Intel's Future Chips: News, Rumours & Reviews

Phaaze88 · Jul 1, 2017

goldstone77 :

How legit is this? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-4D_j7pG1M&feature=youtu.be (@32:50)

goldstone77 · Jul 2, 2017

Phaaze88 :

I watched the video and OC3D TV is claiming that he didn't have any problem with the ASUS board, and then starts theorizing what was wrong with Der8auer's setup. Questioning his power supply, and then his CPU. Der8auer says he used a 5GHz CPU that he used in previous videos, because he knew what voltages and clocks he could reach with that CPU. He used a thermal couple on both sides of the VRMs, so he would know what the temperature would be. Let me continue to watch the video. (15:07) He tests the board and got 43C on top of the heatsink, and 62C on the back of the board. As the video goes on he pulls out infra red temp gauge, and is shows 50C, and he moves the thermal couple and it reads 50-51C. He then pulls the AIO that's blowing air into the case out of the top, and claims it increased the temps 2C. He claims putting a fan directly on the heatsink dropped his temps another 10C. (1:51)Der8auer shows the temps in his video hitting 84.2C and 105.9C. OC3D TV did not use prime 95, but some other program which I'm not familiar. Also, OC3D TV tested the top of the heat sinks, and Der8auer said the heatsinks were acting as insulators. So, that might not have been the way Der8auer tested. Der8auer blames the heatsinks as part of the problem, because he can remove the heatsink from the VRMs, and put a fan directly on them and they cool down to 70C. He says 70C is fine. Der8uaer tested he cable temp in an open test bench, and claims it was 65C. The scenario he describes is summer time, bad air flow, and a modern graphics card bringing your case internal temp to 40C. That gets to 80-90C getting close to catching your PSU or cable on fire. He does say the Asus is aware of the problem and they were working on a fix. Personally, I would not invest that type of money into something unless I was sure that the problem didn't exist or was fixed. Anyone credible speaking out with issues like this should be taken serious until proven otherwise.

Edit: just a side note I've never heard of OC3D TV.
https://www.youtube.com/user/TimeToLiveCustoms/videos

8350rocks · Jul 3, 2017

OC3D is actually a very competent guy. He often runs Linpack for stress tests, which is basically going to find any fault in your rig somehow or another.

jaymc · Jul 3, 2017

I was thinking that maybe he is running on an updated BIOS ... I actually asked him in the comments what version it was.
I dunno what version Der8uaer used cause I haven't checked his video was 5 day's ago did a new one come out in the meantime..

But it did spring to mind when I was watching OC3D (have to say I think he's alright as well I'd be surprised if he's made a mistake).
It was in my head about the BIOS anyway, especially after Juan mentioning that there was a bug in it causing the thing to overheat.

goldstone77 · Jul 7, 2017

Newegg offering some nice price drops on CPU's and Motherboards!
http://promotions.newegg.com/NEemail/July-0-2017/MBAllStars_j9p57lL0_07/index-landing.html?utm_medium=Email&utm_source=IGNEFL070717&cm_mmc=EMC-IGNEFL070717-_-EMC-070717-Index-_-E0A-_-Blitz&et_cid=34824&et_rid=3107179&et_p1=&email64=R09MRFNUT05FNzdAR01BSUwuQ09N#TOP

YoAndy · Jul 7, 2017

goldstone77 :

For the X299 I rather wait for the New Asus ROG Rampage or updated STRIX series of motherboards, that way things should have settled and matured a little, including better bios.

Taran J · Jul 8, 2017

I5 8250u spotted.
On the 3rd of July 2017 passmark has received a passmark for the i5 8250u. It has a passmark of around 4700.
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i5-8250U+%40+1.60GHz&id=3042
Taran J

Jsaaaac · Jul 8, 2017

Taran J :

I7-8650u also seen. anyway loads of people have already found it

goldstone77 · Jul 15, 2017

Intel is LOSING its DIGNITY - WAN Show July 14, 2017
Linus Tech Tips
Published on Jul 14, 2017
00:20:20 - Intel says AMD EPYC processors "glued-together" in official slide deck
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8sXQ6JsNu8

Intel disses AMD’s new processors in what could be an Epyc fail
By Darren Allan 2 days ago Processors
Chip giant reckons AMD hasn’t got a glue
"As you may be aware, AMD followed up its consumer-targeted Ryzen processors with Epyc CPUs (previously codenamed Naples) aimed at servers and data centres – and Intel has been busy slinging mud at the latter chips.

In a presentation slide, Intel claims that Epyc processors (which are based on the same Zen architecture as Ryzen, but go up to a mighty 32-cores) are ‘glued-together’ and a ‘repurposed desktop product for server’.

Basically, Intel is saying this is a cobbled together product, along with the glue comment, references the fact that AMD’s chips aren’t a single die, rather they are comprised of four dies put together. However, this isn’t a bad design, as Tech PowerUp, observes.

Indeed, the tech site argues that Zen cores were built from the ground-up for modularity and scalability, and to craftily maximise yields for AMD – with the Epyc chips also delivering impressive results on the power/performance front.

Intel’s slide, however, engages in other seemingly low blows, accusing AMD’s processors of having ‘inconsistent performance’ due to this ‘glued-together’ nature, and further accuses its rival of lacking in terms of its supporting ecosystem."

Broad brush
"The problem is that making criticisms like these, with broad brush strokes such as vague accusations of inconsistency – as opposed to detailed comparisons or benchmark breakdowns – doesn’t really present Intel in a good light.

Particularly when in another slide, Intel further has a pop at Epyc CPUs by bringing up Ryzen’s initial problems with optimisation for games, and notes that buyers should expect similar software optimisations to be required for the server chips.

Which simply doesn’t follow. Exactly what does tweaking Ryzen for performance with specific games (perhaps at certain resolutions) have to do with what enterprise customers can expect from Epyc? Again, it just looks like a broad smear tactic. ‘This happened here, so it’s bound to happen again somehow…’

And this sort of marketing simply makes Intel look worried about the turf it might lose to AMD with these new Zen chips. After all, it appears that Ryzen is already making some considerable inroads into Intel territory with desktop PCs – albeit in terms of enthusiast rigs as these figures indicated earlier this month.

Intel may just have shot itself in the foot here – with a glue gun, if we can indulge in a bit of poetic licence, leaving the firm in a somewhat sticky situation regarding the tone of its marketing. It’ll certainly be interesting to see if AMD has any response."
http://www.techradar.com/news/intel-disses-amds-new-processors-in-what-could-be-an-epyc-fail

Intel slide criticizes AMD for using "glued-together" dies in Epyc processors
By Paul Lilly 3 days ago
Salty, much?
http://www.pcgamer.com/intel-slide-criticizes-amd-for-using-glued-together-dies-in-epyc-processors/

Intel Says AMD EPYC Processors "Glued-together" in Official Slide Deck
by Raevenlord Wednesday, July 12th 2017 05:12
https://www.techpowerup.com/235092/intel-says-amd-epyc-processors-glued-together-in-official-slide-deck

I ran across story while reading commentary on the previous, and thought it was worth mentioning.

ECHO OF THE BUNNYMEN: HOW AMD WON, THEN LOST
by: Brian Benchoff
DAY: DECEMBER 9, 2015
http://hackaday.com/2015/12/09/echo-of-the-bunnymen-how-amd-won-then-lost/

juanrga · Jul 15, 2017

goldstone77 :

Intel is completely right. EPYC CPUs are four dies glued together in a package

All CPU engineers from companies like IBM, Intel, Sun/Oracle, APM, Cavium, Broadcom, Fujitsu,... use monolithic dies in their server designs. They do because it is the best technological solution, but it seems now that journalists from sites as Techpowerup know better than engineers how to design a server CPU. LOL

goldstone77 :

This is a piece of misinformation and an attempt to rewrite the history. This article insists on spreading the same hype and false information about Keller. The chief architect of the Athlon 64 (K8) was Fred Weber, and the chief architect of Zen is Mike Clark, not Keller.

The article invents the reasons for the decline of AMD: The Intel compiler!!! LOL This must be a joke. The reasons for the decline of AMD are the dozen of huge economic, engineering, and strategic mistakes made by AMD management during its history. A very good discussion of the history of AMD and of the internal affairs (tell by people has worked at AMD) is found in next series of articles

https://arstechnica.com/business/2013/04/the-rise-and-fall-of-amd-how-an-underdog-stuck-it-to-intel/
https://arstechnica.com/business/2013/04/amd-on-ropes-from-the-top-of-the-mountain-to-the-deepest-valleys/

goldstone77 · Jul 15, 2017

juanrga :

FTC Settles Charges of Anticompetitive Conduct Against Intel
Provisions are Designed to Foster Competition in the Computer Chip Business
August 4, 2010
"Under the settlement, Intel will be prohibited from:

conditioning benefits to computer makers in exchange for their promise to buy chips from Intel exclusively or to refuse to buy chips from others; and
retaliating against computer makers if they do business with non-Intel suppliers by withholding benefits from them.
In addition, the FTC settlement order will require Intel to:

modify its intellectual property agreements with AMD, Nvidia, and Via so that those companies have more freedom to consider mergers or joint ventures with other companies, without the threat of being sued by Intel for patent infringement;
offer to extend Via’s x86 licensing agreement for five years beyond the current agreement, which expires in 2013;
maintain a key interface, known as the PCI Express Bus, for at least six years in a way that will not limit the performance of graphics processing chips. These assurances will provide incentives to manufacturers of complementary, and potentially competitive, products to Intel’s CPUs to continue to innovate; and
disclose to software developers that Intel computer compilers discriminate between Intel chips and non-Intel chips, and that they may not register all the features of non-Intel chips. Intel also will have to reimburse all software vendors who want to recompile their software using a non-Intel compiler."
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2010/08/ftc-settles-charges-anticompetitive-conduct-against-intel

Suit: Intel paid Dell up to $1 billion a year not to use AMD chips
http://money.cnn.com/blogs/legalpad/2007/02/suit-intel-paid-dell-up-to-1-billion_15.html?source=yahoo_quote

juanrga · Jul 15, 2017

goldstone77 :

juanrga :

FTC Settles Charges of Anticompetitive Conduct Against Intel
Provisions are Designed to Foster Competition in the Computer Chip Business
August 4, 2010
"Under the settlement, Intel will be prohibited from:

conditioning benefits to computer makers in exchange for their promise to buy chips from Intel exclusively or to refuse to buy chips from others; and
retaliating against computer makers if they do business with non-Intel suppliers by withholding benefits from them.
In addition, the FTC settlement order will require Intel to:

modify its intellectual property agreements with AMD, Nvidia, and Via so that those companies have more freedom to consider mergers or joint ventures with other companies, without the threat of being sued by Intel for patent infringement;
offer to extend Via’s x86 licensing agreement for five years beyond the current agreement, which expires in 2013;
maintain a key interface, known as the PCI Express Bus, for at least six years in a way that will not limit the performance of graphics processing chips. These assurances will provide incentives to manufacturers of complementary, and potentially competitive, products to Intel’s CPUs to continue to innovate; and
disclose to software developers that Intel computer compilers discriminate between Intel chips and non-Intel chips, and that they may not register all the features of non-Intel chips. Intel also will have to reimburse all software vendors who want to recompile their software using a non-Intel compiler."
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2010/08/ftc-settles-charges-anticompetitive-conduct-against-intel

Suit: Intel paid Dell up to $1 billion a year not to use AMD chips
http://money.cnn.com/blogs/legalpad/2007/02/suit-intel-paid-dell-up-to-1-billion_15.html?source=yahoo_quote

Sure, as mentioned in one of the links I gave. But that doesn't hide the dozen of huge economic, engineering, and strategic mistakes made by AMD management during its history, as reported by people working at AMD (including people was president of the company then), people is quoted in the arstechnica articles I gave. Mistakes that ruined the company as explained in the articles.

And AMD continue making huge mistakes today: SeaMicro acquisition and abandon, K12 cancellation and firing Keller, HSA, Polaris, Vega, 14LPP, CCX approach, MCM4 approach,... No one can pretend that Intel is responsible for all of that.

goldstone77 · Jul 15, 2017

juanrga :

goldstone77 :

juanrga :

FTC Settles Charges of Anticompetitive Conduct Against Intel
Provisions are Designed to Foster Competition in the Computer Chip Business
August 4, 2010
"Under the settlement, Intel will be prohibited from:

conditioning benefits to computer makers in exchange for their promise to buy chips from Intel exclusively or to refuse to buy chips from others; and
retaliating against computer makers if they do business with non-Intel suppliers by withholding benefits from them.
In addition, the FTC settlement order will require Intel to:

modify its intellectual property agreements with AMD, Nvidia, and Via so that those companies have more freedom to consider mergers or joint ventures with other companies, without the threat of being sued by Intel for patent infringement;
offer to extend Via’s x86 licensing agreement for five years beyond the current agreement, which expires in 2013;
maintain a key interface, known as the PCI Express Bus, for at least six years in a way that will not limit the performance of graphics processing chips. These assurances will provide incentives to manufacturers of complementary, and potentially competitive, products to Intel’s CPUs to continue to innovate; and
disclose to software developers that Intel computer compilers discriminate between Intel chips and non-Intel chips, and that they may not register all the features of non-Intel chips. Intel also will have to reimburse all software vendors who want to recompile their software using a non-Intel compiler."
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2010/08/ftc-settles-charges-anticompetitive-conduct-against-intel

Suit: Intel paid Dell up to $1 billion a year not to use AMD chips
http://money.cnn.com/blogs/legalpad/2007/02/suit-intel-paid-dell-up-to-1-billion_15.html?source=yahoo_quote

Sure, as mentioned in one of the links I gave. But that doesn't hide the dozen of huge economic, engineering, and strategic mistakes made by AMD management during its history, as reported by people working at AMD (including people was president of the company then), people is quoted in the arstechnica articles I gave. Mistakes that ruined the company as explained in the articles.

You are diverting from the topic. What does anything you said have to do with the fact that Intel used dirty, underhanded, shady tactics then. And is now in official product slides using sketchy vague language without benchmarks to dissuade people from buying AMD? Why would anyone approve or defend this type of behavior?

juanrga · Jul 15, 2017

goldstone77 :

No. Just no.

First. Intel slides about EPYC are accurate. EPYC are four dies glued together in a package as demonstrated above. This multidie approach has multiples technical deficiencies and this is the reason why no engineer beyond AMD --I repeat no engineer beyond AMD-- is using this ugly approach for server CPUs. All the server CPUs from IBM, Intel, APM, Cavium, Fujitsu, Broadcom, Sun/Oracle use monolithic die approach. Everyone else is using monolithic die for reasons explained in the Intel slides and for other reasons not mentioned by Intel.

Second, no one here is defending the dirty and illegal behavior than Intel had in the prehistory. Intel was wrong and they paid for that. My criticism was against the hackaday article, which pretends that AMD is in the current situation because Intel did cheat its compiler. LOL no. AMD is in the current situation for huge dozens of mistakes that AMD has made during its history. The pair of arsctechnica articles report the huge mistakes that ruined AMD, from engineering errors and canceled prototypes to management mistakes as the foundry issue. And AMD continues making mistakes today as the huge SeaMicro fiasco, where AMD lost a huge amount o money.

Third, it is funny that media complaining about Intel slides now; however did remain silent when AMD gave false slides and demos where Intel products were crippled (turbo 3 disabled, memory channels disabled, SPEC scores guessed instead measured, GPU bottlenecks)... or when AMD cheated performance graphs of the 300 series in comparisons with Nvidia GPUs. I am a bit tired of this double standard of certain media.

Fourth. The idea that Intel is not presenting benchmarks is not true:

What's extremely interesting about this announcement vs. AMD's dog & pony show for Epyc is that the only numbers AMD could post were intentionally-fudged SPEC benchmarks based on their own in-house testing of old Xeon parts compared to their own in-house-tuned Epyc scores.

Intel just shows numbers from third party customers who are actually using Skylake in real-world workloads instead of intentionally gimping Epyc in some in-house bakeoff competition.

I have seen those numbers from Google and other customers.

goldstone77 · Jul 15, 2017

juanrga :

goldstone77 :

No. Just no.

First. Intel slides about EPYC are accurate. EPYC are four dies glued together in a package as demonstrated above. This multidie approach has multiples technical deficiencies and this is the reason why no engineer beyond AMD --I repeat no engineer beyond AMD-- is using this ugly approach for server CPUs. All the server CPUs from IBM, Intel, APM, Cavium, Fujitsu, Broadcom, Sun/Oracle use monolithic die approach. Everyone else is using monolithic die for reasons explained in the Intel slides and for other reasons not mentioned by Intel.

Second, no one here is defending the dirty and illegal behavior than Intel had in the prehistory. Intel was wrong and they paid for that. My criticism was against the hackaday article, which pretends that AMD is in the current situation because Intel did cheat its compiler. LOL no. AMD is in the current situation for huge dozens of mistakes that AMD has made during its history. The pair of arsctechnica articles report the huge mistakes that ruined AMD, from engineering errors and canceled prototypes to management mistakes as the foundry issue. And AMD continues making mistakes today as the huge SeaMicro fiasco, where AMD lost a huge amount o money.

Third, it is funny that media complaining about Intel slides now; however did remain silent when AMD gave false slides and demos where Intel products were crippled (turbo 3 disabled, memory channels disabled, SPEC scores guessed instead measured, GPU bottlenecks)... or when AMD cheated performance graphs of the 300 series in comparisons with Nvidia GPUs. I am a bit tired of this double standard of certain media.

Fourth. The idea that Intel is not presenting benchmarks is not true:

What's extremely interesting about this announcement vs. AMD's dog & pony show for Epyc is that the only numbers AMD could post were intentionally-fudged SPEC benchmarks based on their own in-house testing of old Xeon parts compared to their own in-house-tuned Epyc scores.

Intel just shows numbers from third party customers who are actually using Skylake in real-world workloads instead of intentionally gimping Epyc in some in-house bakeoff competition.

I have seen those numbers from Google and other customers.

Off topic again. Linus goes into more detail about multiple slides spinning false narratives as well as other sites I posted about the slides. Intel didn't use a benchmarks to compare in the slides regardless of where else benchmarks might be found. If you are going to use quotes why not link the sources?

juanrga · Jul 15, 2017

I am addressing all the points, including the false claims made about Intel slides. The slides are technically accurate.

The former quote is from someone that watched the live presentation. But I can find a similar quote from datacenterknowledge

More interesting than Intel’s own benchmarks were performance numbers reported by software companies that were given early access to Xeon scalable. Running its cloud based video stitching application optimized for the new platform, Tencent saw a 72 percent gain, and SAS, running its business analytics stack, reported a doubling of performance over Xeon’s last generation.

http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2017/07/13/intels-xeon-scalable-designed-ground-data-centers/

You can also find here Google mentioning how Skylake is 40% faster with same binaries and 100% faster with code tuning.

On the other hand AMD is only giving slides with "intentionally-fudged SPEC benchmarks based on their own in-house testing of old Xeon parts compared to their own in-house-tuned Epyc scores".

goldstone77 · Jul 15, 2017

juanrga said:
I am addressing all the points, including the false claims made about Intel slides. The slides are technically accurate.

technically. Something technically true is actually, really true or correct but it may not be the way people think about it. For example, although people call a tomato a vegetable, technically it's a fruit.

There were no benchmarks present in the slides you are again diverting off topic, which is about the slides Intel used in there product launch referenced previously. Technically, glue is not used. datacenterknowledge.com was never referenced in these slides. Technically, there was nothing accurate about anything Intel said about AMD, and Linus goes into detail about the false narratives. The title of the video is very telling, but the discussion in the video goes into greater detail.

Intel is LOSING its DIGNITY - WAN Show July 14, 2017
Linus Tech Tips
Published on Jul 14, 2017
00:20:20 - Intel says AMD EPYC processors "glued-together" in official slide deck
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8sXQ6JsNu8

juanrga · Jul 16, 2017

When the slide says that dies are glued together, it does not mean that glue is used on the dies.

Similarly when us, scientists, write stuff like:

Quarks are the building blocks of protons, neutrons, and more-exotic entities, whereas gluons are massless particles that glue together quarks.

we do not mean that glue has been used on the quarks. When prosecutors say

has carefully picked and chosen the shreds of evidence she wants the jury to glue together.

They do not mean that glue has been given to people. When language experts write stuff like

In sum, we have used linear logic as a glue language to provide instructions on how to glue together or assemble meanings, based on the relations between the syntactic structures they correspond to.

They do not mean that glue has been used on words.

I agree that part of the media is s LOSING its DIGNITY.

juanrga · Jul 16, 2017

Michael Feldman, from top 500 list

The Linpack numbers are certainly impressive on the high-end SKUs. A server equipped with two 28-core Xeon Platinum 8180 processors, running at 2.5 GHz, turned in a result of 3007.8 gigaflops on the benchmark, which means each chip can deliver about 1.5 Linpack teraflops. That’s more than twice the performance of the original 32-core “Knights Ferry” Xeon Phi processor, and even better than the 50-core “Knights Corner” chip released in 2012. Even the current “Knights Landing” generation of Xeon Phi tops out at about 2 teraflops on Linpack using 72 cores.

-Fran- · Jul 16, 2017

I didn't know "glued together" was a technically accurate term.

Colour me surprised!

Cheers!

juanrga · Jul 16, 2017

As demonstrated above, it is technically accurate to talk about words, shreds of evidence, quarks, or dies glued together. What is more, in particle physics the particles that glue together quarks are named gluons.

Could we left the distractions and just focus on technical aspects of Intel products?

jaymc · Jul 16, 2017

Intel is starting to fight dirty for sure..
They know they are going to loose market share to Epyc especially in the single socket server market.. An there's nothing they can do about it in the near future anyway...

So they have started to fight dirty.. I completely agree..
What is really surprising to me is that they believe System Admins will fall for this "slander"...
In fact quite the opposite, I can see them taking a very practical approach through research and testing !

Anandtech's article agrees Intel definitely going to loose market share for sure.. and it also states that AMD has an excellent Ecosystem ! Which Intel's slides states otherwise.. I cannot understand how anyone could defend these downright dirty tactics..

Here's quote from Anandtech conclusion:
"AMD's single socket offering looks even more attractive. We estimate that a single EPYC 7551P would indeed outperform many of the dual Silver Xeon solutions. Overall the single-socket EPYC gives you about 8 cores more at similar clockspeeds than the 2P Intel, and AMD doesn't require explicit cross socket communication - the server board gets simpler and thus cheaper. For price conscious server buyers, this is an excellent option."

"Scalar floating point operations are clearly faster on the AMD core, and integer performance is – at the same clock – on par with Intel's best."

Here's the review from Anandtech check it out here:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/11544/intel-skylake-ep-vs-amd-epyc-7000-cpu-battle-of-the-decade

Also check this:
Epyc Wins, Intel Prepares To Fight Dirty.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctgAzn5Wx8o

juanrga · Jul 17, 2017

First Coffee Lake configurations

https://videocardz.com/70978/intel-preparing-multiple-6-core-coffee-lake-cpus

It confirms

i7 --> 6C + HT
i5 --> 6C

I guess i3 will be 4C + HT.

The i7 has higher clocks than the 7800X.

juanrga · Jul 17, 2017

jaymc :

Anandtech review is wrong, the performance of Broadwell and Skylake was dropped by 40% and 100%:

And AdoredTV is inventing weird excuses to explain why EPYC is not selling.

goldstone77 · Jul 17, 2017

juanrga :

Look at that Ryzen game changer! 6 and 8 cores mainstream now! So, happy their is competition now!

Intel's Future Chips: News, Rumours & Reviews

Titan

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Reputable

Prominent

Prominent

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Illustrious

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Share this page