Monday, May 15th 2017

Intel Readies the Core i9 Brand Extension

Intel is reportedly giving final touches to a new line of high-end desktop processors under the Core i9 brand extension. Until now, the company used the Core i7 brand extension broadly, to cover both the top-end parts of the mainstream-desktop (LGA115x) segment, and the high-end desktop (HEDT) segment, consisting of the LGA1366 and LGA2011-series sockets. With the advent of the new LGA2066 socket, Intel will be launching two distinct kinds of products - the Core i7 "Kaby Lake-X" quad-core series; and the Core i9 "Skylake-X" 6-core, 8-core, 10-core, and 12-core processors.

The Core i7 "Kaby Lake-X" will include the much talked about Core i7-7740K and i7-7640K quad-core processors (there's no Core i5 Kaby Lake-X). These chips will feature up to 1 MB of dedicated L2 cache per core, which is four times that of the existing i7-7700K chip. The i7-7740K features 8 MB of shared L2 cache; while the i7-7640K features just 6 MB. Interestingly, the i7-7640K also happens to lack HyperThreading, while the i7-7740K features it. The i7-7740K will ship with higher clock speeds than the i7-7700K, with 4.30 GHz core, and 4.50 GHz Turbo Boost. The i7-7640K features 4.00 GHz core, with 4.20 GHz Turbo Boost. The Core i9 series is a whole different beast.
The Core i9 series will consist of four parts, the Core i9-7800X six-core, Core i9-7820X eight-core, Core i9-7900X ten-core, and the Core i9-7920X twelve-core. All chips feature HyperThreading, and 1 MB of dedicated L2 cache per core. The i9-7800X features 8,448 KB (8.25 MB) of shared L3 cache, and comes with clock speeds of 3.50 GHz core, and 4.00 GHz Turbo Boost. The i9-7820X eight-core chip features 11,264 KB (11 MB) of shared L3 cache, clock speeds of 3.60 GHz core and 4.30 GHz Turbo Boost. The Core i9-7900X ten-core chip features 14,080 KB (13.75 MB) of shared L3 cache, and clock speeds of 3.30 GHz, with 4.30 GHz Turbo Boost. Clock speeds of the top-dog i9-7920X twelve-core chip are unknown at the moment, but it comes with 16,896 KB (16.5 MB) shared L3 cache.

The i9-7800X, and the i9-7820X, along with the "Kaby Lake-X" based quad-core parts, feature 28-lane PCI-Express gen 3.0 root complexes, so your 2-card SLI/CrossFire setup will run at just x8 per card. The i9-7900X and i9-7920X feature 44-lane PCIe gen 3.0 root complexes, which enable the 3-way/4-way multi-GPU setups you originally bought any HEDT chip for. Further, the "Kaby Lake-X" quad-core parts feature just dual-channel DDR4 memory interfaces. The entire Core i9 "Skylake-X" series features quad-channel DDR4 memory interface. Socket LGA2066 motherboards will feature quad-channel wiring, with up to 8 DIMM slots, but when a Kaby Lake-X chip is installed, two memory channels are inactive.

Intel is expected to launch most of the Core i7 "Kaby Lake-X" and Core i9 "Skylake-X" lineup in June 2017, with the top-end i9-7920X following on in August, 2017.
Source: AnandTech Forums
Add your own comment

34 Comments on Intel Readies the Core i9 Brand Extension

#26
Tatty_Two
Gone Fishing
Prima.VeraI am very much interested on what quality games out there can use 10 or 12 physical cores??
Are there any?? Any test that have been made with this??
is it not a workstation CPU to rival Threadripper?
Posted on Reply
#27
iBruce
This important story broke last Friday afternoon, May 12th.

What does TPU do all weekend? :ohwell:


Drink Beer? :toast: :roll:
Posted on Reply
#28
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
iBruceThis important story broke last Friday afternoon, May 12th.

What does TPU do all weekend? :ohwell:


Drink Beer? :toast: :roll:
and party.
Posted on Reply
#29
TheoneandonlyMrK
No mention of tdp hmmn, sounds ok not great ,so many boards and options now.
This sounds like a big fail , bar the top two the others are no more appealing then an i7 77ook in many respects yet will have a big markup, i can't see them doing well unless they rejig their entire price list for consumers, that's not going to happen.
I accept the upgrade later route via a shit early chip but how many actually do that, in all honesty most enthusiasts swap whole platforms each time as do average joes so i can't see the point in so many shit( in the context of the motherboards available features not being used) low end chips for a very pricey platform.
Posted on Reply
#30
wiyosaya
Sounds like marketing to me...
Posted on Reply
#31
GorbazTheDragon
DarkHillCould we perhaps wait for the official (press) releases before sharpening the pitchforks?
QRA. Pitchforks must be sharp at all times.
bugEh, who cares about LGA2066? You want to beat AMD, you need something for the mainstream.

However, it's not unexpected intel's first reaction is a hasty one. I'm not expecting a proper answer to Ryzen till 2018 at the earliest.
AMD have yet to compete with the Pentium G4560
ChaosJust barely in non-gaming situations. I imagine it will all even out when you consider 12 core with higher IPC vs 16 core CPU. I wouldn't count on Intel clock speed advantage all that much since i7 6950X@4.3GHz reaches blistering 90c and 240W power draw under FP workloads, it'd be interesting to see how people will cool i9-7920X that's clocked any higher than 4.4-4.5GHz (considering i7 7700k hits 4.5-4.6GHz with same voltages and power draw it takes i7 5775c to hit 4.2-4.3GHz) under proper workloads.
Intel does better than AMD on the gaming stuff :D

None of the multi-CCX chips actually keep up with the i5k or i7k chips... I would wager this problem will persist with the R9 chips will have the same problems.

The i7x and Xeon chips have shown no such weakness aside from the clock scaling when going through the 4-16 core range, maybe the very large chips might have noticeable latency problems in gaming performance, but none of the chips a gamer would buy do. On the other hand, the CCX issue affects the entire AMD gaming lineup outside of the budget sector, and if the IMC problems aren't fixed soon, they are going to be in deep doo-doo.
Posted on Reply
#32
R4E3960FURYX
From Intel insider the new Core i9 Extreme all featuring Intel AVX-512 support.

Due Intel AVX-512 enable now we've got some miracle choice.

+Intel AVX-512 can be 2X AVX/AVX2/AES speed compare to Ryzen 3,5,7,threadripper,naples and all Intel older processors on markets.
+Each core increase L2 cache from 256KB to 1024KB that 4 times from skylake/kabelake 1151 and all predecessor.
+Each core has 1.375MB L3
+Intel Turbo Boost 3.0

Consider Core i9 7920X 3.5GHz 12 Core 24 Thread 16.5MB L3 160watt TDP
12 x 64KB L1 cache 12 x 1024KB L2 12 x 1375KB L3 with AVX-512 support may overkill 16/32 Ryzen part easily.

Posted on Reply
#33
bug
R4E3960FURYXFrom Intel insider the new Core i9 Extreme all featuring Intel AVX-512 support.

Due Intel AVX-512 enable now we've got some miracle choice.

+Intel AVX-512 can be 2X AVX/AVX2/AES speed compare to Ryzen 3,5,7,threadripper,naples and all Intel older processors on markets.
+Each core increase L2 cache from 256KB to 1024KB that 4 times from skylake/kabelake 1151 and all predecessor.
+Each core has 1.375MB L3
+Intel Turbo Boost 3.0

Consider Core i9 7920X 3.5GHz 12 Core 24 Thread 16.5MB L3 160watt TDP
12 x 64KB L1 cache 12 x 1024KB L2 12 x 1375KB L3 with AVX-512 support may overkill 16/32 Ryzen part easily.

An "up to 2x faster" for a code path executed maybe 5% of the time is hardly anything to get excited about. It's a gain (once software actually starts using the new extensions), but not anything groundbreaking.
Posted on Reply
#34
GorbazTheDragon
R4E3960FURYX+Each core increase L2 cache from 256KB to 1024KB that 4 times from skylake/kabelake 1151 and all predecessor.
+Each core has 1.375MB L3
+Intel Turbo Boost 3.0
These don't actually mean anything unless they make some miracle jump in performance
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Apr 25th, 2024 01:08 EDT change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts