Intel’s 18 Core Skylake-X Won’t Be Available Until Next Year – 14 & 16 Core Parts To See Delayed Availability?

[AnonymousGuy]

10 hours ago, Dackzy said:

I can't really see Skylake-X being a best seller in any way. AMDs offerings are quite a bit cheaper, have more lanes and a less complicated platform since every CPU that uses X399 has 64 lanes, so no need to look through a lot of manuals to find out what gets turned off if you go with a CPU with fewer lanes.

 

You give up some IPC, but you also get the same amount of cores for less or more cores for the same price (at least if that 849$ for a 16c TR is true).

With the new cache hierarchy, chances are you're giving up a lot of IPC, ability to overclock (4ghz isn't overclocking, gg Ryzen), and a platform that works out-the-gate.  

 

I'll bet now that a 7900X overclocked beats a 1998 16 core in multithread and wrecks house in single thread   Then comes crying about software optimizations, just wait for something something 6 months later, blah blah.

[Jito463]

13 minutes ago, AnonymousGuy said:

(4ghz isn't overclocking, gg Ryzen)

My guess is that the wafer process from GloFo won't allow for it.  The manufacturing deal AMD has with GF is their biggest obstacle right now, in my opinion.

[SpaceGhostC2C]

3 hours ago, DELTAprime said:

As far as I'm concerned there is only one use case to buy Intel at this point and that is if you want to push maximum FPS like I do. Otherwise just buy Ryzen.

That's actually how AMD is marketing Ryzen right now:

Spoiler

 

 

[Dackzy]

49 minutes ago, AnonymousGuy said:

With the new cache hierarchy, chances are you're giving up a lot of IPC, ability to overclock (4ghz isn't overclocking, gg Ryzen), and a platform that works out-the-gate.  

 

I'll bet now that a 7900X overclocked beats a 1998 16 core in multithread and wrecks house in single thread   Then comes crying about software optimizations, just wait for something something 6 months later, blah blah.

you really think the IPC is going to be over 60% better? You are saying that a 10c will beat a 16c, so the IPC must be at least 60% better, can you see how unrealistic that is? Intel has problems just giving you a IPC improvement, just look at sky vs kaby, same IPC just higher clocks. If you ask me then at worst we are going to see a IPC difference of 22-23%. Plus then we also have the fact that they didn't solder their CPUs, so they are going to be hot, very hot.

 

Have you even seen x299? It is a fucking mess, because it needs to support so many different lane amounts, plus if you look at gigabyte they gave up on TB3, because of the mess that intel made with their stupid idea to make a kaby refresh on a HEDT platform.

X399 is way less of a mess, simply because every single CPU has 64 lanes.

[Dabombinable]

1 hour ago, Dackzy said:

X399 is way less of a mess, simply because every single CPU has 64 lanes.

Which makes it apparent that Intel is shitting themselves because they've actually got some competition now.

[PCGuy_5960]

3 hours ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

That's actually how AMD is marketing Ryzen right now:

Content creation? I guess AMD doesn't think that Adobe Software should be used for that....

Spoiler

 

[Princess Luna]

Who would have thought  that the day AMD bested Intel at something would've happened after the FX fiasco haha... this is all great news I hope Ryzen keeps being people's first choice for workstation as x299 is still another Intel milking people time.

[Dabombinable]

Still got proof of one of Intel's earlier times shitting bricks due to AMD releasing the 1GHz Athlon. The almost impossible to get in 2000 Pentium III 1GHz cCO stepping (it was almost vaporware) which struggles at its stock clock speed (I have to overvolt it from 1.7V to 1.9V to get it stable-which is only possible ATM on my Abit VP6) with the 1100MHz and 1133MHz versions being even worse.
And the cDO stepping from 2001 which was in far better supply could actually hit its stock clock speed while being stable (mine can do 1.2GHz @ 1.85V  at the same time on the VP6).

Pretty much the cCO stepping was Intel trying to rush out their own 1GHz CPU in response to AMD....by using highly binned Pentium III which for the most part ran at the ragged edge of their clock speed limits.