Speculation: AMD's response to Intel's 8-core i9-9900K

[coercitiv]

Have you actually looked at the power draw of the 2700X under full load? It can exceed 140W. Check the stilts testing, or gamers nexus. The 8700K under the same test draws 95W, so there is definitely TDP headroom there to add a further 2 cores.

Both AMD and Intel gave MB manufacturers control over power limits: we are no longer reviewing CPUs, we are reviewing motherboards + CPUs. Based on power delivery specs of their boards they loosen power limits or completely remove them. The 8700(K) will easily use 90W+ in CB15 and 130W+ in Prime 95, and that's with proper voltage settings, which not all mobo makers abide - since they want to enable those one click overclocks.

The same happens on top tier AMD boards lately - like this example shows: with very intensive loads the same CPU runs 200Mhz higher on an Asus board than it does on a MSI board, both configured for stock settings. It is no longer a CPU power usage test, it's a motherboard spec test.

 

[William Gaatjes]

Both AMD and Intel gave MB manufacturers control over power limits: we are no longer reviewing CPUs, we are reviewing motherboards + CPUs. Based on power delivery specs of their boards they loosen power limits or completely remove them. The 8700(K) will easily use 90W+ in CB15 and 130W+ in Prime 95, and that's with proper voltage settings, which not all mobo makers abide - since they want to enable those one click overclocks.

The same happens on top tier AMD boards lately - like this example shows: with very intensive loads the same CPU runs 200Mhz higher on an Asus board than it does on a MSI board, both configured for stock settings. It is no longer a CPU power usage test, it's a motherboard spec test.

Yep, i personally also worry for people who have not done enough research or got bad advice and buy a 2600X or even a 2700 or worse yet, a 2700x and have a not too expensive B350 board.
I wonder if a 2700 or 2700x can actually boost up without hitting max PPT, TDC or EDC in default settings on lower cost B350 boards. And what is worse is when people start overclocking.
What will happen is that either the protection kicks in and there will not be much overclocking at all. Or the vrm burns out without proper cooling.
If i am not mistaken, all the protection is turned off when overclocking is enabled.

• Package Power Tracking (“PPT”): The PPT% indicates the distance to maximum power that can be delivered to the socket by the motherboard across various voltage rails. 100% indicates maximum capacity.
• Thermal Design Current (“TDC”): The TDC% indicates the distance to maximum current that can be delivered by the motherboard voltage regulators when they have been heated to a steady state through sustained operation. 100% indicates maximum capacity.
• Electrical Design Current (“EDC”): The EDC% indicates distance to maximum current that can be delivered by the motherboard voltage regulators in a peak/transient condition. 100% indicates maximum capacity.
• Fastest Core Detection: The stars represent the fastest core(s) within each CCX, while the gold star indicates the fastest silicon in the entire device. The circles represent the second fastest cores within the CCXes. This can be extremely useful for breaking single-core clock speed records.
• Per CCX Overclocking

 

[PeterScott]

This is very cheap. I always have a critical view and if a manufacturer does something i do not like... Well, i will always write about it.No matter if it is AMD, Intel or Nvidia.
I guess you looked at my signature and made assumptions based on that.
Before i buy any kind of hardware, i do some research into what i am going to do with it and how much i am willing to spend on it.
for my A10-6700 system, i just needed a few years ago a pc to do moderate taks. And it sufficed greatly.
For my new R5 -2600 system, i have more in mind. And so far, i am not regretting buying it.
The system i game with, does everything i want at HD resolution 1080p and with all graphic settings maximized.
It does so easily. And when i need to run non gaming software it also does easily.

It is obvious that you have this Intel /AMD bias. I do not. I never mentioned that AMD is superior in every which way or Intel is not, that is your distorted view of reality.
If people want to make a game pc, and are willing to spend and ask me for advice, i always say buy the 8700K and even delidded if possible, because it is the best for gaming you can get.
And for some other tasks as well. Although i now mention the 8086K as well.
If they ask me , i want the fastest graphic card in general, i always promote the 1080TI from Nvidia.
But as i always say, it comes at a price.

AMD can provide a very good system that costs less and in 90% of the general use cases you will not know the difference between having an AMD or Intel.
The whole point i was making in my post was not that Intel should not have an 8 core cpu at all. It is just that they have so many cpu to be sold.
And i fear there will be another stream of reviews where people say Intel is competing with Intel. While AMD is competing with Intel as well.
Alas, you can think what you like.

So in response to me noticing your AMD bias, your write a long winded post about how great AMD is and why you chose them for CPUs?

As I said, your previous pessimistic posts about the 8 core CFL were borderline incomprehensible because I could find no actual reason for the pessimism in what appears to be a very good and highly anticipated product.

They were just heavy with unjustified doom and gloom for the 8 core CFL, and only later did you reveal (and reconfirm here) your strong AMD preference so the pieces finally fall into place.

If you want to back your 8C CFL pessimism with some reality fine, but so far you done nothing but reveal, and now reinforce your strong AMD bias, as the basis for that pessimism.

 

[William Gaatjes]

So in response to me noticing your AMD bias, your write a long winded post about how great AMD is and why you chose them for CPUs?

As I said, your previous pessimistic posts about the 8 core CFL were borderline incomprehensible because I could find no actual reason for the pessimism in what appears to be a very good and highly anticipated product.

They were just heavy with unjustified doom and gloom for the 8 core CFL, and only later did you reveal (and reconfirm here) your strong AMD preference so the pieces finally fall into place.

If you want to back your pessimism with some reality fine, but so far you done nothing but reveal, and now reinforce your strong AMD bias, as the basis for that pessimism.

As most people here, you only read what you want to.
I am just going to stop now since i prefer technical discussions and not bickering about who is better and the king that we must worship. Feel free to have the last word.

 

[PeterScott]

As most people here, you only read what you want to.
I am just going to stop now since i prefer technical discussions and not bickering about who is better and the king that we must worship. Feel free to have the last word.

I can only read what you write, and after several unjustified pessimistic posts about 8C CFL, you finaly finish with:

"I will not continue derailing. I will happily await what will happen with the 7nm ryzens."

That fills in the blanks nicely. I wonder, was your previous thread derailment turning the thread into AMD is a better option than Intel debate?

I understand that some people can't see their own bias, but this is black and white to an outside observer.

If I was in a thread slagging the new Ford Mustang with vague statements, and then finished by saying I was happily waiting for the new Chevy Camaro, would people think I was a Camaro fan? Most likely, and they would probably be right.

 

[coercitiv]

Yep, i personally also worry for people who have not done enough research or got bad advice and buy a 2600X or even a 2700 or worse yet, a 2700x and have a not too expensive B350 board.

No need to worry: motherboard makers set proper power / current limits when their VRM stage is limited. There are all kinds of safeguards in place, as long as engineers do their job neither max current or max operating temps will be a problem.

Be it Intel or AMD budget mainstream board, power limits will start to get properly enforced once you go down in price and/or in form factor. Performance will follow.

 

[William Gaatjes]

No need to worry: motherboard makers set proper power / current limits when their VRM stage is limited. There are all kinds of safeguards in place, as long as engineers do their job neither max current or max operating temps will be a problem.

Be it Intel or AMD budget mainstream board, power limits will start to get properly enforced once you go down in price and/or in form factor. Performance will follow.

Oke, that is good to know but can it happen that these limits prevent for example a 2600X or 2700X to reach and maintain max boost clocks in normal situations, meaning no overclocking by the user ? I am thinking of a scenario where people buy an 2700x and a low cost B350 board and end up being dissapointed because the board reaches the limits and cannot provide enough power for such a cpu. Maybe peak for a short time but not sustained as long as there is enough thermal headroom.

 

[coercitiv]

Oke, that is good to know but can it happen that these limits prevent for example a 2600X or 2700X to reach and maintain max boost clocks in normal situations, meaning no overclocking by the user ?
I am thinking of a scenario where people buy an 2700x and a low cost B350 board and end up being dissapointed because the board reaches the limits and cannot provide enough power for such a cpu.

We're talking about premium motherboards being specced way past stock power requirements, not about budget ones being specced way under. You may find some extra cheap models that can barely power an 8700K / 2700X, but I'm fairly certain that all decent boards from any camp can handle top mainstream CPUs at stock TDP.

In fact, in the case of AMD, most B350 boards will also offer decent overclock capabilities.

 

[William Gaatjes]

We're talking about premium motherboards being specced way past stock power requirements, not about budget ones being specced way under. You may find some extra cheap models that can barely power an 8700K / 2700X, but I'm fairly certain that all decent boards from any camp can handle top mainstream CPUs at stock TDP.

In fact, in the case of AMD, most B350 boards will also offer decent overclock capabilities.

Well, that is the thing, stock tdp. But when boosting, the power consumption goes up above tdp.
If the board cannot provide enough power, the cpu boosting will not happen and people claim the cpu is slower while it is not the cpu that is at fault. But that is also shown in the example you gave from buildzoid.

 

[Vattila]

Well, that is the thing, stock tdp.

Back on topic, please.

 

[PeterScott]

Well, that is the thing, stock tdp. But when boosting, the power consumption goes up above tdp.
If the board cannot provide enough power, the cpu boosting will not happen and people claim the cpu is slower while it is not the cpu that is at fault. But that is also shown in the example you gave from buildzoid.

You keep harping on a non issue. No one is going to buy a 9900K and stick it on a cheap, low end MB.

The quality 370 boards can easily deliver double TDP, or more. Power deliver is a NON issue.

They use these boards to set LN2 records:

https://rog.asus.com/articles/maxim...records-with-the-maximus-x-apex-and-i7-8700k/

"CPU power delivery needs to be robust enough to run benchmarks at high clock speeds. When overclocked to 6.5GHz, a 6-core Coffee-Lake CPU can draw in excess of 600 watts under full load, and the Apex’s 8-phase power solution is more than up to the task. "

Not every board will reach this level, but I expect all the decent Z370 boards can easily supply 300+ watts, which will be more than enough to overclock 9900K on any above ambient cooling solution.

 

[krumme]

You keep harping on a non issue.

Not every board will reach this level, but I expect all the decent Z370 boards can easily supply 300+ watts, which will be more than enough to overclock 9900K on any above ambient cooling solution.

300 watts for 8c on some 14nm+++ process? Sounds like stoneage to me perhaps 5 months away from a 7nm product. Niche niche niche market.
Marketing will just demo a 48/64 core zen2 at 160w tdp running some blender stuff.
Not overclocked.
The 8c 14nm stuff is just to late this autum. If it arived in august perhaps a bit interesting but hey those who needs gaming perf already have the 8700k and some 8c variant will make no difference unless dice forks out a new more threaded engine for the next bf series. Still then 5 months to a 60w tdp cpu that does the same as a 14nm old arch at surely far lower cost.

I like the idea of a 35w tdp 8c mobile cpu that just crush every game to bits better that this old desktop stuff. Had a 4c8t sb 45w tdp back in the days. We need some new stuff here that makes a difference.

 

[whm1974]

So how expensive will the i9-9900K be, north of $500?

 

[french toast]

This coffeelake s looks like a really good product, but it should have arrived 12-18months earlier, looks like a rushed chip to me.

 

[PeterScott]

So how expensive will the i9-9900K be, north of $500?

I do expect it be very close to $500 initially. So definitely no threat to AMD on price/performance.

It's more for the guys looking for the top performing option on the platform even if it is expensive. I don't think they will have any trouble finding a lot of buyers.

 

[whm1974]

I do expect it be very close to $500 initially. So definitely no threat to AMD on price/performance.

It's more for the guys looking for the top performing option on the platform even if it is expensive. I don't think they will have any trouble finding a lot of buyers.

Yeah I didn't think that this would a threat at all to AMD on their price/performance lead they have over Intel.

And how people, even hard core ones would even spend $500 or more on just the CPU? Not very many.

 

[StinkyPinky]

I'd be tempted to swap out my 8700k with it, assuming it works on the Z370 and overclocks close to what the 8700k can.

 

[epsilon84]

Well, that is the thing, stock tdp. But when boosting, the power consumption goes up above tdp.
If the board cannot provide enough power, the cpu boosting will not happen and people claim the cpu is slower while it is not the cpu that is at fault. But that is also shown in the example you gave from buildzoid.

Unless you have a ultra budget $50 motherboard, chances are that is not an issue. I've seen cheap H310 motherboards not being able to sustain boost speeds on a 8700K, but that was due to a lack of VRM cooling.

I run a low end Z370 motherboard and it has no problems powering my 8700K at 5.0GHz, let alone at stock speeds. I think your fears are completely unjustified in this regard. I'm certain practically any B350 motherboard with adequate VRM cooling will be able to run a Ryzen 2700X (or 2800X) at full boost clocks. Whether they can overclock as well as say, a higher end X470 mobo, is a different story, but that is not what we are discussing.

 

[ozzy702]

I'd be tempted to swap out my 8700k with it, assuming it works on the Z370 and overclocks close to what the 8700k can.

That's exactly what I'll be doing if it will work on Z370.

 

[whm1974]

That's exactly what I'll be doing if it will work on Z370.

I highly doubt that you will get a large enough increase in ST and MT performance to be worthwhile to bother with doing, especially at ~$500.

But hey it is your money so do what you want.

 

[krumme]

That's exactly what I'll be doing if it will work on Z370.

Why?
What specific hands down is the useprofile to do such a change?

 

[ozzy702]

I highly doubt that you will get a large enough increase in ST and MT performance to be worthwhile to bother with doing, especially at ~$500.

But hey it is your money so do what you want.

Two more cores, likely the same clocks I currently run and I can sell my 8700k. It's an easy upgrade that for a system that I'll probably use for five years so it makes sense. Also, I don't live in my parent's basement so a few hundred bucks to have the best stuff available isn't a big deal to me. $50 a year isn't a big deal to me, that's a few meals.

 

[PeterScott]

Yeah I didn't think that this would a threat at all to AMD on their price/performance lead they have over Intel.

And how people, even hard core ones would even spend $500 or more on just the CPU? Not very many.

I think you underestimate the amount of enthusiasts that simply want and will pay for the best option. How many were paying over $400 for a 8700K when it launched?

It's not like the alternatives are $500 or $0. Intel marketing will also make it a bunch of incremental steps to the top product, in such a way that people will look at as whats another $50-$100 to have the best...

 

[epsilon84]

Two more cores, likely the same clocks I currently run and I can sell my 8700k. It's an easy upgrade that for a system that I'll probably use for five years so it makes sense. Also, I don't live in my parent's basement so a few hundred bucks to have the best stuff available isn't a big deal to me. $50 a year isn't a big deal to me, that's a few meals.

To be honest, I'm thinking along those lines as well, even though the frugal (sensible?) part of me is telling me I have absolutely no need for an upgrade from a 8700K, being mainly a gamer. But like you said, we can easily sell the 8700K for ~$300 on the 2nd hand market and all of a sudden we are looking at a $200 upgrade to have the 'latest and greatest'. It's a nice option to have, but I'm perfectly happy with my 8700K at the moment and will probably stick it out until next gen parts arrive.

 

[whm1974]

To be honest, I'm thinking along those lines as well, even though the frugal (sensible?) part of me is telling me I have absolutely no need for an upgrade from a 8700K, being mainly a gamer. But like you said, we can easily sell the 8700K for ~$300 on the 2nd hand market and all of a sudden we are looking at a $200 upgrade to have the 'latest and greatest'. It's a nice option to have, but I'm perfectly happy with my 8700K at the moment and will probably stick it out until next gen parts arrive.

Well in my case when I build a new rig, I go for at least close to or over 100%increase in overall system performance compared to what I'm replacing. Otherwise I'll see it as an pointless waste of money.