Wednesday, March 24th 2021

Intel Readies Xeon W-1300 Socket LGA1200 Processors Based on "Rocket Lake"

Intel is reportedly giving final touches to the Xeon W-1300 line of enterprise processors targeting workstations, according to an ASRock CPU support list dug up by Komachi Ensaka. The processors are based on the same 14 nm "Rocket Lake" silicon as the company's 11th Gen Core desktop processors, and come in core counts of up to 8-core/16-thread. The lineup is expected to debut with five SKUs, three of which are 8-core/16-thread, and two 6-core/12-thread.

The lineup is led by the W-1370, with base frequency of 2.90 GHz, 16 MB of shared L3 cache, and 80 W TDP. Next up, is the slightly slower W-1390, clocked at 2.80 GHz, and 80 W TDP. The third 8-core part is the W-1390T, which is clocked at just 1.50 GHz (base), and comes with aggressive power-management that gives it a TDP rating of 35 W. The 6-core/12-thread W-1350P has the highest clock speeds, with a base frequency of 4.00 GHz, 12 MB of shared L3 cache, and 125 W TDP. The W-1350 is its slower sibling, clocked at 3.30 GHz, and 80 W TDP. The processors will be compatible with Intel Z490, W480, and H470 chipsets, besides their 500-series successors.
Sources: ASRock, Komachi_Ensaka (Twitter)
Add your own comment

22 Comments on Intel Readies Xeon W-1300 Socket LGA1200 Processors Based on "Rocket Lake"

#1
ZoneDymo
"The processors are based on the same 14 nm "Rocket Lake" silicon as the company's 11th Gen Core desktop processors, and come in core counts of up to 8-core/16-thread"

ouch more, as Steve would put it, waste of sand
Posted on Reply
#2
1d10t
The fact that even its predecessor W-2155 pack 10 cores makes this generation even more disgraceful. Its official then, Intel gave up on HEDT, pushing mainstream processors to workstations at server prices. But hey, you just have to EXIST these day.
Posted on Reply
#3
Post Nut Clairvoyance
I don't actually think this is news worthy, just as i7-7740x is not newsworthy in the kaby lake days. Same socket as consumer platform, this is barely HEDT, infact Intel may have just quit this segment for the time being. These only get released to be bashed into ground as they makes virtually no sense on any market given that the only thing that makes these different from RocketLake S is ecc, and you might as well go with ryzen 9 for that case, or kaby-x(LGA2066) for avx512.
The only significant difference to W1200 is architecture, and avx512. so i guess if you need both ecc and avx512 prepare to cough up
Posted on Reply
#4
W1zzard
and you are all wrong, (i think). These will sell huge amounts, because AMD has nothing to compete with. EPYC is too high-end to compete, lots of companies don't need 4895649856 cores in their servers, yet they want ECC memory and IPMI

Also price/performance is surprisingly good if you scale horizontally (multiple cheap servers) vs vertically (one expensive server), and you also have better redundancy
btarunrThe processors will be compatible with Intel Z490, W480, and H470 chipsets, besides their 500-series successors.
This is an interesting one. Will it work the opposite way? Pair a server board with a desktop CPU?
Posted on Reply
#5
ZoneDymo
W1zzardand you are all wrong, (i think). These will sell huge amounts, because AMD has nothing to compete with. EPYC is too high-end to compete, lots of companies don't need 4895649856 cores in their servers, yet they want ECC memory and IPMI

Also price/performance is surprisingly good if you scale horizontally (multiple cheap servers) vs vertically (one expensive server), and you also have better redundancy


This is an interesting one. Will it work the opposite way? Pair a server board with a desktop CPU?
Obviously they will sell huge amounts, they have enough contacts and contracts to make sure of it, but as @1d10t stated, it does not have to be good to sell, it just needs to exist atm.

Non of that means this is actually a good product though, (well unless you define good by salesfigures sure)
Posted on Reply
#6
rvalencia
W1zzardand you are all wrong, (i think). These will sell huge amounts, because AMD has nothing to compete with. EPYC is too high-end to compete, lots of companies don't need 4895649856 cores in their servers, yet they want ECC memory and IPMI

Also price/performance is surprisingly good if you scale horizontally (multiple cheap servers) vs vertically (one expensive server), and you also have better redundancy


This is an interesting one. Will it work the opposite way? Pair a server board with a desktop CPU?
Some X570 motherboards have ECC support.

For example rog.asus.com/us/motherboards/rog-strix/rog-strix-x570-f-gaming-model/wtb

[INDENT=2]4 x DIMM, Max. 128GB, DDR4 4400(O.C)/4266(O.C.)/4133(O.C.)/4000(O.C.)/3866(O.C.)/3600(O.C.)/3400(O.C.)/3200(O.C.)/3000(O.C.)/2800(O.C.)/2666/2400/2133 MHz ECC and non-ECC, Un-buffered Memory *[/INDENT]
[INDENT=2]4 x DIMM, Max. 128GB, DDR4 3600(O.C.)/3400(O.C.)/3200(O.C.)/3000(O.C.)/2800(O.C.)/2666/2400/2133 MHz ECC and non-ECC, Un-buffered Memory *[/INDENT]
[INDENT=2]4 x DIMM, Max. 128GB, DDR4 3200(O.C.)/3000(O.C.)/2800(O.C.)/2666/2400/2133 MHz ECC and non-ECC, Un-buffered Memory[/INDENT]
[INDENT=2]* Refer to www.asus.com for the Memory QVL (Qualified Vendors Lists).[/INDENT]
[INDENT=2][/INDENT]
[INDENT=2]3rd Gen AMD Ryzen™ Processors[/INDENT]
[INDENT=2]2nd Gen AMD Ryzen™ Processors[/INDENT]
[INDENT=2]4 x DIMM, Max. 128GB, DDR4 MHz Un-buffered Memory *[/INDENT]
[INDENT=2][/INDENT]
[INDENT=2]2nd and 1st Gen AMD Ryzen™ with Radeon™ Vega Graphics Processors[/INDENT]
[INDENT=2]4 x DIMM, Max. 128GB, DDR4 MHz Un-buffered Memory[/INDENT]
[INDENT=2][/INDENT]
[INDENT=2]Dual Channel Memory Architecture[/INDENT]

On ECC memory support, my ROG X570 Strix beats my old ASUS ROG Strix X299 (for Intel Skylake X/CascadeLake X).


Posted on Reply
#7
W1zzard
rvalenciaSome X570 motherboards have ECC support.
But not IPMI, and I'm not sure if I'd want to run TPU off a consumer motherboard
Posted on Reply
#11
lexluthermiester
W1zzardThis is an interesting one. Will it work the opposite way? Pair a server board with a desktop CPU?
Why not? 1366, 2011 v1&v2, 2011 v3&v4 could all do it.
Posted on Reply
#12
W1zzard
lexluthermiesterWhy not? 1366, 2011 v1&v2, 2011 v3&v4 could all do it.
TIL
Posted on Reply
#15
Chrispy_
So they're still not confident in their 10nm process to trust a single workstation or server part to it yet?

Come on, Intel - We need you to not suck in 2021. TSMC's over capacity already.
Posted on Reply
#16
1d10t
W1zzardand you are all wrong, (i think). These will sell huge amounts, because AMD has nothing to compete with. EPYC is too high-end to compete, lots of companies don't need 4895649856 cores in their servers, yet they want ECC memory and IPMI

Also price/performance is surprisingly good if you scale horizontally (multiple cheap servers) vs vertically (one expensive server), and you also have better redundancy


This is an interesting one. Will it work the opposite way? Pair a server board with a desktop CPU?
...and Intel CPU are time bomb backdoor, if that count :D
You forgetting the fact that previous gen Epyc still exist, or Threadripper in this regards ( workstation class ), heck even previous desktop class CPU would do just fine.
I think Intel targeting entry level, small SOHO with this CPU. With that in mind ( compatible with B or H chipset ) you can say goodbye to ECC/ IPMI. To be honest, 8 core will not sufficient to load security module and hypervisor. Much I care about security, I doubt that many administrator at this level would take advantages of IPMI or BMC ( AMD's IPMI ).
Posted on Reply
#18
efikkan
Post Nut ClairvoyanceThese only get released to be bashed into ground as they makes virtually no sense on any market given that the only thing that makes these different from RocketLake S is ecc, and you might as well go with ryzen 9 for that case
AMD have no counterpart to entry level Xeon.
Post Nut ClairvoyanceThe only significant difference to W1200 is architecture, and avx512.
And the only difference between Zen 2 and Zen 3 was architecture… :rolleyes:

Seriously, it's a significant step up in performance per core, which matters a lot to most workloads.
W1zzardand you are all wrong, (i think). These will sell huge amounts, because AMD has nothing to compete with. EPYC is too high-end to compete, lots of companies don't need 4895649856 cores in their servers, yet they want ECC memory and IPMI

Also price/performance is surprisingly good if you scale horizontally (multiple cheap servers) vs vertically (one expensive server), and you also have better redundancy
And don't forget workstations. Dell, HP, Lenovo etc. sells a lot of these.
W1zzardThis is an interesting one. Will it work the opposite way? Pair a server board with a desktop CPU?
That's totally up to the motherboard maker.
E.g. a W480 motherboard like Supermicro X12SAE supports Pentiums, Celerons etc. The same goes for their other W480 boards.
rvalenciaSome X570 motherboards have ECC support.
Only in theory.
Just enabling ECC is pointless, the memory controller needs to support it and be validated, otherwise it's just placebo.

I would love if AMD made CPUs like 5800W with ECC support and validated for 24-7 load. I'll happily pay $50 extra for that.
Spencer LeBlancI read 1300Watt:roll:
Time to go to the eye doctor then ;)
Posted on Reply
#19
lexluthermiester
1d10t...and Intel CPU are time bomb backdoor, if that count
What are you talking about??
efikkanJust enabling ECC is pointless, the memory controller needs to support it and be validated, otherwise it's just placebo.
That's not exactly correct. If an IMC is ECC compatible then ECC is used if detected. However, if an IMC is not ECC compatible and ECC is installed, the system will do nothing but give error codes/beeps on bootup. A non-ECC IMC can not use ECC memory because the ECC functionality can not be disabled on the DIMMs themselves. Nor can an ECC IMC run ECC RAM in a non-ECC mode. ECC RAM can only run in ECC mode.

Does all that make sense? ECC is a somewhat complicated thing.
Posted on Reply
#20
1d10t
lexluthermiesterWhat are you talking about??
There is a CVE list if you want to check any vulnerabilities that have been found. Spoiler alert, not looking good for blue team.
Posted on Reply
#21
lexluthermiester
1d10tSpoiler alert, not looking good for blue team.
Oh, ok. Spoiler alert, most vulnerabilities have NEVER been seen exploited in the wild. Why? Because they are so difficult to pull off as to render them near impossible. The same goes for AMD's vulnerability lists. CVE lists are not as black and white as you would suggest with your assumptions. Just because a vulnerability exists does NOT make it easily or even generally exploitable. You need to do more research and learn that difference instead of making a blanket statement that has little bearing on reality.
Posted on Reply
#22
1d10t
lexluthermiesterOh, ok. Spoiler alert, most vulnerabilities have NEVER been seen exploited in the wild. Why? Because they are so difficult to pull off as to render them near impossible. The same goes for AMD's vulnerability lists. CVE lists are not as black and white as you would suggest with your assumptions. Just because a vulnerability exists does NOT make it easily or even generally exploitable. You need to do more research and learn that difference instead of making a blanket statement that has little bearing on reality.
Because not all CVE are "exploitable" ? To be fair, most CVE lists contain not only vulnerabilities but also imminent failure due to hardware not functioning as it should or lack there of. If stackexchange or stackoverflow doesn't provide sufficient information, then at least we know which one to shut down.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Copyright © 2004-2021 www.techpowerup.com. All rights reserved.
All trademarks used are properties of their respective owners.