Friday, August 2nd 2024
Intel Granite Rapids SKUs Detailed With Up To 128 Cores and 500 W TDP
The newest leak from X (formerly Twitter) has detailed five Intel Granite Rapids SKUs, including the 6980P, 6979P, 6972P, 6952P, and the 6960P. Featuring up to 128 CPU cores and up to 504 MB of cache, these show that Intel Granite Rapids will double the amount of cores compared to the Emerald Rapids SKUs.
The newest leak coming from Jaykihn over at X, following the previous leak that detailed the most powerful SKU. The 6980P will pack 128 cores, pack 504 MB of cache, have a 2.0 GHz base frequency and a massive 500 W TDP rating. The rest of the SKUs have lower core count, ending with the 6960P, which comes with 72 cores, 432 MB of cache, but also a higher 2.7 GHz base frequency.In case you missed it, Intel Granite Rapids is the next-generation performance-oriented server architecture expected to launch alongside Sierra Forest server chips, with both sharing the same new Xeon 6 branding. While Sierra Forest will be designed entirely with efficiency cores (E-cores), Intel Granite Ridge will feature Redwood Cove performance cores (P-cores), bringing more L1 cache, higher IPC performance, support for the MXFP4 data format, and promising some impressive performance improvements for compute intensive and AI workloads. According to Intel, Granite Rapids should provide up to 2x to 3x higher performance improvement and up to 2.8x higher memory bandwidth.
So far, Granite Rapids is expected to launch in Q3 this year, with more higher-end SKUs coming in early 2025.
Sources:
Jaykihn (Twitter), via Tomshardware.com
The newest leak coming from Jaykihn over at X, following the previous leak that detailed the most powerful SKU. The 6980P will pack 128 cores, pack 504 MB of cache, have a 2.0 GHz base frequency and a massive 500 W TDP rating. The rest of the SKUs have lower core count, ending with the 6960P, which comes with 72 cores, 432 MB of cache, but also a higher 2.7 GHz base frequency.In case you missed it, Intel Granite Rapids is the next-generation performance-oriented server architecture expected to launch alongside Sierra Forest server chips, with both sharing the same new Xeon 6 branding. While Sierra Forest will be designed entirely with efficiency cores (E-cores), Intel Granite Ridge will feature Redwood Cove performance cores (P-cores), bringing more L1 cache, higher IPC performance, support for the MXFP4 data format, and promising some impressive performance improvements for compute intensive and AI workloads. According to Intel, Granite Rapids should provide up to 2x to 3x higher performance improvement and up to 2.8x higher memory bandwidth.
So far, Granite Rapids is expected to launch in Q3 this year, with more higher-end SKUs coming in early 2025.
10 Comments on Intel Granite Rapids SKUs Detailed With Up To 128 Cores and 500 W TDP
also at the top, personally it makes more sense to type "X, (better know as Twitter)".
Lastly I cant wait for AMD Epyc to get some competition but man that TDP.....lets see if Intel does achieve more than parity by blasting it with power....
www.amd.com/en/products/processors/server/epyc/4th-generation-9004-and-8004-series/amd-epyc-9754.html
In fact, and I mean this STRICTLY from the POV of a consumer, it would be in our best interest for Intel to continue losing marketshare in all of those segments to AMD in order to get us as close as possible to a 50%/50% split.
Competition is only good insofar as it benefits consumers, and what would benefit consumers is Intel continuing to lose marketshare....once they give up half the market to AMD, then they can start giving AMD some competition. Exactly, anyone remember those Xeons with HBM on package? If you didn't, I'm not surprise because despite having upwards of 64GB of HBM, they still got their clock cleaned by Epyc and Epyc-X (3D V-Cache)
[and no, it's not like the chip is covered with an IHS made of redwood]
Intel is still the king in single threading - but multithreading AMD beat it's around the bush.
500W is nothing knowing that one chip can perhaps replace a bunch of servers and thus less overall power required for the same workload.
I switched from XEONS to EPYC as well; i have only positive remarks in regard of the EPYC lineup.