Chrispy_1. Does this finally have enough hardware mitigations for specultaive-execution attacks? Without them, all these hyperthreading improvements are meaningless because the vulnerability patches hurt performance and for a secure system, HT needs to be disabled in its entirety.

2. Why do we need a new socket? It's still using DDR4, not DDR5 (that's AMD's excuse for changing to socket AM5) and it's still using PCIe 3.0. Is Intel unable to physically fit more than 8 cores on a package at 14nm?
3. Is 10C the upper limit or are there hints that Intel have 12C and 16C models in the pipeline for later in 2020?

torsoreaperStill on DMI 3.0, a 5 year old technology... Great job Intel, way to push the envelope.

ppn

We can get 16 core, but it would sacrifice the iGPU, it can't fit, outside the limits. and it will draw 500 watts in prime 95 at 5.00Ghz, 9900K draws 250 watts.

For now, only gets 10 core. next year 12, every year is +2 then +2.

Chrispy_Why do we need a new socket? It's still using DDR4, not DDR5 (that's AMD's excuse for changing to socket AM5) and it's still using PCIe 3.0. Is Intel unable to physically fit more than 8 cores on a package at 14nm?

Chrispy_Is 10C the upper limit or are there hints that Intel have 12C and 16C models in the pipeline for later in 2020?

btarunrto match iPad

notbThey're adding pins. This could be because of added PCIe, higher IGP transfers or other features unknown at this point.
Socket/package size is the same as in LGA1151 and LGA1150.

TurmaniaDisappointed with Intel recently but still rest assured it will still and easily best any ryzen 4xxx cpu's launched next year easily and with a bigger margin than this year as far as gaming is concerned with no misleading advertisement on the product.

ppnWe can get 16 core, but it would sacrifice the iGPU, it can't fit, outside the limits. and it will draw 500 watts in prime 95 at 5.00Ghz, 9900K draws 250 watts.

notbIt'll have more than earlier generations. Hard to say at the moment.
Disabling HT does NOT make a system secure. CPU has other security flaws that haven't been found or revealed yet.

They're adding pins. This could be because of added PCIe, higher IGP transfers or other features unknown at this point.
Socket/package size is the same as in LGA1151 and LGA1150.

As for socket size being a limiting factor for core count...
A 4-core SB die was 24% larger than an 8-core CL (below, from wikichip).
Without GPU, 12 cores should fit in SB's 216mm2.
And, of course, both cores' and cache's shape/size can change, so only Intel and partners know the answer at this point.

efikkanWhile it's good to have more than 4 cores on the mainstream platform, we really don't need 12-16 cores for non-server software (except for special use cases). Most applications will scale much better on a 30% faster CPU vs. a CPU with 30% more cores. Intel need to focus on bringing their new architectures to the market rather than winning "the core race".

candle_86So does this mean Celeron can get an upgrade to 2c4t finally if Pentium is 4/4 and i3 is 4/8

notbCelerons serve their purpose in cheap, low power applications (general servers, NAS, HTPC, NUC etc).
There's very little need for more multi-thread performance in this segment... and even less will to sacrifice single thread potential.

It's hard to say how Intel will segment their next generation into traditional product lines. They'll have to stretch something. But it's extremely unlikely that 2-core, non-HT CPUs won't be included.

medi01Come on, which freaking ipad... Did you want to say "a tablet"?