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

Intel Announces 8 Core I9-9900KS: Every Core at 5Ghz, All the Time

anandtech.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 277 posts

Re: Intel Announces 8 Core I9-9900KS: Every Core at 5Ghz, All the Time

#81

Post by vbezhenar »

creato wrote: post #57
lawrenceyan wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From how Apple and AMD are doing with their own processors though, it seems like Intel is just fundamentally doing worse even as things become more difficult with smaller transistor sizes. Apple is going to replace Intel with their own processors because Intel has failed to meet requirements. AMD, with a shoestring budget basically on the verge of bankruptcy the entire time they were doing their R&D, managed to build…

Are they doing worse? Or are they still ahead, just not as far ahead as they used to be? I wouldn't expect any massive leads in any industry to last for long. This might just be regression to the mean.

They are behind. I think they have a chance to catch up with their 7nm which is supposed to be better than TSMC 7nm. But it won’t be soon.

Re: Intel Announces 8 Core I9-9900KS: Every Core at 5Ghz, All the Time

#82

Post by mruts »

api wrote: post #48
dgacmu wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh goodness, thanks. Fixed 'ekeing', which my phone apparently did not believe I'd said.

Mobile is the foot rub. (Autocorrect of "mobile is the future" I saw once.)

That’s ducking funny!

Re: Intel Announces 8 Core I9-9900KS: Every Core at 5Ghz, All the Time

#83

Post by vbezhenar »

msbarnett wrote: post #68
saltyshake wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Besides cloud providers running VMs /containers on the cloud, is Spectre/Meltdown really such an issue for day-to-day consumers ?

Given that most consumers run JavaScript unconditionally, yes. Browser vendors have basically declared Spectre/Meltdown/MDS unmitigatable at the browser level.

Can you link a source please?

Re: Intel Announces 8 Core I9-9900KS: Every Core at 5Ghz, All the Time

#84

Post by bayindirh »

koala_man wrote: post #65
bayindirh wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The switching speed of silicon has also some upper limit. When you drive silicon faster, it starts to make mistakes. i.e. not all electrons go the where you want them to go. This causes soft-faults and CPU re-executes the part at best, or gives you a BSOD, oops or panic at worst. This upper limit depends on process, layout, power design and power limits of the CPU. Last but, not the least, not all CPUs are created eq…

>gives you a BSOD, oops or panic at worst. That's not too bad. I'd be much more worried about code silently doing the wrong thing .

That's also possible. That's why overclockers run Prime95 to test their CPU stability.

Also, a BSOD or panic in the wrong time can cause massive data loss. That's beyond bad sometimes.

Edit: I mixed Prime95 with SuperPi. Thanks AaronFriel.

Re: Intel Announces 8 Core I9-9900KS: Every Core at 5Ghz, All the Time

#85

Post by akvadrako »

vbezhenar wrote: post #77
dgacmu wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Intel was ahead, and hit the wall first. Apple & AMD are not ahead, they're just catching up. I don't want to understate how big a problem that could be for Intel, of course. But they're also doing it on low margin parts, and Intel continues to make bank with their data center parts. I don't think any of this represents a short-term problem for Intel, other than the general downturn in processor sales because fewer p…

Apple sold millions of iPhones with 7nm chips while Intel struggles to build comparable 10nm chips and keeps releasing 14+++ nm. AMD will release 7nm chips very soon. It does not seem like they are catching up. Quite the opposite.

You can’t compare nm between vendors - it’s just marketing numbers.

Re: Intel Announces 8 Core I9-9900KS: Every Core at 5Ghz, All the Time

#86

Post by ben_w »

dual_basis wrote: post #74
d33 wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Meh. It doesn't require Javascript for your computer to run logic described by others. Browsers are such complex machines that it wouldn't surprise me if you could for example craft a malicious SVG that would bypass that, or a turing-complete CSS file that triggers a vulnerability... By the way, does NoScript actually block in-SVG javascript?

Sure, but we all take risks every day. If you're worring about turning-complete CSS files exploiting Spectre and Meltdown then you probably don't leave the house much.

We know that attackers have reason to exploit literally all compute resources they can find a way to access. This is more like worrying about leaving the house during an epidemic of exploding ebola-infected pigeons — if you can do something about it, you should.

Re: Intel Announces 8 Core I9-9900KS: Every Core at 5Ghz, All the Time

#87

Post by msbarnett »

vbezhenar wrote: post #83
msbarnett wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given that most consumers run JavaScript unconditionally, yes. Browser vendors have basically declared Spectre/Meltdown/MDS unmitigatable at the browser level.

Can you link a source please?

https://v8.dev/blog/spectre

> Second, the increasingly complicated mitigations that we designed and implemented carried significant complexity, which is technical debt and might actually increase the attack surface, and performance overheads. Third, testing and maintaining mitigations for microarchitectural leaks is even trickier than designing gadgets themselves, since it’s hard to be sure the mitigations continue working as designed. At least once, important mitigations were effectively undone by later compiler optimizations. Fourth, we found that effective mitigation of some variants of Spectre, particularly variant 4, to be simply infeasible in software, even after a heroic effort by our partners at Apple to combat the problem in their JIT compiler.

> Our research reached the conclusion that, in principle, untrusted code can read a process’s entire address space using Spectre and side channels. Software mitigations reduce the effectiveness of many potential gadgets, but are not efficient or comprehensive.

The “some variants” include MDS, which the author was aware of but which were not at the time of publication out of embargo.

Re: Intel Announces 8 Core I9-9900KS: Every Core at 5Ghz, All the Time

#88

Post by gameswithgo »

ksec wrote: post #39

I used to be Pro Anandtech and consider them one of the best Sources online for Hardware News. But the fact they have yet write a single post, big or small about Intel's Zombieload and its implication on performance worries me a bit. Then there is the "Intel" benchmarks as usual [1] on GPU. Trying to suggest the 2 CPU were both running at 25W TDP to give a "fair" comparison, without mentioning the Ice-Lake U CPU were…

its gaming centric news, nobody cares about these exploits when running fortnite

Re: Intel Announces 8 Core I9-9900KS: Every Core at 5Ghz, All the Time

#89

Post by gameswithgo »

spamizbad wrote: post #58
ksec wrote: post #39

I used to be Pro Anandtech and consider them one of the best Sources online for Hardware News. But the fact they have yet write a single post, big or small about Intel's Zombieload and its implication on performance worries me a bit. Then there is the "Intel" benchmarks as usual [1] on GPU. Trying to suggest the 2 CPU were both running at 25W TDP to give a "fair" comparison, without mentioning the Ice-Lake U CPU were…

It's not just Anandtech. I feel like the entire "PC enthusiast" review space has dropped the ball on hardware vulnerabilities. Reevaluating performance between microcode and OS patches is an afterthought, and when a new CPU hits the market the numbers are presented without the obvious disclaimer that these performance gains may evaporate within months. Some even perpetuate the "only relevant to datacenter" myth despi…

pc enthusiasts aren’t really into running javascript either.

Re: Intel Announces 8 Core I9-9900KS: Every Core at 5Ghz, All the Time

#90

Post by muro »

icegreentea2 wrote: post #60
qwerty456127 wrote: post #55

Why 5 Hz all the time? I'd love to have such an extremely powerful CPU but I'd actually appreciate if it could downclock itself automatically and stay as cold as possible whenever I don't need it's full power. Some times I run heavy computations and having 8 5Hz cores sounds great but most of the time I just read or write something so even 1000 Hz sounds an overkill.

Base frequency isn't the same as lowest frequency (ya... it's weird). Base frequency is vaguely related to the idea that if you had all cores running at the base frequency, you would run just about at the system's TDP (it's really a complete mess, this is a simplification). Your system can still drop CPU cores down to 400-800MHz in low energy states. What this announcement is basically saying is that Intel now has a…

Since it's turbo, I thought it means "as long as the CPU likes it", rather than indefinitely. Or did they change how turbo works and now it's "it will run on turbo frequencies as long as there is enough load and the CPU is not temperature throttled"?
Post reply on HN