Is it really 400W or just for the Base 2.6Ghz?, AMD could not ask for better timing for their 64C/128T Rome ANN Maybe AMD will follow them with High TDP 64C/128T SKU with much higher Boost clocks
Technically true, but some boost within TDP can some times be expected. A consumer CPU with a base clock of 3.5GHz and boost clock of 4.5GHz might manage more than 3.5 within TDP, even if 4.5 requires more power. No boost is guaranteed within TDP, though.
Then again, if this thing needs a 400W TDP, I sincerely doubt there's any headroom left.
I doubt Intel can afford to leave any headroom anywhere. They're less than competitive as it is so I'm sure they're squeezing everything they can from these now.
And if it were a consumer product it could have some headroom to make OCers happy (assuming that was still a possibility). But here what you pay is what you get.
A 400W Intel power consumption rating implies a much higher peak power draw. A PSU with over 1200W output is needed for each 9282 chip (an 8 socket system would need over 10kW of power supply - BEFORE peripherals !!!)
Do the lower core count Cascade Lake chips fit in current Skylake-SP motherboards? It's immaterial at the moment, but it will be interesting to see how far I can soup up my dual Skylake-SP machine when Cascade Lake chips from decommissioned machines start showing up on eBay.
So, Intel is piling up human body parts. I guess this settles it for everyone who's been wondering, what form of dystopia we are heading towards. It's the Lexx dystopia - Robot heads, human bodies.
They were working on their own version of Infinity Fabric so nothing terribly new there. "Gluing together" meant more flexible market points for both, by allowing more chips, less chips, or different chips in a more reasonable time frame than starting anew. AMD had to do it because they wassn't the market leader, and Intel because they need to change quicker.
Looks like prices are going up rather than down per-core for the 2nd generation. Will be interesting to see where AMD's pricing comes in by comparison.
I don't think so, at least not until you're close to the top 28 core. The Skylake vs Cascade Lake of the same model number (i.e. 5120 vs 5220) has roughly the same price, but now 2-4 more cores and slightly improved frequencies.
There is no 'socket', the 56 cores are BGA. Designed to be soldered direct to the motherboard. Though in reality I'm guessing anybody using them will create some sort of plug-in daughter board, as having a CPU that expensive which is unreplaceable (without ripping the entire server apart and changing the motherboard) is unlikely to go down well with potential customers.
Okay, so assuming each Skylake-Server core has Dual 512bit AVX units,. So each core has a maximum vector width of 1024 bits, that's 32x FP32 precision operations per core, per clock. 32x 56 = 1792 FP32 ops/clock for the socket and 2.6 Ghz it will have a little over 4.6 TFLOPS single-precision, if my calculations are correct. (Someone correct me if I'm wrong please).
GTX 1660 at normal boost clocks produces 5.35 TFLOPS FP32.
So yeah, it's not going to touch a big GPU, but it's useful for SIMD operations that are mixed with code that cannot be executed well on a GPU.
But also, it’s pretty clear Micron will be releasing persistent memory at some point.
What most people are not sure of is why anyone would buy Intel when they have experienced monopolistic practices and sky high prices in the datacenter for years.
WTF BGA ? This is blasphemy. I saw the unfolding of the BGA in the laptop/mobile ecosystem at Haswell era and the death of the XM/MX binned extreme CPUs to the cTDP, crippled locked 6700HQ/7700HQ and the messy HK BGA trash.
And the damn death of MXM with Post Maxwell to Pascal and to DGFF abomination (Area 51M Alienware).
Using a BGA part in desktop is hideous and too much control to Intel to dictate already the monopolistic power is too abusive.
I was on the edge of buying a Z390 Dark for 9900K due to Win7 support over the AMD, but if they go this BGA route for their upcoming Sunny Cove ends up BGA or the 10C ringbus last hurrah for 14nm++++ I'm done with Intel. Fuck them. AM4 is getting all this while Z platform ends up BS in the face of consumer.
400W BGA, ugh. Dumpster trash. I hope Dr. Lisa Su crushes this bullshit of a company to oblivion.
The BGA-only thing is really weird. If the point of gluing two dice together was to increase the performance per socket, what does that mean when there are no sockets anyway and it's only available in "specialty" systems? If it's entirely up to system integrators to do something with these, why not just use four of them instead?
Like I said, the system integrators brave enough to use the BGA 56 cores will probably mount them on some sort of proprietary plug-in daughterboard. As it would be suicide to make them an integral part of the motherboard. Server operators demand easy serviceability on everything, because downtime = $. So everything has to be plug 'n play, including CPUs.
Well yes, but the point being that if these SKUs aren't usable in general LGA3647 boards, what's the purpose of glueing two together? If the system integrators have to create unique systems just for this processor anyway, what's even the advantage compared to just using four single-die processors?
Not a lot as far as I can see ?...Personally I think it's just a knee-jerk reaction to Rome, "Look ! We've got 56 cores and Rome is only 64..." But at $20,000+ (easily) I doubt it will prove very popular, because I reckon you'll get two top of the line 64 core Romes for less than that. Ones that won't need a bespoke system, just a regular EPYC motherboard.
In competitive terms, 56 cores vs 128 cores for ~the same price is a non starter. And I'll be very surprised if more than a handful of 9200 systems are ever sold.
Remember those slides Intel used to trash AMD a while ago? They stated that AMD can have supply problems and that their processors are glued together. They painted that as major negatives... odd....
How does Intel keep the 8256 within 105W at 3.8GHz with all it's 24 cores? Is it a typo or is Intel offering 24 cores with a base speed of 3.8GHz and boost of 3.9GHz within a 105W package? Isn't the TDP the all-core power usage at base frequency?
Amazing, Intel and OEMs can keep selling and even market new products that have the "Spoiler" security hole with NO effective patch and without "warning labels" to keep consumers informed!
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
66 Comments
Back to Article
outsideloop - Tuesday, April 2, 2019 - link
firstoutsideloop - Tuesday, April 2, 2019 - link
400W TDPThreska - Tuesday, April 2, 2019 - link
I wonder if data-centers will have to upgrade their PSUs as well?BigMamaInHouse - Friday, April 5, 2019 - link
PLS fix:Intel® Xeon® Platinum 8256 is 4C/8T and costs:$7007.00 - $7014.00
sleepeeg3 - Thursday, May 2, 2019 - link
I like Ian's pricing column - "arm, leg, foot, kidney"Yup.
BigMamaInHouse - Tuesday, April 2, 2019 - link
Is it really 400W or just for the Base 2.6Ghz?, AMD could not ask for better timing for their 64C/128T Rome ANNMaybe AMD will follow them with High TDP 64C/128T SKU with much higher Boost clocks
shabby - Tuesday, April 2, 2019 - link
Intel's tdp is always for the baseValantar - Wednesday, April 3, 2019 - link
Technically true, but some boost within TDP can some times be expected. A consumer CPU with a base clock of 3.5GHz and boost clock of 4.5GHz might manage more than 3.5 within TDP, even if 4.5 requires more power. No boost is guaranteed within TDP, though.Then again, if this thing needs a 400W TDP, I sincerely doubt there's any headroom left.
close - Wednesday, April 3, 2019 - link
I doubt Intel can afford to leave any headroom anywhere. They're less than competitive as it is so I'm sure they're squeezing everything they can from these now.And if it were a consumer product it could have some headroom to make OCers happy (assuming that was still a possibility). But here what you pay is what you get.
MonkeyPaw - Tuesday, April 2, 2019 - link
This 400W TDP—I think AMD will eat Intel’s lunch with Rome. And we all know how Intel measures TDP—this could be a 600W+ monster.DannyH246 - Tuesday, April 2, 2019 - link
A 400W Intel power consumption rating implies a much higher peak power draw. A PSU with over 1200W output is needed for each 9282 chip (an 8 socket system would need over 10kW of power supply - BEFORE peripherals !!!)Intel Innovation Day! Hahaha
Lord of the Bored - Wednesday, April 3, 2019 - link
Intel inside, nuclear reactor outside.Valantar - Wednesday, April 3, 2019 - link
Even if AMD's clocks are >1GHz lower, more cores at barely more than half the power? Yeah, AMD is going to gain on Intel here.[email protected] - Wednesday, April 3, 2019 - link
400W thermal design power != 400W real life avarage power drawIrata - Wednesday, April 3, 2019 - link
For their higher end enthusiast systems, we have seen that TDP < real life power draw. Admittedly not average but under load.SanX - Friday, April 5, 2019 - link
OK first, guess who will be last ?ARM. I hear their snoring
TomWomack - Tuesday, April 2, 2019 - link
Do the lower core count Cascade Lake chips fit in current Skylake-SP motherboards? It's immaterial at the moment, but it will be interesting to see how far I can soup up my dual Skylake-SP machine when Cascade Lake chips from decommissioned machines start showing up on eBay.eddman - Tuesday, April 2, 2019 - link
Why the number of PCI-E lanes isn't doubled? Doesn't each die have its own PCI-E controllers?HStewart - Tuesday, April 2, 2019 - link
Most like because the cpu share the same IO logic - I don't think this is same as two 28 core socket system.tamalero - Tuesday, April 2, 2019 - link
Dont they use the PCI lanes to connect to each other processor?wishgranter - Tuesday, April 2, 2019 - link
intneresting prices :Dhttps://www.dropbox.com/s/80fc5smq6du7kf4/INTEL.JP...
OreoCookie - Thursday, April 4, 2019 - link
Yup, the prices are awesome! :lol:gescom - Tuesday, April 2, 2019 - link
Price: arm, leg, foot, kidney?gfkBill - Tuesday, April 2, 2019 - link
Vague but accurate, given next level down is $17K :)tagcode - Friday, May 10, 2019 - link
So, Intel is piling up human body parts. I guess this settles it for everyone who's been wondering, what form of dystopia we are heading towards. It's the Lexx dystopia - Robot heads, human bodies.https://i.ytimg.com/vi/wEOc8dMhQyU/maxresdefault.j...
atleast3db - Tuesday, April 2, 2019 - link
Looks like they are now also providing a "glued together" solutionThreska - Wednesday, April 3, 2019 - link
They were working on their own version of Infinity Fabric so nothing terribly new there. "Gluing together" meant more flexible market points for both, by allowing more chips, less chips, or different chips in a more reasonable time frame than starting anew. AMD had to do it because they wassn't the market leader, and Intel because they need to change quicker.Smell This - Sunday, April 7, 2019 - link
Uhhhh ...Rory Reed 'stole' Sea Micro's *Freedom Fabric* for $300m from directly under Chipzillah's noses.
Someguyperson - Tuesday, April 2, 2019 - link
"The odd one out here is the ‘Y’ Speed Select model, which relates to a new Intel feature we’ll discuss below"Exactly where do you discuss this? Is this something you are going to add an a future update to this post?
twtech - Tuesday, April 2, 2019 - link
Looks like prices are going up rather than down per-core for the 2nd generation. Will be interesting to see where AMD's pricing comes in by comparison.wallysb01 - Tuesday, April 2, 2019 - link
I don't think so, at least not until you're close to the top 28 core. The Skylake vs Cascade Lake of the same model number (i.e. 5120 vs 5220) has roughly the same price, but now 2-4 more cores and slightly improved frequencies.Dr. Swag - Tuesday, April 2, 2019 - link
Idk about these new 9200 series cpus, they're probably not very good since they're glued togetherjordanclock - Thursday, April 4, 2019 - link
Have any evidence to back up that assertion?Lord of the Bored - Thursday, April 4, 2019 - link
Intel told us so a little while back.Mahigan - Friday, April 19, 2019 - link
Intel claimed that AMD's CCX architecture wasn't good because it was "glued" together. We're just going by what Intel publicaly stated.lefty2 - Tuesday, April 2, 2019 - link
Maybe they're isn't enough room for the extra pins on the socketHaawser - Wednesday, April 3, 2019 - link
There is no 'socket', the 56 cores are BGA. Designed to be soldered direct to the motherboard. Though in reality I'm guessing anybody using them will create some sort of plug-in daughter board, as having a CPU that expensive which is unreplaceable (without ripping the entire server apart and changing the motherboard) is unlikely to go down well with potential customers.tipoo - Tuesday, April 2, 2019 - link
I wonder how close to a GPUs performance you could get out of 56 CPU cores with AVX-512. Cell was kind of such an idea.AshlayW - Friday, April 5, 2019 - link
Okay, so assuming each Skylake-Server core has Dual 512bit AVX units,. So each core has a maximum vector width of 1024 bits, that's 32x FP32 precision operations per core, per clock. 32x 56 = 1792 FP32 ops/clock for the socket and 2.6 Ghz it will have a little over 4.6 TFLOPS single-precision, if my calculations are correct. (Someone correct me if I'm wrong please).GTX 1660 at normal boost clocks produces 5.35 TFLOPS FP32.
So yeah, it's not going to touch a big GPU, but it's useful for SIMD operations that are mixed with code that cannot be executed well on a GPU.
gfkBill - Tuesday, April 2, 2019 - link
Note sure how AMD can "build a platform" like Intel can though, with Intel the big deal is Optane. Will AMD work with Optane RAM?DannyH246 - Tuesday, April 2, 2019 - link
AMD already working with Western Digital...https://www.westerndigital.com/company/newsroom/pr...
But also, it’s pretty clear Micron will be releasing persistent memory at some point.
What most people are not sure of is why anyone would buy Intel when they have experienced monopolistic practices and sky high prices in the datacenter for years.
Let’s not even mention security.
wut - Tuesday, April 2, 2019 - link
The age-old answer "ecosystem support"gfkBill - Wednesday, April 3, 2019 - link
"Availability"Micron "at some point" and WD's fancy SSD device doesn't sound like it would compete with Intels Optane DDR modules as such.
NoodlesX - Wednesday, April 3, 2019 - link
What I find weird is the pricing of the 6254.18 Cores 3.1GHz base speed, seems out of place to the rest of the CPU's in the 6000 range.
Quantumz0d - Wednesday, April 3, 2019 - link
WTF BGA ? This is blasphemy. I saw the unfolding of the BGA in the laptop/mobile ecosystem at Haswell era and the death of the XM/MX binned extreme CPUs to the cTDP, crippled locked 6700HQ/7700HQ and the messy HK BGA trash.And the damn death of MXM with Post Maxwell to Pascal and to DGFF abomination (Area 51M Alienware).
Using a BGA part in desktop is hideous and too much control to Intel to dictate already the monopolistic power is too abusive.
I was on the edge of buying a Z390 Dark for 9900K due to Win7 support over the AMD, but if they go this BGA route for their upcoming Sunny Cove ends up BGA or the 10C ringbus last hurrah for 14nm++++ I'm done with Intel. Fuck them. AM4 is getting all this while Z platform ends up BS in the face of consumer.
400W BGA, ugh. Dumpster trash. I hope Dr. Lisa Su crushes this bullshit of a company to oblivion.
Dolda2000 - Wednesday, April 3, 2019 - link
The BGA-only thing is really weird. If the point of gluing two dice together was to increase the performance per socket, what does that mean when there are no sockets anyway and it's only available in "specialty" systems? If it's entirely up to system integrators to do something with these, why not just use four of them instead?Haawser - Thursday, April 4, 2019 - link
Like I said, the system integrators brave enough to use the BGA 56 cores will probably mount them on some sort of proprietary plug-in daughterboard. As it would be suicide to make them an integral part of the motherboard. Server operators demand easy serviceability on everything, because downtime = $. So everything has to be plug 'n play, including CPUs.Dolda2000 - Thursday, April 4, 2019 - link
Well yes, but the point being that if these SKUs aren't usable in general LGA3647 boards, what's the purpose of glueing two together? If the system integrators have to create unique systems just for this processor anyway, what's even the advantage compared to just using four single-die processors?Haawser - Friday, April 5, 2019 - link
Not a lot as far as I can see ?...Personally I think it's just a knee-jerk reaction to Rome, "Look ! We've got 56 cores and Rome is only 64..." But at $20,000+ (easily) I doubt it will prove very popular, because I reckon you'll get two top of the line 64 core Romes for less than that. Ones that won't need a bespoke system, just a regular EPYC motherboard.In competitive terms, 56 cores vs 128 cores for ~the same price is a non starter. And I'll be very surprised if more than a handful of 9200 systems are ever sold.
AustinPowersISU - Wednesday, April 3, 2019 - link
Remember those slides Intel used to trash AMD a while ago? They stated that AMD can have supply problems and that their processors are glued together. They painted that as major negatives... odd....blu42 - Wednesday, April 3, 2019 - link
I remember those slides in full detail.. There should be a moral here somewhere, along those rocks, 14++++ glass houses and all.Rudde - Wednesday, April 3, 2019 - link
How does Intel keep the 8256 within 105W at 3.8GHz with all it's 24 cores? Is it a typo or is Intel offering 24 cores with a base speed of 3.8GHz and boost of 3.9GHz within a 105W package? Isn't the TDP the all-core power usage at base frequency?Intel.CPU - Wednesday, April 3, 2019 - link
The odd one out here is the ‘Y’ Speed Select model, which relates to a new Intel feature we’ll discuss below.Did not find any relevant information. Can you please elaborate on the 'Y' suffix?
WasHopingForAnHonestReview - Thursday, April 4, 2019 - link
(((Intel))) inside, sucking your power dry.I wonder how their manufacturing plant in Irsael is doing...
OvoFox11 - Thursday, April 4, 2019 - link
extremely normal commentSpunjji - Monday, April 8, 2019 - link
Nazis operating openly on tech forums now! Yay! :|nadim.kahwaji - Thursday, April 4, 2019 - link
Speed Select model? can you clarify ....Rollo3647 - Thursday, April 4, 2019 - link
as i know you can select the base frq of each core to match the thread's need.Rollo3647 - Thursday, April 4, 2019 - link
google for this"Intel Xeon Scalable 2nd Generation Speed Select Technology"
wow&wow - Thursday, April 4, 2019 - link
"Now with Up To 56-Cores"Now with Up To 56 "Spoiler" Security Holes!
Amazing, Intel and OEMs can keep selling and even market new products that have the "Spoiler" security hole with NO effective patch and without "warning labels" to keep consumers informed!
evgen.danilov - Friday, April 5, 2019 - link
Please correct in the table with the CPU list: 8256 4 cores, thank!SanX - Friday, April 5, 2019 - link
Damn ARM, what are you smoking?bananaforscale - Sunday, April 7, 2019 - link
"offering up to 56 cores if you want the processor equivalent of Wolverine at your disposal"So if Linus drops it it'll heal back to functional?
808Hilo - Monday, April 8, 2019 - link
Most broken and derrelict leftover die still sells for 200$. Binning this low is...bad taste.Xeon Bronze 3200
3204 6 1.9 - 8.25 85 - $213
Walkeer - Sunday, April 14, 2019 - link
spoiler security bug insidenhu1993 - Thursday, October 24, 2019 - link
I want to buy CPU Intel Xeon Scalable. I saw at link: https://maychuviet.vn/chuyen-muc/linh-kien-may-chu... I want to be advisoried, pleased!