Intel Core i9-10900K der8auer De-Lidding Reveals Accurate Die-Size Measurements

[ThrashZone]

Hi,
No DP or hdmi on asus formula guess that's what the thunderbolt card is for but I really have not looked into it and of course additional costs for graphic's

I can see why onboard graphic's is a good option on some boards seeing gpu prices are steep and building a computer often people do it in steps and not all at once and can if the board has DP or hdmi there.

 

[ARF]

Hi,
No DP or hdmi on asus formula guess that's what the thunderbolt card is for but I really have not looked into it and of course additional costs for graphic's

I can see why onboard graphic's is a good option on some boards seeing gpu prices are steep and building a computer often people do it in steps and not all at once and can if the board has DP or hdmi there.

Asus Formula is a premium board which is used 100% of the time with enthusiast-grade graphics cards which have DisplayPort and HDMI ports.

 

[ThrashZone]

Hi,
Yep still would of been nice to have a dp/ hdmi port on it at the least
I'm waiting on 30 series nvidia before I buy another gpu so I'm one gpu short now

 

[Chrispy_]

Why the iGPU hate?
iGPU opens up more market niches for Intel. Work computers that need no GPU besides internet stuff and showing picture on monitors are the obvious example.
I love being able to live without a GPU in my computer for a while. Or being able to update BIOS without one (unlike trying to get my AM4 APU machine up and running).

From the other side, there is no power penalty if it is not in use.
Die area might be significant but pretty sure it does not directly affect cost or yield (especially now with F-models).

If you think about the flack Intel gets about power consumption they don't really care for fitting more cores onto this platform and for a good reason.

I don't think there's any IGP 'hate' here, but Intel don't make a 16-core part because there's not enough room lengthwise to fit it under the heatspreader. If they ditched the IGP they could fit four more cores in the space instead, that's all.

Given that AMD have the performance lead over Intel using just the 3900X, Intel really need a 14-core part to rival the 3950X.

 

[ThrashZone]

I don't think there's any IGP 'hate' here, but Intel don't make a 16-core part because there's not enough room lengthwise to fit it under the heatspreader. If they ditched the IGP they could fit four more cores in the space instead, that's all.

Given that AMD have the performance lead over Intel using just the 3900X, Intel really need a 14-core part to rival the 3950X.

Hi,
They do 10940x

 

[Chrispy_]

Hi,
They do 10940x

Wrong platform. The 10940X needs to compete with Threadripper which is AMD's HEDT equivalent. Intel have nothing to match a 64-core 3970X, they price the 10940X to match 2018's 2950X because that's all it can compare to in terms of performance and are so far away from current-gen Threadripper at 24-64 cores that I honestly don't know why Intel are still bothering with their 2066 platform any more.

On this consumer platform, at these consumer prices, in this consumer market segment, the competition is 3950X and 3900X, soon to be the XT variants.

Apples to apples context is important - you can't say that a jet fighter is faster than a car in a car comparison because it's not even in the race, and if you're going to pick a jet fighter to represent Intel then you can't conveniently omit AMD's much bigger better jet fighters.

 

[ThrashZone]

Wrong platform. The 10940X needs to compete with Threadripper which is AMD's HEDT equivalent.

On this platform, at these prices, in this market segment, the competition is 3950X and 3900X, soon to be the XT variants.

Hi,
Yeah people always use that defense can't go hedt verses hedt that's unfair so fall back to price point blah....
Still pretty lame price is same + 4 more cores at 50.00 per.
3950x 750.00 on release
10940x 799.00 on release yeah that's way off

 

[Chrispy_]

Hi,
Yeah people always use that defense can't go hedt verses hedt that's unfair so fall back to price point blah....
Still pretty lame price is same + 4 more cores at 50.00 per.
3950x 750.00 on release
10940x 799.00 on release yeah that's way off

I updated my comment, but that's not even close to an apples-to-apples comparison. You've ignored absolutely everything else such as PCIe lanes, max memory support, motherboard/platform cost, and the fact that the 2920X and 2950X that AMD offered as an equivalents were also the same sort of price ($649 and $899) respectively.

It's not really about price, the competition and price/performancecurve of each manufacturer's own lineup is what keeps price in check, for the most part. AMD or Intel could make a $1000-2000 CPU for their consumer platforms, it would just be pointless with the dual-channel RAM limitation and their relatively low PCIe lane counts designed for a graphics card and maybe a couple of extras.

 

[ARF]

I think idling iGPU on the die consumes energy. The question is how much, not if or not.

 

[Chrispy_]

I think idling iGPU on the die consumes energy. The question is how much, not if or not.

On the KF variants, it's dark silicon that consumes 0W and actually acts as thermal mass in the silicon to improve boost duration and provide a greater contact patch to the IHS.

On the variants with IGPs enabled, it's about 10W for an active GT2 variant (so running a 3D workload or clocking up the fixed-function logic like HEDT decode or QuickSync) and more like 2-3W at idle minimum clocks.

Few articles compare K-series vs KF series but when I've stumbled across them the margins are pretty small and likely down to variation in different silicon samples given that in almost all CPU benchmarking the IGPs would be idle. I'm pulling my numbers from laptop reviews which go into GT2 and GT3 IGP usage in far more detail. Whilst it's true that the desktop IGPs clock higher and have more TDP headroom, their idle states are going to be largely the same, since the minimum operational voltage is going to be similar for each equivalent design, regardless of clock yields and binning.

 

[ThrashZone]

I updated my comment, but that's not even close to an apples-to-apples comparison. You've ignored absolutely everything else such as PCIe lanes, max memory support, motherboard/platform cost, and the fact that the 2920X and 2950X that AMD offered as an equivalents were also the same sort of price ($649 and $899) respectively.

It's not really about price, the competition and price/performancecurve of each manufacturer's own lineup is what keeps price in check, for the most part. AMD or Intel could make a $1000-2000 CPU for their consumer platforms, it would just be pointless with the dual-channel RAM limitation and their relatively low PCIe lane counts designed for a graphics card and maybe a couple of extras.

Hi,
Yeah one of the worst things about amd users is the floating argument to keep shifting comparison points
Now it's pci-e lanes

 

[biffzinker]

you could make a 16 core by adding 6 cores to one side, removing the gpu, and center. but imagine cooling that 5.0Ghz 500 watt CPU.

The current Ring Bus being a holdover from the Skylake architecture isn't made for a higher core count. Ten cores is already outside the sweet spot for core latency.

 

[londiste]

I don't think there's any IGP 'hate' here, but Intel don't make a 16-core part because there's not enough room lengthwise to fit it under the heatspreader. If they ditched the IGP they could fit four more cores in the space instead, that's all.

Given that AMD have the performance lead over Intel using just the 3900X, Intel really need a 14-core part to rival the 3950X.

Nope. It is not about their ability make that CPU, it would make zero sense as an SKU. Intel makes a 16-core part called 9960X. It has 165W TDP at 3.1GHz Base clock. Same cores, same manufacturing process - you can figure out what that means for 4.5+ GHz speeds that it needs against 3950X.

Intel have nothing to match a 64-core 3970X

Technically, there is the Xeon Platinum 9200. It makes about as much sense as making a 9960X for desktop

 

[ARF]

Nope. It is not about their ability make that CPU, it would make zero sense as an SKU. Intel makes a 16-core part called 9960X. It has 165W TDP at 3.1GHz Base clock. Same cores, same manufacturing process - you can figure out what that means for 4.5+ GHz speeds that it needs against 3950X.

What about 12-core or 14-core SKUs?

The 10-core 10900K consumes up to 250W, so those 165 watts are on the lower side.

The current Ring Bus being a holdover from the Skylake architecture isn't made for a higher core count. Ten cores is already outside the sweet spot for core latency.

That's a problem for gaming and nothing else, really.

 

[londiste]

What about 12-core or 14-core SKUs?
The 10-core 10900K consumes up to 250W, so those 165 watts are on the lower side.

What are we talking about here? There has been enough discussion in multiple threads about Intel's 10-series CPUs. Pretty much everyone is saying 10900K does not make sense - too power hungry for what it is. Now, add another 20% or 40% to that and you think that would be more viable? 12 cores at 300W or 14 cores at 350W - would you buy that?

Yeah, 9960X at 4.5 GHz consumes about 300-350W in the worse use cases. And that clock is low for what we want to see on the desktop.

 

[ARF]

What are we talking about here? There has been enough discussion in multiple threads about Intel's 10-series CPUs. Pretty much everyone is saying 10900K does not make sense - too power hungry for what it is. Now, add another 20% or 40% to that and you think that would be more viable?

It is a "narrow" CPU with very high clocks, mainly for gaming and nothing else... You could have 12-core or 14-core with more general computing orientation and slightly milder clocks.

 

[londiste]

I think idling iGPU on the die consumes energy. The question is how much, not if or not.

Power gated. When it is disabled, it does not consume anything.

Wrong platform. The 10940X needs to compete with Threadripper which is AMD's HEDT equivalent. Intel have nothing to match a 64-core 3970X, they price the 10940X to match 2018's 2950X because that's all it can compare to in terms of performance and are so far away from current-gen Threadripper at 24-64 cores that I honestly don't know why Intel are still bothering with their 2066 platform any more.

It does not "need" to do anything. If Intel decides they want the 10940X core on LGA1200 with consumer price (whatever that would be), it can easily be done.

On this consumer platform, at these consumer prices, in this consumer market segment, the competition is 3950X and 3900X, soon to be the XT variants.

I don't know about "consumer prices" these days. 750 is a helluva lot of money for a consumer CPU, so is 500 for that matter. I still remember all the complaining about very expensive 300-something prices of Intel i7s.

 

[ARF]

Power gated. When it is disabled, it does not consume anything.

I am not so sure about this claim.
6-core SKU out of a 10-core dies consumes as much as the fully enabled 10-core SKU of the same 10-core die.

It has been repeated multiple times that existent transistors on a die always consume energy, and there is no such thing as power gating.

10600K and 10900K are both rated 125-watt TDP..

 

[londiste]

6-core SKU out of a 10-core dies consumes as much as the fully enabled 10-core SKU of the same 10-core die.

No. It does not.

Intel Core i5-10600K Review - All You Need for Gaming

The Core i5-10600K is Intel's biggest upgrade in the mid-range for years. Driven by strong competition from AMD, Intel is now giving us a 6c/12t CPU with 125 W TDP and the full compliment of 12 MB cache. Our Core i5-10600K benchmarks show it to be a formidable performer, especially in gaming.

www.techpowerup.com

Intel Core i9-10900K Review - World's Fastest Gaming Processor

Intel's Core i9-10900K achieves highly impressive gaming performance thanks to its 10-core/20-thread design with up to 5.3 GHz. We compare three configurations in our 10900K review: all stock, boost limits removed, and a manual 5.1 GHz all-core overclock.

www.techpowerup.com

 

[ARF]

No. It does not.

Intel Core i5-10600K Review - All You Need for Gaming

The Core i5-10600K is Intel's biggest upgrade in the mid-range for years. Driven by strong competition from AMD, Intel is now giving us a 6c/12t CPU with 125 W TDP and the full compliment of 12 MB cache. Our Core i5-10600K benchmarks show it to be a formidable performer, especially in gaming.

www.techpowerup.com

Intel Core i9-10900K Review - World's Fastest Gaming Processor

Intel's Core i9-10900K achieves highly impressive gaming performance thanks to its 10-core/20-thread design with up to 5.3 GHz. We compare three configurations in our 10900K review: all stock, boost limits removed, and a manual 5.1 GHz all-core overclock.

www.techpowerup.com

Idle power consumption is equal - at equal voltage and likely clock:

 

[londiste]

If anything, this shows power gating is working very-very well. 10-core CPU is not using any more power than 6-core CPU at idle.

It has been repeated multiple times that existent transistors on a die always consume energy, and there is no such thing as power gating.

What the hell are you talking about?

 

[ARF]

What the hell are you talking about?

Leakage current.

Static power

Static power is the part of power consumption that is independent of activity. It constitutes leakage power and standby power. Leakage power is the power consumed by the transistor in off state due to reverse bias current. The other part of static power, standby power, is due to the constant current from Vdd to ground. In the following section we discuss leakage power and dynamic power.

Leakage power
When the transistors are in the off state they are ideally not supposed to draw any current. This is actually not the case: There is some amount of current drawn even in the off state due to reverse bias current in the source and drain diffusions, as well as the subthreshold current due to the inversion charge that exists at gate voltages under threshold voltage. All of this is collectively referred to as leakage current. This current is very small for a single transistor; however, within an IC there are millions to billions of transistors, so this current becomes significant at the IC level. The power dissipated due to this current is called leakage power. It is due to leakage current and depends primarily on the manufacturing process and technology with which the transistors are made. It does not depend on the frequency of operation of the flip-flops.

Static Power - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics

www.sciencedirect.com

 

[londiste]

Power gating - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[ARF]

It does not "need" to do anything. If Intel decides they want the 10940X core on LGA1200 with consumer price (whatever that would be), it can easily be done.

Nope. It is not about their ability make that CPU, it would make zero sense as an SKU. Intel makes a 16-core part called 9960X. It has 165W TDP at 3.1GHz Base clock. Same cores, same manufacturing process - you can figure out what that means for 4.5+ GHz speeds that it needs against 3950X.

Those have beefier memory controllers and beefier uncore, IO, PCIe lanes, etc
4 vs 2, 48 vs 16.

 

[londiste]

Those have beefier memory controllers and beefier uncore, IO, PCIe lanes, etc
4 vs 2, 48 vs 16.

This is not a technical question but about SKUs, margins, marketing, etc.

Disable two memory controllers, disable some of PCIe lanes and slap that die onto a LGA1200 package. Done. It even fits fine physically - HCC, the 18-core die, is 21.6 x 22.4 mm. For comparison from the story here 10900K is 9.2 x 22.4 mm.