Intel comes out with the new stats of new I9 cpus

[Brighttail]

https://newsroom.intel.com/news/intel-unveils-full-intel-core-x-series-processor-family-specs-14-18-...

I can't believe I just noticed this. I was leaning towards the 7800X as I currently have the 5930k which is 6 cores. I'm not needing 44 lanes, tho I'm upset that I'm losing 12 lanes for the same number of cores, then I see that the 7800X doesn't have the intel turbo boost 3.0, but the 8 core 7820x does. So once again I'm feeling that Intel is giving us the middle finger, almost forcing us to either keep the old x99 platform or shell out an extra $500 for a 10core with 44 lanes, just to keep up with what I have now.

Oh let us not forget that VROC won't allow non-Intel SSDs to have a bootable drive using the VROC technology.

It is almost if Intel is begging us to go to AMD. 😕

[Moloch]

Brighttail wrote:
https://newsroom.intel.com/news/intel-unveils-full-intel-core-x-series-processor-family-specs-14-18-...

I can't believe I just noticed this. I was leaning towards the 7800X as I currently have the 5930k which is 6 cores. I'm not needing 44 lanes, tho I'm upset that I'm losing 12 lanes for the same number of cores, then I see that the 7800X doesn't have the intel turbo boost 3.0, but the 8 core 7820x does. So once again I'm feeling that Intel is giving us the middle finger, almost forcing us to either keep the old x99 platform or shell out an extra $500 for a 10core with 44 lanes, just to keep up with what I have now.

Oh let us not forget that VROC won't allow non-Intel SSDs to have a bootable drive using the VROC technology.

It is almost if Intel is begging us to go to AMD. 😕

Turbo boost 3.0 only affects your 2 top performing cores. And, it might not work at all if you are already overclocking.

I really hate proprietary things like Intel might be doing with VROC. They should ask Apple how that went in the 80's:
http://www.businessinsider.com/how-apple-really-lost-its-lead-in-the-80s-2012-12

[Brighttail]

Moloch wrote:
Turbo boost 3.0 only affects your 2 top performing cores. And, it might not work at all if you are already overclocking.

I really hate proprietary things like Intel might be doing with VROC. They should ask Apple how that went in the 80's:
http://www.businessinsider.com/how-apple-really-lost-its-lead-in-the-80s-2012-12

Yeah. My biggest issue isn't even all that. Having an x99 5930k with 6 cores and 40 PCI-e lanes, I really feel like they slapped me in the face by taking away 12 lanes for the new 6 and 8 cores. Sure I can get 2 more cores at the same price point as I had when I bought the old 6 core, but I feel as if Intel is flipping us the middle finger and almost pushing us to AMD with these types of decisions and the proprietary nature of VROC.

[Mavtop]

I think Intel is a little lost right now.

Their marketing strategy is trying ever so hard to sound big new and amazing.

Facts are that Intel is still the speed king, but AMD is closing the gap with Threadripper/Epyc.

Intel needs to get with the times are start aiming for "Intel Experience" where everything just works and is oriented to let people do what they want with the hardware.

Don't limit VROC to intel drives, let it use any old m.2 drive.

Don't use TIM on the new Processors, meet consumers where they are at, solder that ****.

Little tiny things like this, can make all the difference in the world.

And If Intel is having a hard time figuring this out, refer them to me and my consulting firm.

[Mavtop]

Anyone else heard whispers of the 14core and above i9's being soldered due to the angry villagers like us, griping about the TIM?

[Vlada011]

Mavtop wrote:
Anyone else heard whispers of the 14core and above i9's being soldered due to the angry villagers like us, griping about the TIM?

That's even worse news than decision to some people get thermal paste and struggle to lose warranty only to get similar results as soldered CPU and others to get normal products for 1500$. I could see customers who buy 1950X + Zenith Extreme instead Intel 14 Cores. Force you to pay 500$ more than i9-7900X for 1$ worth process. Human misery in full shine. At the end of 2018 processor market will be 50-50%. Because hundreds thousands people will build RIG with 1700 and 1700X or 1800X with some 200-250$ worth motherboards. Intel will sell one i9 one every 30 Ryzen 7 processors. It's not hard to predict that... And they completely confised situation with Coffee Lake and new chipset and compatibility I stop to read news after I saw Kaby Lake "Refresh"... Now I don't know any more who have 6core and who is compatible with old and who with new chipset and how long will be new chipset on matket a....
And to be honest I don"t care. And there is more people who probably think...
We will check again before next socket...successor of 2066 and successor of 1151.

Who make decision to only more expensive models than 14 cores arrive with soldered IHS?
Why not only 18 core or all i9, or all Skylake-X as we expected?

[CSN7]

Where can I hear (read) those whispers (source)?

Also I REALLY need to know for certain: Is the 12-Core 7920X the same LCC as the 7900X? or already the HCC design? There are mixed reports...

[Mavtop]

I have no idea, just a hunch as the 160watt parts (14-18 core) appear to have clock speeds that would necessitate something better than paste based TIM.

I may have to just wait and see, and live with my 7900x until the big boys come out and see if it's worth making a change, or waiting out the next chipset.

Until then siliconlottery.com!

[Brighttail]

Yeah that would be pretty SH*TTY if Intel offered CPUs with solder after a certain price point. They already screwed us with 6/8 cores with only 28PCI lanes. My old 6 core 2133 with 40 cores was $800 CAD, the same price as their 8 core with 28 lanes. To get 44 lanes I have to spend an additional 600-700 dollars? Obnoxious.

[Korth]

To be fair, i9-X processors are effectively rebadged Xeons. Without many Xeon-specific features (which is basically okay for consumers, since they aren't into platform management stuff, although sadly the Xeon "Always Enable Turbo Boost" setting is conspicuously absent on i9-X). So consumers can basically get (1S) Xeon processors for slightly less than Xeon prices.

But i9-X is consumer HEDT chipset/socket and Xeons are now enterprise chipset/socket and now there's no intercompatibility. Intel deliberately segmented the market, they don't want consumers running enterprise parts anymore. So basically the Intel chipset/socket now limits your options while previous Intel chipset/socket did not - I run a Xeon Haswell-EP processor in my X99, that's not an option with X299.

And LGA1151 100 Series and 200 Series and (soon) 300 Series mobos have arbitrarily-limited compatibility with SKL and KBL and (soon) CFL processors. There's no technical reasons preventing them from all working with each other. There's only Intel reasons preventing firmware/microcode updates from being released. So Intel locks out your CPU options with a different socket ... and now they also lock them out on the *same* socket, really?

Intel VROC requires more than just Intel-branded drives. It also requires a (ridiculously expensive) Intel RAID hardware key - not a device which actually adds new functionality, only a device which unlocks existing functionality, it's also license-locked to one platform and one user and a subscription fee.

The 28 lane processors was insulting. Especially when compared vs bottom-of-the-barrel minimum spec Xeon processors (costing as little as $100~$200, lol) which still had all 40 lanes enabled.