Sadly that's what Intel has been doing for last year or so. Since Thread Ripper came to market, it been quite clear how big of a middle finger Intel had been showing to its HEDT users.
Yes I know, but I was referring to modded CB R15 that renders x4 the resolution, and now 2700X takes over 3x the time to finish render. It's going to be great for 2990WX/ Xeon W-3175X and the new ThreadRipper with up-to 64 codes ;-) Original R15 iss to easy for this monster CPU'S.
Doesn't it simply scale to slower for the extreme test? Meaning if a CPU is 10% slower than another CPU in the Cinebench its 10% slower in the extreme version as well? Guess i'm not seeing the point.
On realy powerfull systems the score can jump +- 20% See this for example:Quad Xeon Platinum 8180 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3raiXeUvXWg We all know that this year we gonna see 64C/128T cous so it's gonna be better test for them vs normal R15, also if you check notebook review you see they need to do multiple CB R15 runs to show the actual performance based on the cooling performance, so with this mode with single run you gonna see the actual performance if the cooling cannot handle the CPU.
Intel is selling this chip as a marketing chip and nothing more. Of course for some people this doesn't matter. What it matters for them is that they need it and they have the money to buy it and use it.
What it matters to me, is to see which sites will throw this processor on the top of their CPU charts when publishing reviews. Which sites will play Intel's marketing game.
Its the fastest processor for gaming on the market, and with how much GPUs have gone up its hard to argue with spending the extra couple hundred after you dropped $1200 on the 2080ti. Might as well have the best.
It's an easy argument. 99% of users will not see a difference between the 9900K and 8700k, and the 8700k has the advantage of not needing a freezer for cooling.
Why spend double the price for 1% better performance? If you need more FPS, OC the 8700K and the CPU will never be a bottleneck again,
Halo PC products always get the glory, always have. Its why Nvidia has outsold ATI/AMD over the years because they always had the halo product that was very low volume. People would buy lessor Nvidia cards at the mid to low end because Nvidia has the "best" even when those were lessor products than ATI/AMD for the same money.
I think they were saying that it is the same thing in that it is "for marketing" rather than something that will move the market and be a big seller (if only because they cannot supply it in true volume).
I think in the end, $3000 is not too bad of a price for this chip - provided your workload can benefit from ECC RDIMM support as this is a Xeon not an i9. Basically, workstation workloads needing more than ~128GB of RAM and a ton of cores. $3000 is still a lot cheaper than going with a similar multi-socket Xeon / EPYC setup. It's a lot higher clocked than the fastest single-socket EPYC 7551P, which isn't too cheap either at $2100. The only other option with a similar number of cores is Threadripper, and the astronomical price per GB (and 16GB per DIMM maximum) of ECC UDIMMs narrows the price difference quite a bit.
Now if anyone buys this for gaming... someone at Intel will be laughing all the way to the bank.
That was my original thought when I heard about this chip, but they're not making very many of them, and it doesn't sound like any of the big workstation manufacturers like Dell or HP will be offering systems with this chip in it.
Instead I see cases and components with RGB lighting, gold and crystal colored memory kits, etc. Not exactly what you'd expect a workstation customer to be looking for. So it's hard to say who will actually end up buying this.
But it's shit. It chows down on power like absolute crazy, and requires a board that costs more than most systems. It's not even all that amazing in terms of performance. Once Zen2 Threadripper hits, this thing will look like a paperweight...
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
19 Comments
Back to Article
versesuvius - Saturday, February 2, 2019 - link
Enter the era of bimbo chips.Chaitanya - Saturday, February 2, 2019 - link
Sadly that's what Intel has been doing for last year or so. Since Thread Ripper came to market, it been quite clear how big of a middle finger Intel had been showing to its HEDT users.BigMamaInHouse - Saturday, February 2, 2019 - link
Waiting to see how this cpu performes in CINEBENCH R15 EXTREME! - Unofficial MOD for the community to Stress HEDT platforms.https://forums.guru3d.com/threads/cinebench-r15-ex...
Ian Cutress - Saturday, February 2, 2019 - link
AnandTech already has you covered. Check our benchmark database:https://www.anandtech.com/bench/CPU-2019/2252
BigMamaInHouse - Saturday, February 2, 2019 - link
Yes I know, but I was referring to modded CB R15 that renders x4 the resolution, and now 2700X takes over 3x the time to finish render. It's going to be great for 2990WX/ Xeon W-3175X and the new ThreadRipper with up-to 64 codes ;-)Original R15 iss to easy for this monster CPU'S.
FreckledTrout - Monday, February 4, 2019 - link
Doesn't it simply scale to slower for the extreme test? Meaning if a CPU is 10% slower than another CPU in the Cinebench its 10% slower in the extreme version as well? Guess i'm not seeing the point.BigMamaInHouse - Wednesday, February 6, 2019 - link
On realy powerfull systems the score can jump +- 20%See this for example:Quad Xeon Platinum 8180
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3raiXeUvXWg
We all know that this year we gonna see 64C/128T cous so it's gonna be better test for them vs normal R15, also if you check notebook review you see they need to do multiple CB R15 runs to show the actual performance based on the cooling performance, so with this mode with single run you gonna see the actual performance if the cooling cannot handle the CPU.
yannigr2 - Saturday, February 2, 2019 - link
Intel is selling this chip as a marketing chip and nothing more. Of course for some people this doesn't matter. What it matters for them is that they need it and they have the money to buy it and use it.What it matters to me, is to see which sites will throw this processor on the top of their CPU charts when publishing reviews. Which sites will play Intel's marketing game.
Sahrin - Saturday, February 2, 2019 - link
The 9900K is the same thing. A $550 desktop processor? For what? That's maybe 10% faster than a chip half its price?Intel wants to have its cake (volume) and eat it, too (margins).
And tech review sites play right into their hand by awarding EC's and smacking this worthless 'and the sink, too' chips at them.
Sttm - Saturday, February 2, 2019 - link
Its the fastest processor for gaming on the market, and with how much GPUs have gone up its hard to argue with spending the extra couple hundred after you dropped $1200 on the 2080ti. Might as well have the best.TheinsanegamerN - Saturday, February 2, 2019 - link
It's an easy argument. 99% of users will not see a difference between the 9900K and 8700k, and the 8700k has the advantage of not needing a freezer for cooling.Why spend double the price for 1% better performance? If you need more FPS, OC the 8700K and the CPU will never be a bottleneck again,
FreckledTrout - Monday, February 4, 2019 - link
Halo PC products always get the glory, always have. Its why Nvidia has outsold ATI/AMD over the years because they always had the halo product that was very low volume. People would buy lessor Nvidia cards at the mid to low end because Nvidia has the "best" even when those were lessor products than ATI/AMD for the same money.Qasar - Sunday, February 3, 2019 - link
how is the 9900k the same thing ??? 9900k is only 8 cores.. not 28...GreenReaper - Sunday, February 3, 2019 - link
I think they were saying that it is the same thing in that it is "for marketing" rather than something that will move the market and be a big seller (if only because they cannot supply it in true volume).madmilk - Saturday, February 2, 2019 - link
I think in the end, $3000 is not too bad of a price for this chip - provided your workload can benefit from ECC RDIMM support as this is a Xeon not an i9. Basically, workstation workloads needing more than ~128GB of RAM and a ton of cores. $3000 is still a lot cheaper than going with a similar multi-socket Xeon / EPYC setup. It's a lot higher clocked than the fastest single-socket EPYC 7551P, which isn't too cheap either at $2100. The only other option with a similar number of cores is Threadripper, and the astronomical price per GB (and 16GB per DIMM maximum) of ECC UDIMMs narrows the price difference quite a bit.Now if anyone buys this for gaming... someone at Intel will be laughing all the way to the bank.
twtech - Monday, February 4, 2019 - link
That was my original thought when I heard about this chip, but they're not making very many of them, and it doesn't sound like any of the big workstation manufacturers like Dell or HP will be offering systems with this chip in it.Instead I see cases and components with RGB lighting, gold and crystal colored memory kits, etc. Not exactly what you'd expect a workstation customer to be looking for. So it's hard to say who will actually end up buying this.
Hxx - Sunday, February 3, 2019 - link
In for 10. can it run crysis?bctm - Sunday, February 3, 2019 - link
Looking at the photo, the JPY459,000 price at tsukumo is tax-excluded (税別) so that's actually USD 4,188, tax excluded...piroroadkill - Monday, February 4, 2019 - link
But it's shit. It chows down on power like absolute crazy, and requires a board that costs more than most systems. It's not even all that amazing in terms of performance. Once Zen2 Threadripper hits, this thing will look like a paperweight...