That 28-core CPU That Intel Showed At Computex - it needs some cooling!

I find that comparison that everyone seems to be making just silly though. AMD showed TR2 on Air, running at probably 3.2-3.4GHz (probably not even all cores at those clocks). The 28 core Intel used could've easily done those clocks on air as well - thats not a real exciting thing to achieve.

For AMD, TR2 is just a stripped down Epyc anyway, 4 full dies, less memory channel, less PCIe lanes, re-cooked at 12nm (although not using the full potential of 12nm).

Intel could've just announced that they are bringing Xeon XCC cores to workstations instead of only on servers - well, they basically did, but they decided to make some silly show out of it, but in the end its basically the same thing.

 

It's not about excitement, it's about how these products were represented. AMD used the most mundane of cooling solutions for their demo while Intel used one of the most extreme. AMD didn't try to glam up TR2 in any way (they could have very easily went with custom water cooling) - they just let the product stand on its own merits, using cooling that anyone could use. This is very different from what Intel did, deliberately deceiving the press into believing that their product was far better than it was. Simply put, Intel's demo was a PR stunt while AMD's demo was a real and honest product.

 

Ok, so 1kW CPU + 1.7kW chiller + 2.5 kW AC unit to keep room at low ambient temperature and it will still likely termalthrottle in minute or so. Thats what I would say (d)efficiency world record. Intel PR at its best.

 

If I remember correctly last year there was comparison of Intel Xeons vs AMD epic and performance/wat was highly in favor of AMD.

 

The 28 core cpu from intel is still faster then a 32 cpu from amd even in slower speeds, speed isnt always anything these days.

Quality over Quantity.

 

But the real issue is the VOLTAGE, nobody said anything about the voltage of that CPU at 5 Ghz!
If it takes over 1.5v i think nobody will run it 24/7 at those speeds, a few maybe will buy that chiller and the CPU but they will not run it at 1.5v when they paid 2-3000 $ for it.

 

Now Intel get to explain why they can't hit 5GHz on all cores on a QUAD.

 

Sure, but...
In datacenter use, performance per wat and price/performance are one of most important parameters and in this case Epyc 1st geb was up to 20% more efficient and at same time up to 3 times cheaper.

There are very few application that work on single thread and benefit from higher clock, and even when so, you rather buy lower count variants with higher clock speed.

 

I think they have bigger problem, regardlesof voltage and related early degradation and possible failure, I realydoubt they could sustain that clock at 100% utilization more than few seconds/minutes. There is no way it can last even 1st 24h of load withou thermal throtling or even worse.

 

Intel has always been a bit strange and full of themselves. that cooler needs to go to the Intel Museum (yes, they have one), but it won't be there because...embarrassment.
one of the problems with near monopolies is complacency...and Intel is mighty complacent in most of their divisions (not all, most).
i'm still not selling my stock tho.

 

I was right in assuming they used some form of active chilling. Now let's see if I'm right about it having a minimum of a $5k price point.

I think Intel knows that the OC potential of this chip is really all it has going for it, and will be its selling point. I'm sure it will have better single-threaded performance vs Threadripper, but I think Intel also knows that comparing single-threaded performance on so many cores is ridiculous. That's kind of like benchmarking how well you can use a flamethrower to light a birthday cake candle.

On the other hand... I think the only things AMD has going for Threadripper are the sheer core count and price point. Though I think 4 memory channels ought to be sufficient, the way they went about implementing it I suspect is going to cause a very substantial loss in performance.

All that being said, I think both of these product for this generation are kinda stupid and basically are just a proxy war between Intel and AMD.

 

...if any company had Intel's production capacity ...

no kidding.

you are forgetting this is (although amazing) the stepping stone to 7nm. and AMD is ahead of the process nodes at this point.
meanwhile they've snapped up market share and shoved Intel out of one of their most profitable markets with Epyc.
production IS key as you pointed out, but you need demand first. and here it is.

 

It is even worse than that for Intel PR.
The chiller used is a Hailea HC 1000. This thing is illegal to be sold in North America and Europe because it uses R22 gas (or R134a depending model type) as freezing medium. Usage of those gasses are banned for 14 years now in the case of R22.

 

Intel did this only to make potential TR2 32 core buyers to wait till end of the year and not buy TR2 32core, so until then they could come up with better solution.

 

$2,000 for cpu $5,000 for the cooler lol.

 

Calm down Sir... please take a deep breath. Lets try sticking with the facts instead of nonsense like saying "amd shoved Intel out of one of their most profitable markets". I mean do you honestly believe that?

Here's the deal. With the release of Epyc, AMD's datacenter market share went from 0.3% to 1% according to Mercury Research's latest figures. Nobody was shoved, pushed, or even bumped. If any actual contact was made, i'm sure Intel would have thought it was someone trying to rub up on them. lol. To better put this in perspective, AMD's Opteron once commanded over 25% of this same market. And did so much faster than Epyc has so far.

 

I have a couple of Phase Change units at home. So I'm ready to go.