Comments Locked

68 Comments

Back to Article

  • jjj - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    14, 16 and 18 core parts expected to ship in October

    2017 or 2018?
  • T1beriu - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    Funny.
  • Ninjawithagun - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    Actually, the article is wrong. Intel recently stated very late 4th quarter earliest and 1H 2018 as the most probable release time frame. Bottom line, they lied just to try and rain on AMD's Threadripper party. It didn't work and consumers know it.
  • Cygni - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    Youve posted like 10+ comments breathlessly defending a publicly traded company on this comment section. We get it, you think AMD is extra best special and Intel is evil terrible overpriced. Nobody cares.
  • ddriver - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    You obviously care. Also, he completely is right. Intel did invent non-existent products out of thin air and announced stuff it doesn't even have in the works just to avoid looking as a second-class chipmaker. His comment doesn't smell of fanboyism unlike your devoted response in Intel's defense.
  • ddriver - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    I got to give it to Intel nonetheless, I mean even if they manage to get out something faster than Threadripper in the HEDT market, it will be so expensive that its actual consumer value will plummet.

    It looks like the top TR chip will cost about as much as Intel's 10 core, and for the amount of money they are gonna ask for the 18 core model you may as well go EPYC and still get better value AND performance.

    Have Intel forgotten that competition is not only about performance, but price as well? They'd have to slash a good 1/3 of the price right away before those products are even worth the purchase consideration.
  • Hurr Durr - Wednesday, June 14, 2017 - link

    Talk about kneejerk.
  • Cygni - Wednesday, June 14, 2017 - link

    I really don't give a shit about either company, they are companies not people. They would kill us both in our sleep for a .0001% share price rise and never forget that.

    For a lot of years, AT comments was at least semi-free of this stupid brand loyalty white knight horseshit, but it has gotten as bad as everywhere else lately. Your awful awful posting everywhere certainly hasn't helped.
  • ddriver - Wednesday, June 14, 2017 - link

    That's all fine and dandy but it doesn't change the fact that you had a rather negative reaction to what is essentially true.

    When it comes to companies or for that matter - governments too, they are always evil, but always only as evil as they can afford to be. While it is unarguably true that AMD shows a lot more love to consumers, that's only because they need to and cannot afford not to. While Intel - they did great even when their chips were garbage compare to Athlons - I doubt they will have any change in their ways until something rather drastic, like say losing a third of their market.
  • ZeDestructor - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    2017 if Apple's iMac Pro timeframe (Dec 2017) is accurate
  • KrazyAttack - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    And not a single person clapped, literally. So awkward but awesome at the same time.
  • Gothmoth - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    i wonder more why people faked enthusiasm on these intel events over the last 6 years....
    after sandy bridge everything intel showed was just "meh".
  • Ninjawithagun - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    That's simple - Intel paid them off promises of "free hardware" for favorably future reviews.
  • Byte - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    I'm been an intel uhore for the longest time. Was really happy with all my intel chips. Was about to upgrade the work computer to a 7700k after my lotto of half a dozen 6700k failed to get past 4.6GHz. Pulled the trigger on the 7700k onsale they had for $289ish, but then said screw it and got a 1700 set for $370 instead. Canceled the 7700k. Ryzen here i come!
  • TEAMSWITCHER - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    For me Ryzen is already dead. The 8-Core Skylake-X part is only $100 more than the top of the line Ryzen, but offers so much more. Faster single thread performance, more PCIe lanes direct to the CPU, Quad-Channel Memory, and better platform motherboards with loads of premium features. After all of AMD's hype, Intel swats them away as if they were a pesky fly.
  • asendra - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    I agree that the 7820-X is a very competitive SKU, I would even say that is the best option on the lineup.
    But a couple of things have to be taken into account.
    First, you can have the 1700/1700x for a lot less than the 1800X and the overclock basically the same.
    Second, the X299 motherboards are gonna have a ~100$ premium over the AMD ones if previous releases are any indication.
    So, yes, very competitive, but not so small difference price wise.
  • Gothmoth - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    it´s x299 vs. x399... skylake-x vs. threadripper.

    to compare skylake-x with ryzen only shows that "teamswitcher is clueless.

    with threadripper i get 64 PCI lanes no matter if i buy the cheapest or most expensive CPU.
  • bigboxes - Wednesday, June 14, 2017 - link

    Yeah, he's comparing dissimilar platforms.
  • negusp - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    "only $100 more"

    Don't forget the 1700X is way cheaper than the 1800X and basically performs the same. So you're really looking at a $250 premium + an X299 motherboard, which is an extra $100 compared to existing Ryzen socketed motherboards.

    So, you're paying roughly $350 more for these "premium" features. "Ryzen is already dead", my ass.
  • Ninjawithagun - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    Apparently, the Intel fangirls don't know how to read. AMD Ryzen 7 1800X is only $449 now, 1700X is $349, and the 1700 sells for $299 O.O RIP Intel...lol
  • Hurr Durr - Wednesday, June 14, 2017 - link

    AMD finally comes out with a decent processor after literally ten years of failure to compete, already has to slash prices, and here are you proclaiming intel "RIP" and calling others names. Got to hand it to AMD fanatics, comment sections would be far more boring without you guys.
  • bigboxes - Wednesday, June 14, 2017 - link

    Consumers are happy that prices are dropping. I am not rooting for one company over another. I want competition. By what is best for you. Price/Performance.
  • Twingo - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    The X299 platform is much more expensive than the AM4 platforms. 8 Core starts at ~300 for the Ryzen part versus 600 for the Intel. They aren't that price competitive. The Intel BETTER be significantly faster for 2x the price.
  • Ninjawithagun - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    Actually, try $150. And that's before all the 3rd party sellers mark up the price from $599 to $650 and beyond. You have a very bad memory, if you don't remember this happening with every single Intel CPU release since Sandy Bridge. Case in point, the 7700K was supposed to be $329 on release, yet could not be bought anywhere on the release date for less than $399. I rest my case. AMD Ryzen is not only alive and well, it will rule the consumer mainstream market for the next 6-12 months. Let's say by some mere chance of the 7820K is available for $599, then one has to ask that does it have 25% more performance vs. an 1800X? Nope. Plain and simple, Intel's prices are not competitive and AMD wins again.
  • Ninjawithagun - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    ...oh and I forgot to mention the fact that X299 motherboards are going to be EXPENSIVE...much more expensive than any AMD X370 enthusiast motherboard easily by a couple hundred dollars. AMD wins yet again and doesn't even have to compete against the 7820K with Threadripper as Ryzen 7 already beats it! ;-)
  • Gothmoth - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    i have been using only intel for over a decade.

    but im not stupid enough to ignore their (price) policy.
    milking the user for as much money as possible for only minor improvements.

    i will take a close look at the new boards and cpus.
    i want to build a 10 core system this year.
  • haukionkannel - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    Intel could have maid the 6 core version to have 44 PCI lines and it would have been a really good chip, but instead it will be something very different.
    Well maybe next year...
  • mapesdhs - Thursday, June 15, 2017 - link

    They could have done a lot better than that a long time ago. Remember the 4-core 4820K has 40 lanes, and the original 3930K was just an 8-core (40 lanes) with 2 cores disabled.
  • colonelclaw - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    Assuming that ThreadRipper will cost $1000 or less (some sites are saying as low as $850), then by the time the 12-core and up chips actually ship, surely Intel will have to make price cuts in order to stay competitive?
  • nevcairiel - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    Should wait for any TR reviews before judging, its an entirely different concept then Intels CPUs. Using two Dies on one chip can have real disadvantages if the software is not aware of this layout, so we'll see how that works.
  • Gothmoth - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    well judging how ryzen fares against the consumer intel CPU´s.... i bet threadripper will be more than competitive.

    and if they can deliver the 16 core TR for 1000$ then intel is in deep s**t.
  • damianrobertjones - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    " deliver the 16 core TR for 1000$ then intel is in deep s**t."

    But why? The standard consumer won't spend that amount of cash on a cpu.
  • Dark Man - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    "The standard consumer" does not not to invest in X299 platform, too

    And hence, rmb there are still 12C TR too. If 16C TR is 1000$ (I doubt about that), surely 12C TR would cost lesser than

    Hwr, I don't think AMD would sell TR at that much cheap. They still need profit, too
  • notashill - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    It's not really a new idea, though it's been a while since it was popular. Intel's first dual core CPU, the Pentium D, was a pair of Pentium 4 dies in an MCM and likewise the original Core 2 Quad was a pair of Core 2 Duo dies. Dual socket systems of course also suffer from similar latency issues, so most software designed to take advantage of large core counts *is* designed with it in mind.

    The inter-core latency does impact performance in some situations with a lot of thread dependencies but seems the impact is usually pretty small, sub 5%. Of course we should still wait for benchmarks and all but historically similar setups have been around for years and not been a major issue.
  • nevcairiel - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    No, its not new, but it shows the underlying design of TR, and what AMD really did. Intel actually has a huge die with many cores, AMD has 4-core modules and 8-core dies that they can piece together like legos - flexible for sure, but at a cost (even if it remains <5%).

    In any case we literally know nothing about TR, no clocks, no pricing, no performance. We know PCIe lanes and core counts, but thats it. People make fun of the HCC SKL-X CPUs for not knowing any details, but its not like TR is different.
  • bigboxes - Thursday, June 15, 2017 - link

    I'm sure we can say that TR will be a lot cheaper than KB-X. Now, you can still build your KB-X build at twice the price if you'd like. It's all about competition. Who cares which company beats who? I'm a consumer and I want to win!
  • Gothmoth - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    i don´t see how intel can hold on to the price for the 10 core.

    this seems like 200$ too expensive.
  • jabber - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    It's one big hot mess! Well done Intel. Just goes to show even the biggest corporations can be lead into a blind panic.
  • RaistlinZ - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    I need to spend $1,000.00 to get over 28 PCI-E lanes. F.U. Intel.
  • TEAMSWITCHER - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    I'm not sure a single user needs more than 28 PCI-E lanes. I've never seen a benchmark that shows where having more PCI-E lanes made a machine faster.
  • Gothmoth - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    boy it´s about expansion ... the stuff you connect to your mainboard. it´s not about speed.

    2 GPU´s, M.2, hardware raid card, video cards etc. etc. pp.

    not everyone is a gamer kiddie....
  • Hurr Durr - Wednesday, June 14, 2017 - link

    >boy
    >kiddie

    I see someone got rekt here, and it`s not him.
  • bigboxes - Thursday, June 15, 2017 - link

    I see the Intel fanboys are out in force. I'm running a 4790K in my main rig and am planning out a monster dual-Xeon home server, but don't let that confirm your bias. I'm for competition that benefits the consumer and not the corporations. Who cares which company "wins".
  • hahmed330 - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    Not really Etherium mining comes to mind think of all the dough $$$$$$$$$$
  • mapesdhs - Thursday, June 15, 2017 - link

    TS., try running a CUDA app on 4 GPUs, can't do that with a 28 lane CPU. Cutting back on PCIe lane provision in this way was one of the dumbest things Intel did with its highend consumer CPUs. It's crazy that an old 4820K supports better GPU provision than a 7820K.
  • mapesdhs - Thursday, June 15, 2017 - link

    Amusing that a used 4820K for $75 has 40 lanes.
  • zodiacfml - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    Any news on Cannon Lake? Some news stating it will be coming at the end of the year.
  • Meteor2 - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    I don't think that's changed (it's officially been 'late 2017' for a few months). What I don't think has been clarified is what 'data centre first' actually means (there's no way they have a big-die CPU ready to go on 10 nm). It's also very/completely unclear how Cannon Lake and Coffee Lake are going to line up. Cannon Lake for the Y-series and Coffee Lake with 4C/8T for U?
  • Meteor2 - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    Intel does seem to be a bit of a mess at the moment. I guess it just doesn't know what technologies are going to work and which aren't. It's getting hard now.

    http://www.pcworld.com/article/3168827/components-...

    This X series is something it could've launched anytime in the last seven years or so, but hasn't needed to until now. It could make huge amounts of money from a handful of -EP chips. Thank god for AMD.
  • Meteor2 - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    PS I've realised that data centre-first probably means some small relatively simple networking chips. That sort of thing. Not big CPUs.
  • dnlb42 - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    I know I am not the only one who is giddy with glee about these two companies hacking away at each other. Keep hacking, THE PRICE!!!
    Regardless which CPU MB combo is "better" everyone has different needs. One common need is the prices needed to come down. I personally don't give a rats ass who is king as long as I the peasant gets to purchase one of these very enticing combos at a reasonable price.
    Riddle me this?
    How low can it go???
  • esoel_ - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    You win an Internet 😂
  • Meteor2 - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    Until AMD run out of cash
  • mapesdhs - Thursday, June 15, 2017 - link

    That's what borrowing is for. ;)
  • hajila - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    Anyone know what time these will be available for pre-order?
  • WKCook - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    It is good to see Intel scrambling to answer AMD's offerings for a change. One thing I see missing here is ECC support. I do little gaming and a lot of rendering and math intensive work. Ryzen supports ECC and I expect to see MOBOs to support this combination soon.
  • Samus - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    i7-7820X is just a monster for that price.
  • firerod1 - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    Damn, Intel priced this thing perfectly to be competitive. It will be a better experience than an ryzen 8 core but you will be paying a premium for those features
  • Ninjawithagun - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    Intel just doesn't get it. The vast majority of consumers aren't going to put up with their crap anymore. Intel, either lower your prices or fail miserably. Plain and simple, AMD will take over the mainstream consumer market as they have the very best performance per dollar. Intel offers no competition whatsoever, not even at the highest enthusiast level of CPUs.
  • firerod1 - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    The prices dropped 15% for the 6 core and 40% drop for the 8 and 10 core.
  • mapesdhs - Thursday, June 15, 2017 - link

    Only recently. Ryzen was out ages ago.
  • hahmed330 - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    i5-7640X 4Cores/4Threads... $242 Ugh...
    Is something really wrong with Intel???
  • artk2219 - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    Yes and no, I cant blame them for trying to milk people for as long as they can, but it also shows you just how accustomed they've gotten to being the only game in town. I'm sure it'll change, but only when it really starts hurting their pocket book, and honestly I can see them pulling the shit they did in the past again, rebates to customers that use only their parts, and punishing customers that don't.
  • razvanics - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    https://youtu.be/3o3mLsrPoP8 Funny Interview Intel :)
  • none12345 - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    "For me Ryzen is already dead. The 8-Core Skylake-X part is only $100 more than the top of the line Ryzen, but offers so much more. Faster single thread performance, more PCIe lanes direct to the CPU, Quad-Channel Memory, and better platform motherboards with loads of premium features. After all of AMD's hype, Intel swats them away as if they were a pesky fly."

    Bad comparison. You are comparing a mainstream platform to high end desktop. You should be comparing high end desktop to high end desktop. Thats x299 to x399. And on top of that you choose the most expensive am4 chip to the budget x299 chip. 1700 vs the 8 core x299 would be a much fairer comparison.

    You can look at it 2 ways.

    With ryzen you can get an 8 core for half the price, the cpu is half the price, and the mobo will probably be less then half the price.

    With threadripper you can probably get a 12 core for that same $600(dont know pricing yet), so on price to price, threadripper will give you 12 cores vs 8, both give you quad channel ram, and threadripper gives you 64 lanes of pci vs 28.

    Either comparison makes the x299 8 core look like a really bad deal. You can spend half as much with ryzen, and not get the extra I/O, or you can spend the same amount with threadripper, and you get more I/O then intel, and a lot more multithread performance.

    Single threaded performance, intel will definitely win. But who buys a 8-18 core cpu and gives 2 craps only about single threaded perormance? If you cant use the cores, you have no business buying these platforms. Go buy kaby lake instead, and clock up for your single threaded heart's content.

    Pointless to try to guess which is better tho without benchmarks. we know the x299 platform will be more expensive, we know the x399 platform has better i/o. What we dont konw is how much performance/dollar on either untill we can benchmark both.
  • mapesdhs - Thursday, June 15, 2017 - link

    Holy grud, a sensible, balanced post! Are you an alien? :D
  • AGS3 - Saturday, June 24, 2017 - link

    These are consumer HEDT CPUs. What consumer needs 16+ cores? Ryzen hype has the market believing "if 4 cores is good, 8 or more cores must be better". Consumer application software is limited by parallelism and multi-threading and few apps benefit from more than 4 cores/8 threads and only benefit from faster clock speeds due to sequential processing. Time for Anandtech to do an article for HEDT users and the "upgrade" trade-off of fewer cores at faster clock speed vs more cores (and more money) at slower speeds for consumers. CPU speeds hit the wall 6 years ago and stalled at 4-5ghz and we won't see 8-10ghz CPU's in the next six years - which is only 2X the speed in 12 years. i9s are NOT new but just existing Xeons with ECC removed at better prices as a reaction to Ryzen like other i7 "X" CPUs. An old i7-4790K user running at 4.5-5ghz may see little improvement for the cost of upgrading to X299 and App performance may be worse. Last, but not least, all i9s are missing the often underrated Intel Graphics iGPU. Kaby Lake i7 iGPU can playback and encode multiple streams of H.264 and H.265 4K video realtime for free. All the above CPUs will need an expensive discrete GPU card in addition to the new CPU and motherboard cost. The "new" i9-7740K has disabled the iGPU. http://www.anandtech.com/.../intel-launches-7th...... http://www.edn.com/.../The-future-of-computers--Pa...
  • Ian Cutress - Sunday, August 20, 2017 - link

    https://myhacker.net Hacking news | hacking tutorials | hacking ebooks

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now