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

The pictures lighting is misleading.
Watch the YT vid, he'll explain the gold layer...

 

No, I am referring to the 9900k / 9700k / 9600k being pasted rather than soldered, kinda confused as to your point now... which is it - soldered IHS or pasted?

 

It's soldered, but not with gold solder like they tweeted it out after seeing the picture, which then suddenly again became 'news' a month later...

 

Ahh, your facebook post link was for a "pasted" 9900k / 9700k / 9600k IHS quote though... nevermind.

I didn't think it was worth digging into the "gold solder" part of the rumor myself, as I don't particularly care to waste time on rumors, I was only answering the question:

Seemed worded as if he had heard "new news", so that's why I limited the search to 24 hours and saw what popped up.

Seriously not worth the time to continue wasting time on this, I figured someone here would complain about anything Eurocom said, so thanks for making that thought come true for me.

It could be a bad quote or translation:

"New Intel i9-9900K and i7-9700K CPUs are coming with gold soldered TIM/IHS to the CPU die."

That could mean "gold solder", but it could also mean gold - STOP - soldered TIM - STOP - to the CPU die. Using "gold backing", the same as pasted die's.

 

Ah, here we go:

Intel Core i9-9900K With Gold Plated Soldered IHS Pictured – Heatspreader Design Straight Out of The Sandy Bridge Era
By Hassan Mujtaba, Aug 29 2018
https://wccftech.com/intel-core-i9-9900k-9th-gen-gold-solder-ihs-cpu-pictured/

" Intel Core i9-9900K With Soldered IHS Pictured – Sandy Bridge-Esque Heatspreader, Gold Plating, and High-Quality STIM"

Now I remember where I saw that facebook image from, this article, and when I saw it I passed on posting it here, as the month before I had already posted the "soldered IHS" article, July 25th.

Nice to see where the "gold soldered IHS" quote came from: "... Gold Plated Soldered IHS..."

So it was indeed, a bad quote, there wasn't any "gold solder" involved.

 

Maybe that's because they love to tell 'fairy-tales-for-sales':

http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...ounge-phoenix-4.809589/page-221#post-10782554

 

Moved the GPU portion of this discussion to the Nvidia thread:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/threads/nvidia-thread.806608/page-74#post-10797564

 

1 EAB ≅ RTX 2080 (NOTEBOOK)
1 EAE ≅ RTX 2080-G (NOTEBOOK)

 

Not sure how legit this is. Could be rumours.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Euroc...with-Core-i9-9900K-and-i7-9700K.324038.0.html

 

Moved the GPU portion of this discussion to the Nvidia thread:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/threads/nvidia-thread.806608/page-74#post-10797564

 

Nvidia was able to cripple down 1080(N) to 1080 Max-Q so why not? And they pushed out useless Gtx880M.

 

Just to quickly explain, not all solder binds well with all materials. Intel patented the process long ago and AMD licenses it. You have to prepare the silicon sitting on the die differently, then you use gold to help the wetting for the indium solder to bind.

Think of spreading liquid metal. You now how sometimes it just rolls on the nickel plating for the IHS so it takes some working to spread it out. The gold plating just allows for it to wet and stick, thereby providing good contact between the silicon block and the IHS.

Now, if you want an interesting talk, then let's discuss replacements that work better than silicon to transfer the heat from the die to the IHS. Now THAT would be a cool thing to discuss.

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

der8auer... The Truth about CPU Soldering Overclocking.Guide

 

Tom's Hardware: Intel Ramps Additional 14nm Manufacturing Site to Ensure Chip Supply.
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-14nm-shortage-test-facility,37783.html

TL;DR New facility in Vietnam.

Also;
ExtremeTech: Intel Goes Back to 22nm for New Chipset to Address Manufacturing Shortage.
https://www.extremetech.com/computi...new-chipset-to-address-manufacturing-shortage
Some low end chipset with Windows 7 support is going to be made in 22nm as a 70mm^2 chip instead of a ~55mm^2 on 14nm

 

Looks like a Clevo dealer already started selling P870TM1-G with 9900K (etc) in China:

Spoiler

Just a couple of days short of an entire month before official sales date...

 

Intel (Bullwinkle):

 

At least THIS is good news if this is correct... Intel open up for older OS on their coming Z390 lineup. But I don't know what the Redmond Morons aka Micro$h4ft will say to this

"Our sources indicate that vanilla H310 motherboards will continue to be offered at retail locations, but they fully expect the H310C motherboards, which will be branded with either an H310C or H310 R2.0 branding, to replace the existing SKUs eventually. The new chipsets will also support Windows 7, as reported by our sister site AnandTech, which may signal that Intel will restore compatibility with the older OS on its newer motherboards, such as the forthcoming Z390 lineup. That's an abrupt about-face from the decision to stop supporting olmy post der versions of Windows with the Kaby Lake processors."

From my post here http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...ql-findings-fixes.823076/page-2#post-10797272

 

I doubt that. H310 is a low stack chipset often used by businesses, which Microsoft offered to sell security updates to. In other words, Redmond already agreed to it.

Meanwhile, Z390 is a consumer chipset. So, what incentive does Microsoft have in helping that chipset? None. Sure the CPUs may be supported, but Microsoft has already stopped doing much support on that platform.

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

Intel already offer Win 7 support for H310 chipset in China.

 

Yes, a commercial based chipset. Did you even read my post?

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...ers-welcome-too.810490/page-312#post-10779862

"Windows 7 defiantly remains a commonly-used operating system both among businesses and individuals who cannot, or do not want to, jump to Windows 10"

 

That doesn't say anything other than a very specific version of h310C or R2.0 has compatibility, meaning not even all h310 chipsets get support. So, if not even all of that version chipset get it, why would Z390?

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

If you read my previous post #425 "At least THIS is good news if this is correct"... I'm not best in English but IF is a word I should understand. Sorry if theis come wrong out.

 

I read that. I said you are coming to the wrong conclusion. Are you going to buy a motherboard with an H310 chipset? Probably not. Why? Because they are more low stack boards. What do we use? Z370 boards, and soon Z390 boards.

So, even if correct, it means nothing to the majority of people here. Hence my derision at your statement.

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

I would not count (your) my chickens until they are hatched.

 

Fine, don't listen to reason. Instead, get your hopes up, then get them dashed. Either way, not my business.

Meanwhile, this is why I'm learning Linux. Windows as a service is bull, windows 7 is aged, isn't really supported, is stable, but security... But you do you.

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

https://siliconlottery.com/products/9900k?variant=12748795805782

https://siliconlottery.com/products/9700k?variant=12748784336982

End-of-life for binned Skylake-X and Coffee Lake CPUs
https://www.overclock.net/forum/180...d-life-binned-skylake-x-coffee-lake-cpus.html

"This is a formal end-of-life post in regards to binned 7800X, 7820X, 7900X, 7940X, 7980XE, 8600K, 8700K, and 8086K processors. We will have a bit more stock coming in before the end of the month, but will be using September to clear out any remaining inventory. This is in preparation for all the new processors coming up over the next few months. Our delidding service will still be available for these processors through at least the end of 2019.

With this in mind all products we are offering are now in an End-of-life status, so there may be a short period of time that we don't have any processors available for sale.

Also to note although we are not binning the new Threadripper parts from AMD, we are committed to binning the upcoming Matisse processors next year."

 

shame theyre not binning TR2, but i somewhat understand the decision tbh, given the similarity to TR1. then again, on the intel side its the same with 6700K/7700K or 8700K/8086K its probably also due to differing sales numbers

Sent from my Xiaomi Mi Max 2 (Oxygen) using Tapatalk

 

Also it is Intel's chips spread out further, but AMD having already binned the chips, then leaving less on the table leaves less stratification in the stack, so fewer wanted to purchase at the binned premium.

But, Intel leaves tons of performance on the table, and has a wider range in swing from worst to best (AMD having 200-300MHz, Intel having 300-500, depending on chip). So like amd first gen getting 3.9 to 4.1 while Intel got 4.9-5.3. With a larger range, paying to get a higher chip can make sense.

But, also, TR1, depending on demand, could have left resources tied up at times. Or they wasn't the larger jump, like you said.

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

Yeah, it's a bit weird though, SL clearing out starting in August and then not restocking more of the 8700k/8600k till SL ran out. Maybe SL thought the 9900k/9700k were coming sooner?

The 14nm shortage and price hikes were a surprise for everyone, except Intel I suppose. That probably wasn't part of SL's plan.

On top of all of that, hopefully that tariff thing will work itself out in short order, or we'll get exceptions for enthusiast parts, well before the 25% level kicks in.

The SL prices for the 9900k / 9700k seem kind of low, given the shortages, maybe Intel will try to shield the 14nm shortage from the 9xxx series?

 

I disagree. MSRP means nothing. We will see retailers charging well above that value due to the shortage. But, it is harder to sell prior gen chips once the new gen is released.

We have all known the 9000 series was die in September/October time frame (since around July to August that was the rumored time frame, and end of July, beginning of August, there were fury revisions of internal roadmaps leaked). But, the stories have also suggested that mainstream 14nm will be in short supply until next year, so, this is more of a barely better than paper launch on Intel's part. But that's OK, considering there is a tightness in supply of the Z390 chipset, too.

But, there are rumors the 24-28 core and socket change will cause that platform to cost $3000-6000 per chip. If it costs that much, you would need to have that money free, but it really makes me question the wisdom of those setting their money on fire, just like the 2080 Ti. At 30% performance for around 70% increase in performance, it is horrible value and gives incentives for Nvidia to continue harming consumers.

And before anyone tries the BS of "but if AMD...," stop. You are wrong. It is like me pushing you down the stairs, then you not blaming me, instead blaming the person that stood by and didn't stop me. I am the responsible party. Sure, we might have some talk of what that person could have done, if anything, but who is the primary person bearing responsibility? Me. Who has control over my actions? Me. So who is screwing you on pricing? Nvidia. Who is giving you less performance generationally? Nvidia. Who tried to hide performance data in their ads and presentations? Nvidia. This "blame competition" or "it's just the market" or "come on AMD" is just subterfuge to not direct the anger at the person responsible. The bike meme comes to mind.

In the same way, Intel's 14nm and 10nm problems are Intel's. The shortage is their fault. The coffee refresh instead of ice being moved to 14nm is their choice, them gutting 10nm to get it out the door is their choice, then not doing 10nm EUV is their choice, them ceding process dominance to TSMC and Samsung is its choice, it building more 14nm capacity (which shows actor how bad 10nm is and a resignation to use 14nm for some time coming to recoup those costs is extremely telling) is its choice. But that is why analysts have changed market share numbers for AMD from teens and low 20s up to 30% market share next year (upper amount potential).

Still, I'm waiting for numbers to see what performance on these chips will be. I've analyzed so far, but price premium vs performance. Great for gaming and certain benching. But I do think this is the last Intel chips worth much for 2-3 years.

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

I didn't say MSRP, I said the price Silicon Lottery listed on their pages for boxed 9900k / 9700k, it seems too low, I didn't say it was the MSRP - we don't know what that is going to be. Maybe SL has the MSRP, maybe the prices are place holders.

I found those pages via google search, there's no way to those pages from their product page tree - although you can also find them on the SL site using their (google powered) search box.

I'm pretty sure those 9900k/9700k pages at SL weren't supposed to be accessible yet.

We haven't really known anything for sure about the 9xxx series release date. There have been lots of guesses along the way, some "leaks" from loose lipped vendors, but really no official release from Intel, even now - a few weeks away from the next leaked release date.

It seems SL has jumped the gun themselves, and now sit without products to sell. Intel is nowhere to be seen with any offical announcement.

The z390 doesn't seem to be anything more than the z370 besides the additional of USB 3.1 native, so IDK if z390 will be required, more of a nice update if available.

That 28 core double sized socket is another animal altogether, and it's not the topic of this thread. Given the yield limitations for large silicon, and the lack of 14nm production available, I doubt Intel is going to waste time on making a consumer version of Xeon to compete with AMD's ThreadRipper. That would be a waste of resources for small potatoes.

Not sure what you are trying to say, since you didn't say it, you just said:

"before anyone tries the BS of "but if AMD..."

You'll need to fill in the ellipsis, the text that followed didn't make sense...

I think that has a good chance of being true, but then again, Intel might pull a rabbit out of a hat...

 

So, part of that was general ranting at the idea that the premiums people pay are in fact worth the value they think they are.

But, to go through, we begin with SL. They currently do not have any prices up that I can see on their main page. https://siliconlottery.com/collections/all

So, any talk of what they may charge is up in the air. But, the point generally made on MSRP is still good. Due to shortages in the electronics industry, and adoption of behavioral economics, as well as major online vendors allowing others to buy out their inventory, then repost for a markup, it has helped to increase price volatility while making the ideal suggested price become more than something to mention in passing. Seeing how that is used with Nvidia's recent release is a great example of it.

But, yes, most likely placeholders.

As to releases, we know the approximates. You don't need the details on specific day if it can be narrowed to a two month window. Also, I'm sure Intel was debating a practical paper launch versus just waiting for volume availability, which required an examination of the 8700K release. Hence some saying Q1, others Q4 release. Either way, it makes the 9900K first three months a public beta of sorts, almost like a wide market sampling.

For the Z390, it brings a little extra, but rumors have it produced on a smaller process node and potentially having icelake support, although that is not official. Basically, that would be a reason to get the newer chipset, but that is also going to be short supply. Who knows.

As to the 28-core, it is happening. Computex showed them backed into a corner, they had the 5GHz chiller stink, and have already said a Q4 release of it. Now, if they price most people out of the market, which is whyh I discussed the $3K-5K rumored price tag, you can prevent too many purchasers, thereby preventing the need for massive amounts of supply. Instead, you take a small portion of it from the Cascade-SP supply, which is also rumored to be taking a price hike over the Skylake-SP chips (upwards of $7K according to one rumor, although price guidance is with salt and steep discounts are offered if you mention getting the AMD platform, further exacerbating the Xeon shortage, etc.).

But, MB vendors, when hearing about the release in Q4 laughed and said Q1. So, I'm expecting a December release, Q1 actual availability, all while dealing with AMD showing off Epyc 2 in either December or at CES, or somewhere in there (to steal Intel's thunder on the 14nm++ chips). As such, it will happen, but very small potatoes and very niche adoption.

As to that, almost all statements following are blaming AMD for lack of competition. Used to be heard on the CPU side, now on GPU side more. That was a general tangent not primarily meant for this thread, but was a venting. At this point, anyone trying to say AMD doesn't have competition and has not effected Intel's plans doesn't know what they are talking about. Intel still has strongest single thread performance and best lightly multi-threaded performance on mainstream and HEDT. Whether that makes sense for any given person is on their basis, as well as whether the premium is worth it to them. But, the Intel premium and Nvidia premium are making less and less sense, Intel's because of competitive products and the slowing performance gains, Nvidia for competing against its own products, but jumping the price exorbitantly due to their own greed and potentially trying to clear out 10 series overstock from the mining collapse. Either way, it is a class in incentives. Here, AMD had two choices: 1) create a high end gaming card at lots of cost and likely still have moderate sales numbers, or 2) take that money and use it on the CPU side to try to make inroads into the server market, where they possessed like 0.5% or less at the time. They chose the latter due to their incentives. It paid off. And, that chip scaled to provide a full stack of products and was competitive. Their lack of giving anything to compete against the 1080 Ti or 2000 series has no bearing on what Nvidia charges. People being willing to pay crazy prices is what determines Nvidia's pricing. If people said no more, then Nvidia would have to lower prices to sell their product. Has nothing to do with AMD. Same with the Intel tax. But, that is tangential and a discussion for behavioral econ.

Now, on the Intel not having much for a couple years, supposedly they have it so the not using one of their ways for denser production is mitigated a bit, but it still isn't their originally planned 10nm density, so....

 

hahaha loved that part! imagine such a meeting taking place between big player customer and intel

intel: so yeah, shortage, blabla, ultra high performance jump, blabla, supersize silicon, new platform, best thing on the market right now! thats why price tag is 7k+ minimum...

customer: ummm....u know, i got the AMD rep on the line...

intel: ...but, of course, for you as a special customer im sure we can do half or less!!! nooo problem! just dont mention that to other customers!!!

xD

Sent from my Xiaomi Mi Max 2 (Oxygen) using Tapatalk

 

No, escalated premiums due to artificial shortages, imagined or real, are not worth the extra cost, in fact you are bending over should you accept them - better to walk away.

I posted the SL 9900k / 9700k pages and prices here, just a few posts back:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...e-lake-cpus-z390.811225/page-44#post-10799505

If you are saying that people should wake up and stop getting robbed, use AMD as an alternative to avoid getting screwed by Intel / Nvidia one more time, then yes I agree - take the AMD alternative and allow the market share drop to reduce the Intel / Nvidia prices - if either or both stop selling product they will need to adjust their pricing model.

Yeah, IDK, seems low, but it also seems "accurate".

A 2 month wide window isn't specific enough to plan a buying decision, especially from a source that has already proven to not deliver on their promises with the 8700k release, the 10nm multiple failures, and the 14nm "surprise" shortages. Intel could leave a lot of people holding empty air in the data center, or on desktops. Buy AMD to be sure of delivery.

IDK, the 8700k initial release was handpicked, and for the follow-on "real" release, the samples were worse - Intel was throwing in "clinkers" because they weren't making high enough yield to cull the dogs, but I don't know if we can count on the same for the 9xxx series. Intel might sacrifice everything else just so they don't look bad vs AMD Ryzen 2 +.

The 10nm Icelake is now scheduled for 2020... so that ain't happening to the z390. At best the z390 will be a 14nm part, but Intel doesn't need to ship it to sell the 9xxx series, so it would make sense to ship more 9xxx's and few or zero z390's.

Given AMD's Epyc schedule, and ThreadRipper schedule, Intel would be wasting resources on a 28 core with new socket / chipset, and I don't know who would want to waste their resources make motherboards for such a limited release, doomed to fail anyway.

Yup, laughter isn't a good sign...noone is going to be making motherboards for a fantasy product like that. Not after the 32 core / 64 thread AMD showed Windows isn't ready for "big boy" pants, it can't handle the cores.

Yup, Intel and Nvidia are bad on their own, AMD being competitive just makes them fall apart and do silly desperate things - AMD can just keep delivering and watch them implode, explode, fizzle out, and count the ways as they arrive.

That's why I posted Rocky and (Intel) Bullwinkle, with "Intel" repeatably trying to pull a rabbit out of a hat, and Intel being surprised every time at what comes out once they reveal the "rabbit".

http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...e-lake-cpus-z390.811225/page-43#post-10798506

 

TechCrunch: Intel acknowledges supply issues, will prioritize premium chips.
https://techcrunch.com/2018/09/28/intel-acknowledges-supply-issues-will-prioritize-premium-chips/

Hopefully coffee lake R falls within the ambit of the "premium" chips they will prioritise to years end

 

sure, as it mentions core cpu skus. so im guessing pentium and celeron models will shift to the backburner...

Sent from my Xiaomi Mi Max 2 (Oxygen) using Tapatalk

 

https://imgur.com/a/W3UfRk1

1. that box looks cool
2. I want one

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-core-i9-9900k-price-amazon,37871.html

 

Is it April 1st already?

What a dumb-ass box design...12-sided dodecagon, wtf does that signify? Unless it's supposed to be a 16-sided hexadecagon to match 16 threads, then it's cool?...

That price is a joke too, you guys don't believe this is real, right?

Either Intel has finally gone off the deep end of silly, or an Amazon partner is having a run at Intel fan's.

 

IDK where Silicon Lottery got the October 26th ETA date, and if that is the Intel Official Release date or the date SL get their first shipment?

Coffee Lake-R Binning
https://www.overclock.net/forum/18068-silicon-lottery/1705980-coffee-lake-r-binning.html

"That's a reasonable time frame. Canadian distributors are listing the ETA for Oct 22nd as of today."


https://siliconlottery.com/collections/all/products/9900k

https://siliconlottery.com/collections/all/products/9700k

 

They just follow AMD's silly steps with a glossy package And yeah, it's waste of money.

 

No, the waste of money is if that price is correct! For nearly $600, it makes AMD not have to respond on mainstream AT ALL. That would be priced out of the market.

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

We will see prices "when" the chips is out.

Noo need to pack it in glossy boxes. The chips will sell as hot cakes. As I said... Wasted money on the "Package".

 

From another point of view the high price and dumb-ass box design make sense.

Given the previous yield problems with the 8700k, the 9900k has to be higher in failure rate - producing low yield - at least initially, given the expanded die size with 8c/16t.

Intel was forced to drop HT on the lower end sku's to reduce die size to increase production / yield numbers, but with the 9900k Intel is stuck with 16 threads for 8 cores.

The 9900k low production yield quantities coupled with the 14nm production constraints, Intel needed to figure out how to match supply by throttling demand.

Intel can use a high price to reduce the out of stock occurrences, reducing the likelihood of repeating the 8700k paper launch.

The huge goofy box is simply a way to fill the shipping boxes with plastic and air and mask Intel's non-existent CPU production capability; so Intel can fill the shipping containers with something.

Intel probably hopes AMD will come out with a higher performance Ryzen SKU to topple the 9900k's brief time at the top of the charts, and reduce demand for the Intel 9900k to a level that matches Intel's production capabilities.

To further frustrate 9900k buyers, dissuading those that were bad at math in school, the sight of that dodecahedron is probably enough to scare off half the class.

 

Barclays downgrades Intel to SELL, citing risk of a big price war with AMD
Barclays lowers its rating to underweight from equal weight for Intel, predicting the chipmaker will generate earnings below expectations next year.
“Intel faces a costly battle ahead to retain share as competitive threat from AMD heats up, along with near-term slowing of end markets,” analyst Blayne Curtis says.
Tae Kim | @firstadopter, Published 14 Hours Ago Updated 4 Hours Ago
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/01/bar...-citing-risk-of-a-big-price-war-with-amd.html

" Intel will either lose market share or be forced to cut its prices to compete with its resurgent competitor AMD, according to Barclays.

The firm lowered its rating to underweight from equal weight for Intel shares, predicting the chipmaker will generate disappointing earnings next year.

"Intel faces a costly battle ahead to retain share as competitive threat from AMD heats up, along with near-term slowing of end markets," analyst Blayne Curtis said in a note to clients Monday. Intel's financial model "sensitivity shows material downside to EPS, declining FCF [free cash flow] a real possibility."

Intel shares closed down 1.8 percent Monday.

Curtis lowered his price target for Intel shares to $38 from $53, representing 20 percent downside to Friday's close.

The analyst said Intel faces a "no-win" situation of either cutting prices or losing market share to AMD.

"The market is already giving AMD credit for significant share gains, but Intel is not going to let that share go without a fight with pricing the only real lever to pull," he said.

Curtis reduced his estimate for Intel's 2019 earnings per share to $4.21 from $4.30 versus the Wall Street consensus of $4.27.

On Friday, Intel's interim CEO, Bob Swan, said the company has enough supply to meet its 2018 full-year revenue outlook but admitted chip supply was "tight," especially in the entry level part of the market.

Intel did not immediately respond to a request for comment."

 

Ha, well I appreciate the humour!

 

It's funny because it's True.

 

Lol The market closed with Intel up 3.5% and AMD down 7.6%.

In fact AMD got downgraded.

Apparently Intel is investing an addition 1 billion into their 14nm production and have fixed 10nm with increasing yields and are on track for high volume production in 2019.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/seekin...amd-plunges-analyst-predicts-faster-10nm-ramp


Do we have any idea of the scale or size of that box? I really like it. Pretty cool change to their marketing and product design. If it’s a larger box maybe Intel is releasing a new heatsink and fan wig thwir CPUs? I don’t want an included fan but of that box is huge what else would they put inside?

 

You sound as foolish as the market. $1B to increase production is no small amount. It means additional hardware for production which means dedicating the company to have to fill that production capacity after the shortage is relieved, which coincides roughly with releases of AMD's competing chips. That means that by the time it is fine for volume for Intel, it is 14nm++ vs 7nm. Hell, even Compal, one of the largest assemblers for the industry, said it doesn't expect Intel's shortage to end until mid-2019. Now, this was around the same time, within a day before or after, of Intel's announcement of the $1B investment.

Now, let's go over the Intel "fix" shall we. Yes, they have mitigations in play to get 10nm out the door on schedule, which is holiday 2019, followed by server in 2020. The fix makes the gutting less severe, but is still lower density than promised in 2017, which was a 2.7x shrink, 25%performance and either a 45 or 55% in power efficiency. Well, since they can't do what they planned, it means less performance and energy efficiency. Also, if you look at Intel's own slides, 10nm was always behind 14nm++, while 10nm+is a side grade, just slightly behind 14nm++. Of course, you can add more transistors at the smaller size rather than just a die shrink, so you cannot just think of this in terms of density and pure shrink while retaining count. But, I think people will be underwhelmed, to be honest.

This while bleeding money on a 14nm expansion once Intel does deliver on 10nm is also a consideration. Keeping fabs operating at capacity can be difficult at times.

Then there is the rumor of zen2 7nm having early silicon at 4GHz base, 4.5GHz boost. For comparison, in December 2016/January 2017, we saw Ryzen early silicon at 3.1 base/3.4 boost, with a March release, April for the rest of the lineup (so two to three months after seeing those numbers). Second generation Ryzen released in April. That means earliest we see those 7nm mainstream chips is in 6 months, with 7 months being most likely, and 8 months out on the other side. The post on those speeds came from two weeks ago. For all these reasons, those speeds are likely low for what will be released at that point, which is before discussing IPC changes and that changes were made to the interconnect, which could mean lower latency and faster speeds on infinity fabric or adoption of an interposer. Those lend to the older rumors of a 10-15% IPC increase, which would put zen 2 at 5-10% IPC over Intel's offerings until 10nm holiday 2019 or 2020. If AMD increases the speed and the IPC rumor is true, Intel will be forced to cut prices to compete.


Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

Well, I hope some of this comes true, because I'd like to see AMD have a better offering than Intel for once in the last while (2002'ish I think)! It might make my next CPU buy less straight forward though, as in not an 'eyes shut' Intel choice!