Monday, January 13th 2020

Core i9-10990XE 22-core Processor Last Gasp of the X299 Platform?

Way back in June 2018, when the first Threadrippers made landfall, it was reported that Intel was working on a new 22-core "Skylake-X" silicon that sat in between the 18-core HCC (high core-count) die, and the 28-core XCC (extreme core-count) die. The roughly 700 mm² XCC die, with its 6 memory channels, couldn't be integrated with the LGA2066 package, and was reserved for the enterprise LGA3647 package that made a workstation/quasi-client debut with the 28-core Xeon W-3175X. It was hence rumored that an in-between 22-core silicon was under development that could be integrated with LGA2066. Fast forward to 2020, and Intel's client HEDT processor lineup doesn't look much different from its 2017 one. The 18-core i9-10980XE leads the pack, and despite its $1,000 price, has received largely lukewarm reviews. If screenshots surfacing on Chinese tech forums are to be believed, Intel is toying with the idea of the 22-core die meant for LGA2066 once again.

Referenced as Core i9-10990XE in straight-up CPU-Z screenshots, the processor is based on the "Cascade Lake-X" microarchitecture, and has the same I/O as the i9-10980XE, looking at the instruction sets featured. It has 22 cores and HyperThreading enables 44 threads. Cache hierarchy and balance are characteristic of "Cascade Lake," with 1 MB of dedicated L2 cache per core, and 30.25 MB of shared L3 cache. The I/O is likely identical to the i9-10980XE as that's a function of the platform and the socket. What's more interesting are the clock-speeds. The name-string of the engineering sample references a nominal clock-speed of 4.00 GHz, and in the screenshot, the chip is shown running at 5.00 GHz (at least on one core). There's also a performance benchmark to go with the leak, possibly CineBench R20 nT. Here, the i9-10990XE is shown scoring 14,005 points, which is in the same ballpark as the 24-core Ryzen Threadripper 3960X.
Sources: ChipHell, ChipHell (2)
Add your own comment

42 Comments on Core i9-10990XE 22-core Processor Last Gasp of the X299 Platform?

#2
champsilva
HwGeek
380W...
This is an unannounced CPU, CPU-z can produce some errors.
Posted on Reply
#3
HwGeek
9990XE is 255W for 14C 4Ghz base, so 380W looks plausible.
Posted on Reply
#4
ncrs
champsilva
This is an unannounced CPU, CPU-z can produce some errors.
I'm pretty sure cpu-z is just reading the MSRs containing this information like MSR_PKG_POWER_LIMIT programmed into the CPU itself.
Posted on Reply
#5
dgianstefani
For the people out there who need the performance of these Intel cores with the applications they use, and if this is $1500 or less, this could be compelling. Bear in mind these people, some of who i've worked with, earn upwards of $1k a day with the work the perform off of their PCs. So the price/performance ratio isn't really as important to them, as it is for us.

It's somewhat interesting to see the 10980xe, which is a product improved 2017 CPU (7980xe), built on a 2015 architecture, on a 2014 process still be competitive.

Threadripper 3000 is great for it's use cases. But strangely enough there are lots of professional and workstation applications that still see diminishing returns past 10/20 cores. Intel seems to have an advantage here with it's monolithic design with high clock speeds.
Posted on Reply
#6
yeeeeman
dgianstefani
For the people out there who need the performance of these Intel cores with the applications they use, and if this is $1500 or less, this could be compelling. Bear in mind these people, some of who i've worked with, earn upwards of $1k a day with the work the perform off of their PCs. So the price/performance ratio isn't really as important to them, as it is for us.

It's somewhat interesting to see the 10980xe, which is a product improved 2017 CPU (7980xe), built on a 2015 architecture, on a 2014 process still be competitive.

Threadripper 3000 is great for it's use cases. But strangely enough there are lots of professional and workstation applications that still see diminishing returns past 10/20 cores. Intel seems to have an advantage here with it's monolithic design with high clock speeds.
AMD fans contradicting you saying you're crazy and why in the world you would look at Intel incoming in 3, 2, 1....
Nevertheless, if they can sell this in the range of 1000 bucks (say, 1100$) and lower 10980xe to 900$ I think these would be quite interesting.
Posted on Reply
#7
xkm1948
AVX-512 is still good on Intel’s platforms
Posted on Reply
#8
yakk
X299 platform is basically dead in the water, Intel is probably being pushed to release at least 1 or 2 more CPUs for motherboard manufacturers to liquidate their inventory they are sitting on.
Posted on Reply
#9
xkm1948
dgianstefani
For the people out there who need the performance of these Intel cores with the applications they use, and if this is $1500 or less, this could be compelling. Bear in mind these people, some of who i've worked with, earn upwards of $1k a day with the work the perform off of their PCs. So the price/performance ratio isn't really as important to them, as it is for us.

It's somewhat interesting to see the 10980xe, which is a product improved 2017 CPU (7980xe), built on a 2015 architecture, on a 2014 process still be competitive.

Threadripper 3000 is great for it's use cases. But strangely enough there are lots of professional and workstation applications that still see diminishing returns past 10/20 cores. Intel seems to have an advantage here with it's monolithic design with high clock speeds.
Yes as a complete eco-system for stable HiP usage Intel is still good.

I hope TR4 in 2021 would bring AVX-512 support
Posted on Reply
#10
Berfs1
I get the feeling this is a fake.

EDIT: I want to hear a lot of people argue about how TDP relates to temperature. Therefore, this CPU SHOULD OVERHEAT WITH ALMOST ANY COOLER RIGHT?

EDIT 2: Just wanted to make sure my point was clear on the TDP thing, that um, oh now you need a cooler capable of cooling 380W huh, OK TO WHAT TEMPERATURE? Oh right, cus it really doesn't make any sense whatsoever, but thanks.

EDIT 3: I made all those edits so that I could answer a lot of TDP knowitall's questions in advance. Thanks for reading!
Posted on Reply
#11
Assimilator
BOOORING.

Intel is releasing press announcements "hey look we managed to beat a couple more cores out of the Skylake/14nm+++++++++++ dead horse", meanwhile AMD is all "YOU get more cores! And YOU get more cores! EVEREYBODY GETS MOAR COREZ!!!!!111"

Seriously Intel, you gotta learn when to stop. You already look ridiculous, every extra pitiful increment of your current dead uArch just makes you look more and more desperate. And desperation isn't a good look for a company your size. Just eat that humble pie, admit that you can't compete with AMD in its current form, stop wasting resources on poor dead Skylake, and focus on getting desktop 10nm parts to consumers.
Posted on Reply
#12
Berfs1
Assimilator
BOOORING.

Intel is releasing press announcements "hey look we managed to beat a couple more cores out of the Skylake/14nm+++++++++++ dead horse", meanwhile AMD is all "YOU get more cores! And YOU get more cores! EVEREYBODY GETS MOAR COREZ!!!!!111"

Seriously Intel, you gotta learn when to stop. You already look ridiculous, every extra pitiful increment of your current dead uArch just makes you look more and more desperate. And desperation isn't a good look for a company your size. Just eat that humble pie, admit that you can't compete with AMD in its current form, stop wasting resources on poor dead Skylake, and focus on getting desktop 10nm parts to consumers.
bruh u know they cant focus on anything cus they have an abysmal amount of SKUs, especially on the LGA3647 socket. Just look at my database and see how I manage to keep up (spoiler, I can't): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1c-UyYACl4_bmsBb4CFp1RI0A1lkA2GJUjpwM7E9zbAE/edit?usp=sharing
Posted on Reply
#14
Tomgang
22 cores OMGo_O... Wait, amd has 64 cores to the consumer marked. Go home Intel, you are drunk and still produced on 14 NM combined with 22 cores regardless of fake or real, we all know what that means for power consumption:shadedshu:

And still doesn't Change the fact that x299 is a living dinosaur now with only pcie gen 3 and so on. A living fossil from the past.

Frankly now I think of it, 380 watt tdp, 4 ghz baseclock and 5 ghz boost single, dual or maybe all core boost? Who knows. My point is that this smell of I9 9990XE all over again just now with 22 cores and just as high power consumption and heat output :roll:
Posted on Reply
#16
Tomgang
cucker tarlson
it's a 10980X that comes with a 7600K glued on top
Wrong, it's a I7 7740X glued on top as the cores does have HT :p
Posted on Reply
#17
Dave65
champsilva
This is an unannounced CPU, CPU-z can produce some errors.
Yeah, that's got to be it:roll:
Posted on Reply
#18
EarthDog
Dave65
Yeah, that's got to be it:roll:
380W, 'stock' for a 22c CPU when a 18c CPU is 165W. Now, anything is possible, however a non red tinted logical look at it tells me not to believe that value. ;)
Posted on Reply
#19
HTC
Intel says Cinebench isn't a "real world" benchmark.
Posted on Reply
#20
HwGeek
EarthDog
Don't let ignorance precede you. ;)

380W, 'stock' for a 22c CPU when a 18c CPU is 165W. Now, anything is possible, however a non red tinted logical look at it tells me not to believe that value. ;)
If the 4Ghz base is real than 380W for 22C is reasonable, remember that 10980XE has only 3Ghz base.
Maybe it's another 9990XE for Stock market High binned, Auction only SKU?
Posted on Reply
#21
EarthDog
HwGeek
If the 4Ghz base is real than 380W for 22C is reasonable, remember that 10980XE has only 3Ghz base.
Maybe it's another 9990XE for Stock market High binned, Auction only SKU?
That's a good point I didn't consider (opens mouth...foot raising...lol). Oh boy...

...my bad, Dave(edited my douchey comment out)! Isnt as outlandish as I thought. :)
Posted on Reply
#23
Nihilus
At all core 5.0 ghz, this thing is going to draw around 600w. Other reviews show the 18 core drawing in excess of 500w when running 4.8 ghz.

Even with a 360mm custom loop, the 4.8 ghz 10980xe was running at 100*C at Hardware Unboxed.

Here is total system power consumption of various overclocked Cacade Lake parts.



https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.techspot.com/amp/review/1950-intel-core-cascade-lake-x-hedt/

The 14000 CB20 score was done at 5.0 ghz.

Skylake has about a 125 point multiplier in CB20 which means (# cores w/ht) x (frequency) x 125 = CB20 score.

The point is, the 3960x will use about half the power to get a similiar MT performance.
Posted on Reply
#25
techguymaxc
Nihilus
At all core 5.0 ghz, this thing is going to draw around 600w. Other reviews show the 18 core drawing in excess of 500w when running 4.8 ghz.

Even with a 360mm custom loop, the 4.8 ghz 10980xe was running at 100*C at Hardware Unboxed.

Here is total system power consumption of various overclocked Cacade Lake parts.

The 14000 CB20 score was done at 5.0 ghz.

Skylake has about a 125 point multiplier in CB20 which means (# cores w/ht) x (frequency) x 125 = CB20 score.

The point is, the 3960x will use about half the power to get a similiar MT performance.
Not quite.

This won't be 5GHz all-core, 4GHz base clock is indicated in the CPU-Z screenshot and was mentioned in the article.

5GHz is a single-core Turbo clock. This is in line with other recent Intel HEDT SKUs.

Assimilator
BOOORING.

Intel is releasing press announcements "hey look we managed to beat a couple more cores out of the Skylake/14nm+++++++++++ dead horse", meanwhile AMD is all "YOU get more cores! And YOU get more cores! EVEREYBODY GETS MOAR COREZ!!!!!111"

Seriously Intel, you gotta learn when to stop. You already look ridiculous, every extra pitiful increment of your current dead uArch just makes you look more and more desperate. And desperation isn't a good look for a company your size. Just eat that humble pie, admit that you can't compete with AMD in its current form, stop wasting resources on poor dead Skylake, and focus on getting desktop 10nm parts to consumers.
Such a simple-minded view.

Not every workload scales with core count, let alone to the degree necessary to invalidate the existence of this (still) hypothetical CPU.

AMD is not your favorite sports team. They're not going to reward you with free computer parts for cheering them on. If you like their products, they expect you to buy them. It is a mutually-beneficial exchange.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment