Intel Core i9-9900k 8c/16t, i7-9700K 8c/8t, i7-9600k 6c/6t 2nd Gen Coffee Lake CPU's + Z390

You don’t realize it? Last year some said $2K for a top dog chips was crazy And now we maybe will see AMD follow up and put near same “crazy” price point you all complaints about Intel did last year. On top probably a high end chips with limited overclock potential. Yeah, talk about shooting themself in the foot

 

I didn't get the Intel $2k pricing as an issue / meme that you seem to think it was. The x299 seemed like a dud to me, completely out in another world not frequented by main stream gamers / buyers.

The cost / power of the x299 even at the low end (not talking about the 1151 CPU's on carriers) was way out there, way past the ThreadRipper even.

Ah, now I get it. Yeah, I completely discounted the X299 due to it being so expensive. Didn't really assign $2k as the number, more like "over $1k".

And, I wouldn't spend $2000 on an enthusiast CPU, even AMD. For a workstation for work, yeah, as long as that's what was indicated by the work.

And, I don't think AMD is aiming the ThreadRipper series at enthusiasts or gamers, it's really a professional - work or personal - kind of realm.

Sort of a "pre-Datacenter" solution.

 

Was not directly aimed at you.. But Yeah, we can agree on who'm will take most advantage of max core counts... Yees, not a chips intended/aimed for the gamers (Too low clocks and too expensive). There is cheaper chips out there with this in mind... The mainsteream series. And with high clocks.

------------------------------------------

AMD 2nd Gen Threadripper And Intel Core i9 8-Core Cinebench Throwdown Leak Is Drool-Worthy-hothardware.com
Earlier this morning we brought you some rumored specs for AMD's incoming Ryzen Threadripper 2990X, 2970X and 2950X processors. Now, we're getting another look at the performance of the flagship Threadripper 2990X along with some incoming [unreleased] Intel processors.

The Ryzen Threadripper 2990X reportedly has a base clock of 3.4GHz, but this particular 32-core, 64-thread processor is seen overclocked at speeds ranging from 4GHz on up to 4.2GHz. Now before you cry foul about the result at 4.2GHz being the slowest showing for the processor, we'd have to imagine that it's reaching its thermal limits and is being throttled back, resulting in the lower scores.


The other key takeaway from these results is the unidentified Intel CPU called out in red. It's listed as an 8-core, 16-thread CPU clocked at 3.1GHz. By all accounts, we're looking at the Core i9-9900K, which is reported to have 8 cores and 16 threads.

However, this [likely] engineering sample is one microcode short of revealing its true identity as witnessed by the lack of a model number and the misrepresented clock speed. Our earlier reporting suggests that the Core i9-9900K won't have a base clock of 3.1GHz, but rather 3.6GHz with a single-core boost of 5GHz.

What's interesting to note about these scores is that the alleged Core i9-9900K is actually slightly faster than the Core i9-7900X, which is a 10-core/20-thread processor in the Core-X family. If these results are accurate, Intel could have a pretty stout mainstream processor on its hands.

We've seen this 8-core, 3.1GHz chip pop up recently on 3DMark. Over the weekend, a strikingly similar chip was kicking ass and taking names in the Time Spy benchmark with a CPU score of 10,719 and an overall score of 9,862. Not even an overclocked Ryzen 7 2700X could keep up with those figures.

It won't be too much longer before we're given the complete rundown on AMD and Intel's latest salvo of processors. AMD is expected to launch its second-generation Ryzen Threadripper processors on August 13th, while the Coffee Lake Refresh processors are also rumored to arrive next month.

 

Every time I see someone refer to a "5GHz 28 Core Intel CPU" I despair a little bit more at how far that fud has spread

Any site that has put that in an article title should be permabanned from the Internet for spreading fake news

 

Intel Mainstream 'Z390' and High-End 'X299' Desktop Processor Roadmaps Leaked - Z370 Supports 8th/9th Gen
A new set of Intel desktop product roadmap has leaked out which shows us the mainstream and HEDT families and their expected launch schedules. The roadmaps are listed in several slides that are compiled by XFastest and give us a look at what Intel’s CPU lineup would look like in the coming quarters.

8th and 9th Gen Core Processors Will Work Across Entire 300-Series Motherboard Lineup, Z390 Chipset Details and 300-Series Compatibility List Officially Confirms
This is the most interesting part about the leak as it is officially confirmed that 8th generation CPUs would work on Z390 chipset and vice versa, the 9th generation CPUs would work on all previously released 300-series motherboards including Z370. I think it puts all rumors to rest that showed that Intel would not offer 9th generation processor support on older motherboards.

 

BTW, to chime in, I think that AMD lloses a bit in terms of price locally. In Romania, making an AMD setup with similar power like Intel can cost you more rather than less....

 

hello BGA lovers! you don't get to upgrade your laptop this time. we 8700k LGA laptops got a chance for free pass thanks to competition. also the 7700k boys with z170/z270 can also get the upgrade as well with the pin mod. if 8700k worked in their machine 9900k would work too.

BGA from skylake/kabylake gen stuck with 4 cores, BGA from just few months ago stuck with 6 cores, all 3 are required to buy a new laptop in order to get an 8 core CPU =(

@Papusan we hit the jack pot!

 

Not available until Q1 2019?

 

Even if it was competition in the BGA world... Won't help, bruh

Jack pot or jack pot... LGA machines is the only choice. Mine is from 2015 but todays Intel BGA Jokes ain't near in Cpu Performance

None know 110% yet. But keep in mind that Intel has already listed some of the upcoming processors in their last Microcode Update Guidance from Juli this year.

And here is more news...
Intel Core i9-9900K launches in Q3 2018 after all

 

Yeah, one leak says 2H 2018, another says 1H 2019 for i9, and another says both coming out together at the same time... kinda hard to do given these release quarters.

" Original Post: The most interesting thing about this roadmap leak is that it lists down the 9th Generation CPU family to release in Q1 of 2019 whereas the Z390 chipset is mentioned for release in Q3 of 2018. Could be possible that we are looking at two different roadmaps for the desktop lineup and the PCH.

Since the Z390 and 9th Generation family are inclined to launch around a similar timeframe, the Q1 ’19 launch of the 9th Gen family seems a little odd. We have been hearing a 2H 2018 time frame for the 9th Generation lineup for some time now so maybe we just have to wait for official word on this."

Maybe the i9-9900k release will be like the 8700k release? A small release to match AMD releases this year and then a long period of unavailability before general availability in 1H 2019? - those dates would match what happened with the 8700k.

 

BGA, coming in... never or you can buy a new laptop

 

That part about the performance is part of the reason why I went LGA, BGA trash is so weak that the best BGA i7 gets to be about 1/3 - 1/2 of the performance of a well-cooled, OC'ed 8700K.

 

i wouldnt say 1/2 i think thats underestimating the chip. with proper repaste + LM and undervolt, BGA cpus can do decent at around 4.3 ghz or more on 6 cores along with decent temps, especially the MSI laptops. (dependent on the binning of BGA of course).

i'd say a good 3/5 to 4/5 of the performance of LGA, its just that the last tiny bit 1/5 is an impossible task for BGA and most of BGA book's design.

 

Did you just call me a BGA lover?

 

Pssst! Quiet!!, another 9900k super secret leaked screenshot:

Spoiler: AMD users don't look!!

Do you think it was running stock?

 

Don’t forget the need for 1-2 bin extra to come on level or slightly above in Cpu benchmarks vs. LGA

I expect it's Windows 10 who throw out the notifications No need to say more

 

Sure, blame the 9900k's overtemp reading on Windows 10, classic.

 

Sure, Windows 10 is a damn perfect OS Maybe you should jump on it as well? Or maybe you already use it home?

 

Leaked Intel roadmap points to the Core i9-9900K releasing in early 2019
So much for Intel octa-core processors this year…
By Kevin Lee 2018-07-31 15:50:19
https://www.techradar.com/news/intel-roadmap-points-to-the-core-i9-9900k-releasing-in-early-2019

"... Xfastest posted slides of what it claims to be an official Intel roadmap outlining the processor release schedule for the coming year. Going by the schedule, and disappointingly, we shouldn’t expect 9th generation Intel processors until the first few months of 2019.

The Intel roadmap lists that the Core i9-9900K, Core i7-9700K and Core i5-9600K will all release in the first quarter of 2019."

https://hk.xfastest.com/11058/intel-new-raodmap-2018-2019-i9-9900k-i7-9700k/

"According to the internal news of the motherboard manufacturers and the latest INTEL internal documents, the Coffee Lake Refresh originally scheduled for Q1 in 2019 will be released as early as 203, and the new models include i9-9900K, i7-9700K, i5-9600K, etc. . More than a month after the completion of Q3, according to the current INTEL inventory and market conditions, I believe there is a great opportunity to launch the market in mid-September, while the existing i7-8700K and i5-8600K will also exit the market simultaneously, by Coffee Lake Refresh. succeed.
<< Updated at 2 am on August 1, 2018 >>"

 

Level1 News August 1 2018
23:18 - Leaked benchmarks show Intel is dropping hyperthreading from i7 chips
http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...8-fake-news-faker-users.821713/#post-10774314

 

missed this post. you had already purchased and switched camp so it wouldn't apply to you lol. but yes a brand new purchase of a laptop, ultimately going from 4c to 8c is an excellent upgrade if you have use for it, even if its at a lower frequency say 4c 4.8ghz to 8c at 4.5ghz.

 

Or if the rumors is correct... 4.7GHz on all 8 cores out of the box

Btw. It was me who gave bro @Falkentyne some home lessons in how to swim



Edit...
Intel Core i9-9900K, i7-9700K and i5-9600K to launch in October-guru3d.com (1. Aug 2018).
Chinese Hkepc shows documents that mentioned the Core i9-9900K, i7-9700K and i5-9600K, with a release in October. it also noted down a review embargo. The Coffee Lake-S Refresh for i9 would have eight cores with HyperThreading and the i7 would also have eight cores but no HyperThreading. The i5 is a hexacore with HyperThreading.



A Basin Falls Refresh is also planned for October, these are the successors of the current Skylake-X and Kaby Lake-X processors for the X299 platform. Details about the new processors are not yet available, but it is a Refresh generation, in which the architecture remains the same. The top model again gets 18 cores and a tdp of 165 watts.




So yes, three parts are released in October based on Coffee Lake.


Exclusive: Intel’s Desktop Roadmap 2018 to 2019-Wccftech.com (1. Aug 2018)
Intel Coffee Lake platform including the Core i9-9900k and Z390 platform landing in October 2018, will contain quad core and dual core parts
Moving on to something that we have been talking about for quite some time now: the Coffee Lake-S platform. Intel’s Core i9-9900K will be the first time that the i9 branding has landed in the mainstream (S-Series processors) and will also represent the company’s first octa-core processor for the same segment. Unlike what some rumors have suggested earlier this week, the Core i9-9900K has not in fact been delayed and is on schedule for early Q4 2018. Production rollout will begin on 9th September 2018 through 6 October 2018, and the announcement is expected by October 2018.

 

Oops! MSI confirms 9th-gen Core processors that Intel hasn't announced yet-PCworld.com
MSI confirmed in a news post on Wednesday that several of its Z370 motherboards are receiving updates to support Intel’s 9000-series processors. But here’s the thing: Intel hasn’t announced any 9000-series processors.

A screenshot of the MSI post confirming Intel 9000-series support.

This means for Clevo P870 BGA-KILLER in my sig... i7-6700K → i7-7700K → i7-8700K and finally i9-9900K. Can BGA beat this? Not even one gen up. Those who have it are deeply screwed. One of the reason, you never ever should buy soldered <junk>.

 

No deny it at the slightest, you right about that

 

Gigabyte too, but official press release, not a leak.

https://videocardz.com/press-releas...or-their-z370-h370-b360-and-h310-motherboards

 

I know. Posted it here yesterday http://forum.notebookreview.com/threads/bga-venting-thread.798775/page-196#post-10775885

Seems they will marketing themselves.

 

Gigabyte press release...

https://www.gigabyte.com/Press/News/1631

GIGABYTE Optimizes Motherboards Ahead Of Intel 9000 CPUs' Debut
New BIOS Updates For Complete Lineup Of Motherboards To Fully Support New CPUs

2018/08/03
Taipei, Taiwan, August 3rd, 2018 – GIGABYTE TECHNOLOGY Co. Ltd, a leading manufacturer of motherboards and graphics cards, announced the release of new BIOS updates which provide support for the highly-anticipated Intel 9000 processors. GIGABYTE’s engineering teams have developed BIOS updates for the Z370, H370, B360, H310 motherboards to provide the best support for Intel’s next-gen CPUs. The newest BIOS updates are now available on the official GIGABYTE website for users to download and upgrade their systems.

The complete lineup of motherboards and their corresponding download links are listed below:

Spoiler

Z370 Chipset

Z370 AORUS ULTRA GAMING WIFI-OP

Z370 AORUS Gaming 3

Z370 AORUS Ultra Gaming

Z370M D3H

Z370 AORUS GAMING 7-OP

Z370 AORUS Gaming 5

Z370 HD3

Z370M DS3H

Z370 AORUS ULTRA GAMING 2.0

Z370 AORUS Gaming 7

Z370 HD3-OP

Z370N WIFI

Z370 AORUS ULTRA GAMING 2.0-OP

Z370 AORUS GAMING WIFI

Z370 HD3P

Z370P D3

Z370 AORUS ULTRA GAMING WIFI

Z370 AORUS Gaming K3

Z370 UD3H

Z370XP SLI

H370 Chipset

H370 AORUS GAMING 3 WIFI

H370 AORUS GAMING 3

H370M D3H GSM

H370M DS3H

H370M D3H

H370 HD3

H370N WIFI

B360 Chipset

B360 AORUS GAMING 3 WIFI

B360 AORUS GAMING 3

B360M AORUS GAMING 3

B360 HD3

B360M GAMING HD

B360 HD3P

B360M D2V

B360M D3H

B360N AORUS GAMING WIFI

B360M D3P

B360M D3V

B360M DS3H

B360M H

B360M HD3

B360N WIFI

H310 Chipset

H310M S2H (rev. 1.0)

H310M DS2 2.0

H310 D3

H310M A

H310M S2H (rev. 1.1)

H310M DS2

H310M DS2V

H310M H

H310M H 2.0

H310M HD2

H310M S2

H310M S2V

H310M S2 2.0

H310M S2P

H310N

GIGABYTE will continue to release new BIOS updates for the best system performance and stability. For more details, please visit the official GIGABYTE website: https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard

To learn more about GIGABYTE: http://www.gigabyte.com

 

So it’s almost confirmed z370 will still be compatible to 9xxxx

 

Well, maybe.

They don't come out and say it exactly:

" Z370 AORUS ULTRA GAMING WIFI-OP
(rev. 1.0)

1. Update CPU microcode for upcoming CPU
2. Improve windows boot time"

And, we don't know if it will support the whole line-up, or just up through the 9700k without Hyperthreading, leaving out the i9-9900K, and just because the BIOS will see the CPU and let it run, there might be power limits designed to limit power draw - on a board by board basis.

But, yeah, off the top of my head I'd say if you plug in a new release CPU into a z370 with the BIOS update, it'll power up and say Hello.

If I were spending $450 on a new CPU with 33% more cores and threads (9900K), I'd want the highest performance power delivery and power cooling available to optimize it, and if there are z390 motherboards with higher power delivery than the best z370 motherboards, then I'd recommend the best z390 motherboard for the i9-9900k.

Maybe the top z370's will be fine powering the i9-9900K, but I wouldn't go out and buy a new z370 motherboard now in preparation for a new build paired with an i9-9900k or other new 9th gen CPU:

Question: Z370 Motherboard for 8th and 9th Gen
https://www.reddit.com/r/intel/comments/94jd8n/question_z370_motherboard_for_8th_and_9th_gen/

We need to wait for release of the new z390 motherboards and see them tested with the 9900k and other 9th gen CPU's to see which of the new z390 motherboards have the best power delivery and cooling when overclocking, and compare to the best power delivery z370's.

If you already have a z370 and want to swap in a 9th gen CPU, I wouldn't worry about, wait for release and see what the reviews say paired with your motherboard.

 

It will be plug and play with updated bios. Don’t listening on @hmscott

He has also said before that the owner’s of previous gen Z170 and Z270 board was screwed if they tried upgrade to 6 cores i7-8700K processors.

And it’s already put overclock records for 8700K with Z270.

The Power delivery for Z370 MB will be more than sufficient.

As well the best Z270 boards.

 

Intel Core i9 9900K: Do We Need Another Leap in CPU Power?
DigitalFoundry
Published on Aug 4, 2018
Just how much CPU power do we really need? With the Core i9 9900K set to deliver eight cores and 16 threads, will games actually make use of them? Rich discusses the i9 leaks and explains why we're going to need this new level of power - sooner or later.

 

It's been 3 year's since the first z170's came out, almost 2 year's since the z270's came out, and only recently have hacked BIOS's come out to support newer CPU's in those old release motherboards.

As I recall when Intel first released new CPU's and required manufacturers to not allow support for future CPU's, I said I wouldn't count on Intel unlocking those motherboards or future motherboards to support future CPU releases beyond what they supported at the motherboard release.

This is still true for all of those z170 and z270 motherboards today, Intel hasn't allowed the manufacturers to released BIOS updates to support new CPU's.

I never said what you said I said back then, but now with hindsight, yes all of those buyers of z170 and z370 motherboards were "screwed" out of years of prime time use of new generations of CPU's that came out after the z170 and z270 motherboards were released, by limits Intel put on those manufacturers to obsolete those motherboards.

Even now, years later, with only a hacked BIOS with errata (bugs in features, like audio, among other things) that is not "supported by Intel", it's a hack that is a risk to use and run, and not something I would recommend to a client, even if it "works".

Give it up man, if you recommended people to go ahead and expect support for new CPU's in their z170 and z270, you've put them on a long fruitless path for years of wasted time.

Maybe with the z370 Intel will make good, and even as Intel does this, I wouldn't put it past Intel to "slip in a mickey" with those BIOS updates, and continue to "screw" with us moving forward. I don't trust Intel, and I'd rather err on the side of caution than depend on Intel's good behavior.

Intel still sucks and I wouldn't recommend anyone consider any Intel CPU's until Intel release's the updated architecture without software "patches" limiting performance.

Buy AMD, and save yourself from Intel's machinations.

Intel doesn't deserve any more of our money. Intel's mismanaged their dominance in process technology, throwing away years of lead in the industry.

Intel is sticking us with 14nm 9th generation CPU's instead of delivering the 10nm CPU's Intel has promised year after year for many years - since 2012, promising delivery in 2015.

Intel is now promising to deliver at the end of 2019 for 10nm consumer CPU's, and end of 2020 for commercial 10nm CPU's. Intel is still "screwing" with us with 10nm delivery promises.

Intel has done nothing but "screw" with us all this time.

Screw Intel.

 

You mean the mods should be done finished before the chips being launched and thrown out from Intel factory? 8700K was out Q4 2017. Already in April 2018 we had working chips on older not allowed chipset.

Exactly as Intel has done before... 4770+4790 - 6700+7700 and now 8700K + 9900K. Nothing has really changed.

The main question was Z370 support for coming 8 cores. And the support via unofficial Mod’s for older chipset is only a nice bonus.

We know. You only support AMD graphics and processors.

 

Intel's Reckoning is at Hand!
...9th gen last gasp, Intel loses market leadership...
The Good Old Gamer
Published on Aug 6, 2018
Looking ahead at Intel's i9 9900K announcement this moment in time feels like the calm before the storm. No doubt the i9 9900K will be the fastest mainstream CPU when it launches, but with all the issues Intel faces, how long will that reign last?

 

I 'reckon' we will see if it actually plays out that way. Makes for a good headline, though. We also have to wait and see how the alternative plays out. I don't really care if it's red or blue as long as I get what I want and don't have to settle on a half-baked piece of crap that sucks at overclocking. Just throwing more cores at it won't be impressive if everyone gets the same results with a cookie cutter product.

This (official) from ASUS... Z370 boards with i9-9900K support: https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthre...or-Maximus-X-amp-Strix-Z370-Boards#post730996 - mine's on the list, so I guess my next upgrade might be that. Need to see some real overclocking results first though. None of the overhyped marketing crap based on leaks.

 

With auto-tuning of the CPU attaining 95% of the performance of hand tuning, and more and more optimization through automation with each refinement of the technology, manual overclocking is finally going away.

As we discovered the ways to tune past fixed settings - hardware and software - that allowed more CPU's to be useful at higher performance than the product offered upon release, it seemed clear to me that all of this tuning could and should be automated.

The user shouldn't have to intervene in the tuning of their computer for best performance, the automation skills and advantage of sensors and computing hardware should be applied on itself to optimize performance.

It's taken what seems like forever for this to start happening - like 20+ years longer - than I expected, but it's finally here, and Intel's going to need to use that "cushion" of untapped performance to compete against AMD.

Without 10nm, Intel is going to have to work smart, using software and customized automation along with hardware sensors to gain some advantage while they secure Fab resources that can deliver yield's they need, or get their own 10nm (or?) Fab capacity off of idle and into production.

AMD is once again leading the way with automated tuning in the CPU and external sensors to give them full access to CPU optimized performance.

Automatic optimization of CPU performance is here and getting better with each new release from AMD, and soon from Intel.

The days of manual overlocking are coming to an end. Enjoy it while you can.

 

I don't see it quite like that. Sure AMD and Intel have XFR for AMD and Turbo bins for Intel, but the the voltage/frequency curves aren't fully optimised at the factory - ie there's always a 'voltage buffer' that they allow to maintain stability amoungst all their SKUs. I see overclocking as a means to bring voltage/frequency curve to their optimum point, in terms of not wasting any voltage for any given clock or overclock you're gonna be running. AMD & Intel aren't currently completely optimising what I'm describing from the factory, and I think in the future that there will always be some 'buffer' of voltage that they build into their CPUs to ensure stability amoungst all of their SKUs, so I think overclocking will always exist to gain that last bit of extra performance. I suppose that the optimisation/binning process at AMD/Intel could improve in the future, thereby reducing the size of the overclock overhead, but I think it will exist for quite some time to come.

 

Yeah, they have reached the OC or near clock speed limits for the chips so that's natural way to go. Not much more the users (overclockers) can do.

 

"...I see overclocking as a means to bring voltage/frequency curve to their optimum point..."

I'm not saying overclocking is going away, I am saying it is taken out of our hands and automated in the hardware / firmware itself.

That's what the new automation tools do, is that optimization, but it is done on the fly, using "AI" even, to keep every single CPU and computer support resources in tune for maximum performance - on demand.

IDK if there will be "Competition" buttons to push the pedal to the maximum, and hold it there, but they could.

Defeating that automation to regain control from our "AI" Overlords might replace manual overclocking.

 

Will you say the same when Intel does that to gain the last few inches of competitiveness?

The CPU that costs the least and provides the most performance to the road will win.

99.9% of computer users could care less about manual overclocking. Once the maximum performance is already provided with automation, there won't be any demand for manual tuning.

We finally figured out how to get the CPU to play the "performance game" against itself... and to avoid Thermonuclear Throttling...

How about a nice game of chess? - W.O.P.R.

The only winning move, is to not play...how about a nice game of chess?

 

For AMD & Intel the voltage/frequency curves are fixed currently, they don't allow their CPUs to optimise themselves to attain the highest frequency for any given voltage point, there's always a buffer of voltage left over to ensure stability amoungst every SKU. I don't know what automation tools you're referring to, because AMD's XFR and Intel's Turbo bins don't do that. These CPUs don't overclock themselves to determine the maximum stable frequency for a given voltage point - I'm pretty damn sure they don't do that, that's what we do ourselves when we overclock.

 

I didn't say the CPU performance optimization automation was at 100% yet, did I? No, and I didn't list specifics where we can still manually control things outside the current control of the hardware automation, but that will continue to change in favor of the automation.

"With auto-tuning of the CPU attaining 95% of the performance of hand tuning, and more and more optimization through automation with each refinement of the technology, manual overclocking is finally going away."

I didn't say it was "all over", or that it was "gone", I said "going away".

That last 5%, at least on AMD CPU's - if you give enough power and cooling to AMD Ryzen 2 - and likely ThreadRipper 2 - CPU's they will auto-tune on the fly and outperform cursory manual overclocking, as shown in many reviews.

At the expertise level of most OC'er's - mostly the lack of (extreme) cooling methods, they are beaten by the automation in AMD's self-tuning.

Will there be extreme cooling performance optimization too? There are sub-zero friendly BIOS's already shipping, why not extend the automation to extreme cooling too?

We aren't there yet with completely eliminating the option of manual overclocking, and Intel isn't completely "out-processed" yet either, but like I said for both - enjoy it while you can.

The direction and potential and need, especially by Intel to eek out as much process locked performance as they can attain while waiting for a new process to jump to, is going to end up being all Intel has left without a new process to save them.

 

Well I agree with this idea. And is one reason why Intel are going with solder on their upcoming 8 core 9700K & 9900K - I think that's a good idea anyway. I still expect manual overclocking, at least in terms of providing an offset frequency (like you can do on Pascal (NVidia) and Intel), I expect that to continue into the future due to the fact that CPUs are always gonna be running excess voltage to maintain stability across each of their SKUs, so I see that always being on the table for overclockers.

 

Excess voltage as defined as a fixed value that doesn't require individually customized tuning for each CPU / motherboard mating.

Which is the point of giving the CPU and support hardware the ability to monitor and adjust in real time that previously "fixed" settings and make them "customized" on the fly.

Automating the previously manual only task of overclocking with the very software and hardware previously manually tuned.

We've hit this conceptual gap before you and I, so let's leave it as it is for now, and give it a little more thought over time.

 

This doesn't make sense in English.

 

"We've hit this conceptual gap before you and I, so let's leave it as it is for now, and give it a little more thought over time."

Is that part clear?

Let's let it rest for now.

 

Errr yes, I know that's what you said, I was just offering a parting statement on the content & context of your post.

 

As a hint, the part you are blind to is your belief that the "too high fixed value(s)" in the BIOS can't be controlled by the CPU and support hardware.

Those fixed settings must become "tunable" by the CPU and the support hardware in order to attain the most performance through automation, *without* the intervention of a human being needed to adjust / tune them.

Believing that any fixed BIOS setting will forever remain as a fixed value that only humans can change is a fallacy that you must shake off.

Every fixed value is picked within a workable range for the reason of convenience and time / cost saving, to remove human intervention in the process - speeding up production.

The hardware / software automation can pick up where the humans have intervened with "overclocking", taking on that role through AI - seeded by the range of human interactions and results gained by manual tuning techniques.

If your first responses are to repeat once again:

"...These CPUs don't overclock themselves to determine the maximum stable frequency for a given voltage point - I'm pretty damn sure they don't do that, that's what we do ourselves when we overclock."

or

"...I still expect manual overclocking, at least in terms of providing an offset frequency (like you can do on Pascal (NVidia) and Intel), I expect that to continue into the future due to the fact that CPUs are always gonna be running excess voltage to maintain stability across each of their SKUs, so I see that always being on the table for overclockers...."

Or something similar, saying in effect that automation can't do what humans are doing.

You are massively missing the point of automation and AI taking over the previously manual tasks that humans do.

 

I'm not missing anything. Some motherboards offer auto overclocking features or you can do it manually yourself, but better to do it yourself currently - I think one or both of those features will exist in the future. CPUs currently don't overclock themselves in relation to tuning the voltage & frequency curve to their max, they currently need intervention externally through the motherboard's overclocking features (either auto or manually by the user) in order to test for errors/stability.

I personally don't like discussing things with you, you tend to make everything more complicated than it needs to be, seemingly to divert the argument or changing the goal posts to suit your need for 'control'. This might not prevent me from discussing stuff with you in the future, but it's a point I want to make, night night.

 

"Currently" isn't "future", and today's hardware isn't holding back tomorrow's hardware from becoming fully automated in extracting the best CPU and GPU performance possible.

Completely removing the need for human intervention as in "overclocking" in future hardware is what I have been discussing, not current hardware, I would have thought that was very clear without explicitly stating it.

Actually, I have been trying to simplify it in my explanations. I haven't changed the premise or goal, it's always been the same for me, for many many years.

Unfortunately not everything can be described simply, and solutions take in many inputs controlling many outputs relying on many things be in place for a successful result, involving more concepts than would be considered simple, and instead breed complexity.

That isn't the case here though. This is really simple.

Take out the complexity of the implementation and only consider the simple premise, and believe that the path from here to there is not only possible, but also inevitable - perhaps in some as of now unknowable final form - but the result is the same.

"Any human process or task can be automated and will be automated in time when the cost advantage meets the - performance or desired results - value."

I've been automating manual human processes in software for a very long time. I've been OC'ing since first I had access to or built in the first adjustable frequency oscillator, and from the very first time I tuned a computer for performance I looked for ways to automate that manual process.

We are getting closer and closer all the time, and I've had to remain optimistic for far longer than one would initially imagine necessary, to see those obvious thoughts finally come to fruition.

To hear someone deny the reality in front of them as it is plainly occurring is wholly foreign to my thought process, if pointing out what is obvious to me for so long is "unlikable" to you, that's not the intention. I am only trying to explain it to you clearly and simply.

Good night.