add arrow-down arrow-left arrow-right arrow-up authorcheckmark clipboard combo comment delete discord dots drag-handle dropdown-arrow errorfacebook history inbox instagram issuelink lock markup-bbcode markup-html markup-pcpp markup-cyclingbuilder markup-plain-text markup-reddit menu pin radio-button save search settings share star-empty star-full star-half switch successtag twitch twitter user warningwattage weight youtube

Why did Intel make the i9-9980XE?

RayvenOne1

4 months ago

I don't really understand why they made it at all. Anyone know?

Comments

  • 4 months ago
  • 4 points

Presumably HFT (high frequency trading): the slightest edge in seeing a trade pop up will quickly cover the cost of the chip (or more likely, the other guys already have them, you need to buy one to avoid losing every tick).

In their hay day, RISC workstations ran ~$50-$100k (1990s dollars), presumably many of the same jobs will be done with these (obviously excluding anything that can be done with a threadripper and remotely price conscious).

There really are builds out there where money is no object (or at least willing to pay even more for that last bit of performance than even Intel will charge). For everyone else there's AMD.

  • 4 months ago
  • 1 point

Aah. I see now. t h a n k

  • 4 months ago
  • 3 points

The 9980XE like the rest of the family and prior 7980XE etc are part of the Skylake (server) microarchitecture. So the CPU's are not just limited to these HEDT chips. They are also the same chips as the Xeon's family. Therefore as these Xeon chips are being produced anyways, make sense to re purpose the CPU and put it into the market to provide a competitor to TR. not much of a cost as the chips were going to exist anyways.

Plenty of people will similarly as others mentioned pick up the CPU for fun / hobby / benching etc in addition to having more practical uses, even if its not fairly significant.

  • 4 months ago
  • 1 point

very knowledgable. thank you!

  • 4 months ago
  • 2 points

I don't really understand why they made it at all. Anyone know?

Perhaps they were thinking it would be a good idea to sell fast 18 core CPU's to willing customers who need/want them?

  • 4 months ago
  • 1 point

Yes, that makes sense. Thank you!

  • 4 months ago
  • 1 point

I am guessing AMD have been squeezing their HEDT market. With the Threadripper destroying Intel in every benchmark going while being half the price, Intel's response has been "some action is better than none". A lot of weird releases and weird chips been coming out on their HEDT platform.

A good example of Intel's strange activity is their 8 core lineups. A total of 5 chips. This alone was in response to the Ryzen 7 2700X. Funny thing is the Ryzen 7 2700X obliterates all of these 8 core chips in every benchmark going for every performance indicator (one exception might be the i9-9900K but given all it's issue, most people agree the 2700X is overall the better chip). Quite honestly, I do not know why AMD did not release the 2800X this generation, a 10 or 12 core Zen chip would have essentially killed off Intel.

  • 4 months ago
  • 3 points

This alone was in response to the Ryzen 7 2700X. Funny thing is the Ryzen 7 2700X obliterates all of these 8 core chips in every benchmark going for every performance indicator (one exception might be the i9-9900K but given all it's issue, most people agree the 2700X is overall the better chip).

You really need to recheck those benchmarks the only way the 2700X wins is in price for what You get in almost all of them.

Quite honestly, I do not know why AMD did not release the 2800X this generation, a 10 or 12 core Zen chip would have essentially killed off Intel.

That would have required a new CCX design which isn't part of AMD's game plan for Ryzen.

AMD is developing a single do all design to stretch from data center/server workloads to the lower end consumer CPU.

And a single mobile APU that can be reused as desktop parts.

By cutting down on the number of designs they are able to compete at the same pace with less money.

  • 4 months ago
  • 1 point

You really need to recheck those benchmarks the only way the 2700X wins is in price for what You get in almost all of them.

You are correct, in the hands of an enthusiast overclocker, he/she could push the Intel over the line against Ryzen. Without OC, given vast majority of people run at stock settings, the results are a lot more interesting, 4 of the 5 Intel chips bench lower than Ryzen.

Ryzen 7 2700X > i7-7800X (1396 Pts vs 978 Pts)
Ryzen 7 2700X > i7-9700K (1396 Pts vs 1060 Pts)
Ryzen 7 2700X > i7-7820X (1396 Pts vs 1338 Pts)
Ryzen 7 2700X > i7-9800X (1396 Pts vs 1375 Pts)
Ryzen 7 2700X < i9-9900K (1396 Pts vs 1504 Pts)

I am not sure the 7820X is still available, stock looks dead online, old stock moving for more it seems. The other 4 chips seem to be alive but I do wonder why the 7800X is still being produced, it looks really really weak for an 8 core.

  • 4 months ago
  • 3 points

The other 4 chips seem to be alive but I do wonder why the 7800X is still being produced, it looks really really weak for an 8 core.

Double check the core count on that.

And remember Cinebench actually favors Ryzens SMT over Hyperthreading now so it really isn't an accurate gauge of performance for anything other then Cinebench.

  • 4 months ago
  • 1 point

Urgh, Reddit info, cut and paste. Actually did get off my lazy behind and checked everything out, indeed, you are right, my post is inaccurate. Rechecked all the scores as well, fellow was comparing OC'd Ryzen versus stock Intel. Silly me, it is the Internet, cannot believe or duplicate everything I read. Glad folks like you are around to correct bad info.....

and yes, the 7800X is a six core. Any idea why this HEDT chip is so slow? 8700K is faster...

  • 4 months ago
  • 2 points

Gilroar pointed to an effect which makes an impact. However another and I suspect the main impact really is the large clock speed deficit the 7800x has out the box.

7800x turbo boost (stock Intel) across the board is 4Ghz. The 8700k turbo (stock Intel) is

  • 1 core = 4.7 Ghz
  • 2 core = 4.6 Ghz
  • 3 core = 4.5 Ghz
  • 4 core = 4.5 Ghz
  • 5 core = 4.4 Ghz
  • 6 core = 4.3 Ghz

So a near 8% delta when all cores active and near 18% delta in clock speed with single core active turbo. That will show up quiet a bit!

  • 4 months ago
  • 1 point

and yes, the 7800X is a six core. Any idea why this HEDT chip is so slow? 8700K is faster...

Ring Bus versus Mesh Interconnect.

One is built conventional (8700K)

One is built more like a Ryzen (7800X)

[comment deleted]
  • 4 months ago
  • 1 point

why would you not overclock your chip though?

Probably because stability would be paramount and unless there's an IT department around to fool with it, you aren't going to spend a couple days dialing in a 100% stable overclock when you could be billing at $250/hr or whatever.

The lower core count HEDT chips are likely being bought for the added PCIe lanes and memory channels. Or, because there's already N of them in the data center or departmental computing room and we need 10 more, not going to mix and match.

  • 4 months ago
  • 1 point

Depends how important your output is. If you are charging $250 an hour, I wouldn't expect your clients to be willing to accept data generated by an overclocked machine. Maybe if you developed/debugged software on the overclocked machine and did the shipping compile on a legit system you would be ok, but that's not a field I'm familiar with.

It all comes down to CYA: if you overclocked the system, good luck convincing anyone that your system was still stable and any fault could have been caused by software/hardware/something beyond your control. All other parties will jump on your overclocking the thing and leave you holding the bag.

If it is for personal reasons, go right ahead and eat the risks.

[comment deleted]
  • 4 months ago
  • 1 point

I agree, someone like yourself would know how to OC and would certainly do so were an HEDT chip purchased (with a build planned to avoid hitting thermal walls too early). In reality a good number of folks own overclockable machines that never move past stock settings. Heck my neighbour has an i7-8700K rig with i7 pinged at stock and 3200MHz RAM running at 2133MHz. Of course, like any good neighbour, I fixed that for him ;)

  • 4 months ago
  • 1 point

Very true. My rig will have a Ryzen 7 2700X

  • 4 months ago
  • 1 point

Money.

  • 4 months ago
  • 1 point

gg

Sort

add arrow-down arrow-left arrow-right arrow-up authorcheckmark clipboard combo comment delete discord dots drag-handle dropdown-arrow errorfacebook history inbox instagram issuelink lock markup-bbcode markup-html markup-pcpp markup-cyclingbuilder markup-plain-text markup-reddit menu pin radio-button save search settings share star-empty star-full star-half switch successtag twitch twitter user warningwattage weight youtube