Editorial Intel's 28-core HEDT Processor a Panic Reaction to 32-core Threadripper

[GlacierNine]

How dare they?
*cough*Polaris will offer 2.5x the perf/W*cough*

*sigh*

Once again, you attack only the part of anyone's argument that you think you can manage to make a point about, while completely ignoring the main substance of any other post in this thread that makes a better point. What AMD has done in the past is not at all relevant here - it is simple whataboutery and does not address the reasons anyone would have an issue with what intel have done here, or what AMD have done in the past.

Let's just ask you a few very pointed questions here:

1 - Intel lied. This is beyond question at this point. The only reason they would lie is to gain a competitive advantage in the marketplace. This is also beyond question. Bearing in mind the two previous points, why would anyone not have an issue with the fact they did so?

2 - Bearing in mind the same two points as before, why would Intel, rather than coming clean and making a proper statement about it, choose to only contact those few media outlets that ran followup stories mentioning the chiller, in order to provide their excuse of having forgotten to mention the overclock, and why would their statement be so short regarding what is a fairly major gaffe, potentially affecting their credibility within the tech community?

3 - Why would intel make the specific claim "You can get single-threaded performance frequency <...> not having to sacrifice that for this kind of multithreaded performance" in their demonstration, while demonstrating a part running at 5GHz, massively overclocked, if their intention was not to mislead the audience to believe that this part was capable of running at this speed in consumer's hands? Bearing in mind that in advance of the demonstration, Intel had already announced and *released* a part that ran at 5GHz stock speeds.

 

[RejZoR]

With 16A breaker, you can pull 3800W. Although 10A and 6A are more common for general wall sockets.

 

[bug]

bla, bla, bla

1 - Intel lied. This is beyond question at this point.

By omission and only if you are brain dead, but yeah, that guy "conveniently" forgot to use the term "overclocked".

The only reason they would lie is to gain a competitive advantage in the marketplace. This is also beyond question.

This one may be beyond question for you, but for me it isn't. I have no idea what Intel thought they would gain by acting the way they did. You have no idea either, but your apparent hate for Intel helps you fill in the blanks.

 

[Reeves81x]

Whats the "Update" as usual it is not marked with any sort of identifier.

 

[GlacierNine]

By omission and only if you are brain dead, but yeah, that guy "conveniently" forgot to use the term "overclocked".


This one may be beyond question for you, but for me it isn't. I have no idea what Intel thought they would gain by acting the way they did. You have no idea either, but your apparent hate for Intel helps you fill in the blanks.

And once again you not only fail to leave the thread alone but you also spend another fruitless few minutes responding to only a small part of the content of any post that disagrees with you.

I think its quite clear at this point that breaking through your delusion and inanity is not worth anyone's time. Of course, you could always prove me wrong on that point by actually addressing my post as a whole, or even the parts of the previous one that you ignored, but I shan't be holding my breath for that to happen.

 

[Reeves81x]

Well, maybe where that PSU was being tested in the video the socket can deliver more than 3KW, but I know that here in Blighty 3KW (240V 13A) is the limit. The fact that it's only a bit over at 3.3KW perhaps uses the tolerance in the system to run, a bit like an overclock and I wouldn't recommend it.

I've looked at a couple of retailers here and that brand isn't being sold. I suspect they'd have to release a 3KW version for the UK if they were (or 2.5KW or so to allow for inefficiencies in the PSU).
Finally, did you notice how skinny that mains cable was? I'd bet money it was running hot with all that current flowing through it.

Most 220V localities have 20A single phase, 230V (EU) have 18A, and 240V have 16A (so 3.84 to 4.40 kW). It's a lot a juice, but there a lot of single-phase appliances that can max that out (such as air-conditioners, boilers, etc.)

With 16A breaker, you can pull 3800W. Although 10A and 6A are more common for general wall sockets.

Taiwan is 120v US Standard plugs.. so based on standard 14 Gauge wiring and standard 15A breaker. max per circuit is appx. 1875 Watts peak, 1500w continuous. Unless it was on 10 Gauge wires and a 30A breaker @120v "appx. 3800 Watt Peak, 3000W continuous"... So it would require 2 standard 15A dedicated circuits for anyone with standard wiring @120V, like in Taiwan. Unless they either hooked it up to 220v which to me seems unlikely since US and Taiwan share the same 120v sockets, Ran it on a beefed up heavy duty 30a 120v 10 gauge, or used 2 dedicated 15a circuits.... yeah., https://www.google.ca/search?ei=nqI....64.psy-ab..2.13.1585...0i131k1.0.estNq6IXbq4 but hey with intels rep lately maybe they just plugged into a dryer socket cuz thats the kind of circuit it would need., lol.

 

[mouacyk]

BTU is over 9000 in here.

 

[RichF]

First, bug posts this:

I really don't care. I'm unsubscribing from these threads as I really don't have anything else to add.

Then, bug posts again:

Not rage quitting. But I genuinely have nothing else to add. It's not like Intel will send me a cookie if I point out enough times that no puppies have been harmed during the process

And then, bug posts again:

Damn, I didn't unsubscribe this one. @GlacierNine Not sure what marketing effect are you talking about. Did you do market research and found people who still believe Intel will launch a 28 core, 5GHz product? Over and out.

And then, bug posts again:

How dare they? *cough*Polaris will offer 2.5x the perf/W*cough*

And then, bug posts again:

By omission and only if you are brain dead, but yeah, that guy "conveniently" forgot to use the term "overclocked". This one may be beyond question for you, but for me it isn't. I have no idea what Intel thought they would gain by acting the way they did. You have no idea either, but your apparent hate for Intel helps you fill in the blanks.

 

[RejZoR]

@Reeves81x Well, countries using 120V are automatically at loss for the power output...

 

[RealNeil]

whataboutery

New word! Inventive, but appropriate too.

Four points!

 

[Reeves81x]

@Reeves81x Well, countries using 120V are automatically at loss for the power output...

Yep.

 

[R-T-B]

Yep.

But Thomas Edison told me high voltage AC is DANGEROUS!

 

[GlacierNine]

New word! Inventive, but appropriate too.

Four points!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism

Not new, I'm afraid.

 

[efikkan]

Intel lied. This is beyond question at this point.

In order for Intel to be liars, there would have to be a lie.
Anyone who watched the screen or the actual computer would have immediately spotted that this is an overclock. And any tech journalist who didn't understand this was overclocked should look for another profession.

Even the original article from Techpowerup stated this as an overclocked CPU, it was only later they jumped on the bandwagon and called it a panic reaction. You can find a better example of untruthful behavior in the title of this very article, than Intel did in their overclocking demonstration.

What AMD has done in the past is not at all relevant here

It is relevant when you and others portray Intel as liars and misleaders based on nothing of substance, while you simultaneously turn a blind eye to obvious lies from their competitor. Any mature and self-conscious being would understand that we need to set the same standard for everyone, put personal feelings aside, call out their BS and untruthful behavior, and of course give credit where credit is due.

 

[GlacierNine]

In order for Intel to be liars, there would have to be a lie.
Anyone who watched the screen or the actual computer would have immediately spotted that this is an overclock. And any tech journalist who didn't understand this was overclocked should look for another profession.

Even the original article from Techpowerup stated this as an overclocked CPU, it was only later they jumped on the bandwagon and called it a panic reaction. You can find a better example of untruthful behavior in the title of this very article, than Intel did in their overclocking demonstration.


It is relevant when you and others portray Intel as liars and misleaders based on nothing of substance, while you simultaneously turn a blind eye to obvious lies from their competitor. Any mature and self-conscious being would understand that we need to set the same standard for everyone, put personal feelings aside, call out their BS and untruthful behavior, and of course give credit where credit is due.

In order for Intel to be liars, there would have to be a lie.
Anyone who watched the screen or the actual computer would have immediately spotted that this is an overclock. And any tech journalist who didn't understand this was overclocked should look for another profession.

Even the original article from Techpowerup stated this as an overclocked CPU, it was only later they jumped on the bandwagon and called it a panic reaction. You can find a better example of untruthful behavior in the title of this very article, than Intel did in their overclocking demonstration.


It is relevant when you and others portray Intel as liars and misleaders based on nothing of substance, while you simultaneously turn a blind eye to obvious lies from their competitor. Any mature and self-conscious being would understand that we need to set the same standard for everyone, put personal feelings aside, call out their BS and untruthful behavior, and of course give credit where credit is due.

1 - There was. A lie of omission, and a clearly intentional one.

2 - Please find any instance of me ever in any way "turning a blind eye to obvious lies from their competitor". This thread is, quite simply *not about AMD*.

 

[RealNeil]

What they did on that stage, lie or not, reeks of desperation.
All of a sudden, they are faced with competition that is much more formidable than the years before.
It looks like they don't know what to do about it. (even though they may indeed)

Competition is what makes a free market work and I'm glad to see it and be a buyer in it.

 

[trparky]

What they did on that stage, lie or not, reeks of desperation.

They may have not lied in the literal sense but by not saying it, that's a lie of omission. Sometimes by not saying something it makes you look worse than if you had come right out with a bald-faced lie.

All of a sudden, they are faced with competition that is much more formidable than the years before.

They've not had any real competition for over eight years, they don't know how to handle it. I can imagine that Intel execs damn near pissed their pants when Ryzen came about.

Yes, I did indeed buy an 8700K-based system but that's only because at this moment I don't think Ryzen is quite there yet when it comes to performance. Give Ryzen another two years and Intel will be pissing blood. Meanwhile, all of us here will be laughing.

 

[RealNeil]

Yes, I did indeed buy an 8700K-based system but that's only because at this moment I don't think Ryzen is quite there yet when it comes to performance.

I have two Ryzen boxes here. One is my 8-core 1700X and the other is my wife's 6-core 1600X. Both work great and game well with a good GPU inside them.
I also have four five Intel-based systems starting with a 7900X and working down to a 6700K.
They're all pretty capable too.

As far as brand loyalty I have very little. I'm looking for the best performance for the least money most of the time.
If I can get something that's wazoo for a good price, I buy it. Hence the 7900X.

 

[efikkan]

What they did on that stage, lie or not, reeks of desperation.

What precisely indicates desperation? The overclocking demo itself, or Intel bringing 28-cores to HEDT like this article claims? If you mean the latter then it's entirely untrue. These new CPUs will be Cascade Lake-X/-SP, which is a refresh of Skylake-X/-SP, and was taped a year ago. Anything we see now was planned ahead of the launch of Threadripper. When Intel wants to make a new lineup based on a new chipset of even a finished architecture, it takes about a year to market. Many news sites claims the 28-core HEDT CPU was something Intel "whipped together" right before Computex to steal attention from AMD. While the exact timing could have been strategically chosen close to the unveiling, the actual planning and execution was put in place a long time ago. If this move by Intel is considered "desperate" or a "panic reaction", then Threadripper should also be considered the same, since it's just a re-purposed Epyc, unlike X299/LGA2066 which was planned from the very beginning of the Skylake-X/-SP design cycle.

 

[hat]

Well, they made a shitty attempt at masking a ridiculous claim. Nobody in their right mind would think that's normal. So let's all bash everybody all the way down to the guy who invented the abacus. Once again, the basic rule of "do your research before you buy" applies here. It's a world of shit and nobody is going to be 100% honest. I'll take this little show any day. They should have mentioned it was overclocked and using a ridiculous cooling solution, but there are far worse business practices.

 

[Caring1]

What precisely indicates desperation? The overclocking demo itself, or Intel bringing 28-cores to HEDT like this article claims? If you mean the latter then it's entirely untrue. These new CPUs will be Cascade Lake-X/-SP, which is a refresh of Skylake-X/-SP, and was taped a year ago. Anything we see now was planned ahead of the launch of Threadripper. When Intel wants to make a new lineup based on a new chipset of even a finished architecture, it takes about a year to market. Many news sites claims the 28-core HEDT CPU was something Intel "whipped together" right before Computex to steal attention from AMD. While the exact timing could have been strategically chosen close to the unveiling, the actual planning and execution was put in place a long time ago. If this move by Intel is considered "desperate" or a "panic reaction", then Threadripper should also be considered the same, since it's just a re-purposed Epyc, unlike X299/LGA2066 which was planned from the very beginning of the Skylake-X/-SP design cycle.

I disagree, AMD planned Epyc, Threadripper and Ryzen a long time ago, Intel had an existing product in the Xeon processors and modified it for consumer use, as the media stated, in a knee jerk reaction in an attempt to beat them and retain market share.
It doesn't take years of planning to do that.

 

[Patriot]

C13 is more than capable of 3000watts it's rated at 15 amps for C13, 15*240=3600watts but In USA you cannot do a 2000W psu because 15*110 for instance = 1650 watts max for C13.
In any 240V system a C13 is sufficient for pretty anything you can throw at it unless you daisy chain through it.

Most C13 cables are 10A not 15A. But yes it is available in 10 amp/18 awg, 13 amp/ 16awg and and 15 amp/14 awg, just not common in the US due to the low standard voltage...and that cable shown in the pictures is not a fat 15A cable.

Adding a 240v circuit to a house is rather expensive in the US, and the efficiency gains are actually not that much. 1-3%
https://www.servethehome.com/120v-208v-power-consumption/

Now lets talk about circuits... They are typically rated at 70% continuous not 100%, so those 10-16A breakers are going to pop if you try and run them at max. Industrial breakers are rated at 80%.
I was very happy at Uni with the power in the wall overdriven to 130v and 20A circuits... but most houses run 115-120v and 15A circuits except for the plugs behind the appliances and those are rather hard to get at for non-appliance use.

Max draw before the circuit is going to have trouble for long periods.

16A*.7= 11.2A @120V, 1344W @240V, 2688W @250V, 2800W
15A*.7= 10.5A @120V, 1260W @240V, 2520W @250V, 2625W
13A*.7= 9.1A @120V, 1092W @240V, 2184W @250V, 2300W

So you shouldn't plug a 15A device into a 15A circuit...

20A*.7= 14.0A @130V, 1820W
Needless to say, I miss that apartment... I had a rig while there that drew 1450W wall when overclocked to... um the wall.
It basically forces us US guys to colo our servers if we want to do anything crazy.

My server stuff is 3 phase... and I am not redoing those calculations. The typical L6-30 stuff. But basically if I have plugs on my PDU it's safe, the PDU is under the .8 max.

(Wishes the US had higher voltage standard)

 

[kid41212003]

I agree wholeheartedly with this article.

 

[Totally]

What precisely indicates desperation?

To summarize: "Don't look over there, while we don't actually have anything interesting to show this year but we do have this chip! It can hit 5.00Ghz! Wooooo!!"

It was desperate when AMD was doing it with bulldozer, still is today.

 

[RealNeil]

It was desperate when AMD was doing it with bulldozer, still is today.

Remember the FX-9590 launch? They asked $1000.00 at first. It was one of the most underwhelming Chips that I ever owned. (won it and a motherboard in a contest in July 2013)
But it has been dependable. My son has it in California to play games with and it still works fine with the AMD supplied CoolerMaster AIO it came with.