Intel i9 CPU's get the finalized specs announced

[VagabondWraith]

5 minutes ago, MageTank said:

It's possible. Remember, TB2.0 operates at an all-core boost ratio depending on the board. It's labeled under "enhanced turbo" in most motherboard options. As long as you meet the power and thermal requirements (on a custom loop, 4.2ghz should still be feasible) it should work.

 

As for the solder issue, I genuinely wish I was wrong. In fact, if they did go back and fix it, and I am wrong about it, I'll be ecstatic. I just don't think they will do it, not after they've already manufactured this initial batch. Would be confusing to have some unsoldered versions on the market, while others have soldered chips. Even if they issued a recall and ate the cost, not everyone would send theirs back.

 

I suppose we will see come September, but I won't be holding my breath for that to change. 

I wonder if Intel will solder Cascade Lake-X on their next X299 chips. Hopefully they would learn their lesson although I can say they've definitely improved their TIM process this time around. 

[PCGuy_5960]

2 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

the problem is the vrms, there is so little space, and as you said, it wont use much voltage which is bad as vrms use more power at lower voltages for the same amps, most vrms will be getting super hot under that cpu, and probably using more than 30-40w of power

AFAIK, Skylake-X has a FIVR, so the voltage being supplied to the CPU isn't 1.2V but closer to 1.9V

[tom_w141]

38 minutes ago, done12many2 said:

I'd expect that the 7980XE will boost to 4.2 GHz on all cores under load.

Really 0.1 less for 8 more cores with a lower base whilst being unsoldered? I'm going with 3.8 all core boost.

38 minutes ago, done12many2 said:

4.2 GHz on all cores will put it considerably ahead of the 1950x.

He was talking 16v16 not 16v18 otherwise yeah ofc it'll crush it.

[Ryujin2003]

I love the BS Marketing.... Only our CPUs have Turbo Max 3.0 Boost and Zen doesn't.... Boost 2. Boost 3... Sounds like some kid and his Civic with N02 stickers for the extra HP...

And those PCiE lanes? Wow. Only 24 on their 6 core... Not much competition there.

 

 

 

Out of curiosity, what would the i9 x6 and x8 bring that a Ryzen 7 wouldn't have? Yes low price, but looks very limited for expansion.

[tom_w141]

40 minutes ago, goodtofufriday said:

 

if what morgan says is correct then the 7640 -> 7820 are i7s?

Then I would still be correct in saying 16 lanes are too little. 

Why are you even talking none i9s? Are you looking for something to hate on? The artificial segmentation forcing you spend $1k for the full lanes sucks we all know that but this is an i9 news thread. All i9s have 44 lanes.

[VagabondWraith]

14 minutes ago, AnonymousGuy said:

I'm excited for this, going to attempt direct die watercooling with it, maybe have a shot at setting the CB non-LN2 record for single socket.  I look at being able to delid as a feature,  I don't want to be limited by an IHS- soldered or not.

Which one, XE?

[sazrocks]

41 minutes ago, done12many2 said:

Believe it or not, this is actually good news for the i9 lines as I didn't think they were even going to hit a TB 2.0 of higher than 4 GHz.  At 4.2 GHz boost on all cores, the 7980XE is going to be a nasty multi-threading CPU and should crank out a 4300cb to 4400cb without even officially overclocking it.  

I might be misunderstanding this, but isn't TB 2.0 heavily dependent on the number of actual cores being used? If so, wouldn't turbo speeds be below 4.2GHz on all cores when actually using all cores?

[Taf the Ghost]

The one interesting part is that as the clock rate goes down, it should produce less heat/use less energy per core. Keeping an all-core Turbo of even 4.0 Ghz is going to be rough on the 16c & 18c parts. Even then, I think there's going to be a run of X299 boards getting fired trying to OC these parts. This should be hilarious to watch.

[samcool55]

For some weird reason i think cooling will be a disaster.

I mean the 10-core at stock already runs at 80-85 with a decent tower cooler...

[done12many2]

10 minutes ago, tom_w141 said:

Really 0.1 less for 8 more cores with a lower base whilst being unsoldered? I'm going with 3.8 all core boost.

 

I'll put a $100 bill on it that it higher.  Convert that to whatever currency you want.  

 

Quote

He was talking 16v16 not 16v18 otherwise yeah ofc it'll crush it.

 

The 16c stock and the 14c overclocked are going to both outperform the 16c TR part (stock or overclocked).  That's not to say that TR isn't great and not a much better deal.  It's just to say that's the way it is.  

[done12many2]

1 minute ago, sazrocks said:

I might be misunderstanding this, but isn't TB 2.0 heavily dependent on the number of actual cores being used? If so, wouldn't turbo speeds be below 4.2GHz on all cores when actually using all cores?

 

No, if you run multi-core enhancement in BIOS, it will lock all the cores to a 4.2 boost.  

[sazrocks]

Just now, samcool55 said:

For some weird reason i think cooling will be a disaster.

I mean the 10-core at stock already runs at 80-85 with a decent tower cooler...

As others have said, air, even something like an nh-d15 will be near inadequate/inadequate at stock speeds, let alone overclocking. A 360 rad will be the minimum for proper overclocking.

[tom_w141]

33 minutes ago, Evolution90 said:

That fucking price.. intel just never learn.. wow.

Actually this is a substantial discount for them  look at the price of a 6950X

[goodtofufriday]

6 minutes ago, tom_w141 said:

Why are you even talking none i9s? Are you looking for something to hate on? The artificial segmentation forcing you spend $1k for the full lanes sucks we all know that but this is an i9 news thread. All i9s have 44 lanes.

Not looking to hate.

 

I wasnt aware that anything under 10 core wasnt an i9. So when I saw the full slide of 16/28 lane offerings I thought that was way too low for HEDT , which is why I made the original comment.

[tom_w141]

1 minute ago, done12many2 said:

I'll put a $100 bill on it.  Convert that to whatever currency you want.  

Haha since that post i've had more of a think about how turbo boost works  With exceptional cooling its possible. IF the motherboard VRM doesn't crap out 1st.

1 minute ago, done12many2 said:

The 16c stock and the 14c overclocked are going to both outperform the 16c TR part.  That's not to say that TR isn't great and not a much better deal.  It's just to say that's the way it is.  

Yeah not disputing. Not even comparing TR to X299 myself. They both serve their purpose. Just saying the guy you quoted was talking 16v16 so i corrected thats all.

[sazrocks]

1 minute ago, done12many2 said:

No, if you run multi-core enhancement in BIOS, it will lock all the cores to a 4.2 boost.  

But that would be up the the motherboard vendor right? So on some boards it could hit 3.9-4.0GHz while on others it would go to 4.2GHz?

[samcool55]

1 minute ago, sazrocks said:

As others have said, air, even something like an nh-d15 will be near inadequate/inadequate at stock speeds, let alone overclocking. A 360 rad will be the minimum for proper overclocking.

Honestly i think that won't do much.

The issue is that the heat doesn't reach the IHS. Even if you manage to keep the IHS at like 40°C if the cpu is overclocked far enough it will overheat anyway because the heat is basically trapped...

[tom_w141]

1 hour ago, goodtofufriday said:

 

Still 16 lanes. Way too little.

So you are admitting not looking at the chart you yourself posted? There is i7 written next to half of them and an i5 at the bottom (I wish it wasn't)

[goodtofufriday]

4 minutes ago, tom_w141 said:

So you are admitting not looking at the chart you yourself posted? There is i7 written next to half of them and an i5 at the bottom (I wish it wasn't)

I am indeed admitting to that. 

 

In fact until you pointed it out i did not even notice it said iX next to the model numbers at all. 

[Taf the Ghost]

It should be noted I'm kind of surprised they will be able to get these 14c to 18c parts out by September.

 

The other interesting thing is this chart from OC3D:

https://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/cpu_mainboard/intel_i9_7900x_skylake-x_review/16

 

 

If there's a Power Draw limit because of technical issues, this could make for some really interesting results. We shall see!

[sazrocks]

Just now, samcool55 said:

Honestly i think that won't do much.

The issue is that the heat doesn't reach the IHS. Even if you manage to keep the IHS at like 40°C if the cpu is overclocked far enough it will overheat anyway because the heat is basically trapped...

I don't know about that. Sure, a delid will definitely increase the headroom in an overclock by upwards of 300MHz, but I'm pretty sure some ok/good overclocks will be possible without one, provided a rad of sufficient size.

[tom_w141]

Also everyone should stop for a moment and just imagine the pricing/existence of this platform though in a world without Ryzen/TR  

 

It would stop at 10 cores

Have the same lane segmentation

Cost the same or more than Broadwell E

 

Anyone that posts things like "R.I.P Threadripper" or is anti competition is a total moron/Oxygen thief. This is what competition gets you, better products throughout the entire product stack. Right from mainstream to HEDT.

[done12many2]

1 minute ago, sazrocks said:

But that would be up the the motherboard vendor right? So on some boards it could hit 3.9-4.0GHz while on others it would go to 4.2GHz?

 

I'm not sure if you are trying to insist that this isn't going to happen or if you don't legitimately understand.  

 

Yes, the motherboard manufacturer is providing the setting, but it is not an auto overclock.  It is simply setting all cores to the TB 2.0 speed and VID determined by Intel.  ALL modern Intel chips will run at their turbo'd (2.0) speed across all core simultaneously.  The only reason they don't by default is to keep TDPs down and within expectations.

 

On the boards that lack this feature, you simply set the cores to a multiplier of say 40, and the VID table automatically scales voltage as it would have if the motherboard would have had the "multi-core enhancement".  Same amount of steps and same result either way.    

 

Base clock is in no way anything that should be used to determine potential.   

[AnonymousGuy]

16 minutes ago, VagabondWraith said:

Which one, XE?

Indeed.  The 10 core would probably be a better "fit" for my usage scenario of future proofing + high single core performance from an overclock, but the 18 core is what really interest me because it's going to (probably) be a wild ride.  I'll feel accomplished if I see CorsairLink indicatig 4 digits of CPU power consumption.

[tsk]

Oh wow, finalized specs three days before threadripper launch? 
Try harder Intel.