Monday, November 26th 2018
14nm 6th Time Over: Intel Readies 10-core "Comet Lake" Die to Preempt "Zen 2" AM4
If Intel's now-defunct "tick-tock" product development cadence held its ground, the 14 nm silicon fabrication node should have seen just two micro-architectures, "Broadwell" and "Skylake," with "Broadwell" being an incrementally improved optical shrink of 22 nm "Haswell," and "Skylake" being a newer micro-architecture built on a then more matured 14 nm node. Intel's silicon fabrication node advancement went off the rails in 2015-16, and 14 nm would go on to be the base for three more "generations," including the 7th generation "Kaby Lake," the 8th generation "Coffee Lake," and 9th generation "Coffee Lake Refresh." The latter two saw Intel increase core-counts after AMD broke its slumber. It turns out that Intel won't let the 8-core "Coffee Lake Refresh" die pull the weight of Intel's competitiveness and prestige through 2019, and is planning yet another stopgap, codenamed "Comet Lake."
Intel's next silicon fabrication node, 10 nm, takes off only toward the end of 2019, and AMD is expected to launch its 7 nm "Zen 2" architecture much sooner than that (debuts in December 2018). Intel probably fears AMD could launch client-segment "Zen 2" processors before Intel's first 10 nm client-segment products, to cash in on its competitive edge. Intel is looking to blunt that with "Comet Lake." Designed for the LGA115x mainstream-desktop platform, "Comet Lake" is a 10-core processor die built on 14 nm, and could be the foundation of the 10th generation Core processor family. It's unlikely that the underlying core design is changed from "Skylake" (circa 2016). It could retain the same cache hierarchy, with 256 KB per core L2 cache, and 20 MB shared L3 cache. All is not rosy in the AMD camp. The first AMD 7 nm processors will target the enterprise segment and not client, and CEO Lisa Su in her quarterly financial results calls has been evasive about when the first 7 nm client-segment products could come out. There was some chatter in September of a "Zen+" based 10-core socket AM4 product leading up to them.
Source:
HotHardware
Intel's next silicon fabrication node, 10 nm, takes off only toward the end of 2019, and AMD is expected to launch its 7 nm "Zen 2" architecture much sooner than that (debuts in December 2018). Intel probably fears AMD could launch client-segment "Zen 2" processors before Intel's first 10 nm client-segment products, to cash in on its competitive edge. Intel is looking to blunt that with "Comet Lake." Designed for the LGA115x mainstream-desktop platform, "Comet Lake" is a 10-core processor die built on 14 nm, and could be the foundation of the 10th generation Core processor family. It's unlikely that the underlying core design is changed from "Skylake" (circa 2016). It could retain the same cache hierarchy, with 256 KB per core L2 cache, and 20 MB shared L3 cache. All is not rosy in the AMD camp. The first AMD 7 nm processors will target the enterprise segment and not client, and CEO Lisa Su in her quarterly financial results calls has been evasive about when the first 7 nm client-segment products could come out. There was some chatter in September of a "Zen+" based 10-core socket AM4 product leading up to them.
123 Comments on 14nm 6th Time Over: Intel Readies 10-core "Comet Lake" Die to Preempt "Zen 2" AM4
(Man, its so easy these days :D)
That said, 10 cores within 95W would be quite a feat, I expect these to need a little more than that.
I dont want to know how much they will charge for that refresh-refresh-refresh 14nm 10core cpu
You lead by a sizeable margin, you get to charge a premium. That's how business works. End of story.
So yeah, its quite hilarious to see you didn't get that memo right here. So great, you can now notice your mouse pointer lagging on the desktop at 144hz. I don't. Who's experience is really better now? :)Diminishing returns is a thing, look it up. 24 fps or 60 or 144 or 240, its quite a stretch. There will always be a next best thing, that doesn't mean its something you'd need.
You know I'm on a 120hz panel too. I'm sure that a higher refresh rate will still be smoother, but the investment versus the payoff simply isn't worth it, and consistency suffers. Its better to have a slightly lower but fixed FPS/refresh than 'as high as possible' while only hitting it rarely. Why? So I can use my strobing backlight, which helps motion clarity far more than even 480hz would. I don't spend my days counting pixels or pushing my nose into my panel so I can spot the smoothness of my 240hz mouse pointer. I play games :)
Intel's shit runs hot these days. Way hotter than their marketing implies or even outright states it actually should. Quite why you're so married to the idea of minimising that is beyond me, but here we are again - another piece of news that makes Intel look terrible, and you're on deck with damage control.Your point ignores that "back in the day" Intel did not segment their products into "Mainstream" and "HEDT" segments.
The first chips Intel formally denoted as separate from "Mainstream" platform were the Sandy Bridge E chips, the 3960X in specific, on LGA2011 with an RRP of $1059. The 2700K was $339 - Before that, the high end chips existed on the same platform as the lower end chips - the 980X was also $1059 but it sat in exactly the same motherboards as the i7 920, which was $305 and was a highly recommended budget/overclockers chip for what we now refer to as "mainstream" users.
Since the inception of i7 branding, RRPs for mainstream CPUs have gone from $305 to $499, (63.61% increase over 7 years), and "HEDT" processors have gone from $1059 to $1999 (88.76% increase over 7 years).
In the same 7 year period, the dollar has only inflated from $100 to $112.42, meaning that in all segments, Intel's price increases have outstripped inflation.
On top of that, the end of Moores law, the stagnation of corecounts and clocks, means that while prices have been rising more quickly, performance has been rising more slowly.
In other words, for the last 7 years, Intel has been fucking us all and even Intel fanboys should be glad that AMD are finally stepping up to put pressure on them to be more competitive in all areas.
Having 120fps-200fps interval on games like Overwatch, Quake Champions, Dirty Bomb, Rainbow 6, Destiny 2 or Warframe, at medium/high settings 1080p, doesn´t require an unrealistic amount of juice! Requires a very good cpu for gaming yes! Something like the 8600k at 4,8ghz will do! Something Ryzen can´t deliver, otherwise I would have one! Simple as that. You need to understand everyone has different needs. I love my 240hz setup and I don´t want a CPU that will keep my minimum fps at 85 or 90, as you can see, for example, on today Steve BF V multiplayer analysis with Ryzen vs Intel highlighted.
Now you can argue that Intel CPUs are so expensive right now that it is madness to buy them instead of a Ryzen and I agree! 100%! But 1 year ago that wasn´t the case.
One thing I can warranty you, 240hz is not placebo and it really improves your experience on every game that is not a 2d platformer or maybe RTS! The persistence is valid even if you can´t reach close to 240fps, you don´t need to. When you move your mouse realatively fast even on a 3rd person RPG, having 240hz 1080p will provide better clarity and image quality while on movement even compared to 4k 60hz! Because there will be no distortion/smearing/ghosting. You should try one day and then you agree with me.
And remember, 240hz monitors go as low as 260€ nowadays on European Amazon. Is not a premium price.
Stop whining and go buy one.
What he's saying isn't impossible.