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

141–150 of 277 posts

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

#141

Post by Lev1a »

Shorel wrote: post #66
Analemma_ wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That means very little. As the saying goes, “How did you go bankrupt?” “Two ways: gradually, then all at once.” In technology, downward swings of fate tend to come fast and hard. The camera world went from 100% film to 100% digital in the space of about five years, which extinguished Kodak. Or consider Palm/Nokia/ Blackberry, who went from collectively owning the entire mobile market to dead as doorknobs in even less…

IMO this is only a repeat of the AMD Athlon days and Intel will go back to their anticompetitive antics sooner than later.

Did they ever truly stop?

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

#142

Post by jjeaff »

vbezhenar wrote: post #81
creato wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

But what does that really mean?

They still seem to be producing the fastest processors available for desktop and server.

It doesnt matter if someone else is making even a 3nm chip if the chip still can't outperform the current offerings.

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

#143

Post by Traster »

So as I understand it, this isn't new silicon, it's just binning the existing 9900K and if you wanted an overclock 9900K you would have just gone to Ciara who obviously bin and overclock and verify their systems anyway. So now you go to Ciara and Ciara go to Intel and buy a 9900KS instead of previously where you would go to Ciara they would go to Intel and buy a 5 9900K's and find the one that would've been as fast as the 9900KS anyway.

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

#144

Post by dfrage »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #99

From an interesting historical perspective, I mark the end of Moore's Law in 2001 with Intel's prediction of a 5GHz "Netburst" in 2005, which could not keep itself from melting. Somewhere I have a marketing road map of 5GHz in 2005, 10GHz in 2010. It was aspirational of course, but seeing what had to happen between then and now in order to get a chip that runs at 5GHz all the time based on their architecture is illum…

Amplifying the other current replies, what you're bemoaning and what slagged the Netburst "marchitecture" is the end of MOSFET Dennard Scaling: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennard_scaling

Moore's Law is "the number of lowest cost transistors doubles at X interval", and 193nm UV immersion lithography limits have been hitting it hard lately (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_patterning). But chip manufacturing equipment makers haven't run out of tricks quite yet.

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

#145

Post by kingosticks »

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #121
gameswithgo wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

sure, and maybe browsers or os need some way to say “running untrusted code please turn off performance for a sec” for that use case. until then ill just use one tab at a time or disable js before i opt in for slow.

I expect that the vast majority of PC gamers keep Javascript enabled in their browsers.

I wouldn't expect that. Is this the kind of thing that would be reported by the Steam hardware survey (if that's still a thing)?

Edit: I took a look and it seems they don't ask/record that info. I apologise for the offence this idea seems to have caused someone.

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

#146

Post by jjeaff »

xbmcuser wrote: post #101
icegreentea2 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Not indefinitely just at the same time because thermal throttling will happen after sometime. It just means all cores will be able to go to 5Ghz at the same time nothing about all being able to stay at 5Ghz

Did they say that? Because there are people overclocking current chips and with good cooling have no trouble staying at 5ghz on all cores without throttling.

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

#147

Post by nullandvoid »

gameswithgo wrote: post #89
spamizbad wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Because downloading and running binaries of applications is much safer?

From what i've seen web browser teams have taken the recent risks extremely seriously - I have sure had a worse track record of infection via downloading and installing software versus visiting sites with JS running

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

#148

Post by lawrenceyan »

tntn wrote: post #139
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…

Apple and AMD just have to ask TSMC to do their magic to make 7nm chips - they haven't had to do anything spectacular, just use TSMCs design libraries. Intel is struggling because of their struggles with 10nm. Apple and AMD are not because TSMC has pulled off 7nm. Architecture matters, but process node matters a lot too.

What would you say are the primary differences between the two companies? Is it more just a matter of luck that has allowed for TSMC to have been able to succeed where Intel hasn't? Or is there actually a meaningfully different process design and/or problem solving approach that is enabling this?

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

#149

Post by ksec »

AmVess wrote: post #73
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…

Anand Lal Shimpi left Anandtech 5 years ago, and the quality articles he wrote have not been replaced. It's basically a tech lite blog now.

So Despite what I wrote, I still think they are one of the best. Both Ian and Andrei are good with many in depth article, I really do miss Anand's article though. I think, the real problem is Anandtech is short on staff.

Anand has been working in Apple for a few years now, I wonder what has he been up to.

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

#150

Post by robocat »

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #124
vbezhenar wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

And iPhones still don't come close to competing with desktop-class processors in terms of performance. iPhones also use much less electricity, of course, but the point remains. I don't know enough about this, but the GP's argument of "Intel hit the wall first because they were the first to reach that level of performance" makes logical sense to me.

"Apple’s iPhone Xs is faster than an iMac Pro on the Speedometer 2.0 JavaScript benchmark"

Yes, Safari, but iPhones do compete with your average desktop processor (not the top end).

https://macdailynews.com/2018/09/23/apples-iphone-xs-is-fast...

Post reply on HN