Still marketing SMT. Interesting move.
Desperate, is what they are.
Intel Announces 8 Core I9-9900KS: Every Core at 5Ghz, All the Time
261–270 of 277 posts
Re: Intel Announces 8 Core I9-9900KS: Every Core at 5Ghz, All the Time
#262Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't see how the act of taking and publishing measurements after microcode and OS updates constitutes hysteria. It's my understanding, at least on Windows, you pretty much have to opt-out of these patches or manually install an update that disables the mitigations. I fully support a users right to bypass these mitigations, and you're correct that your typical desktop user, at least today, isn't a target. But it se…
> I don't see how the act of taking and publishing measurements after microcode and OS updates constitutes hysteria. It's quite easy to sensationalize benchmark results even unintentionally. The average reader of PC hardware review sites is totally willing to latch on to a microbenchmark result that shows a 20% performance drop and claim that it's disastrous for performance, even if the actual added delay to real-wor…
In the case of my 6850k my overclock was silently killed by the Windows 10 microcode update which locked multi to 38x.
This behaviour angered me no end. I wasted significant time looking for workarounds, and deleting the microprocessor driver was the only way. I wonder what fixes I've now nixed, but there was seriously no need for Intel to kill my overclock.
On a couple of occasions Intel have pushed updates which have reset my fix. Dear $deity .. my next PC will be AMD for sure.
Re: Intel Announces 8 Core I9-9900KS: Every Core at 5Ghz, All the Time
#263I 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…
I was put off AT the day I noticed they forgot to cover the Threadripper launch for weeks while they flooded the front page with dry half pagers about new Intel motherboards (not benchmarks mind you, just snippets from the OEMs Press release). I asked about it in the comments and got a boilerplate answer that they strive to present quality articles to the readers.
They also had the Intel series 6 launch where they praised the 6600K and compared it to the 2500K to show “massive” improvements over the years. This while all the other websites noted “minimal speed boost for too big price”. Perhaps both true but the spin on it makes all the difference when showing the intention.
AT shows quite the Intel bias. And it’s not the Intel part that bothers me, it’s the bias part. They go out of their way to make Intel look better without outright lying, just selectively presenting the truth in a way that shines a much better light on Intel. This for me casts doubt on other articles.
I’m glad Andrei Frumusanu’s mobile reviews still have a home, being the best I have seen on the entire internet. But that’s the only segment on AT where I can be reasonably sure about impartiality.
Re: Intel Announces 8 Core I9-9900KS: Every Core at 5Ghz, All the Time
#264I am likely the odd one out here, but wouldn't having the capability to turbo a single core to, let's say, 5.5 GHz or higher as factory stock be more useful in real life than the one or all eight core turbo to 5 GHz instead of 4.7? There are still enough single core/single thread apps out there that could benefit from faster single core performance, and this newest and hottest (also in temperature) i9 cannot go faster in single core than the 9900K.
Re: Intel Announces 8 Core I9-9900KS: Every Core at 5Ghz, All the Time
#265Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm glad the PC enthusiast space hasn't succumbed to the wild hysteria caused elsewhere by the side channel issues. It's tiresome to see every new variation people come up with reported as a new apocalypse all over again. Half the reason I still pay attention is to find if there's a new Linux boot switch I need to turn on to disable some new performance regression. Even though I'm personally in the fortunate position…
> Half the reason I still pay attention is to find if there's a new Linux boot switch I need to turn on to disable some new performance regression. No need, if you really want to disable all mitigations, including future ones, use mitigations=off. https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Spectre-...
Thank you, I didn't know about this! Currently still on 5.0 for most of my machines, but this will be helpful once I move to 5.2+.
Re: Intel Announces 8 Core I9-9900KS: Every Core at 5Ghz, All the Time
#266Earlier quoted context omitted.
But weren't there Intel 10nm chips sold for revenue in 2017? [0] Granted, it was an OEM-only part for some China specific education laptops... 0: https://www.anandtech.com/show/13405/intel-10nm-cannon-lake-...
Cannon Lake was released only because many at Intel have their bonuses tied to the process node launch. Well, they launched a 10nm CPU... so bad the GPU is disabled, performance/watt it's worse than KBR and it was only available in limited quantities.
KBR = Kaby Lake Refresh. Interesting, in that Intel's "10nm" node is said to be more power efficient than their "14nm" node, in this case, per AnandTech (https://www.anandtech.com/show/11738/intel-launches-8th-gene...) KBR was launched with 14+nm. Could be that early of a 10nm part wasn't yet very power optimized. And that would be a very good explanation for why the GPU was disabled vs. the yield issue, which we're pretty sure is much more fundamental than specs of dust and other isolated things that can disable a part of a die without killing it altogether.
Re: Intel Announces 8 Core I9-9900KS: Every Core at 5Ghz, All the Time
#267Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oddly enough, the challenge of estimating who is "ahead" is kind of like traffic. Intel arrived at the scaling traffic jam way before anyone else, and has been slowly slogging through it. New entrants are catching up to the traffic jam and will have to make their way through it as well. If there is no breakthrough, then everyone will find themselves more tightly bunched in feature/performance curves than they have be…
Bad analogy. You can prove that getting in line earliest will get you out of it earliest. If you postulate that it’s more complex than that, it might hold up. You could say that Intel is driving a semi, while others are mini coopers and motorcycles, splitting lanes and better at speeding up/slowing down. At which point no analogy is necessary: startups and smaller companies are more nimble than larger companies, at t…
It's a good analogy as long as Intel was the first to experience the end of Dennard scaling (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennard_scaling) because their fab lines were ahead of the rest of the industry's. And fabs are all "semis", due to the massive amounts of capital and talent needed to move to the next node.
So much so that we're now we're down to two companies in the whole world who are successfully executing the smallest CPU nodes, unless Intel manages to make their "10nm" work, or pulls off their "7nm".
While we're hearing the very roughly equivalent TSMC "5nm" node is starting risk production (https://wccftech.com/tsmc-5nm-production-euv/ beta testing, you might say, someone outside of TSMC has to be the first, second, etc. to try to get real world dies that work on a new node). Intel isn't saying anything, but Semiaccurate has reported at least two fab lines that were slated to move to their 10nm are installing lots of EUV equipment consistent with using them for their 7nm node (and at least one fab moving back to 14nm).
Re: Intel Announces 8 Core I9-9900KS: Every Core at 5Ghz, All the Time
#268Earlier quoted context omitted.
People are using your benchmarks to decide what computer to buy. If they're that out of date, what should I tell them?
End-user perceived performance is usually not affected enough to meaningfully change the ranking of products. If a chip goes from being 5% faster to 3% slower when mitigations are applied, you'll never notice that without busting out a stopwatch and digging for a reason to be disappointed. Remember, measurable performance differences aren't always noticeable performance differences, especially without a side by side…
Why not do an article with then-current mitigations every 6 months? Rather than conveniently waiting until Intel can get their hardware fixes out. Which will coincide with the "mitigations are stable" article.
I'd be willing to bet that if the majority of mitigations impacted AMD rather than Intel as it does today, you'd already have done this and would continue to follow up. This is very interesting material and a special moment in time to cover it and inform your readers. Other than willful laziness ("lack of time", everyone knows you make time for priorities), this appears like shilling hard for Intel.
If Anandtech decides to do the right thing, I'd like to see .Net or Java compilation. Real-world based benchmarking only.
Re: Intel Announces 8 Core I9-9900KS: Every Core at 5Ghz, All the Time
#269I 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…
It's rumored that companies like Intel and Nvidia will retaliate against review sites and publications for bad press coverage by slowing or cutting off access to preview release products for reviews.
Re: Intel Announces 8 Core I9-9900KS: Every Core at 5Ghz, All the Time
#270Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cannon Lake was released only because many at Intel have their bonuses tied to the process node launch. Well, they launched a 10nm CPU... so bad the GPU is disabled, performance/watt it's worse than KBR and it was only available in limited quantities.
KBR = Kaby Lake Refresh. Interesting, in that Intel's "10nm" node is said to be more power efficient than their "14nm" node, in this case, per AnandTech ( https://www.anandtech.com/show/11738/intel-launches-8th-gene... ) KBR was launched with 14+nm. Could be that early of a 10nm part wasn't yet very power optimized. And that would be a very good explanation for why the GPU was disabled vs. the yield issue, which we'r…
https://semiwiki.com/semiconductor/intel/7433-intel-10nm-yie...
The GPU was disabled because it is those blocks which are the most problematic yield wise.