8 core version of 8700k is coming this Fall!

[pas008]

Intel corrected the media after twisted developments

Sounds like a showcase. Are you butthurt? Quit yelling lol

32/28/24/28 core has it's place right?

Quit yelling lol

Oh producers can't shoecase

Lol yell at Samsung for needing softwarr for neediing software yell at amd for volta killer in their video or overclockers dream or 4.2 ryxen1 or nvidia for2200 overclock

Oh wait those were showcases. Lol production models were like their showcases

Yell at themnot to mention intel is spending fab time on quantum 

Lol relax a showcasr3 is a shocase

No need to be Butthurt

1950c at mc for 630

[pas008]

33 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

Nobody was excusing anyone, again you're trying to shift blame from Intel for what they admitted they were wrong for doing.  You were the one yelling at everyone.  You're not right, sorry.   And, I'm not butthurt clearly you are since Intel admitted they wrong and you continue to argue that they weren't wrong.  Heck, you got so upset about it you went to a completely different topic to argue over it.

"Everyone else does it; therefore, it is okay!"  Um, no what they all had done is wrong, but that doesn't matter because this is about Intel.  In those topics yes that matters, but we aren't discussing all those other companies, you are.  Maybe try to stay on topic or do you have nothing to add other than the same failed/disputed argument over and over?

It's almost like 

lol yelling hahaha

was I the one to bring it up here?

hahaha

and a showcase is a showcase you are the one to continue to cry about it

I'm simply responding my opinion

of course intel has to release a statement after media twisted it

oh wow

[pas008]

2 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

No, they originally intended to state all of it.  Aka, you were refuted and ya you did.  I hadn't said anything in this thread until I saw your carried over argument from the previous thread.  I guess we are done since you keep arguing the same thing over and over, have been refuted by Intel themselves, and just want to argue it over and over because...

because i have been around long enough to know a showcase is a showcase and if the media twisted a story and copy and pasted like no tomorrow of course the company needs to release a statement

and like I said all companies have done it from ram ssd gpus and even cell phones and vehicles

 

only one getting worked up here is you claiming i'm yelling

but i am simply pointing out what happened

[pas008]

12 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

Again, this isn't about those other companies, and we all said what they have done is wrong.  So, you can stop arguing about that.

Lastly, you keep arguing that fallacy over and over and over.  Intel had originally meant to say it, failed to do so, and admitted they were wrong, so your argument has no value to it.  Move on it's done.  I also didn't realize everyone was you.  Wow, what a boring world we live in.  The media didn't twist a story, you twisted the reasoning.  They reported what Intel misled them with.  It's like you didn't get that the first 100 times.

you can move on journalist should be more than copy and paste and knowing what you are reporting about plain and simple

not saying anything isnt misleading especially on an unnamed unannounced product that may not even come to be

not sure where you been but this isnt the first time a company will not state shit on a product but show it doing something

 

[pas008]

12 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

1)  Welcome to journalism, this is just what they do and I'm not saying that's okay I don't really care for the news myself.

2) That doesn't make it okay.

 

hahaha

no journalism use to be about integrity and not reporting assumptions as fact or even this clickbait trend shit

 

and not saying anything is what it is not saying anything especially on future products

should companies never tease a product or possible product? or not have a nda?

 

lol ok then

 

[pas008]

11 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

Um, that integrity thing is bs there's always been bad coverage or people ignorant of a topic covering it.  This is not some new "millennial trend" it's always been a thing with journalism.  I don't know where you've been.  Or, ya know piss poor phrasing leading to misleading coverage when you originally intended to state those things while knowing not everyone there would know the difference is on Intel.  They admitted to this and stated they were wrong to do so.  It's not damage control.  Do you really not having anything to add, or do you just wanna keep arguing the same thing through more threads.  Why you are so vocal about this is beyond me.  And, it's really getting boring especially when the company themselves refuted your claim.

refuted nothing they added they forgot to use overclocked

but still is a showcase and a demo on an unnamed unannounced product was taking seriously

why? because supposedly rain on some fanboys parade, which in my mind didnt even come close to raining on it

tr2 still trumps this by far considering price and mobos already available for it, it actually made tr2 more attractive

like I said I have seen this many times dating back to the 90s

and back then journalist didnt clickbait like now days and copy and paste the news they didnt even attend

 

 

[pas008]

18 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

It was taken seriously because of the way they phrased it and forgot to add some words while having ignorant journalists there.  And, if you really think clickbait/misled coverage/bad coverage/and so on is anything new then I hate to break it to you, but it's nothing new.  Read any magazine on health and bodybuilding since they first came out.  Remember how good hard drugs were for ya?  Remember how bad some things were for ya because ya know they competed in an industry?  Remember all those Arnold coverages where he explained his diet and workout plan/s yet recently explained that he and everyone back then were actually abusing steroids?  The same type of coverage happened globally in the tech world with the bit wars and several other forms of utter bs.  You can call it showmanship/nothing new/integrity and so on, but it's all equally wrong regardless.

hahaha no the truth was there not assumptions

get the point

[mynameisjuan]

11 minutes ago, pas008 said:

 

 

3 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

 

OK you two, timeout for both of you. 

 

Take a breath and agree to disagree. Just going in circles.

[pas008]

15 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

Which you haven't gotten hence why you still are arguing?  FFS just let it go already they admitted they were wrong.  What more do you want?  And, what truth?  Hidding an industrial grade chiller under a table, using piss poor phrasing, and not mentioning that it was overclocked when originally intending to?  Yup, much truth m8.  Tonight at 5!  We learn that journalists are all secretly Kal-El!

like i said showcase on unnamed unannounced product concept considering that wasnt cascadelake x either

but hey I should jump to conclusions on 5ghz all core while Im at it considering only thing intel confirmed was 28 core and clx hahahaha

[pas008]

17 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

Hey, "28 cores 5ghz q4!"  Later, "oh wait we forget to mention that was overclocked!  We originally intended to."  You're wrong, move on.

where did intel confirm 5ghz? oh wait they demo'd a unnamed unannounced concept because wasnt even gen it would be released on

oh wait intel never demo'd shit like this before running new products above and beyond release specs?

haha ok then

[pas008]

3 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

And, that doesn't make it right/any less misleading since it was a 28 core being showing at 5ghz they just forgot to mention the OC.  They admitted they wrong, and originally intended to mention it.  I guess the maker is wrong.

like I said failing to mention doesnt give journalists free for all to make assumptions as fact

 

hahaha

[MellowCream]

10 core Ryzen when

[MellowCream]

The 8700k @ stock gets a 1230 Cinebench r15 score, if we divide 1230 by 6 (the core count) we get 205, that's the score per core. 205 times 8 cores for the new chips is still only 1640, which is about the speed of a 1800x, the new 2700x is scoring 1800+.

 

Keep in mind Intel is still on 14nm, as they've been for years. This isn't innovation, this is stagnation from a company that hasn't experienced competition in long time. 

[GoldenLag]

7 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

Well, Intel is having trouble moving to 10nm, iirc.  Next year AMD is moving to 7nm on the CPU side while already there on the GPU side.

There will probably be a 10nm vs 7nm late next year. Intel will take the crown with their 8 core late this year untill 7nm arrives in April. 

 

10nm isnt supposed to be that great though. Yields are bad atm and even intel is saying it isnt much better than 14nm+++ (how many + is it atm?)

[JuztBe]

2 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

There will probably be a 10nm vs 7nm late next year. Intel will take the crown with their 8 core late this year untill 7nm arrives in April. 

 

10nm isnt supposed to be that great though. Yields are bad atm and even intel is saying it isnt much better than 14nm+++ (how many + is it atm?)

I have a feeling they'll have to put 10nm on a bench. 4 years delay and it's still unusable. 
Can it actually get good enough for mass production over a year? Doubt it, especially since they will increase core count and most likely die size for mainstream platform.

[GoldenLag]

15 minutes ago, JuztBe said:

I have a feeling they'll have to put 10nm on a bench. 4 years delay and it's still unusable. 
Can it actually get good enough for mass production over a year? Doubt it, especially since they will increase core count and most likely die size for mainstream platform.

10nm is allready in production and in products atm. though only as an i3 without integrated graphics. they might drop the iGPU to increase yields, but remember they have a full year and a quarter to get yields working for a launch next year. hopefully the i3 production will kink out the some of the issues with manufacture. 

[JuztBe]

11 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

10nm is allready in production and in products atm. though only as an i3 without integrated graphics. they might drop the iGPU to increase yields, but remember they have a full year and a quarter to get yields working for a launch next year. hopefully the i3 production will kink out the some of the issues with manufacture. 

Oh I do know of that i3. It doesn't seem like it was released for actually a reason chips should be released. Looks more like a release to meet some sort of promise to investors. It's dual core 8th gen without an iGPU, when 8th gen i3 moved to 4 cores already. It was released silently, only single brand released it in a single model (is there any other besides that Lenovo laptop?).
There's simply so much wrong with it to be considered anything else than product to meet some date or quota for 10nm ""release"".

[ravenshrike]

23 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

10nm is allready in production and in products atm. though only as an i3 without integrated graphics. they might drop the iGPU to increase yields, but remember they have a full year and a quarter to get yields working for a launch next year. hopefully the i3 production will kink out the some of the issues with manufacture. 

They've finally managed to put out dual core chips for a single laptop manufacturer. Now the question becomes is that because they've finally got a successful process, or is that because they've salvaged enough working chips off a completely borked process that they can start selling them and therefore build hype?

[farmfowls]

On 6/13/2018 at 4:23 AM, Christophe Corazza said:

In military speak, they would say Intel has lost the vital strategic initiative.

Intel must now respond to AMD's moves rather than vice versa.

 

Most likely still using toothpaste between the die and heat spreader though...

Will this actually be a thing? I'm thinking of waiting or going with the 8700k. I would only be waiting to see if they don't use the toothpaste. 

[farmfowls]

On 6/13/2018 at 5:57 AM, Taf the Ghost said:

Given it'll be an expanded Ring Bus, unless Intel is rolling out more tweaks, expect this to be no different than the 8700k in gaming. And possibly worse in some instances, given the bigger ring will introduce some more latency compared to the 6c model.

Why would this be? Wouldn't there be some performance gains? Sorry if I'm asking a stupid question.

[Taf the Ghost]

30 minutes ago, farmfowls said:

Why would this be? Wouldn't there be some performance gains? Sorry if I'm asking a stupid question.

Core to Core latency. The ring will be physically bigger, as the ring simply has more physical distance to traverse. I really doubt we'll find a non-constructed situation where it actually performs worse, if there is no architectural changes with the new "generation", but that little extra latency might show up in >700FPS CS:Go benchmarking.

[mr moose]

On 6/19/2018 at 3:22 AM, GoldenLag said:

There will probably be a 10nm vs 7nm late next year. Intel will take the crown with their 8 core late this year untill 7nm arrives in April. 

 

10nm isnt supposed to be that great though. Yields are bad atm and even intel is saying it isnt much better than 14nm+++ (how many + is it atm?)

Yields aside, I have heard that Intel 10nm is supposed to perform on par with everyone else's 7nm (it has 2.7x the density of their 14nm) Of course we are going to have to wait to see how true this is and even then there are going to be many factors to take into consideration.   

[yian88]

On 6/13/2018 at 11:21 AM, Dabombinable said:

But it will have a monolithic die and thus be quite expensive for a CPU designed to fit a mainstream socket.

Ryzen 2700 series 8 core is a monolithic die and built on GF 12nm which is larger than intel 14nm, what are you talking about?

Plus the current socket can totally handle an 8 core, the main problem of intel is and has been the iGPU, they refuse to get rid of the iGPU they want to sell you useless silicon at all costs for the company, their problem, they will keep losing to AMD until they get rid of it. Only i3 and below should have iGPU and maybe some budget 4-6 core low power i5 models.

Intel can easily absolutely crush AMD's Zen CPU's, all they have to do is replace the iGPU silicon with extra cores and cache for the same price which they wont do even if hell freezes over, i dont know whats wrong with them and their obssession with iGPU but its the main reason they are losing this desktop battle.

 

On the server market its a different story, AMD's infinity fabric with high yield smaller multi-die design is totally beyond intel's tech.

[Dabombinable]

25 minutes ago, yian88 said:

Ryzen 2700 series 8 core is a monolithic die and built on GF 12nm which is larger than intel 14nm, what are you talking about?

Plus the current socket can totally handle an 8 core, the main problem of intel is and has been the iGPU, they refuse to get rid of the iGPU they want to sell you useless silicon at all costs for the company, their problem, they will keep losing to AMD until they get rid of it. Only i3 and below should have iGPU and maybe some budget 4-6 core low power i5 models.

Intel can easily absolutely crush AMD's Zen CPU's, all they have to do is replace the iGPU silicon with extra cores and cache for the same price which they wont do even if hell freezes over, i dont know whats wrong with them and their obssession with iGPU but its the main reason they are losing this desktop battle.

 

On the server market its a different story, AMD's infinity fabric with high yield smaller multi-die design is totally beyond intel's tech.

Ryzen 2700 don't have a gigantic iGPU. And monolithic means that all CPU cores are in the same die.

 

And just look at the iGPU-less HEDT CPU from Intel, what you want Intel to offer already exists. Also, simply replacing the iGPU with more cores still doesn't change the fact that the bigger the die, the higher the chance of defects, and the more that is wasted from a silicon wafer.

[Jito463]

1 hour ago, yian88 said:

Ryzen 2700 series 8 core is a monolithic die and built on GF 12nm which is larger than intel 14nm, what are you talking about?

Ryzen 7's aren't a single octo-core, it's 2 quad-core CCX's within the die.  Monolithic in this sense doesn't mean that all the cores are in the same die, it means they're a single unit within the die.