Editorial Intel's 28-core HEDT Processor a Panic Reaction to 32-core Threadripper

[Nkd]

Why dishonest? Did they say they will sell a 28 core processor with 5Ghz frequency in the future? Or did they clearly say that it is a demo?
Please, lets use our brains, it is easy to understand, given current performance in CPUs that it is not possible to sell that kind of a processor.
I hope we are not as dumb as the americans that put a cat in the microwave oven and then complained that it is manufacturers fault that it didn't say it is not safe for cats... Come on...

Here comes that one person that thinks intel did just fine making it seem like this was a new processor all for their worthy fans. They were shady about it. Enough said! Stop justifying stupidity by calling everyone dumb! Intel is in panic mode right now and it shows. Oh yea we are bringing a 5ghz processor to you all but wait we forgot to mention overclocked and we didn't tell you how it was being cooled lol.

They pitched the entire presentation of the 28core as a coming soon in Q4 2018

Here is the entire presentation on the 28core - its 2mins long

Shame really i was getting my PSU off the shelf

LOL that video is all hype for sure. New 28 core processor! lol I am laughing at those who are saying they weren't being shady. Presented it as 28 core 5ghz processor coming soon to you. ROFL!

No offense but anyone who believed that the cpu was not overclocked to the max on stage is mentally challenged.

its not even the OC portion. They faked the whole thing. New processor coming to all of us? They were using a 10k processor that is already out and overclocking the shit out of it. They pretty much made it seem like they were bringing something highly overclockable, brand new never seen before to the market lol.

 

[Xuper]

wow , I can't believe some people are really defending Intel... like It's not worth to talk about it ...wow.

 

[Xzibit]

LOL that video is all hype for sure. New 28 core processor! lol I am laughing at those who are saying they weren't being shady. Presented it as 28 core 5ghz processor coming soon to you. ROFL!

It starts out with here is a "NEW" and tops it off with "We are going to take that product to market in Q4 this year you'll be able to get it"

I'll be disappointed if the chiller doesn't come in the retail box cause i'm set

 

[bug]

wow , I can't believe some people are really defending Intel... like It's not worth to talk about it ...wow.

Why? What was the horrible wrong they did? I mean, it's not like you expect thousands of buyers to have been deceived into buying these only to find out later they don't actually run at 5GHz.
They presented a sample running at 5GHz without explicitly saying it was overclocked. Anyone with half a brain should have figured it was overclocked, but this wasn't an actual reveal of a product. So why fret if the end product won't be exactly like what was shown there?

I mean, it could be the end of the world for you, but for me, it's like Bugatti showcasing a 2000BHP prototype only to find out later it can't actually output that much power unless special conditions are met. Guess what, it makes zero difference to me: I don't have the money to buy a Bugatti any more than I have the cash to blow on this upcoming* Intel platform.

*If it ever sees the light of day, in the light of Threadripper2 reveal.

 

[Thefumigator]

Ok, then it's certainly possible. I just had a close look at that video and noticed how skinny that mains cable is. Seems too thin to me to safely support that much current. I'll be it was running hot.

I can just imagine his electricity bill.

Well it all depends how much will the system take out of those 3300W supplied.
Why choose such a PSU... maybe Intel was improvising too much or maybe the system really needs a huge amount of power...

 

[Tomgang]

Poor little intel is being bullyed by big bad amd .

No i dont feel sorry for intel. Dont get me wrong i am still an intel believer, but the reason i believe for intels missing platform to compete againts amd threadripper 2 chips.

Is intels own dam fault for being lazy the later years, because they had no competition for years and now that they do, they dont have platforms ready to take on amd latest platform. With first gen threadripper intel panic with the 14, 16 and 16 core i9 chips and now they do it again with a server based platform because they dont have any desktop platform ready. Thats what intel gets for being lazy and not considered that amd some day might have something that cut give intel a scare.

 

[Prima.Vera]

Why? What was the horrible wrong they did? I mean, it's not like you expect thousands of buyers to have been deceived into buying these only to find out later they don't actually run at 5GHz.
They presented a sample running at 5GHz without explicitly saying it was overclocked. Anyone with half a brain should have figured it was overclocked, but this wasn't an actual reveal of a product. So why fret if the end product won't be exactly like what was shown there?

I mean, it could be the end of the world for you, but for me, it's like Bugatti showcasing a 2000BHP prototype only to find out later it can't actually output that much power unless special conditions are met. Guess what, it makes zero difference to me: I don't have the money to buy a Bugatti any more than I have the cash to blow on this upcoming* Intel platform.

*If it ever sees the light of day, in the light of Threadripper2 reveal.

You must be jocking. Sorry dude, but I have never seen a Bugatti, or any other street car for that matter, to have their engines cooled with liquid H2/N2 or with some custom freon based cooling.

 

[btarunr]

What's the max current supply at 240V? It will have to be above 13A for this to work.

Most 220V localities have 20A single phase, 230V (EU) have 18A, and 240V have 16A (so 3.84 to 4.40 kW). It's a lot a juice, but there a lot of single-phase appliances that can max that out (such as air-conditioners, boilers, etc.)

 

[qubit]

Most 220V localities have 20A single phase, 230V (EU) have 18A, and 240V have 16A (so 3.84 to 4.40 kW). It's a lot a juice, but there a lot of single-phase appliances that can max that out (such as air-conditioners, boilers, etc.)

Well, maybe where that PSU was being tested in the video the socket can deliver more than 3KW, but I know that here in Blighty 3KW (240V 13A) is the limit. The fact that it's only a bit over at 3.3KW perhaps uses the tolerance in the system to run, a bit like an overclock and I wouldn't recommend it.

I've looked at a couple of retailers here and that brand isn't being sold. I suspect they'd have to release a 3KW version for the UK if they were (or 2.5KW or so to allow for inefficiencies in the PSU).
Finally, did you notice how skinny that mains cable was? I'd bet money it was running hot with all that current flowing through it.

 

[bug]

You must be jocking. Sorry dude, but I have never seen a Bugatti, or any other street car for that matter, to have their engines cooled with liquid H2/N2 or with some custom freon based cooling.

And you haven't heard of tuning either. But that's hardly my problem.

 

[GlacierNine]

And you haven't heard of tuning either. But that's hardly my problem.

Yeah, your problem is that you refuse to believe a company known for pulling shady bullshit, pulled any shady bullshit, despite a clear incentive to do so, and a whole heap of circumstantial evidence that *only* makes sense if shady bullshit was their express intention.

Again, this is the transcript of what they said at the event -

"Sometimes this benchmark takes minutes to run, but you can see when we have 28 cores running at 5GHz, you'll fly through it, now look at that number, 7334 that is an incredible number. If you look that up tonight you'll see that, it's not the fastest in the world, there are a few that are faster, but they all require 2 or 4 sockets to get what this single socket system can do with 28 cores at 5 GHz."

"Now what's amazing is there's that tradeoff, this actually gives you 5GHz, you can get single-threaded performance frequency, not, you know, not having to sacrifice that for this kind of multithreaded performance, so you got kinda the best of both worlds"

That second portion DIRECTLY addresses the potential consumer - they say "You", to the audience. YOU can get the best of both worlds. YOU don't have to sacrifice single thread in order to have 28 cores.

Except, that's clear bullshit, isn't it? The customer can't get the best of both worlds. The customer *does* have to sacrifice single-thread to get 28 cores.

Without even addressing the point that they didn't mention overclocking here, it is ABUNDANTLY CLEAR that Intel in the space of those two sentences, have promised a level of performance in both single and multi-thread, that this product cannot possibly deliver to consumers. And they *know* they're doing it - Unless you want to make the argument that this entire exchange (Which comprises really the entire worthwhile content of their demo), was also a mistake, and they "forgot" that the consumer has to make a tradeoff?

 

[bug]

For the millionth time: WHO CARES WHAT THEY SAID? DO YOU TAKE ANYTHING A COMPANY SAYS AT FACE VALUE?
There was no damage done here. Move along.

 

[GlacierNine]

For the millionth time: WHO CARES WHAT THEY SAID? DO YOU TAKE ANYTHING A COMPANY SAYS AT FACE VALUE?
There was no damage done here. Move along.

1 - Everyone should care about any attempt to mislead consumers.
2 - No, I don't take things companies say at face value, however there is a matter of degrees. When a bicycle company says their new frame is 17% stiffer than last years, I know that's a cherrypicked measurement of a certain stressor, but that the measurement itself is true in some context and a consumer can expect a product that reflects the claim - even if the claim is hyperspecific and not significant in the grand scheme.

When Intel say "You can get single-threaded performance frequency <...> not having to sacrifice that for this kind of multithreaded performance" and it turns out that the consumer cannot actually get that? That's very different.

3 - There absolutely was damage done here. The tech press reporting this story have done the work of Intel's marketing department. They have successfully allowed Intel's announcement of a chip that doesn't exist and will never exist (A 5GHz, 28 Core part), to overshadow AMD's announcement of a product that does exist and is coming to market in a matter of a few months in a form that the consumer can expect will match the demonstration AMD provided.

That's a HUGE corporate win for Intel, achieved only via deception and misleading the press. It is not "Nothing" - It has real, and significant, financial consequences for the companies involved.

 

[qubit]

@bug Why are you being an apologist for Intel? The points that @GlacierNine has made expose Intel's underhandedness which can't just be dismissed away like you're doing. Intel is flat out lying here and that's not ok in any sense.

btw, I've got and Intel CPU, so you can't just brush me off as an AMD apologist.

 

[bug]

@bug Why are you being an apologist for Intel? The points that @GlacierNine has made expose Intel's underhandedness which can't just be dismissed away like you're doing. Intel is flat out lying here and that's not ok in any sense.

btw, I've got and Intel CPU, so you can't just brush me off as an AMD apologist.

I just don't see the harm done, that's all. It's a press release, things are always presented in rosy colors at these events. That, plus my aversion towards people getting off burning companies to the stake at the slightest misstep.
I really don't care. I'm unsubscribing from these threads as I really don't have anything else to add.

 

[qubit]

I just don't see the harm done, that's all. It's a press release, things are always presented in rosy colors at these events. That, plus my aversion towards people getting off burning companies to the stake at the slightest misstep.
I really don't care. I'm unsubscribing from these threads as I really don't have anything else to add.

Because they're actively lying at a presentation, as I've said. It's one thing to embellish something like we see all the time everywhere, but quite another to actually deliberately lie and mislead to gain an unfair advantage over the competition.

No need to rage quit the thread!

 

[bug]

Not rage quitting. But I genuinely have nothing else to add.
It's not like Intel will send me a cookie if I point out enough times that no puppies have been harmed during the process

 

[GlacierNine]

Not rage quitting. But I genuinely have nothing else to add.
It's not like Intel will send me a cookie if I point out enough times that no puppies have been harmed during the process

Again, you're completely ignoring the marketing effect of this misdirection they've pulled.

You are completely ignoring this point, because, as qubit said, you are insistent on being an Intel apologist.

It would be a stronger point in favour of your position if you were able to articulate how this confusion has not been of benefit to Intel in the tech press. The fact you refuse to do so is because you are unable to do so - Intel have clearly gained from the confusion.

The argument is whether Intel *intended* to benefit from the confusion. Repeating that "nobody was hurt" is facile - AMD were hurt by it. This is self-evident. If Intel had mentioned the word "overclocked" in their presentation, AMD would not have been hurt by the announcement. That is also self-evident.

 

[bug]

Damn, I didn't unsubscribe this one.

@GlacierNine Not sure what marketing effect are you talking about. Did you do market research and found people who still believe Intel will launch a 28 core, 5GHz product?

Over and out.

 

[qubit]

It's not like Intel will send me a cookie if I point out enough times that no puppies have been harmed during the process

You get a thanks just for that sarcy line about the puppies, made me laugh.

 

[GlacierNine]

Damn, I didn't unsubscribe this one.

@GlacierNine Not sure what marketing effect are you talking about. Did you do market research and found people who still believe Intel will launch a 28 core, 5GHz product?

Over and out.

Yes. Everyone who read one of those original articles, but who didn't read a subsequent clarification article.

Now at what point are you going to address the substance of this instead of cherry picking individual sentences to respond to?

I think it's quite clear to anyone reading this debate you're not having with us, that you've been deliberately straying from the topics anyone is trying to get you to address, because they're inconveniently well founded and you can't make a reasonable point against them.

 

[Aquinus]

Overclocking the 28-core chip was no small effort. It took an extreme cooling method, specifically a refrigerated heat-exchanger, coupled with a custom motherboard (we suspect GIGABYTE-sourced), to keep the processor bench-stable at 5.00 GHz. Intel's defense to Tom's Hardware was that "in the excitement of the moment," its on-stage presenter "forgot" to use the word "overclocked." Gregory Bryant, SVP client-computing at Intel not only omitted "overclocked" from his presentation, but made sure to stress on "5 GHz," as if it were part of the chip's specifications.

"What's amazing is that trade-off, this actually being a 5 GHz in single-threaded performance frequency and not...having to sacrifice that for this kind of multi-threaded performance, so you've got kind of the best of both worlds. So, you guys want to see us productize that thing? Tell you what, we'll bring that product to market in Q4 this year, and you'll be able to get it," he said.

A lie of omission is still a lie, knee-jerk reaction or not. This was clearly done to hype Intel's HEDT lineup. If anything, this was to make investors happy but, I suspect that investors won't be happy that they had to lie in order to do it.

 

[eidairaman1]

For the millionth time: WHO CARES WHAT THEY SAID? DO YOU TAKE ANYTHING A COMPANY SAYS AT FACE VALUE?
There was no damage done here. Move along.

Fact is they lied.

 

[bug]

Fact is they lied.

How dare they?
*cough*Polaris will offer 2.5x the perf/W*cough*

 

[Aquinus]

How dare they?
*cough*Polaris will offer 2.5x the perf/W*cough*

At least they put in the fine print "at the same clocks" when they make claims like that. It wouldn't be the first time that AMD used wording about these things by saying something like "2.5x perf/W or 20% higher clocks." That "or" makes a whole lot of difference and is very different from it being an "and".