Intel unveils Cascade Lake-X: 18 cores for less than $1,000

[midian182]

Something to look forward to: Intel has unveiled details on its Cascade Lake-X line of high-end desktop (HEDT) processors. The biggest takeaway? It appears that the threat from AMD’s upcoming new Threadripper and Ryzen 3950X chips has seen team blue slash its prices, with the flagship chip costing under $1,000.

We’d already seen some of the Cascade Lake-X Core-i9s appear on Geekbench last month, boasting scores that put it ahead of the Core i9-7980XE and Threadripper 2950X.

Now, Intel has revealed information on its upcoming line of HEDT chips, which are more affordable than its previous Skylake-X line—that series' Core i9-9980XE cost $1,979. Prosumers will be pleased to hear that the 18-core/36-thread flagship Core i9-10980XE has had its price cut in half to $979, less than the last-gen Core i9-9900X, which has just ten cores.

Cascade Lake-X is still based on Skylake and the 14nm++ process node, but Turbo Boost Max 3.0 speeds are up to 4.8GHz (4.7GHz for the i9-10900X), and all the CPUs support 256GB of quad-channel memory and come with 48 PCIe 3.0 lanes (72 when including the chipset). Memory speed support is listed as DDR4-2933 for 1 DIMM per channel, and DDR4-2666 for 2 DIMMs per channel.

Each chip is unlocked and comes with a TDP of 165W, which Intel says will help them turbo for longer under the company’s recommended settings. They're also compatible with X299 motherboards.

Other Cascade Lake-X features include support for Wi-Fi 6 AX200 (Gig+), Thunderbolt 3, and Optane 905P SSDs. They also have Intel Deep Learning Boost (DLBoost) AI instructions that can double or triple the performance of FP16 or INT8 AVX-512 vector code. Overclocking, meanwhile, can be carried out using Intel’s “one-button” Performance Maximizer (IPM) tool, which allows both automated and manual overclocks.

With Cascade Lake-X’s aggressive pricing, it appears Intel is aiming to compete with AMD’s upcoming high-end processors. The 16-core Ryzen 9 3950X launches next month at $749, while Threadripper 3 will likely offer massive performance at competitive prices. Plus, AMD's chips are now on 7nm, rather than Cascade Lake-X’s 14nm++.

The Cascade Lake-X line will be available in November.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/82163-intel-unveils-cascade-lake-x-18-cores-less.html

 

[VitalyT]

Competition does its magic

 

[candle_86]

So the they are now playing by AMD's rules, but man 165w is bad, wonder that threadripper 3 will have though I'd bet a 125w part with more cores

 

[Uncle Al]

Yep, competition is King!

 

[Neutronbeam]

Yep, competition is King!

It's good to be the King!

 

[Burty117]

So the they are now playing by AMD's rules, but man 165w is bad, wonder that threadripper 3 will have though I'd bet a 125w part with more cores

Also remember Intel's numbers tend to lie. They are based on base clocks and not boost so tend to use more power than they claim. AMD's numbers are based on boost clocks and tend to use less than they claim!

 

[wiyosaya]

Credits to everyone previously mentioning competition, but perhaps this will start a price war - and I would not be surprised if sIntel is trying to do this. They probably figure that in an outright price war, AMD will lose because they cannot match sIntel's margins?

IDK, but I would not, in the least, put it past sIntel to try something like this. As I see it, sIntel is desperate...

 

[axiomatic13]

Been using an x299 board since late 2017 and it has issues. The weirdest being PCI enumeration differences between UEFI and LEgacy BIOS settings. I just can't see myself going for a third speedbump when the AMD X570 chipset offers so many more features. I guess if you are looking for another speedbump the Intel might be enticing due to its price but I'm personally done with x299 once the ryzen 9 3950x releases.

 

[scavengerspc]

Credits to everyone previously mentioning competition, but perhaps this will start a price war - and I would not be surprised if sIntel is trying to do this. They probably figure that in an outright price war, AMD will lose because they cannot match sIntel's margins?

IDK, but I would not, in the least, put it past sIntel to try something like this. As I see it, sIntel is desperate...

That is an excellent point. And if the price war were to devolve into downright dumping AMD doesn't have nearly enough resources to play along. At least not for any length of time.

 

[quadibloc]

That is an excellent point. And if the price war were to devolve into downright dumping AMD doesn't have nearly enough resources to play along. At least not for any length of time.

True, but Intel also has to avoid getting in trouble for predatory pricing due to its dominant competitive position. So it can price its products competitively, but dumping is dangerous territory.

 

[Dimitrios]

That is an excellent point. And if the price war were to devolve into downright dumping AMD doesn't have nearly enough resources to play along. At least not for any length of time.

True, but Intel also has to avoid getting in trouble for predatory pricing due to its dominant competitive position. So it can price its products competitively, but dumping is dangerous territory.

Also factor in INTEL stock holders.

 

[axiomatic13]

Been using an x299 board since late 2017 and it has issues. The weirdest being PCI enumeration differences between UEFI and LEgacy BIOS settings. I just can't see myself going for a third speedbump when the AMD X570 chipset offers so many more features. I guess if you are looking for another speedbump the Intel might be enticing due to its price but I'm personally done with x299 once the ryzen 9 3950x releases.

To be more clear for those who might have noticed the same thing. I have owned two different x299 boards, an Asrock and an ASUS and they both act the same in this regard. If it is set to legacy GPU0 goes in Slot 1. If it is set to UEFI, GPU0 is Slot 3. Don't even get me started on what that means for the NVME PCIe lanes. Serious weirdness.

 

[wiyosaya]

True, but Intel also has to avoid getting in trouble for predatory pricing due to its dominant competitive position. So it can price its products competitively, but dumping is dangerous territory.

Personally, I think that sIntel has to get away with avoiding getting into trouble. Given their past track record, I would not be surprised to see them try to mask everything they are doing in an effort to avoid the appearance of causing trouble.

The past few years have seen sIntel put out several instances of pure marketing ; unfortunately, for them, they were caught in the act. My bet is that we see more of this coming from sIntel since they were happily resting on their laurels with marginal performance improvements, higher prices for those marginal improvements, and a new chipset required for nearly every generation. They were capable of doing that until AMD gave them a kick. sIntel does not appear to be taking the situation lightly since AMD deflated their cash cow.

As I see it, a flagship E series proc for a retail price of less than $1K has to be a rather tough pill for them to swallow especially since the previous generation E series flagship went for $2K. My bet is that they have internally declared war on AMD and will do anything and everything they can to win.

 

[Irata]

Credits to everyone previously mentioning competition, but perhaps this will start a price war - and I would not be surprised if sIntel is trying to do this. They probably figure that in an outright price war, AMD will lose because they cannot match sIntel's margins?

IDK, but I would not, in the least, put it past sIntel to try something like this. As I see it, sIntel is desperate...

Not sure who of the two could handle a price war better. Intel still has considerable financial means but AMD has a much leaner cost structure and is used to selling cheap.

Also, price dumping would damage Intel's brand and not go over well with their share holders.

Historically, Intel made sure AMD could not sell their CPU. While this worked well the last time they did it, it seems to be somewhat different now.

In any case, it shows that competition is good but also that the previous generation of Intel hdedt CPU were overpriced.

 

[Irata]

That is an excellent point. And if the price war were to devolve into downright dumping AMD doesn't have nearly enough resources to play along. At least not for any length of time.

Intel has to pay for their fabs, their employees, buildings...

Just for comparison: In 2016, Intel had 106,000 employees, AMD 9,600. Those employees sit in buildings that need to be paid, cooled and maintained and that costs money.

 

[wiyosaya]

In any case, it shows that competition is good but also that the previous generation of Intel hdedt CPU were overpriced.

I doubt that many would disagree that sIntel's previous gen flagship hedt cpus were over-priced. I certainly will not.

I have to wonder, though, about the prices of Gen 3 Threadripper CPUs. The last time AMD had the lead, way back before Core-2, AMD's flagship CPUs were much more expensive than sIntel's cpus were. Given gen 2 Threadrippers were $2K, it will be interesting to see the prices on gen 3.

 

[Tom01]

So the they are now playing by AMD's rules, but man 165w is bad, wonder that threadripper 3 will have though I'd bet a 125w part with more cores

TDP is irrelevant. The base clock is pretty much never used. The real Power-Consumption is much higher. Intel and AMD TDP cannot be compared anyway, because they are defined differently.

 

[candle_86]

TDP is irrelevant. The base clock is pretty much never used. The real Power-Consumption is much higher. Intel and AMD TDP cannot be compared anyway, because they are defined differently.

I disagree tdp is quite relevant to some. I myself care because I live in Texas and frankly don't want a heater in the summer. Power may not matter but the waste heat does.

 

[jpuroila]

Credits to everyone previously mentioning competition, but perhaps this will start a price war - and I would not be surprised if sIntel is trying to do this. They probably figure that in an outright price war, AMD will lose because they cannot match sIntel's margins?

IDK, but I would not, in the least, put it past sIntel to try something like this. As I see it, sIntel is desperate...

Thanks to the chiplet design, AMD can manufacture their high-end CPUs for much cheaper than Intel can(which is why you can get a 64-core Epyc for less than a 28-core Xeon). And for mid-range CPUs, Intel is using huge amounts of die-space on iGPUs. If it comes to outright price war, I don't think Intel will be able to compete in price/performance without selling at loss, except in laptop and low-end parts.

 

[Daniele 00]

Im glad Amd bring competition to cpu market

 

[Markoni35]

I wish someone like AMD would exist in pharmaceutical business. Because price inflation and scam in that industry is huuuuge. Those b'stards really need price wars.