The Slumbering Giant Wakes: Intel to Introduce 18-core X-Series Processors?

[Grings]

AMD HEDT is not going to be cheap. Think. The Ryzen 1800X is $500. Prices for the Ryzen HEDT is going to be way north of that.

It has dropped from £489 to £425 here already, and looking at the prices of the 1700 and 1700x its not unreasonable to see it drop below 400 once the hedt platforms out, it was only priced that high initially because its comparable to intels hedt

I think once their hedt platform is out, mainstream pricing will match intels more closely, the 1700s are either side of the 7700k already with twice the cores, a 12 core threadripper aimed at the 6 core intels price point is not out of the question

 

[Darmok N Jalad]

I didn't search for "Moar cores," but for some reason this old thing came to mind:

 

[romeg]

Yup thanks to AMD now intel is forced to bring out more cores. Hope this continues and we get 100cores in no time

The number of cores matters less than Intel now has competition. Competition can be a wonderful thing. In this case it is.

 

[Cr4zy]

Crediting AMD for this is just as silly as those who credited AMD for the release of GTX 1080 Ti, despite Vega is still MIA.

Threadripper is just multiple Zens slapped together, we basically know how it's going to perform. Intel already have faster cores than AMD, and if Skylake-X is any improvement at all, AMD will be the ones shaking in fear.

Well if only Skylake-X had been rumoured to be 18core from the start. But it never was, it was a upto 10core part for the better part of half the year, then 12c and now it's 18. Sure rumours aren't everything, but Intel didnt add +8 to their core count before ryzen.

 

[Grings]

The Broadwell chips overclocked progressively worse as the cores went up, so anything over the 10 core one would have probably struggled to get much further than 4ghz on all cores

Unlike the xeons, where they had a 22 core variant already, with i7 they need to keep the speed up so the ipc dosent suffer in less than megathreaded situations

I would imagine seeing AMD's chips only reaching 4ghz, Intel may have found these newer chips can run high enough clocks even on the 18 core variants to stay competitive with that

 

[efikkan]

Well if only Skylake-X had been rumoured to be 18core from the start. But it never was, it was a upto 10core part for the better part of half the year, then 12c and now it's 18. Sure rumours aren't everything, but Intel didnt add +8 to their core count before ryzen.

That's just silly. We all know Intel can't add more cores weeks before launch, this was planned years ago.
The silicon has been designed with >18 cores from the start, and there have even been 18 core engineering samples for a long time. Just because your rumors only claims "10 cores", doesn't mean Intel has not planned more.

 

[rtwjunkie]

That's just silly. We all know Intel can't add more cores weeks before launch, this was planned years ago.
The silicon has been designed with >18 cores from the start, and there have even been 18 core engineering samples for a long time. Just because your rumors only claims "10 cores", doesn't mean Intel has not planned more.

If you read what I said earlier instead of arguing, you would not be making this statement now. I said they had already researched it. That is why the quick release. It was waiting in their "what if" or "maybe someday" pile. The hard work was done. It just needed to go into production.

 

[buildzoid]

That's just silly. We all know Intel can't add more cores weeks before launch, this was planned years ago.
The silicon has been designed with >18 cores from the start, and there have even been 18 core engineering samples for a long time. Just because your rumors only claims "10 cores", doesn't mean Intel has not planned more.

HEDT CPUs are cut down Xeon. Intel already has 22 core Broadwell-e CPUs. Making an 18 core i9 is a matter of disabling some of the extra Xeon features and slapping a different name on the CPU. It would be very very easy for intel to respond to 16 core Threadripper by just re-branding some Xeons as i9s.

 

[Dave65]

Crediting AMD for this is just as silly as those who credited AMD for the release of GTX 1080 Ti, despite Vega is still MIA.

Threadripper is just multiple Zens slapped together, we basically know how it's going to perform. Intel already have faster cores than AMD, and if Skylake-X is any improvement at all, AMD will be the ones shaking in fear.

Not silly at all, I doubt we would see this now if Ryzen hadn't dropped.

 

[efikkan]

If you read what I said earlier instead of arguing, you would not be making this statement now. I said they had already researched it. That is why the quick release. It was waiting in their "what if" or "maybe someday" pile. The hard work was done. It just needed to go into production.

So you believe in a world where Intel spend billions of dollars on chips the don't release? Just in case AMD decides to come up with something? That's ridiculous.

 

[rtwjunkie]

So you believe in a world where Intel spend billions of dollars on chips the don't release? Just in case AMD decides to come up with something? That's ridiculous.

With the amount of R& D money they have, which is more than AMD costs almost, they research and develop whole families of things that individual parts need to be adjusted and "new" product can be put into production, if necessary....yes.

 

[notb]

HEDT CPUs are cut down Xeon. Intel already has 22 core Broadwell-e CPUs. Making an 18 core i9 is a matter of disabling some of the extra Xeon features and slapping a different name on the CPU. It would be very very easy for intel to respond to 16 core Threadripper by just re-branding some Xeons as i9s.

The tiny issue here is that Skylake-X is clearly a new design, so it can't be a "cut down Broadwell-e".
Obviously it could be (and most likely is) a cut-down version of a future Xeon (Skylake-based) - something Intel was preparing for 2017 anyway.

So yes, the number of cores AMD decided to offer could be a reason why we'll see 18 core i9s (instead of 12 or 14 cores). But some here are clearly thinking that Intel DESIGNED these Skylake-based CPUs as an answer to Ryzen and that's just... preposterous.

 

[Grings]

The tiny issue here is that Skylake-X is clearly a new design, so it can't be a "cut down Broadwell-e"

pretty sure he meant broadwell-e i7 is a 'cut down' broadwell-e xeon

and yes of course this is the same silicon as skylake-x xeons will be(i would assume with at least the 22 cores broadwell ones come with) HEDT is just a desktop variant of Xeon chips since x58

you can even put them 22 core broadwell xeons in current x99 desktop boards btw

 

[Prima.Vera]

How today's applications and games are codded:

 

[TheLostSwede]

HEDT CPUs are cut down Xeon. Intel already has 22 core Broadwell-e CPUs. Making an 18 core i9 is a matter of disabling some of the extra Xeon features and slapping a different name on the CPU. It would be very very easy for intel to respond to 16 core Threadripper by just re-branding some Xeons as i9s.

Thank you, finally someone using their brain and logic. This was not a huge task for Intel, as they already have CPU's with more cores than 18. But apparently these were always destined for consumers...

This is not a new CPU architecture Intel pulled out of nowhere. It's not a new Core architecture, which was a huge step up from Netburst and which is what Intel has been improving over the past decade and change now, it's simply utilizing Xeon technology in a "consumer" product. It's not magic and it's something that's fairly straightforward for Intel to do.

 

[TheLostSwede]

Are you at least considering the possibility that both companies have been developing these CPUs for a long time and AMD simply released their earlier?



I'm getting slightly tired of this, really. Why don't we start praising Intel, because they forced AMD to make something serious? I mean, if it wasn't for Intel, AMD would still make mid-2000s Phenoms, wouldn't it?


Until now Infinity Fabric has been nothing but a huge letdown - especially in the memory latency department.
They're marketing it as a feature of the platform (i.e. giving some advantages), but it is in fact a compromise they needed to make the whole Zen idea work (that is: joining multiple CCX segments).
And it could become even worse. Some rumors suggested that in 2-CPU solutions Zen cores will be able to access the whole RAM in the system - also the DIMMs connected to the other CPU. This sounds like an incoming disaster.

Now you're putting words in my mouth. Of course Intel has spent time and money designing these chips for a long time. They just added parts that would most likely never have seen the light of day unless there was some new competition, but apparently this make me an idiot.

 

[Mistral]

I'm reading the comments... I'm reading the comment... and I really have to ask...

Am I the only one who thinks the packaging design on these took too many cues from condom boxes?

 

[xkm1948]

How today's applications and games are codded:

View attachment 88567

Good thing is there are a large portion of PC users that can perfectly utilize the increased number of cores.


Meanwhile this old comic finally has some new twist:

 

[Camm]

Intel's cache coherency problem\design choice over large amounts of cores isn't exactly going to evaporate just because AMD is coming off life support.

Unless Intel has done something dramatic to reduce this problem, these higher core count chips are going to have increasingly pathetic (in the 2.x Ghz range) clockspeeds.

Intel hasn't gone below 3Ghz with a HEDT part, so being honest, I just can't see this happening. At all.

Sidenote, I wonder if you might get ECC validation in X299 considering AMD's more open approach to ECC use?

 

[Grings]

Sidenote, I wonder if you might get ECC validation in X299 considering AMD's more open approach to ECC use?

I doubt it, it looks like they are going to lock out using xeons on desktop x299 boards this time around

 

[toilet pepper]

That's just silly. We all know Intel can't add more cores weeks before launch, this was planned years ago.
The silicon has been designed with >18 cores from the start, and there have even been 18 core engineering samples for a long time. Just because your rumors only claims "10 cores", doesn't mean Intel has not planned more.

They already have this up their sleeves. There's no reason to release it unless they have competition. Without ryzen all you'd be seeing is an i7 8700k 4 cores 8 threads at 4.7ghz instead of this. You'd get a tick tock cycle forever and they'll just keep more moneys to themselves since they dont have to spend on research and innovation.

 

[Hood]

Yup, Intel seen dem new-fangled Ryzen doohickeys n says "We gotta gets busy, an' we gotta do it in 3 month what normal take 3 year, we caint let dem low rent basards beat our ass!" And so dey did it...it's a dang miracle, what it is...

 

[Melvis]

Sigh, intel intel intel.........Intel will continue with there mega high price tags on there CPU's regardless how well AMDs are in performance, all u have to do is look at the current 6900k and 6950x, did the prices drop for those here in Aus after Ryzen came out, nope there still priced the same, $1500ish for the 6900k and $2500 for the 6950x and this new line of CPU's from Intel will be no different, the prices will be massive, my guess this 18core will be around $3500 regardless if AMD's 16core is only 10% slower and at a price of lets say $1500. Intel dont care! period. and id say they have been sitting on this core count for a good 5yrs, just couldnt be fucked and milked all the intel fan boys of there money first before finally seeing what AMD have brought to the table and thought hmmm ok might as well let the plebs buy our mega core CPU's now since that tiny AMD mob have decided to bring out mega core count CPU's. Yes good on you AMD but also Shame on you Intel. This 18core CPU is just to say hey we have the fastest most powerful multi cored CPU out there and so they can keep there prices high!.

 

[AsRock]

not just someone, its very common on giant tech company

And why wouldn't you, better to slow down than hit a wall and have no were to go. Of course this give competition chance ( lucky for us ) but it makes more money as well.

 

[springs113]

AMD HEDT is not going to be cheap. Think. The Ryzen 1800X is $500. Prices for the Ryzen HEDT is going to be way north of that.

Maybe at launch, but its MSRP has been around $450-460 for quite some time now. If the prices leaked for Intel X299 Processors bodes true, then surely Threadripper will high on being the better price/perf CPUs. AMD is out for blood(market share), I get that they need to make money, but I think doing both is what they truly need. Winning people over all the while making a decent buck. Pricing the things accordingly will be crucial. I'm just glad that us as consumers have choices...Now AMD just needs to bring on Vega so we all can have more choices. My .02.