Thursday, February 12th 2015

Intel Haswell-EX an 18-core Leviathan

Intel's biggest enterprise CPU silicon based on its "Haswell" micro-architecture, the Haswell-EX, is a silicon monstrosity, according to its specs. Built in the 22 nm silicon fab processes, the top-spec variant of the chip physically features 18 cores, 36 logical CPUs enabled with HyperThreading, 45 MB of L3 cache, a DDR4 IMC, and TDP as high as 165W. Intel will use this chip to build its next-gen Xeon E7 v3 family, which includes 8-core, 10-core, 12-core, 14-core, 16-core, and 18-core models, with 2P-only, and 4P-capable variants spanning the E7-4000 and E7-8000 families. Clock speeds range between 1.90 GHz and 3.20 GHz.
Source: CPU World
Add your own comment

68 Comments on Intel Haswell-EX an 18-core Leviathan

#1
neko77025
I need the 18 core for Minecraft so freaking bad .. somone get me one !
Posted on Reply
#2
lemonadesoda
If I get this, will minesweeper stop lagging?

Jokes aside, this is pretty good. I wonder what idle power looks like, rather than just TDP. I'm still running a somewhat older 2x E5472. The idle consumption and heat is the spoiler. If the new Haswell-EX E7v3's manage to noticeably cut the idle+average power consumption, then upgrades are merited for that reason alone.
Posted on Reply
#3
natr0n
If you don't want this cpu something is wrong with you.
Posted on Reply
#4
Sony Xperia S
Now this I like... a lot! :)

If they optimise all game engines to use at least 90 % (see how modest I am) of its power and computing capabilities, we would already enjoy a much more beautiful world even than that of Crysis 3. :)
Posted on Reply
#5
TheGuruStud
Sony Xperia SNow this I like... a lot! :)

If they optimise all game engines to use at least 90 % (see how modest I am) of its power and computing capabilities, we would already enjoy a much more beautiful world even than that of Crysis 3. :)
CPUs aren't a limiting factor in games.
Posted on Reply
#6
ZoneDymo
Sony Xperia SNow this I like... a lot! :)

If they optimise all game engines to use at least 90 % (see how modest I am) of its power and computing capabilities, we would already enjoy a much more beautiful world even than that of Crysis 3. :)
Ermm not really, thats the gpu area.
Posted on Reply
#7
HammerON
The Watchful Moderator
I would really like to see what the 18-core/36-thread beast could produce while crunching for WCG///\\\
Posted on Reply
#8
THE_EGG
A couple of these on a multi-socket mobo would. be. absolutely. MENTALLLLLL!!!!!!
Posted on Reply
#9
dj-electric
cut it from 165 to 125, give me extra 300-400mhz and it would be much sexier. This is what 14nm should be
Posted on Reply
#10
Breit
lemonadesodaIf I get this, will minesweeper stop lagging?

Jokes aside, this is pretty good. I wonder what idle power looks like, rather than just TDP. I'm still running a somewhat older 2x E5472. The idle consumption and heat is the spoiler. If the new Haswell-EX E7v3's manage to noticeably cut the idle+average power consumption, then upgrades are merited for that reason alone.
You know its an E7 (Haswell-EX) and not an E5 (Haswell-EP)? This 18-core E7 will cost ~$7K alone for one chip... :cool:
Posted on Reply
#11
Mr B
fantastic. I'll take three!
Posted on Reply
#12
Sony Xperia S
TheGuruStudCPUs aren't a limiting factor in games.
ZoneDymoErmm not really, thats the gpu area.
I hope you both will understand that we haven't and probably will never reach the maximum possible computing power to be thrown at a problem.

You can take the "sleeping" threads of those processors and tell them to calculate something, even to take some of the load of the GPU.

GPUs continue to grow with shaders count, right or no?
Posted on Reply
#13
micropage7
and as usual
more cores is in vain when the OS/ apps cant fully utilize them
Posted on Reply
#14
dj-electric
^People are not meant to use those CPUs to play Left for team portal Episode 3
They use well-programmed programs and take efficiency as high as they can.
Posted on Reply
#15
Sony Xperia S
Dj-ElectriC^People are not meant to use those CPUs to play Left for team portal Episode 3
They use well-programmed programs and take efficiency as high as they can.
Those CPUs are used to create virtual reality with maximum realism. Which of course would need as much as possible resources.

Yeah, I agree that the state of current gaming industry is bad but I guess, in 10 years it will be a different picture.
Posted on Reply
#16
LiveOrDie
I would be happy with a 4core 8 thread CPU that runs @ 6Ghz you would get more out of it for gaming.
Posted on Reply
#17
Disparia
Oh, this wouldn't be good for gaming at all... :rolleyes:
In recent years, Intel Labs has shown steady progress towards developing real-time ray tracing engines running on multicore Intel® processor-based platforms. In 2008, we were able to show Quake Wars: Ray Traced running at 15-20 frames per second (fps) on an Intel® Xeon® processor-based server using four quad-core CPUs. After several months of making optimizations, we showed the demo using the same four socket server, but with the newly updated six-core Intel® Xeon® X7460 processors at 20-35 fps. The following year the next Intel processor allowed us to go down from a server to a workstation system with two sockets achieving the same frame. It is clear that we will see continued performance increases with higher core counts and new architectures like Intel® microarchitecture code name Sandy Bridge.
That was written in 2011 and since then Daniel Pohl of Intel has demo'd it with with even more powerful Xeons + Phi achieving 1080p:



... and since then Intel has produced vastly more powerful Phi models as well as announced Haswell-EX Xeons above.

The short story is that there will be a point when this kind of power is almost in the hands of the consumer and the problem with be tackled from the other end - software. Several prominent developers have spoken their desire to design engines for ray-tracing. Many would like to be on the fore-front of such an evolution in graphics.
Posted on Reply
#18
Nordic
I would love to have a quad socket 18 core xeon set up for crunching.
Live OR DieI would be happy with a 4core 8 thread CPU that runs @ 6Ghz you would get more out of it for gaming.
I want one of those for gaming.
Posted on Reply
#19
FordGT90Concept
"I go fast!1!11!1!"
Does this rub anyone else the wrong way seeing how Intel keeps improving the server market by leaps and bounds but only leaves the scraps to desktops? @Federal Trade Commission: it is time to start looking at anti-trust. The lack of competition is becoming obvious now.
Posted on Reply
#20
romeg
I could probably hit 300 FPS on FSX:laugh:! Seriously, these CPUs would be massive overkill for me and just about anyone, but I'd most likely buy a 16 core CPU anyway.
Posted on Reply
#21
64K
FordGT90ConceptDoes this rub anyone else the wrong way seeing how Intel keeps improving the server market by leaps and bounds but only leaves the scraps to desktops? @Federal Trade Commission: it is time to start looking at anti-trust. The lack of competition is becoming obvious now.
True. I have my fingers crossed that Intel will toss me more than a bone with Skylake to upgrade from Ivy Bridge but it may not happen. I heard some rumors a while back that Samsung was considering buying AMD and if they did they could pump enough cash into AMD R&D to put them in a position to shake Intel out of their lazy stupor. I haven't heard anything more for a while so I guess it's not going to happen.
Posted on Reply
#22
Petey Plane
FordGT90ConceptDoes this rub anyone else the wrong way seeing how Intel keeps improving the server market by leaps and bounds but only leaves the scraps to desktops? @Federal Trade Commission: it is time to start looking at anti-trust. The lack of competition is becoming obvious now.
What? This has nothing to do with anti-trust laws. Intel isn't monopolizing anything, and simply making a better product that your competition isn't against the law.

It's not Intel's fault that the vast majority of software only takes advantage of 1 to 2 cores/threads, and Intel already sells multiple chips specifically for the home market that can handle 8-16 threads. It's up to the software to take advantage of that.

Also, a home users CAN purchase server/workstation CPUs if they think their home office/game PC need two 16 core/32 thread CPUs (protip: it doesn't) and they have about $7000 to throw away.

And it's not Intel's fault that AMD can't make competitive chips.
Posted on Reply
#23
Toothless
Tech, Games, and TPU!
I'll take 2.
Posted on Reply
#24
eidairaman1
The Exiled Airman
64KTrue. I have my fingers crossed that Intel will toss me more than a bone with Skylake to upgrade from Ivy Bridge but it may not happen. I heard some rumors a while back that Samsung was considering buying AMD and if they did they could pump enough cash into AMD R&D to put them in a position to shake Intel out of their lazy stupor. I haven't heard anything more for a while so I guess it's not going to happen.
Not Since Mrs Su stepped in.

Petey plane part of it deals with Intel twisting peoples arms during the Athlon 64 days. So alot of this is Intel's Fault not all of it though.
Posted on Reply
#25
Petey Plane
eidairaman1Not Since Mrs Su stepped in.

Petey plane part of it deals with Intel twisting peoples arms during the Athlon 64 days. So alot of this is Intel's Fault not all of it though.
Oh yeah, i'm not saying Intel is a shining example of corporate ethics, but rather that the argument that Intel should be sued for anti-trust violations just because they don't sell a sub-$1000 18 core, consumer oriented chip is completely silly. AMD started selling 16 core Opterons in 2011, a few years before the 16 core Xeon. They can still be had, for significantly less than a Xeon too. Have fun finding a socket G34 mobo though.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
May 28th, 2022 10:48 EDT change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts