Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Intel’s High-End Cascade Lake CPUs to Support 3.84 TB of Memory per Socket

anandtech.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 95 posts

Re: Intel’s High-End Cascade Lake CPUs to Support 3.84 TB of Memory per Socket

#21

Post by opportune »

dantiberian wrote: post #2

A few months ago Intel pulled a stunt where they showed a 28 core 5GHz CPU, implying it was a production CPU that would ship this year. They failed to mention that it was attached to an industrial compressor to supply the necessary cooling for the overclocked CPU, and that it was a server socket ( https://www.anandtech.com/show/12932/intel-confirms-some-det... ). Since then, whenever I see a headline with Intel in it…

They probably felt pressured to release that because the next gen thread rippers are actually going to approach those specs: 32 core 3.8 (base) GHz as per https://www.techradar.com/news/amd-ryzen-threadripper-2nd-ge...

supposedly coming out in Q3, i.e. soon

Re: Intel’s High-End Cascade Lake CPUs to Support 3.84 TB of Memory per Socket

#22

Post by qoi2ijds0 »

djsumdog wrote: post #15
quantumwoke wrote: post #10

I've weighed up the pros and cons, and my next processor will be the 32 core AMD cpu. This seems much better value than anything Intel has to offer.

I got a Ryzen 7 for my recent build and am pretty happy with it.

Same, bought a 2700x and couldn't be happier... the extra cores does wonders for using something like intellij whilst browsing / gaming. You only need something like an 8700k / 8086k if you have a 100hz+ monitor and want to spend more money than necessary on a dead socket. AMD are really landing the uppercuts this time round

Re: Intel’s High-End Cascade Lake CPUs to Support 3.84 TB of Memory per Socket

#23

Post by opportune »

quantumwoke wrote: post #10

I've weighed up the pros and cons, and my next processor will be the 32 core AMD cpu. This seems much better value than anything Intel has to offer.

The last gen 1900x (3.8 GHz 8 core) is on sale now for only $300

AMD becoming competitive again is one of the better things to happen in tech in recent years

Re: Intel’s High-End Cascade Lake CPUs to Support 3.84 TB of Memory per Socket

#24

Post by userbinator »

dantiberian wrote: post #2

A few months ago Intel pulled a stunt where they showed a 28 core 5GHz CPU, implying it was a production CPU that would ship this year. They failed to mention that it was attached to an industrial compressor to supply the necessary cooling for the overclocked CPU, and that it was a server socket ( https://www.anandtech.com/show/12932/intel-confirms-some-det... ). Since then, whenever I see a headline with Intel in it…

If there are 42 address bits, there are 42 address bits. Can't really fake something like that, unlike their overclocking experiment.

Re: Intel’s High-End Cascade Lake CPUs to Support 3.84 TB of Memory per Socket

#25

Post by theevilsharpie »

opportune wrote: post #21
dantiberian wrote: post #2

A few months ago Intel pulled a stunt where they showed a 28 core 5GHz CPU, implying it was a production CPU that would ship this year. They failed to mention that it was attached to an industrial compressor to supply the necessary cooling for the overclocked CPU, and that it was a server socket ( https://www.anandtech.com/show/12932/intel-confirms-some-det... ). Since then, whenever I see a headline with Intel in it…

They probably felt pressured to release that because the next gen thread rippers are actually going to approach those specs: 32 core 3.8 (base) GHz as per https://www.techradar.com/news/amd-ryzen-threadripper-2nd-ge... supposedly coming out in Q3, i.e. soon

Threadripper may come close in core count, but it cannot use registered memory, which means it's limited to 128 GB of RAM (based on the current maximum UDIMM capacities). That's not competitive in the server space.

Re: Intel’s High-End Cascade Lake CPUs to Support 3.84 TB of Memory per Socket

#26

Post by opportune »

theevilsharpie wrote: post #25
opportune wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They probably felt pressured to release that because the next gen thread rippers are actually going to approach those specs: 32 core 3.8 (base) GHz as per https://www.techradar.com/news/amd-ryzen-threadripper-2nd-ge... supposedly coming out in Q3, i.e. soon

Threadripper may come close in core count, but it cannot use registered memory, which means it's limited to 128 GB of RAM (based on the current maximum UDIMM capacities). That's not competitive in the server space.

oops, you're right, good point

Re: Intel’s High-End Cascade Lake CPUs to Support 3.84 TB of Memory per Socket

#28

Post by chrisseaton »

cheschire wrote: post #19
chrisseaton wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and that it was a server socket What's wrong with that? High-end workstations often have the same sockets as servers don't they? Did they say it wasn't a server socket?

The answer to your question is, I believe, in the article that grandfather post linked to. "What Platform Did It Run On? Intel did not answer this platform directly, however it was clear that the CPU was aimed at the LGA3647 server-based socket given from our examination of the demo system. It was unclear how Intel was going to promote this as an extreme workstation-type system, however Intel did note that they expec…

Hmm I don't see whatever you are seeing. It's running on a server socket. That's normal for an extreme workstation, which is what Intel publicly suggested it was for because they said it was for a very select market.

Re: Intel’s High-End Cascade Lake CPUs to Support 3.84 TB of Memory per Socket

#29

Post by evfanknitram »

akmittal wrote: post #9
evfanknitram wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tiny correction: Should be 1.53 TB, not 1.53 GB

Certainly not tiny, off by 32 bit

I meant tiny as in maybe not even worth pointing out since people will understand it anyway.

Re: Intel’s High-End Cascade Lake CPUs to Support 3.84 TB of Memory per Socket

#30

Post by naveen99 »

djsumdog wrote: post #14
nordsieck wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Case in point: > chips will support up to 3.84 TB of memory per socket ... due to combining 512 GB Optane DIMMs and 128GB DDR4 DIMMs > ... > in a 6 x Optane and 6 x DDR4 configuration, they will provide 3072 GB of 3D XPoint memory and 768 GB of DDR4 RAM for a total of 3.84 TB of memory Optane DIMMs don't really have the performance characteristics of traditional DRAM. It sounds like the real capacity per socket is 12…

But what market are they even trying to hit here? DDR4 prices are insane, but home consumers don't run large NUMA systems. Data center admins are going to be able to get the capitol for real DDR4 over Optane. They'd need to be ordering a lot of servers before the price point becomes significant enough that they'd order an Optane configuration and decide to benchmark them. I'd be curious about the real benchmarking at…

I thought the real advantage of Optane was bypassing the pcie bus, with much larger bandwidth of dimm: 80GB/s instead of 12GB/s
Post reply on HN