Intel's Future Chips: News, Rumours & Reviews

Page 88 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.


You have changed the AMD model to the 1700. I could change in the opposite direction and mention the 1800X, which has a worse performance/price ratio.

You mention the more expensive X299 motherboard, but you only chose cheaper B-chipset mobos for AM4. The more expensive AM4 mobo that you mention costs $90. The more expensive in that link is $350 and there are several above $200.

You don't count memory or the rest of system. I find interesting the amount of people that purchases Ryzen and then spend money on getting the more expensive RAM that can find to compensate for the latency issue.

The X299 platform can be competitive in performance/ratio, and many people not only recommend SKL-X chips but purchased one. Among the new releases, the SKL-X line is selling very well and are best-sellers

https://www.amazon.com/gp/new-releases/pc/229189/ref=zg_bs_tab_t_bsnr

Power consumption? As mentioned before launch reviews of SKL-X used beta BIOS with problems regarding p-states, turbo3,... and that affected both performance and power consumption. Things have changed with final BIOS.

SA just reviewed the i9, and found that it consumes less power and is more efficient than AMD TR chips.
 
HW News: X399 Outstripping X299, PCIe 5.0, 1900X CCXs
Gamers Nexus
Published on Sep 7, 2017
Speaking with vendors the word on the street is that looking at X299 vs. X399 the venders with whom we have spoken said that the first few days to the first week, depending on which vendor, of sales of the X399 products, related products surpassed the first month of Intel X299 products sales from those same vendors, not retailers, but actual manufacturers.
Click to expand...

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/id-3341285/amd-naples-server-cpu-info-rumours/page-10.html#20156921
 


Source for bad NVMe RAID support?

I mean, even if they are working bugs out, native NVMe RAID is better than a $400 set of dongles.

 


You get all 64, if you use NVMe drives, then you are using some of that 64.

Threadripper actually has 128 lanes, but 64 are used to communicate between dies. You get the full 64 lanes they advertise, it is merely your choice as to what you do with them.

By comparison, Intel gives you 44 at best, and you use some of those with NVMe as well, and you do not get native RAID support, and you pay more for the hardware.
 


Please break down pricing per core and discuss price/performance terms via per core pricing.

Last I checked you get 12 cores with Intel for the price of 16 with TR. I would call that a price/performance advantage.
 


I give you a common sense solution, which maximizes price to performance and what everyone "in the know" is doing. If the 1700, 1700X, and 1800X are the same CPU just buy the cheapest one, and get the same performance. You don't have this option with Skylake-X, so you can't. The 1700 comes with a great CPU cooler capable of a mild overclock, which is value added! You will need to purchase a CPU cooler for the 7800X, if AIO they range in the ~$100+.

Let me try to simplify this with numbers
Ryzen 1700 System
1700 a $294(comes with a great cooler)
MSI - B350M GAMING PRO Micro ATX AM4 Motherboard Price: $69.99 Free Shipping for Prime Members
G.SKILL TridentZ Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 3200 (PC4 25600) Intel Z170 Platform Desktop Memory Model F4-3200C16D-16GTZKW $143.99
This is the cheapest 2 X 8GB set on PC Parts Picker and is also supported by the B350 Gaming Pro!
Total Cost with CPU, Motherboard, and 16GB 3200MHz RAM: $507.98
CPU Cooler if you want to get 200MHz over clock beyond the 3.7GHz turbo add
Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO Processor Cooler Sale Price: $34.89 $24.89 after $10.00 rebate.
Total with cooler: $532.87
Add a Video Card:
Gigabyte - GeForce GTX 1080 8GB Turbo OC Video Card Price: $499.99 Free Shipping for Prime Members
Total with CPU, Motherboard, RAM, CPU Cooler, and Video Card: $1032.86 Without Cooler: $1,007.97

Intel 7800X System
7800X a $375(need to buy a freezer to cool it)
MSI Pro Series Intel X299 LGA 2066 DDR4 USB 3.1 SLI ATX Motherboard (X299 RAIDER) Sale Price: $217.89 $207.89 after $10.00 rebate
G.SKILL TridentZ Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 3200 (PC4 25600) Intel Z170 Platform Desktop Memory Model F4-3200C16D-16GTZKW $143.99
Total Cost with CPU, Motherboard, and 16GB 3200MHz RAM: $726.88
CPU Cooler Add
Noctua NH-D9DX i4 3U 92mm SSO2 For Intel LGA2011-0 & LGA2011-3, LGA1356, LGA1366 Sockets, 1x92mm NF-A9 PWM Quiet CPU Cooler $53.85
Total with cooler: $780.73
EVGA GeForce GTX 1060 GAMING, ACX 2.0 (Single Fan), 06G-P4-6161-KR, 6GB GDDR5, DX12 OSD Support (PXOC) $264.99
Gigabyte - GeForce GTX 1080 8GB Turbo OC Video Card Price:$499.99 Free Shipping for Prime Members
Total with CPU, Motherboard, RAM, CPU cooler, and 1080GTX Video Card: $1,280.72 Without cooler:$1,226.87
Total with CPU, Motherboard, RAM, CPU cooler, and GTX1060 Video Card: $1,045.72 Without cooler:$991.87

Even with the cheapest options Ryzen 1700 System only $16.10 more expensive using a video card offering twice the performance of a comparable 7800X System. Ryzen is simply the much better deal with equivalent budgets.


Link to the list of memory supported at 3200MHz by the B350 Gaming Pro
 


Link was given above...
 


Nope. Pricing per core is irrelevant because not all cores are the same. AMD cores are simpler and weaker, and that is why AMD has to add moar cores to get similar performance.

It doesn't matter if AMD gives moar cores for the same price when those cores are slower and less efficient.

In the end Intel’s i9-7900X appears to offer the best combination of singlethreaded performance, multithreaded performance, and efficiency at the $1000 price point. It’s not as fast as AMD’s Ryzen Threadripper in well threaded tasks, but it offers significantly stronger performance in single and lightly threaded workloads while remaining more efficient than the competition. More to the point its performance in multithreaded workloads is really quite good. Given the massive disadvantage it has in core count, the gap in performance is smaller than one would expect.
Click to expand...
 


They aren't the same CPU, the performance is different. You continue comparing cheapest B-class mobos on the AM4 system, ignoring that people is purchasing the more expensive X-class mobos, because the cheapests have problems. Even with that trick the faster SKL-X system is only 24% more expensive. The SKL-X system has a similar performance/price ratio.

And you also ignore upgrade paths; people can purchase the cheapest 6-core SKL-X model today and update to a much higher model latter.
 
Intel foundry customer bails out
Another partner silently goes AWOL
Sep 6, 2017 by Charlie Demerjian
It looks like one of Intel’s marquee foundry customers just jumped ship. SemiAccurate has been saying that Intel’s vaunted 10nm process is not commercially viable, now we are seeing the first fallout.

You might recall we have been saying there are two, not one, fundamental problems with Intel’s 10nm process. We told you about the first last December and the second a few weeks later. The problems are not tied together however, fixing one won’t necessarily, or even likely, mean the other is solved, and either one makes for a commercially non-viable process.

You might recall the 10nm process is officially going great according to Intel PR, they talk about Icelake taping out, how they are not behind in Moore’s law because Hyperscaling redefined the numbers, and so on and so forth. One thing they won’t point out is that 10nm products are not out. They were supposed to be out more than two years ago and now, well, 2018. Maybe. And only on the lowest volume parts of the stack, “8th generation” is now overwhelmingly 14nm parts. Does that tell you about how viable Intel believes 10nm is when (if?) it comes out in 1H/2018 as “planned”?

Then there are the foundry customers, lots were announced. Altera would be the big one shipping if Intel didn’t buy them but there are others with silicon on the market. Netronome, Archronix, and Tabula seem to be the entirety of the list but together they don’t add up to more than a blip in Intel’s revenue. Remember Cisco and Panasonic? Cisco signed up in early 2013, Panasonic in mid-2014. Their Intel manufactured devices should be flooding the market now, right? Shall I go on?
Click to expand...
Intel_foundry_roadmap-617x463.jpg

Customers love predictability like Intel delivers
So Intel can’t make 10nm chips, has a customer list that can be counted on one hand, and the ones of those with financially significant volumes can be counted on one finger. Progress is being made though, and customers should be happy with the timelines Intel is promising. And delivering. Page 11 notwithstanding. Since the 2013/2014 announcements, several others, a few big names included, have officially signed on. This ‘wave’ was set into motion by ARM announcing they would be working with Intel as a foundry. Big names followed. One of the largest just left.
Click to expand...

 


Engineering samples of 10nm CannonLake intel chips have already been measured and launch is planned for this year, with second gen 10nm chips (IceLake) coming next year.

 


That's what the article is saying there is no 10nm viable for production.
 
By the way, apparently Spreadtrum is going back to TSMC 12 nm half-node, after they went with Intel for 14nm. Interesting move given Intel owns 20% of Spreadtrum!
 


The most expensive X299 motherboards have problems! You have short term memory! VRMs! Expensive means expensive not better! Skylake-X 4, 6, and 8 core pay a premium for the platform. The platform is HEDT. 16 and and 28 PCI-E is not HEDT! This segmentation among other pricing schemes made Skylake-X a flop. It's not a trick it's common sense! I can tell you don't build much, because if you did you wouldn't say nonsensical things. For the same budget you get a better system with Ryzen. The numbers don't lie Ryzen is the better choice hands down.
 


I have 2 suspicions:

1.- Intel might end up selling that 20% you're mentioning in the short term, since the 14nm departure (or divorce?) could signal a break in their dependence.
2.- Intel is not planning for a low power tuned node after 14nm (since they pretty much killed all ultra low power stuff) and they allowed Spreadtrum to seek another foundry.

I wonder if there might be other options.

Cheers!
 


The article is wrong. 10nm chips are in production actually.

But I was discussing the above slide. That slide is from a talk given in 2014 by Intel

https://www.wesrch.com/electronics/paper-details/pdf-EL1SE1V8OYHLG-intel-custom-foundry-competing-in-today-s-fabless-eco-system#page11

The slide says that prototype silicon will start in 2015, not that volume production in final silicon would start in 2015.
 


Didn't GloFo have 7nm prototypes in 2015 as well? I vaguely remember an article or news somewhere stating that.

Cheers!
 


Those VRM problems were exclusive to some initial models of mobos and beta BIOS, and solving the problem was so easy as retiring the fancy plastic cover from the VRMs and allowing that zone to be cooled or updating the BIOS. Current motherboards work fine and owners are overclocking at 4.5GHz or 4.8GHz and tempts are fine.

There is a saying in my country that says sometimes the cheap becomes expensive. It means that when we buy something cheap, but it causes a lot of trouble because it stop work sooner than expected, and you have to pay in order to repair it or doesn't work as expected one loses money.

You chose a cheapest B350 mobo for favoring the AMD build, but precisely forums are full with people is having all class of issues with those cheaper mobos. In fact when in the early days of the segmentation fault on RyZen, many AMD fanboys believed that the problem wasn't on the RyZen, but on people using B350 mobos. It was latter verified that the problem also appears in chips mounted on X370 mobos, because the fault was on the chip, but the B350 mobos have that stigma of bad quality.

The SKL-X solution is the better solution for all that people that has purchased 7800X and 7820X instead RyZen. It seems that despite all the FUD in forums and the biased/paid reviews, the SKL-X line is getting good sales.

The SKL-X line is also better than the ThreadRipper line:

In the end Intel’s i9-7900X appears to offer the best combination of singlethreaded performance, multithreaded performance, and efficiency at the $1000 price point. It’s not as fast as AMD’s Ryzen Threadripper in well threaded tasks, but it offers significantly stronger performance in single and lightly threaded workloads while remaining more efficient than the competition. More to the point its performance in multithreaded workloads is really quite good. Given the massive disadvantage it has in core count, the gap in performance is smaller than one would expect.
Click to expand...
 


Sure no! And I guess you mean that IBM fabricated a 7nm transistor back in 2015

Single transistor != prototype chip
 


I'm sure he doesn't mean that.
IBM had already fabricated a 6 nm transistor in 2002 !!!
https://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1034321/ibm-claims-worlds-smallest-silicon-transistor

And in fact IBM did produce a 7nm prototype chip in 2015.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom