Sunday, September 30th 2018

Intel HEDT Platform to be Forked into Z399 and X599
Intel could very soon fork its high-end desktop platform into two, with the introduction of the new Z399 socket LGA2066 chipset later this quarter; and the fabled X599 chipset powering LGA3647 processors. The move is probably triggered by AMD's introduction of new 24-core and 32-core Ryzen Threadripper processors that wipe out competitiveness of its existing "Basin Falls" X299 platform. The X599 could essentially be a C629 with the addition of some client-segment features (and the subtraction of some enterprise-segment ones), whereas the Z399 is a whole different beast.
With the introduction X599 and LGA3647, Intel could restore competitiveness at the >$1,500 market segment with new 24-core, 26-core, and 28-core "Skylake-X" XCC (extended/extreme core count) processors; whereas the introduction of Z399 could be necessitated with a that of a new 22-core chip for the LGA2066 socket, from which Intel can carve out new 20-core and 22-core SKUs. Existing Skylake-X LCC and HCC chips could be forwards-compatible with Z399, and X299 motherboards could still be eligible for supporting new 20-core and 22-core processors via BIOS updates. The Z399 could introduce a handful of new client-segment features Intel is introducing with the Z390.Since the LGA2066 platform won't be "extreme" anymore as that distinction gets reserved for LGA3647, the "X" in the chipset name gets replaced by "Z." This could also help consumers tell Intel's platform apart from AMD X399, which powers two generations of Ryzen Threadripper processors. Intel could hence use Z399 and the new 22-core die to compete with 2nd generation Threadripper X-series processors, while the X599 and 28-core processor could deal with Threadripper WX-series.
Source:
PC Builder's Club
With the introduction X599 and LGA3647, Intel could restore competitiveness at the >$1,500 market segment with new 24-core, 26-core, and 28-core "Skylake-X" XCC (extended/extreme core count) processors; whereas the introduction of Z399 could be necessitated with a that of a new 22-core chip for the LGA2066 socket, from which Intel can carve out new 20-core and 22-core SKUs. Existing Skylake-X LCC and HCC chips could be forwards-compatible with Z399, and X299 motherboards could still be eligible for supporting new 20-core and 22-core processors via BIOS updates. The Z399 could introduce a handful of new client-segment features Intel is introducing with the Z390.Since the LGA2066 platform won't be "extreme" anymore as that distinction gets reserved for LGA3647, the "X" in the chipset name gets replaced by "Z." This could also help consumers tell Intel's platform apart from AMD X399, which powers two generations of Ryzen Threadripper processors. Intel could hence use Z399 and the new 22-core die to compete with 2nd generation Threadripper X-series processors, while the X599 and 28-core processor could deal with Threadripper WX-series.
46 Comments on Intel HEDT Platform to be Forked into Z399 and X599
can you see which department has been, and currently still is running Intel right now...
Engineering or Marketing?
I would prefer if Intel made one HEDT platform, not two. The X/SP dies are the same, there is no technical reason why they couldn't stick with one socket like AMD did with Threadripper and Epyc.
Still, Cascade Lake-X will bring hardware fixes for Spectre/Meltdown and will be moved to the 14nm++ node.
Skylake-X/-SP exists in three die sizes; 10, 18 and 28 cores. If it's true Intel can fit >18 cores on LGA 2066, then they can fit the full 28. If not, 18 will be the maximum.
Currently Intel have these high-end platforms:
Consumer HEDT: (X299): 10 and 18 core dies
Xeon W (C422): 10 and 18 core dies
Xeon Scalable (C621): 10, 18 and 28 core dies
The dies themselves are the same, they are compatible with all of these. Rumors claim Intel will end up with the consumer HEDT spread across two sockets, which is completely unnecessary.
They will push the CPU as far as it can get with 250W tdp (I expect 4.5Ghz turbo), so it will be marginally faster than what AMD has, but they will ask top dollars for it - I am guessing 3000$, maybe 2500$ if they have a very good day.
Not everyone will use this new chip for gaming...it will be a workstation class chip too Why does Porsche have 20 plus different versions of there 911 when they only have 10,000 buyers a year.
Because it allows them to seel another 100,000 cars that are basically rebadged VW's !!!
Porsche is the MOST profitable car company on the planet...AMD is more like Tesla!!!
Come on...this naming convention is easy:
X = extreme (911)
Z = everything NOT extreme Why does it have to be completely necessary?? Intel seems to think that their are TWO high end markets: overclocking gamers and workstations.
They both want high speed but but in different ways. I like what AMD is doing as it is doing the BEST for the market which...COMPETITION.
I do not not want ONE cpu from ONE company that does EVERYTHING...do you??
I love capitalism because usually competition will bring the best products to the market and more importantly take crappy products OFF the market.
AMD is in fact doing Intel a favor and if you look at Intel's track record over 50 years, they have beaten nearly EVERY competitor on the market with their lousy x86 based architecure.
X86 is a terrible design but it has one great feature: EVERY one buys.
We need competition!!!
big difference is AMD sells their chip for their threadripper 1 for half the price 79xx on average so Intel has no push to lower its price when they are selling as many 79xx chips as AMD Threadripper 1.
For Threadripper 2990WX, Amd has got smart and is selling them for a little lower than the 7980xe and will definitely sell more as it has way better performance at similar price as the 7980xe.
Intel will be coming out with a 2990wx competitor which will one again be priced way more than the 2990WX and will sell just as many!!!
The list price for the 28-core Xeon includes the ability to be put in compuer with up to 8 sockets which would of course be a very high end computer and therefore Intel can charge a sky-high price.
Since the consumer 28 core is targeted at a different customer, they can price it at whatever price level they want. The 8180 does not cost $8700 but if you want a SINGLE one, you will pay $8700!!!
Believe me, NO ONE who is buying the Xeon 8180 is paying $8700 in lots of 1000 or more and enterprise customers never pay list price anyway.
AMD will be charging $5000( or more) for their high-end Epyc 2 when it comes out, as they are targeting customers who are willing to pay that price for the performance it offers...
I would expect that Intel continue the tradition of making "every possible permutation" of the CPUs within the HEDT range, even though I think a 12-core, 16-core, 20-core, 24-core and 28-core would have been plenty.
Overclocking on HEDT is pointless, there are no longer any substantial gains without extreme cooling and short lifetime for the CPU. Those who needs these HEDT CPUs will not be willing to sacrifice stability, lifetime and warranty for a few percent extra performance. Having overclocking as a hobby is fine, but overclocking HEDT is pretty wasteful.
Lets take the following example: if the 8700K which is a 6 core CPU sells for 350$ at best, a 28 core version of it would be 28/6 * 350 ~= 2000$. Given the fact that this is a niche product, it doesn't have yields as good as a 8700K chip would have, etc, etc, it won't be 2 grand for sure. If they have amazingly good yields (which they might have by now since 14nm is mature), they could sell it for 3 grand.
But I agree that enthuasiats (which are also targeted by 2990WX) might be willing to pay the extra money just to get the Intel solution since it has better compilers, better support in scientific apps, better latency, etc. In any case, by the time Intel launches its 28 core super HEDT platform, AMD will already have its Rome silicon ready with all the benefits that come (7nm, low power consumption, better IPC, hopefully better memory latency, etc) so, the Intel platform might not do so well as they as planning. But we'll see.
Sure, the real cost of making a Skylake-SP 28-core might not be more than a few hundred bucks for Intel, but given all the other costs that I have mentioned, plus the capacity issue and the risk of production, it might very well cost somewhere in the thousands of dollars to actually fab a CPU like this. They also won't ramp up the production volume for these high count cores, because there won't be so many people who will buy them, so still, cost will be high.
CPU dies also include more cache, which have higher tolerances for yields.
TSMC makes high volumes of similar TDP and similar sized dies, I don't see why Intel can't with a better node. I don't see the problem. Intel know very well the cost of producing wafers. Unless they cancel these products, these will sell thousands. And BTW, Intel usually make excess CPUs for commercial customers anyway.