actually. Intel's *only* advantage at 14nm is gaming, where more than about 6-8 threads becomes pointless. Comet lake doesn't really bring anything new to the table other than more cores that games don't use - so a 9700K will still be the default gaming chip for those who only care about gaming - specifically when not streaming because then AMD wins all the benchmarks, not just most of them.
> 
> If you want new process and new architecture, Comet Lake isn't it. It's still 14nm and it's still just a minor tweak of the same Skylake architecture from four years ago - with the downside of having to shell out for a new motherboard.
> 
> What Intel need to do to compete is sort out their process tech so that they can compete with TSMC, because Ryzen on TSMC's 7nm at 65W (actual) is matching Intel at 125W (claimed), 180W actual. It's kind of embarassing for Big Blue.




I am no way worried about Intel. They have the money, resources and people to come back up into first place. As most of us know they have hired Keller and Raja who were responsible for Ryzen and Polaris. They have also been very quiet on 10nm for the desktop. Not because they have no response but because they are working on a proper response. Just like how Nvidia made refinements on the RTX series after the reviews stated that AMD's refinements (anti lag etc) made their GPUs better.


----------



## Chrispy_ (Aug 27, 2019)

Nobody is worried about Intel. They're like Apple in that they can screw up for an entire decade without running out of money and their enormous marketing/media/incentives budgets will allow them to keep shifting inferior products without any issues whatsoever. Look at desktop/laptop sales from the big OEM brands like HP/Dell/Lenovo - or every Macbook sold in the last 2 years with a defective-by-design keyboard. Intel and Apple are _fine_. Zen2 may be winning the performance/value/sales race at the moment but that won't stop Intel and Apple from making more _profit_.

There was that article at the beginning of August covered by several sites about the EU's largest retailer publishing sales statistics. One single SKU (Ryzen 3700X, and that's not even AMD's most popular Ryzen) outsold the _entire Intel product stack_. Very few people want to pay 50% more for a 4-year old tech with serious power and heat issues and up to 25% less performance in multi-threaded productivity tasks. For AMD to gain the upper hand, they have to do this year-after-year across all market segments. That means laptop APUs, their entire GPU product stack, their drivers and platform support, their developer tools, compilers and developer support.

I want AMD to bring full-spectrum competition back to the CPU and GPU industry as much as as the next person, but Zen2 alone isn't enough.


----------



## svan71 (Aug 28, 2019)

Gungar said:


> They already told us they will go directly to PCIE 5.0 in 2021.



I told intel GET BENT !


----------



## Vlada011 (Aug 30, 2019)

Hahahaa PCI-E 3.0.
Intel inferiority continue.

People repeat No improvements in gaming with PCI-E 4.0.
Actually owners of X299 and Z390 and new Intel chipset are in worse position then I with X99 and Gen 2 Chipset.
I could reach Gen 3 speed with M.2 connected on CPU. They can't reach Gen 4 speed of AMD platform on any way.
Buying Intel is like investing in SATA II platform when SATA III was available.
When SATA III show up motherboard vendors immediately adopt him on new revision of X58 motherboards.
Now PCI-E Interface is important for speed of OS, read, write, copy same as SATA Controller before several years.
Don't forget that when you invest huge money in high end platform. Race in M.2 Gen 4.0 will start very soon.
SATA Ports are important only for storage, everything else depend from PCI-E Interface.


----------



## phanbuey (Aug 30, 2019)

The only hope they have is if socket 1200 supports the future 10nm chips or no one will buy this.

Why would I want a 10 core 14nm+++++ thats 10% more (maybe) performance than the 9900k and the whole platform will be obsolete in 12 months?.

Yikes.


----------



## ToxicTaZ (Sep 2, 2019)

Crackong said:


> 10 cores 135W ?
> we knew the 9900k is 95W and eats > 170W when overclocking
> so this 10 core will eat 240W ?



9900KS is 95w based and with workload 195w around. 

You're 3900X is almost 400 Watts gaming! Then again it's two 6 cores CPUs working together...


----------



## Crackong (Sep 2, 2019)

ToxicTaZ said:


> 9900KS is 95w based and with workload 195w around.
> 
> You're 3900X is almost 400 Watts gaming! Then again it's two 6 cores CPUs working together...



You are joking right?

That is *Whole System Power Consumption*


----------



## GlacierNine (Sep 2, 2019)

ToxicTaZ said:


> 9900KS is 95w based and with workload 195w around.
> 
> You're 3900X is almost 400 Watts gaming! Then again it's two 6 cores CPUs working together...


That's whole system power consumption. You can tell by the fact the chart *BEGINS with an i3 8300 pulling 348 watts.*


----------



## Chrispy_ (Sep 3, 2019)

MMmmm, where can I buy me one of these 348W i3 chips? It gets cold here in winter.


----------



## Vlada011 (Sep 5, 2019)

I would like to see how will be interest for this platform.
14nm... AMD is 7nm. PCI-E 3.0, AMD PCI-E 4.0.


----------



## goodeedidid (Sep 8, 2019)

Gungar said:


> They already told us they will go directly to PCIE 5.0 in 2021.


That makes no sense.


----------



## svan71 (Sep 12, 2019)

Gungar said:


> They already told us they will go directly to PCIE 5.0 in 2021.



I'll wait, they said they were going to 10nm in 2015 so they are good with these promises.


----------



## ToxicTaZ (Sep 12, 2019)

goodeedidid said:


> That makes no sense.



Makes a lot ot of sense! 

First off Q4 2021 is Intel release date for their 7nm tech..... (equivalent TSMC 3nm) so leaping over the competition with 7nm and PCIe 5.0 makes sense. 

BTW 
PCIe 6.0 is ready! 









						PCI-SIG Announces PCIe 6.0 Specification
					

PCI-SIG today announced that PCI Express (PCIe ) 6.0 technology will double the data rate to 64 GT/s while maintaining backwards compatibility with previous generations and delivering power efficiency and cost-effective performance. The PCIe 6.0 specification is actively targeted for release in...




					www.techpowerup.com
				




Personally they should go right to PCIe 6.0 my opinion... As PCIe 5.0 is already becoming old specs as they are working on PCIe 7.0 now.....


----------



## lexluthermiester (Sep 13, 2019)

ToxicTaZ said:


> Makes a lot ot of sense!
> 
> First off Q4 2021 is Intel release date for their 7nm tech..... (equivalent TSMC 3nm) so leaping over the competition with 7nm and PCIe 5.0 makes sense.
> 
> ...


No, he's right, doesn't make sense at all.. Nothing currently on the market can saturate the PCIe3 bus, let alone PCIe4, or 5 or 6. Jumping ahead will be very expensive and benefit no one.


----------



## Gungar (Sep 13, 2019)

svan71 said:


> I'll wait, they said they were going to 10nm in 2015 so they are good with these promises.



Oh yeah the famous quote, they failed one thing and now they aren't trust worthy. Sad human.


----------



## Chrispy_ (Sep 13, 2019)

Gungar said:


> Oh yeah the famous quote, they failed one thing and now they aren't trust worthy. Sad human.


Well they also promised the same thing in 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019. And although 10nm is *technically* here, the overwhelming majority of their current production is still on 14++++++++


----------



## ToxicTaZ (Sep 13, 2019)

Chrispy_ said:


> Well they also promised the same thing in 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019. And although 10nm is *technically* here, the overwhelming majority of their current production is still on 14++++++++



Guess It doesn't matter when you still have the fastest 8 cores CPU on Earth!

9900KS nothing touches it!

Let the benchmarks begin!


----------



## eterniti (Sep 16, 2019)

> no PCIE 4



optane is much more useful than pcie 4, if you use large optane disks for caching you are golden with professional applications and simulations, and even games
for now the pcie 4 is making things worse in therms of an additional fan prone to failures, I agree I'd rather have it , but the expensive optane is better


----------



## Keviny Oliveira (Sep 16, 2019)

R.I.P Intel, AMD current is better

lol


----------



## trparky (Sep 17, 2019)

Keviny Oliveira said:


> R.I.P Intel, AMD current is better


For those on a budget, yes... AMD does win over Intel.


----------



## ToxicTaZ (Sep 17, 2019)

Keviny Oliveira said:


> R.I.P Intel, AMD current is better
> 
> lol



Lol

Yet AMD has nothing to go against the 9900KS

Let the Gaming Benchmarks begin!


----------



## lexluthermiester (Sep 17, 2019)

Keviny Oliveira said:


> R.I.P Intel, AMD current is better
> 
> lol





ToxicTaZ said:


> Lol
> 
> Yet AMD has nothing to go against the 9900KS
> 
> Let the Gaming Benchmarks begin!


What is with these people? I mean, how bad do people need to shovel that kind of nonsense?


----------



## trparky (Sep 17, 2019)

ToxicTaZ said:


> Yet AMD has nothing to go against the 9900KS
> 
> Let the Gaming Benchmarks begin!


It doesn't matter for those of us who can't afford the "Intel Tax". We can drool all we want over Intel benchmarks but it doesn't matter at the end of the day if you can't afford to buy a 9900KS.

For instance, at my local Microcenter store a 9900K is nearly $470, plus tax that's nearly $510. To have the processor alone be nearly half the cost of your build is insane.


----------



## ToxicTaZ (Sep 17, 2019)

trparky said:


> It doesn't matter for those of us who can't afford the "Intel Tax". We can drool all we want over Intel benchmarks but it doesn't matter at the end of the day if you can't afford to buy a 9900KS.
> 
> For instance, at my local Microcenter store a 9900K is nearly $470, plus tax that's nearly $510. To have the processor alone be nearly half the cost of your build is insane.



Lol 
3900X is selling for $699. In Canada how is that cheap?? The 3950X is even more!!!.... Let's not talk about Threadripper 3....

Don't know what kind of PC Gaming RIG you're trying to build but good advice don't bother! You can't even buy a new Smartphone for the money you're talking about let alone a new gaming RIG PC is 3x the price of the top phones that are out now! iPhone 11, Pixel 4, Note 10, ROG Phone 2 etc etc.... 

What's the point of running jug fest?

Do yourself a favor and get the 9900KS and have a kick ass CPU that actually performs gaming performance.

9900KS is very soon let the benchmarks begin!

CometLake also going to be very interesting with 10 cores 5GHz even faster than the 9900KS just blows my mind.


----------



## trparky (Sep 17, 2019)

Who says you need that kind of high-end AMD processor? You don’t need a 3900X when a 3600X is more than capable and won’t break your bank account.

It sounds to me like you have a lot of disposable income. Congratulations, many of us don’t. Most of us have to... just get by with what we can afford. If that means that we won’t be experiencing the highest most awesome gaming experience, so be it.

If one has to sacrifice in the food department just to get the best gaming experience, you need to get your priorities straightened out.


----------



## Crackong (Sep 17, 2019)

ToxicTaZ said:


> Lol
> 3900X is selling for $699. In Canada how is that cheap?? The 3950X is even more!!!.... Let's not talk about Threadripper 3....
> 
> Don't know what kind of PC Gaming RIG you're trying to build but good advice don't bother! You can't even buy a new Smartphone for the money you're talking about let alone a new gaming RIG PC is 3x the price of the top phones that are out now! iPhone 11, Pixel 4, Note 10, ROG Phone 2 etc etc....
> ...



1. 3900x is $499 , 3950x is $749
2. You can't play PC games on a phone, done.
3. 10 core CometLake is nothing but a nuclear reactor, check my calculation at #175
4. I am pretty sure the 10 core CometLake will be beaten by Intel's own 9900k(s) in terms of gaming, because it will thermal throttle and struggle to reach 5GHz all-core.


----------



## ToxicTaZ (Sep 17, 2019)

Huh?
1. Like I said before many times before the 3900X is $699.






						Searching for '3900X' - Memory Express Inc.
					






					www.memoryexpress.com
				




2. Who said anything about playing PC games on their phone? I pointed out that people are trying to build gaming RIGs the same price as a new top phone.

3. "Nuclear Reactor"? Time for you to go back to school. Want to see a nuclear reactor? Run any AMD 3000 series @5GHz and see what happens. 

4. 9900KS already blows away all AMD 3000 series in gaining performance! Cometlake will be even faster!


----------



## GlacierNine (Sep 17, 2019)

I don't get it. Why exactly are you pouring so much time and effort into praising Intel here? 

They're a multibillion dollar corporation. They're not your friend. They don't care about you. Neither does AMD. All they're here to do is take your money.

I'd really like to know exactly why you feel obligated to defend them any time someone thinks that another product might be more suitable for their purposes.


----------



## Crackong (Sep 17, 2019)

ToxicTaZ said:


> Huh?
> 1. Like I said before many times before the 3900X is $699.
> 
> 
> ...



1.  https://pcpartpicker.com/product/tLCD4D/amd-ryzen-9-3900x-36-ghz-12-core-processor-100-100000023box , $499 / $529 

2. Then why are you mentioning ?

3. 135W in a 200mm²  package is nuclear, DO THE MATH Genius. 

4. 9900ks in gaming will blow 10 core Cometlake out of nowhere, Guaranteed.


----------



## kapone32 (Sep 17, 2019)

ToxicTaZ said:


> Huh?
> 1. Like I said before many times before the 3900X is $699.
> 
> 
> ...



1. So Gaming is the be all and end all of CPUs and that 10% at 1080P is great? To me it is a total waste to buy anything over the 3700X for gaming (at 1080P). You seem to be uber confident about a product that has not even launched yet. Neither do we know what this will cost. The 3900X is at that price because it beats the 9900K and probably the 9900KS in everything other than gaming. 

2. You can definitely build a gaming PC for less than the top Smart phone even the R5 2600 is good enough for that. 






						AMD Ryzen 5 2600 Processor with Wraith Stealth Cooler - YD2600BBAFBOX: Amazon.ca: Computers & Tablets
					

AMD Ryzen 5 2600 Processor with Wraith Stealth Cooler - YD2600BBAFBOX: Amazon.ca: Computers & Tablets



					www.amazon.ca
				




$189






						GIGABYTE B450M DS3H (AMD Ryzen AM4/M.2/HMDI/DVI/USB 3.1/DDR4/Micro ATX/Motherboard): Amazon.ca: Computers & Tablets
					

GIGABYTE B450M DS3H (AMD Ryzen AM4/M.2/HMDI/DVI/USB 3.1/DDR4/Micro ATX/Motherboard): Amazon.ca: Computers & Tablets



					www.amazon.ca
				




$100



			https://www.amazon.ca/Corsair-Vengeance-3000MHz-Deskt6+p-Memory/dp/B0134EW7G8/ref=sr_1_3?keywords=16gb+ddr4+3000&qid=1568721451&s=electronics&sr=1-3
		


$100






						PowerColor Red Dragon Radeon RX 570 AXRX 570 4GBD5-3DHD/OC: Amazon.ca: Electronics
					

PowerColor Red Dragon Radeon RX 570 AXRX 570 4GBD5-3DHD/OC: Amazon.ca: Electronics



					www.amazon.ca
				




$191






						Thermaltake Smart 600W ATX 12V V2.3/EPS 12V 80 Plus Certified Active PFC Power Supply PS-SPD-0600NPCWUS-W: Amazon.ca: Electronics
					

Thermaltake Smart 600W ATX 12V V2.3/EPS 12V 80 Plus Certified Active PFC Power Supply PS-SPD-0600NPCWUS-W: Amazon.ca: Electronics



					www.amazon.ca
				





$65

Right there is $645 but let's got to the cost of the 3900X 






						Deepcool Tesseract SW-WH White Window Mid Tower Case | 1 Blue LED Fan (TESSERACT SW-WH): Amazon.ca: Electronics
					

Deepcool Tesseract SW-WH White Window Mid Tower Case | 1 Blue LED Fan (TESSERACT SW-WH): Amazon.ca: Electronics



					www.amazon.ca
				




So right there a $700 Gaming PC that is good enough for most newbs. Is there any part of this build that sucks?

3. As far as Intel those CPUs go up to 90+C on an OC my 12 core does not go past 65 under load (using the same software).

4. You don't know that, let's keep in mind that the FX chips could clock to 4.9 and beyond and the 9590 was a 5GHZ processor. Then we get Ryzen that does not clock as high but has higher IPC and is faster. The only thing Intel has over Ryzen is single core clock speed so Comet Lake may see IPC gains but not 5  GHZ OC with a node shrink. There is also the fact that more and more games are and will be using multi cores. No one on this forum knows any of the official details about Comet lake including you so don't boast about something that is not yet a reality.


----------



## Crackong (Sep 17, 2019)

kapone32 said:


> Comet Lake may see IPC gains but not 5  GHZ OC with a node shrink.



CometLake is still 14nm +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

We saw what happened from 14nm 6 cores  Ringbus -> 14nm 8 cores Ringbus
We can safely expect a portable nuclear reactor for 14nm 10 cores Ringbus .


----------



## trparky (Sep 17, 2019)

ToxicTaZ said:


> 9900KS already blows away all AMD 3000 series in gaining performance! Cometlake will be even faster!


*And I don't care!!!* I don't care about a processor that's outside of my PC budget.

If Intel wants me to buy their stuff from now on, they're going to have to seriously drop their prices. Nearly $500 after-tax for a 9900K is absolutely insane for me. Intel really needs to drop their prices by a decent amount of they're going to continue to have their product be purchased by people who, like me, can get by with _slightly_ less gaming performance while paying a whole lot less. Intel is going to be losing a lot of people in the mid to high segment of the market if they expect people to pay their absolutely insane prices. AMD will have a much better product that will perform within a few percentage points while costing significantly less.

I can say the same thing about an RTX2080Ti which is priced at $1069.99 ($1160.95 after-tax). There is no way in Heaven or Hell that I'm going to pay that damn much, Jen-Hsun Huang is out of his damn mind.


----------



## kapone32 (Sep 17, 2019)

Crackong said:


> CometLake is still 14nm +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 
> We saw what happened from 14nm 6 cores  Ringbus -> 14nm 8 cores Ringbus
> We can safely expect a portable nuclear reactor for 14nm 10 cores Ringbus .



There are so many "Lake releases" that I can't even keep up. You are absolutely right about the heat production though. Remember when Intel used a home air conditioner to cool their 28 core Skylake_X at Computex 



trparky said:


> *And I don't care!!!* I don't care about a processor that's outside of my PC budget.
> 
> If Intel wants me to buy their stuff from now on, they're going to have to seriously drop their prices. Nearly $500 after-tax for a 9900K is absolutely insane for me. Intel really needs to drop their prices by a decent amount of they're going to continue to have their product be purchased by people who, like me, can get by with _slightly_ less gaming performance while paying a whole lot less. Intel is going to be losing a lot of people in the mid to high segment of the market if they expect people to pay their absolutely insane prices. AMD will have a much better product that will perform within a few percentage points while costing significantly less.
> 
> I can say the same thing about an RTX2080Ti which is priced at $1069.99 ($1160.95 after-tax). There is no way in Heaven or Hell that I'm going to pay that damn much, Jen-Hsun Huang is out of his damn mind.



That sentiment is exactly why AMD is on the Ryse .


----------



## Keviny Oliveira (Sep 17, 2019)

trparky said:


> For those on a budget, yes... AMD does win over Intel.


Not only in prices like too in IPC, performance multitasking, power consumption and support extended for socket AM4, easy overclocking in mobos cheaper, and support for all processor in a mobo simple like a B350 per example, policies with clients of AMD is much better than Intel current, and remeber that AMD has innovation, while Intel is stopped since 2016 in yours 14nm.



ToxicTaZ said:


> Yet AMD has nothing to go against the 9900KS


hahhahaha lol Ryzen 9 3900X beat a i9-9900K in all, a version binned with overclocking not will decreasing the power consumption, increase the cores and threads and fix fail security, you're funny, Ryzen 9 3950X will be smashes all i9-9xxx HEDT in cost per performance and performance per watt.


----------



## juiseman (Sep 17, 2019)

I still say that Intel has to have something big up its sleeve. 
They are getting spanked like a naughty child ATM.  Either that, or they just don't care about Desktop performance CPU's as much
as their enterprise hold. 
The only thing, is; Epyc is good there as well. Whos knows.....not me for sure...just pure speculation....
 I really want to see what Threadripper can do, I don't need that kind of power yet, but the Nerd in me wants to see some benchmarks.....


----------



## Keviny Oliveira (Sep 17, 2019)

We are experiencing an AMD Ivy Bridge moment where Intel has no innovation and has to release one more refresh with more and more clocks just like the FX 9xxx were, but the fanboys do not accept and say it is not the same.



juiseman said:


> I really want to see what Threadripper can do, I don't need that kind of power yet, but the Nerd in me wants to see some benchmarks.....


Processors 64c/128t are possibles with 7nm in zen2 

While Intel in 14nm+++ have to settle for the amount of security flaws and high power consumption of their processors


----------



## Tatty_One (Sep 17, 2019)

Just a reminder in here, inflammatory posts including reference to fanboy's and attacks on personal preference will result in thread bans (to start with)….. have an awesome day!


----------



## lexluthermiester (Sep 17, 2019)

ToxicTaZ said:


> Huh?
> 1. Like I said before many times before the 3900X is $699.


Incorrect, Newegg lists it for $550;








						AMD Ryzen 9 3rd Gen - RYZEN 9 3900X Matisse (Zen 2) 12-Core 3.8 GHz (4.6 GHz Max Boost) Socket AM4 105W 100-100000023BOX Desktop Processor - Newegg.com
					

Buy AMD Ryzen 9 3rd Gen - RYZEN 9 3900X Matisse (Zen 2) 12-Core 3.8 GHz (4.6 GHz Max Boost) Socket AM4 105W 100-100000023BOX Desktop Processor with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!




					www.newegg.com
				






Crackong said:


> 3. 135W in a 200mm² package is nuclear, DO THE MATH Genius.


Nuclear reactions take place in the range of millions of degrees. A CPU using between 100w and 200w of power hardly qualifies, even when used as a metaphor.


----------



## trparky (Sep 17, 2019)

He’s just ... on second thought, I’m not going to say what I thought I was going to say. I’d probably get in trouble with the moderators.


----------



## ToxicTaZ (Sep 17, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> Inccorect, Newegg lists it for $550;
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Like I said before many times before the 3900X is $699. Here in Canada









						3900x | Newegg.ca
					

Search Newegg.ca for 3900x. Get fast shipping and top-rated customer service.




					www.newegg.ca
				




3950X most likely $999. Here.

CometLake ake will have higher IPC then Coffeelake Refresh at same clock.

9900KS is going to be awesome. Super Binned cheaper than Siliconlottery.com.


----------



## trparky (Sep 17, 2019)

ToxicTaZ said:


> 9900KS is going to be awesome. Super Binned cheaper than Siliconlottery.com.


But still, outside of the price range for most people. The 9900K has been out for several months and we still haven’t seen any price drops.


----------



## Crackong (Sep 18, 2019)

ToxicTaZ said:


> Like I said before many times before the 3900X is $699. Here in Canada



Newegg.ca was selling 9900k for $750 before discount , $635 after discount.
Your lovely 9900ks will be mostly > $800

Good luck for that.


----------



## ToxicTaZ (Sep 18, 2019)

trparky said:


> But still, outside of the price range for most people. The 9900K has been out for several months and we still haven’t seen any price drops.




9900K is getting a price drop in October to $399. US

9900KS is supposed to be $499. US

Most likely 9900KS will be short lived.... Maybe 6 months production as Cometlake production ramps up.

Since Cometlake doesn't work on Intel 300 series boards, the 9900KS is the 300 series last hurrah.


----------



## trparky (Sep 18, 2019)

ToxicTaZ said:


> 9900KS is supposed to be $499. US


That remains to be seen. I doubt it though. I have a feeling that it’s going to be more expensive than that.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Sep 18, 2019)

ToxicTaZ said:


> Like I said before many times before the 3900X is $699. Here in Canada


Ah, there was the problem. As both of our nations use the term dollar with a $, it might be a good idea in future to state $699C or note Canadian currency in some way.


----------

