Friday, August 23rd 2019

Alleged Leaked Details on Intel Comet Lake-S Platform Require... You Guessed It... A New Platform

Intel's development of their Core architecture in the post-Ryzen world has been slow, with solutions slowly creeping up in core counts with every new CPU release - but much slowly than rival AMD's efforts. Before Intel can capitalize on a new, more scalable and power-efficient architecture, though, it has to deliver performance and core count increases across its product line to stay as relevant as possible against a much revitalized rival. Enter Comet Lake-S: the desktop parts of Intel's new round of consumer CPUs, which will reportedly see an increase in the maximum core count to a 10-core design. This 10-core design, however, comes with an increase in power consumption (up to 135 W), and the need, once again, for beefier power delivery systems in a new, LGA 1200 package (with 9 more pins that the current LGA 1151).

The move to a new socket and the more stringent power requirements give Intel the opportunity to refresh its chipset offerings once again. If everything stays the same (and there's no reason it should change), new Z470 and Z490 chipsets should be some of the higher tier offerings for builders to pair with their motherboards. The new Comet Lake-S CPUs will still be built in the now extremely refined 14 nm process, and allegedly keep the same 16 PCIe 3.0 lanes as current Coffee Lake Refresh offerings. The new CPU offerings from Intel are expected to roll out in Q1 2020.
Sources: XFastest, via Tom's Hardware
Add your own comment

224 Comments on Alleged Leaked Details on Intel Comet Lake-S Platform Require... You Guessed It... A New Platform

#177
JB_Gamer
Could next generation be the "Death Lake"
Posted on Reply
#178
_JP_
I was heaving a sort of déja vu...

Posted on Reply
#179
Chrispy_
r.h.p, post: 4103248, member: 158032"
My two cents , these names are just getting better coffee lake , comet lake- s , Icey lake , shiny river , …...

anyway they are still awesome cpus but they cost a lot more than AMD
I'm not sure they will be awesome CPUs actually. Intel's only advantage at 14nm is gaming, where more than about 6-8 threads becomes pointless. Comet lake doesn't really bring anything new to the table other than more cores that games don't use - so a 9700K will still be the default gaming chip for those who only care about gaming - specifically when not streaming because then AMD wins all the benchmarks, not just most of them.

If you want new process and new architecture, Comet Lake isn't it. It's still 14nm and it's still just a minor tweak of the same Skylake architecture from four years ago - with the downside of having to shell out for a new motherboard.

What Intel need to do to compete is sort out their process tech so that they can compete with TSMC, because Ryzen on TSMC's 7nm at 65W (actual) is matching Intel at 125W (claimed), 180W actual. It's kind of embarassing for Big Blue.
Posted on Reply
#180
kapone32
Chrispy_, post: 4105181, member: 185623"
I'm not sure they will be awesome CPUs actually. Intel's only advantage at 14nm is gaming, where more than about 6-8 threads becomes pointless. Comet lake doesn't really bring anything new to the table other than more cores that games don't use - so a 9700K will still be the default gaming chip for those who only care about gaming - specifically when not streaming because then AMD wins all the benchmarks, not just most of them.

If you want new process and new architecture, Comet Lake isn't it. It's still 14nm and it's still just a minor tweak of the same Skylake architecture from four years ago - with the downside of having to shell out for a new motherboard.

What Intel need to do to compete is sort out their process tech so that they can compete with TSMC, because Ryzen on TSMC's 7nm at 65W (actual) is matching Intel at 125W (claimed), 180W actual. It's kind of embarassing for Big Blue.
I am no way worried about Intel. They have the money, resources and people to come back up into first place. As most of us know they have hired Keller and Raja who were responsible for Ryzen and Polaris. They have also been very quiet on 10nm for the desktop. Not because they have no response but because they are working on a proper response. Just like how Nvidia made refinements on the RTX series after the reviews stated that AMD's refinements (anti lag etc) made their GPUs better.
Posted on Reply
#181
Chrispy_
Nobody is worried about Intel. They're like Apple in that they can screw up for an entire decade without running out of money and their enormous marketing/media/incentives budgets will allow them to keep shifting inferior products without any issues whatsoever. Look at desktop/laptop sales from the big OEM brands like HP/Dell/Lenovo - or every Macbook sold in the last 2 years with a defective-by-design keyboard. Intel and Apple are fine. Zen2 may be winning the performance/value/sales race at the moment but that won't stop Intel and Apple from making more profit.

There was that article at the beginning of August covered by several sites about the EU's largest retailer publishing sales statistics. One single SKU (Ryzen 3700X, and that's not even AMD's most popular Ryzen) outsold the entire Intel product stack. Very few people want to pay 50% more for a 4-year old tech with serious power and heat issues and up to 25% less performance in multi-threaded productivity tasks. For AMD to gain the upper hand, they have to do this year-after-year across all market segments. That means laptop APUs, their entire GPU product stack, their drivers and platform support, their developer tools, compilers and developer support.

I want AMD to bring full-spectrum competition back to the CPU and GPU industry as much as as the next person, but Zen2 alone isn't enough.
Posted on Reply
#182
svan71
Gungar, post: 4103222, member: 163163"
They already told us they will go directly to PCIE 5.0 in 2021.
I told intel GET BENT !
Posted on Reply
#183
Vlada011
Hahahaa PCI-E 3.0.
Intel inferiority continue.

People repeat No improvements in gaming with PCI-E 4.0.
Actually owners of X299 and Z390 and new Intel chipset are in worse position then I with X99 and Gen 2 Chipset.
I could reach Gen 3 speed with M.2 connected on CPU. They can't reach Gen 4 speed of AMD platform on any way.
Buying Intel is like investing in SATA II platform when SATA III was available.
When SATA III show up motherboard vendors immediately adopt him on new revision of X58 motherboards.
Now PCI-E Interface is important for speed of OS, read, write, copy same as SATA Controller before several years.
Don't forget that when you invest huge money in high end platform. Race in M.2 Gen 4.0 will start very soon.
SATA Ports are important only for storage, everything else depend from PCI-E Interface.
Posted on Reply
#184
phanbuey
The only hope they have is if socket 1200 supports the future 10nm chips or no one will buy this.

Why would I want a 10 core 14nm+++++ thats 10% more (maybe) performance than the 9900k and the whole platform will be obsolete in 12 months?.

Yikes.
Posted on Reply
#185
ToxicTaZ
Crackong, post: 4103224, member: 185495"
10 cores 135W ?
we knew the 9900k is 95W and eats > 170W when overclocking
so this 10 core will eat 240W ?
9900KS is 95w based and with workload 195w around.

You're 3900X is almost 400 Watts gaming! Then again it's two 6 cores CPUs working together...
Posted on Reply
#186
Crackong
ToxicTaZ, post: 4108449, member: 145598"
9900KS is 95w based and with workload 195w around.

You're 3900X is almost 400 Watts gaming! Then again it's two 6 cores CPUs working together...
You are joking right?

That is Whole System Power Consumption
Posted on Reply
#187
GlacierNine
ToxicTaZ, post: 4108449, member: 145598"
9900KS is 95w based and with workload 195w around.

You're 3900X is almost 400 Watts gaming! Then again it's two 6 cores CPUs working together...
That's whole system power consumption. You can tell by the fact the chart BEGINS with an i3 8300 pulling 348 watts.
Posted on Reply
#188
Chrispy_
MMmmm, where can I buy me one of these 348W i3 chips? It gets cold here in winter.
:laugh:
Posted on Reply
#189
Vlada011
I would like to see how will be interest for this platform.
14nm... AMD is 7nm. PCI-E 3.0, AMD PCI-E 4.0. :)
Posted on Reply
#190
goodeedidid
Gungar, post: 4103222, member: 163163"
They already told us they will go directly to PCIE 5.0 in 2021.
That makes no sense.
Posted on Reply
#191
svan71
Gungar, post: 4103222, member: 163163"
They already told us they will go directly to PCIE 5.0 in 2021.
I'll wait, they said they were going to 10nm in 2015 so they are good with these promises.
Posted on Reply
#192
ToxicTaZ
goodeedidid, post: 4113141, member: 165582"
That makes no sense.
Makes a lot ot of sense!

First off Q4 2021 is Intel release date for their 7nm tech..... (equivalent TSMC 3nm) so leaping over the competition with 7nm and PCIe 5.0 makes sense.

BTW
PCIe 6.0 is ready!

https://www.techpowerup.com/256634/pci-sig-announces-pcie-6-0-specification

Personally they should go right to PCIe 6.0 my opinion... As PCIe 5.0 is already becoming old specs as they are working on PCIe 7.0 now.....
Posted on Reply
#193
lexluthermiester
ToxicTaZ, post: 4115104, member: 145598"
Makes a lot ot of sense!

First off Q4 2021 is Intel release date for their 7nm tech..... (equivalent TSMC 3nm) so leaping over the competition with 7nm and PCIe 5.0 makes sense.

BTW
PCIe 6.0 is ready!

https://www.techpowerup.com/256634/pci-sig-announces-pcie-6-0-specification

Personally they should go right to PCIe 6.0 my opinion... As PCIe 5.0 is already becoming old specs as they are working on PCIe 7.0 now.....
No, he's right, doesn't make sense at all.. Nothing currently on the market can saturate the PCIe3 bus, let alone PCIe4, or 5 or 6. Jumping ahead will be very expensive and benefit no one.
Posted on Reply
#194
Gungar
svan71, post: 4115094, member: 152013"
I'll wait, they said they were going to 10nm in 2015 so they are good with these promises.
Oh yeah the famous quote, they failed one thing and now they aren't trust worthy. Sad human.
Posted on Reply
#195
Chrispy_
Gungar, post: 4115815, member: 163163"
Oh yeah the famous quote, they failed one thing and now they aren't trust worthy. Sad human.
Well they also promised the same thing in 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019. And although 10nm is *technically* here, the overwhelming majority of their current production is still on 14++++++++
Posted on Reply
#196
ToxicTaZ
Chrispy_, post: 4115872, member: 185623"
Well they also promised the same thing in 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019. And although 10nm is *technically* here, the overwhelming majority of their current production is still on 14++++++++
Guess It doesn't matter when you still have the fastest 8 cores CPU on Earth!

9900KS nothing touches it!

Let the benchmarks begin!
Posted on Reply
#197
eterniti
no PCIE 4
optane is much more useful than pcie 4, if you use large optane disks for caching you are golden with professional applications and simulations, and even games
for now the pcie 4 is making things worse in therms of an additional fan prone to failures, I agree I'd rather have it , but the expensive optane is better
Posted on Reply
#199
trparky
Keviny Oliveira, post: 4117659, member: 190162"
R.I.P Intel, AMD current is better
For those on a budget, yes... AMD does win over Intel.
Posted on Reply
#200
ToxicTaZ
Keviny Oliveira, post: 4117659, member: 190162"
R.I.P Intel, AMD current is better

lol
Lol

Yet AMD has nothing to go against the 9900KS

Let the Gaming Benchmarks begin!
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment