Threadripper: The inside story

[Drak3]

1 hour ago, mr moose said:

The idea that Intel is knee jerking adding 8 cores (almost doubling) to an existing chip without R+D is highly unlikely. 

Again, with Intel just announcing Xeon-W, an LGA2066 platform that goes up to 18 cores, it's EXTREMELY likely that X299 would have only seen 12C if not for ThreadRipper, which would just be unlocked Xeon-W sans ECC, up to 12 cores.

Between Intel announcing X299 Octodecacores, and the set release of the 7980XE, is enough time for R&D to create and validate firmware that separates the 7980XE from its Xeon-W borther.

 

[mr moose]

4 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

Again, with Intel just announcing Xeon-W, an LGA2066 platform that goes up to 18 cores, it's EXTREMELY likely that X299 would have only seen 12C if not for ThreadRipper, which would just be unlocked Xeon-W sans ECC, up to 12 cores.

Between Intel announcing X299 Octodecacores, and the set release of the 7980XE, is enough time for R&D to create and validate firmware that separates the 7980XE from its Xeon-W borther.

 

 

I don't see how that changes what I am saying.  You are essentially just giving us more evidence that they had the R+D and CPU's already operational before deciding how far they would go on x299.

 

[Drak3]

Just now, mr moose said:

 

I don't see how that changes what I am saying.  You are essentially just giving us more evidence that they had the R+D and CPU's already operational before deciding how far they would go on x299.

 

They've had the R&D to go up to 22C on X99, yet they didn't. Intel tapped out at 8 and 10 cores, Haswell-E and Broadwell-E respectively. And I'm guessing for the same reasons that they were going to stop at either 10 or 12C on X299's SLX:

 

There are power efficiency and thermal targets they've set. X99 and X299 might be Intel's enthusiast platforms, but they're great alternatives to Xeon when ECC isn't needed. And not everyone is looking to overclock, even on a platform marketed for overclockers.

 

18C is pushing want mainboard manufacturers expected for X299, and pushing Intel's goal posts simply because AMD has more cores on an HEDT platform that use a "cooler" die.

[mr moose]

1 minute ago, Drak3 said:

They've had the R&D to go up to 22C on X99, yet they didn't. Intel tapped out at 8 and 10 cores, Haswell-E and Broadwell-E respectively. And I'm guessing for the same reasons that they were going to stop at either 10 or 12C on X299's SLX:

 

There are power efficiency and thermal targets they've set. X99 and X299 might be Intel's enthusiast platforms, but they're great alternatives to Xeon when ECC isn't needed. And not everyone is looking to overclock, even on a platform marketed for overclockers.

 

18C is pushing want mainboard manufacturers expected for X299, and pushing Intel's goal posts simply because AMD has more cores on an HEDT platform that use a "cooler" die.

 

That might be true.  But that also brings a lot more reasoning to the table than simply saying they only did it because AMD and they are freaking out.  We don't know if they have always been able to do it, only that it has been in development for a lot longer than people assume.  We also know that the xeon cores operate at a lower frequency, so just whacking those same18C at an overclocking platform requires a little bit more time in development.   Why did motherboard manufacturers not manufacture for 18Cores? who knows, maybe they where having trouble getting stable VRM for that many cores so just didn't bother.   Maybe Intel was not sure they could release 18c just yet,  maybe 18c was always the target but they didn't want to push it onto under performing Motherboards because their CEO is on vacation and won't be able to sign off.   Lots of supposition here.  

[GDRRiley]

58 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Never bothered looking into motherboards.  what evidence is there to suggest hey had no idea what was happening?

they said when the chips were announced also these are just cut down xeons. 

[mr moose]

2 minutes ago, GDRRiley said:

they said when the chips were announced also these are just cut down xeons. 

Well they did bring the release forward didn't they?  so that makes sense. 

[The Benjamins]

2 hours ago, mr moose said:

Never bothered looking into motherboards.  what evidence is there to suggest hey had no idea what was happening?

He said the press was first provided slides that the did NOT have the 14c+ CPUs a week earlier. also go to 8:14

 

Thats what I could find from the computex videos, I am not going to look though them all.

[mr moose]

1 hour ago, The Benjamins said:

He said the press was first provided slides that the did NOT have the 14c+ CPUs a week earlier. also go to 8:14

 

Thats what I could find from the computex videos, I am not going to look though them all.

That tells me that they had them planned, just that for whatever reason they weren't quite ready to include them.   Given the lack of specs for TDP etc, it would indicate they just weren't ready for x299 and overclocking users at that time.   Did they pull them forward in response to TR? Maybe. Did they post them because they got them ready and always wanted to? maybe.  Is it a bunch of knee-jerk thrown together CPU's at the last minute while they freak out over TR? not likely.

 

 

[leadeater]

3 hours ago, mr moose said:

That tells me that they had them planned, just that for whatever reason they weren't quite ready to include them.   Given the lack of specs for TDP etc, it would indicate they just weren't ready for x299 and overclocking users at that time.   Did they pull them forward in response to TR? Maybe. Did they post them because they got them ready and always wanted to? maybe.  Is it a bunch of knee-jerk thrown together CPU's at the last minute while they freak out over TR? not likely.

Well for me I simply do not see the 18 core Skylake-X CPUs existing without Threadripper. There is no reason for such a CPU to exist or a realistic market for it either, in the Intel product stack. 12 core makes perfect sense and fits inline with their previous generations +2 cores expansion of the HEDT lineup i.e. i7-980 (6 core), i7-4960X (6 core), i7-5960X (8 core), i7-6950X (10 core). The i9-7920X (12 cores) follows this logical progression, the i9-7980XE (18 cores) does not follow this progression curve and there is no node shrink to justify it either. This and the last generation were 14nm so an 8 core jump is illogical from that perspective.

 

The other factor why I think this is a pure reaction to Threadripper is that within the i9 range there are two completely different die architectures, one using the traditional Intel design and another using the scalable mesh architecture. If the 18 core SKU was an original part from inception of the X299 product stack then I would still expect to see two different dies however they would both be using the same architecture, you don't make a scalable architecture for use on a platform and then not use it.

 

Whether planned or not Intel struck it rather well with the way they packaged the X299 CPUs. Having Kabylake-X and Skylake-X on X299 and having a multi package design would have allowed Intel to do a late addition of these higher core count SKUs, it just means a third package option on top of the LGA2066 package. Personally I don't think this was done so they could add higher core count options if required this looks to be solely due to Kabylake-X.

 

I don't really think the actual debate is when the 18 core CPUs were planned but rather why, and that is as far as I can see down to the existence of Threadripper and not original planning of the X299 platform.

 

TL;DR Where there's smoke there's fire. There's no such thing as a coincidence. etc etc.

[mr moose]

10 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Well for me I simply do not see the 18 core Skylake-X CPUs existing without Threadripper. There is no reason for such a CPU to exist or a realistic market for it either, in the Intel product stack. 12 core makes perfect sense and fits inline with their previous generations +2 cores expansion of the HEDT lineup i.e. i7-980 (6 core), i7-4960X (6 core), i7-5960X (8 core), i7-6950X (10 core). The i9-7920X (12 cores) follows this logical progression, the i9-7980XE (18 cores) does not follow this progression curve and there is no node shrink to justify it either. This and the last generation were 14nm so an 8 core jump is illogical from that perspective.

 

The other factor why I think this is a pure reaction for Threadripper is that within the i9 range there are two completely different die architectures, one using the traditional Intel design and another using the scalable mesh architecture. If the 18 core SKU was an original part from inception of the X299 product stack then I would still expect to see two different dies however they would both be using the same architecture, you don't make a scalable architecture for use on a platform and then not use it.

 

Whether planned or not Intel struck it rather well with the way they packaged the X299 CPUs. Having the Kabylake-X and Skylake-X on X299 and having a multi package design would have allowed Intel to do a late addition of these higher core count SKUs, it just means a third package option on top of the LGA2066 package. Personally I don't think this was done so they could add higher core count options if required this looks to be solely due to Kabylake-X.

 

I don't really think the actual debate is when the 18 core CPUs were planned but rather why, and that is as far as I can see down to the existence of Threadripper and not original planning of the X299 platform.

 

So we have established that they where planning for the ability to go as far as 18 (if not more) cores on x299.   Which means they were already prepared for the TR. Clearly they hadn't managed to get them polished enough for release at Computex.    Which still indicates it's not a knee jerk reaction.   And as such some of the claims I was addressing earlier regarding it not being freak out move still stand yes? 

 

 

Maybe I should stop using the term knee-jerk, it seems to be upsetting people.  I'll use the term "panicked response" instead.  It's not a panicked response,  They are just doing what they did with x299, I.E moving the release forward even though it's not entirely ready.   Except in this case they are just increasing the number of cores available (not that I am sure they are exactly ready to do that on this platform).  They did it with the i3 in response to ryzen 3 too remember, that was hardly a surprise though. I don't think it would be fair to call that a panicked response either. Up and forward is always the name of the game.   

 

 

[leadeater]

20 minutes ago, mr moose said:

So we have established that they where planning for the ability to go as far as 18 (if not more) cores on x299.

No I think they were planning for no more than 12 cores originally, 18 cores was a later addition and was possible only due to previous design decisions that in turn allowed it to be possible.  

[mr moose]

1 minute ago, leadeater said:

No I think they were planning for no more than 12 cores originally, 18 cores was a later addition and was possible only due to previous design decisions that in turn allowed it to be possible.  

You don't think those decisions where intentional?  Even though it has been suggested they were designing x99 to go as high as 22 cores.

[leadeater]

6 minutes ago, mr moose said:

You don't think those decisions where intentional?  Even though it has been suggested they were designing x99 to go as high as 22 cores.

Nope, Kabylake-X was the driving factor to the design that allowed it to happen. Also 22 cores on X99 wasn't in the plans, I think people read far to much in to what Intel can do with their Xeon lineup. A 22 core part on X99 would have been something like a $5000 CPU at the time minimum.

[MageTank]

1 minute ago, leadeater said:

No I think they were planning for no more than 12 cores originally, 18 cores was a later addition and was possible only due to previous design decisions that in turn allowed it to be possible.  

I can say with absolute certainty (through magical powers that need not be explained) that X299 was only going to include 12C at most. Everything above that was a complete shock to the board partners, and were a direct response to Core Wars II: The Threadening (Sorry). It's also why these SKU's launched later than the first LCC batch (10C and below), and why Intel was still able to get them out in time without having to tape them out brand new. Everyone knew these were going to be cut from Xeons, however, we didn't know that these were the exact Xeons that was intended to be released at a later time. The differences between the X299 12C+ CPU's and their Xeon-W counterparts are like to be almost entirely artificial. This begs the question of whether or not bios trickery will allow overclocking of these Xeons (through forced microcode) or perhaps even the use of overclockable 7980XE's on dual socket WS motherboards. 

 

Fun fact: The "new" Xeon-W CPU's are also not soldered. Someone can correct me if I am wrong, but this may be the first time we've ever seen an unsoldered Xeon on an HEDT+ platform. 

[mr moose]

Just now, leadeater said:

Nope, Kabylake-X was the driving factor to the design that allowed it to happen. Also 22 cores on X99 wasn't in the plans, I think people read far to much in to what Intel can do with their Xeon lineup. A 22 core part on X99 would have been something like a $5000 CPU at the time.

 

And just another reason why they wouldn't have bothered before today.  Personally I can't see any of these decisions being luck or fortune, but rather intentional with or without the specific intentions of actually going that high.  Onward and upward is the only method.  

[leadeater]

2 minutes ago, mr moose said:

 

And just another reason why they wouldn't have bothered before today.  Personally I can't see any of these decisions being luck or fortune, but rather intentional with or without the specific intentions of actually going that high.  Onward and upward is the only method.  

Onward and upward is 12 cores though, 18 cores isn't that. It's not so much luck, even without Kabylake-X and the multi-package design of the X299 CPUs Intel could still have delivered 14-18 core CPUs but it would have taken longer. We all know that they could of, that is one thing that the Xeon lineup does show us.

 

What makes you think the 18 core part was ever in the original plans for X299? Completely ignore it's existence and Threadrippers too, what driving factor is there to deliver such a product? I can't think of any.

 

Also look at what happened with the i7-6950X, only 2 more cores than the last extreme edition CPU but an extra $700 ish dollars and came with a node shrink. You can't seriously tell me that Intel had the full intention of adding 8 more cores in the next generation while using the same node size with minor improvements.

 

Most of my reasoning for Intel not originally planning the 14-18 core parts has nothing to do with Threadripper at all, my reasoning is based almost entirely on Intel's past actions and design decisions. I only give Threadripper credit for being the trigger to make Intel do it and not out of fear, it's just what competition does especially when it's by the numbers.

[mr moose]

16 minutes ago, leadeater said:

What makes you think the 18 core part was ever in the original plans for X299? Completely ignore it's existence and Threadrippers too, what driving factor is there to deliver such a product? I can't think of any.

 

I never said it was,  my gripe has always only been that the inclusion of 18 cores was not a freak out panic response, because at the very least they would have had to have the ability to make that CPU in the design stages for a longer than TR has been out.  It also strikes me as naive to assume Intel had no idea TR was coming with that many cores.   It may not have been the perfect implementation (and that goes to show that Intel aren't that far advanced with their R+D, etc), but it was not unforeseen and, as many have pointed out, the product was already there waiting to go should they need it. 

[Jito463]

10 hours ago, mr moose said:

Maybe I should stop using the term knee-jerk, it seems to be upsetting people.  I'll use the term "panicked response" instead.  It's not a panicked response

I wouldn't call it knee-jerk or panicked.  I would say it was unplanned response, though.  As @leadeater has stated several times, there was no reason for Intel jump beyond 12 cores for the HEDT lineup, based on past behavior.  TR forced them to advance it much farther than they had intended to.

9 hours ago, mr moose said:

It also strikes me as naive to assume Intel had no idea TR was coming with that many cores.

While I believe generally both companies know what's coming from either side, there are instances where they manage to keep secrets from one another.  TR wasn't even on the roadmap from AMD, practically until launch.  They likely shrouded the development under the guise of more Epyc line R&D.  I think Intel really was caught with their pants down, and were forced to make additions to their HEDT SKUs that were never planned.

[dexT]

It looks like Threadripper is outselling X299 CPUs by a large margin to DIY enthusiasts

 

 

[mr moose]

3 hours ago, dexT said:

It looks like Threadripper is outselling X299 CPUs by a large margin to DIY enthusiasts

 

 

I wouldn't be surprised if Intel loses sales across the board at the moment,  They are right in the middle of a platform change waiting for CL.  Enthusiasts will either go with AMD or wait to see what CL turns out like.

[Pixel5]

On 6.9.2017 at 3:12 PM, Jito463 said:

I think it's WCCF, and I'd question them if they said the sky was blue and water was wet.  They have a known tendency to over exaggerate, if not just make stuff up completely out of thin air.  If you had posted from a more reputable source I might have conceded, but I take everything they post with a

 

 

while we are on off topic stuff here i just wanted to point out that this picture shows the biggest salt mountain in germany which is used to dump salt waste of a mine.

over 200 meters high and growing due to continuous mining.

[Dylanc1500]

On September 7, 2017 at 2:47 AM, mr moose said:

I never said it was,  my gripe has always only been that the inclusion of 18 cores was not a freak out panic response, because at the very least they would have had to have the ability to make that CPU in the design stages for a longer than TR has been out.  It also strikes me as naive to assume Intel had no idea TR was coming with that many cores.   It may not have been the perfect implementation (and that goes to show that Intel aren't that far advanced with their R+D, etc), but it was not unforeseen and, as many have pointed out, the product was already there waiting to go should they need it. 

Here is what I can say, they had planned for it ahead like you said. They weren't sure of the level of competition that was going to be brought to the table. That being said, there is a reason they are using the package that they are, it makes it very easy to move dies to different sockets (note the reason they call it a scalable architechure). If enough people scream for more cores they could step up to the 28 core die, slap it on a 2066 socket, and call it good. They planned ahead as you said, they just didn't know what they should release and when.

[leadeater]

4 hours ago, Pixel5 said:

growing due to continuous mining

So we need to get WCCFTech's mining rights revoked to stop that mountain getting any bigger? Who do I contact at Green Peace to get the ball rolling? 

[mr moose]

4 hours ago, Pixel5 said:

 

while we are on off topic stuff here i just wanted to point out that this picture shows the biggest salt mountain in germany which is used to dump salt waste of a mine.

over 200 meters high and growing due to continuous mining.

It actually surprises me that there is greenery around it, and so close. I would have thought that much salt would have leached into the soil killing everything for KM's.

[Salacious B Crum]

On 9/5/2017 at 0:14 PM, Dylanc1500 said:

Intel isn't freaking out when they have 18 cores running at 4.8 ghz.

No but people that fork over the money will!