[AnandTech] Intel Begins Commercial Shipments of 10nm Ice Lake CPUs to OEMs - Page 3 - Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community

Forum Jump: 

[AnandTech] Intel Begins Commercial Shipments of 10nm Ice Lake CPUs to OEMs

Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #21 of 45 (permalink) Old 08-05-2019, 05:06 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
Hwgeek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 570
Rep: 14 (Unique: 12)
not trolling, Zen2 succes was depended on TSMC 7nm, imagine if they had problems like intel's 10nm. then AMD could not lauch in time or the zen2 chiplets would look same as Ze1 if they were clocks under 4Ghz boost, this bets were made 4~5 years ago.

Also if there was 10900KF with sunny cove arch on 14nm+++ that can boost ~5.0Ghz with it's 18% IPC + AVX512 support then none of use would looked at 3700X/3800X.
Hwgeek is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #22 of 45 (permalink) Old 08-05-2019, 06:27 AM
Not a linux lobbyist
 
rluker5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,676
Rep: 43 (Unique: 34)
Quote: Originally Posted by Hwgeek View Post
not trolling, Zen2 succes was depended on TSMC 7nm, imagine if they had problems like intel's 10nm. then AMD could not lauch in time or the zen2 chiplets would look same as Ze1 if they were clocks under 4Ghz boost, this bets were made 4~5 years ago.

Also if there was 10900KF with sunny cove arch on 14nm+++ that can boost ~5.0Ghz with it's 18% IPC + AVX512 support then none of use would looked at 3700X/3800X.
That's not trolling. But there is no way they could reasonably cool such a hypothetical 10900KF. More instructions per second means more heat, just like more load means more heat.
You can test this yourself at home Just take your current cpu oc, stress it in a repeatable fashion, check your temps and/or power use, change your cpu speed lower while keeping the same volts, repeat the stress, check temps/ power again.
Intel has to get their chips to run cooler before they can make a 5Ghz sunny cove.

L5
(17 items)
Lea2
(11 items)
L7
(11 items)
CPU
5775c
Motherboard
Maximus VII Hero
GPU
Aorus 1080ti Waterforce
RAM
16 Gb Gskill Trident @ 2400,cas10,1.575v
RAM
8 Gb Gskill Trident @ 2400,cas10,1.575v
Hard Drive
1Tb Team ssd
Hard Drive
seagate barracuda 3T
Hard Drive
Optane 900p 480G OS
Optical Drive
Asus BW-16D1HT
Power Supply
EVGA Supernova 1300 G2
Cooling
Cooler Master MasterLiquid Pro 120 (cpu)
Cooling
2 140mm case fans, 2 120mm
Case
Fractal Design R4 (no window)
Operating System
W10 64 pro
Monitor
panasonic TC-58AX800U
Audio
Focal Elear, Nova 40, 598se, HE4xx, DT990pro w b.boost earpads
Audio
SoundbasterX AE-5, onboard
CPU
4770k
Motherboard
Asus Z87 Deluxe
GPU
Fury Nitro
RAM
8Gb klevv urbane 2133
Hard Drive
ROG Raidr 240Gb pcie
Hard Drive
1Tb WD blue
Power Supply
Pc Power&Cooling silencer Mk2 950w
Cooling
Deepcool Lucifer V2
Case
DIYPC P48-W
Operating System
W10 64 pro
Monitor
40"tv
CPU
4980hq
Motherboard
Asus H81T/CSM
RAM
8Gb 1600 samsung
Hard Drive
Samsung 850 evo 120gb
Power Supply
Skyvast 90w brick for hp pavilion something
Cooling
SilverStone Tek Super Slim
Case
SilverStone Tek PT13B
Operating System
W10 64 pro
Monitor
24" samsung 1080p
Keyboard
Logitech K400+
Other
Intel wifi ac card and noname antennas
▲ hide details ▲
rluker5 is offline  
post #23 of 45 (permalink) Old 08-05-2019, 08:14 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
Liranan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Soviet China... Oh wait..
Posts: 8,602
Rep: 607 (Unique: 292)
Quote: Originally Posted by Hwgeek View Post
not trolling, Zen2 succes was depended on TSMC 7nm, imagine if they had problems like intel's 10nm. then AMD could not lauch in time or the zen2 chiplets would look same as Ze1 if they were clocks under 4Ghz boost, this bets were made 4~5 years ago.

Also if there was 10900KF with sunny cove arch on 14nm+++ that can boost ~5.0Ghz with it's 18% IPC + AVX512 support then none of use would looked at 3700X/3800X.
If an asteroid hits the earth and kills us all we won't have to care about whether Intel could have been better if someone else hadn't been.

If is an entirely nonsensical proposition to start with. If Netburst had scaled to the 10GHz Intel were aiming at AMD would never have annihilated them, causing Intel to resort to crimes to still beat AMD. And if the BD uArch had scaled to 10GHz, as AMD were hoping, we wouldn't be having this discussion either.

Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by faraz1729 go_quote.gif
Haha, Liranan, you creep.

Tacitus - The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws

Only when the last tree has died and the last river been poisoned and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money. - Cree Indian Proverb
Liranan is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #24 of 45 (permalink) Old 08-05-2019, 08:19 AM - Thread Starter
sudo apt install sl
 
WannaBeOCer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 5,154
Rep: 168 (Unique: 120)
Quote: Originally Posted by Hwgeek View Post
not trolling, Zen2 succes was depended on TSMC 7nm, imagine if they had problems like intel's 10nm. then AMD could not lauch in time or the zen2 chiplets would look same as Ze1 if they were clocks under 4Ghz boost, this bets were made 4~5 years ago.

Also if there was 10900KF with sunny cove arch on 14nm+++ that can boost ~5.0Ghz with it's 18% IPC + AVX512 support then none of use would looked at 3700X/3800X.
AMD's 15% IPC increase over Zen+ and Intel's 18% IPC over SkyLake were mostly due to the node shrink. If it wasn't they'd both be pulling a nVidia and use the cheaper node to produce their chips.

Quote: Originally Posted by rluker5 View Post
That's not trolling. But there is no way they could reasonably cool such a hypothetical 10900KF. More instructions per second means more heat, just like more load means more heat.
You can test this yourself at home Just take your current cpu oc, stress it in a repeatable fashion, check your temps and/or power use, change your cpu speed lower while keeping the same volts, repeat the stress, check temps/ power again.
Intel has to get their chips to run cooler before they can make a 5Ghz sunny cove.
An increase in IPC doesn't mean more heat.

6700k @ 4.2Ghz running OCCT uses 110w
7700k @ 4.5Ghz running OCCT uses 90w
9900k @ 4.5Ghz w/ 1.025v running Blender uses 113w

Silent
(20 items)
CPU
Core i9 9900K... CoffeeTime! @ 4.2Ghz w/ 1v
Motherboard
Maximus VIII Formula
GPU
Radeon VII @ 1900Mhz/1250Mhz w/ 1v
RAM
TeamGroup Xtreem 16GB 3866Mhz CL15
Hard Drive
Samsung 850 Evo 1TB
Hard Drive
Samsung 850 Evo 1TB
Hard Drive
Samsung 850 Evo 500GB
Power Supply
EVGA SuperNova 1200w P2
Cooling
EK Supremacy Full Copper Clean
Cooling
XSPC D5 Photon v2
Cooling
Black Ice Gen 2 GTX360 x2
Cooling
EK-Vector Radeon VII - Copper + Plexi
Case
Thermaltake Core X5 Tempered Glass Edition
Operating System
Clear Linux
Monitor
Acer XF270HUA
Keyboard
Cherry MX Board 6.0
Mouse
Logitech G600
Mouse
Alugraphics GamerArt
Audio
Definitive Technology Incline
Audio
SMSL M8A
▲ hide details ▲

Last edited by WannaBeOCer; 08-05-2019 at 08:29 AM.
WannaBeOCer is online now  
post #25 of 45 (permalink) Old 08-05-2019, 04:15 PM
Not a linux lobbyist
 
rluker5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,676
Rep: 43 (Unique: 34)
Quote: Originally Posted by WannaBeOCer View Post
AMD's 15% IPC increase over Zen+ and Intel's 18% IPC over SkyLake were mostly due to the node shrink. If it wasn't they'd both be pulling a nVidia and use the cheaper node to produce their chips.



An increase in IPC doesn't mean more heat.

6700k @ 4.2Ghz running OCCT uses 110w
7700k @ 4.5Ghz running OCCT uses 90w
9900k @ 4.5Ghz w/ 1.025v running Blender uses 113w
Here's an example of that trick I told Hwgeek: I ran my living room itx at 4.2ghz with xtu internal benchmark then cpuz benchmark, but it wasn't long enough so I stressed it for a while to get stable values. I then reduced the core clock to 3.3ghz and adjusted the volts to be the same and ran the xtu bench, then cpuz stress test. The xtu bench is all jumpy so I'll use the cpuz stress test numbers as an example.

Core tdp during 4.2Ghz stress was 85w, during 3.3Ghz was 68w. (85/68)*3.3=4.125 so apparently the chip is more efficient at 4.2ghz at the same volts, but not by much. The power scaling with instructions per second is near linear with the same cpu, software.

How does a higher ipc, with all else equal, resulting in higher ips consume power differently than higher clocks, with all else equal, resulting in higher ips? I've seen with my various atom mini pcs(z8300,z8500,n4100) that their performance scales close to linear with power. This 5775c test seems to agree. Maybe I'm missing something. It's easy to replicate with all sorts of software and hardware though. Makes the problem of making cpus go faster a little tougher if every instruction carries heat with it.

Intel has been getting more efficient over the years and AMD really has with Zen. And once they get the bugs ironed out 10nm should be able to efficiency away the extra heat from extra ips.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Screenshot (1).png
Views:	9
Size:	894.5 KB
ID:	286466  

Click image for larger version

Name:	Screenshot (2).png
Views:	6
Size:	897.7 KB
ID:	286468  


L5
(17 items)
Lea2
(11 items)
L7
(11 items)
CPU
5775c
Motherboard
Maximus VII Hero
GPU
Aorus 1080ti Waterforce
RAM
16 Gb Gskill Trident @ 2400,cas10,1.575v
RAM
8 Gb Gskill Trident @ 2400,cas10,1.575v
Hard Drive
1Tb Team ssd
Hard Drive
seagate barracuda 3T
Hard Drive
Optane 900p 480G OS
Optical Drive
Asus BW-16D1HT
Power Supply
EVGA Supernova 1300 G2
Cooling
Cooler Master MasterLiquid Pro 120 (cpu)
Cooling
2 140mm case fans, 2 120mm
Case
Fractal Design R4 (no window)
Operating System
W10 64 pro
Monitor
panasonic TC-58AX800U
Audio
Focal Elear, Nova 40, 598se, HE4xx, DT990pro w b.boost earpads
Audio
SoundbasterX AE-5, onboard
CPU
4770k
Motherboard
Asus Z87 Deluxe
GPU
Fury Nitro
RAM
8Gb klevv urbane 2133
Hard Drive
ROG Raidr 240Gb pcie
Hard Drive
1Tb WD blue
Power Supply
Pc Power&Cooling silencer Mk2 950w
Cooling
Deepcool Lucifer V2
Case
DIYPC P48-W
Operating System
W10 64 pro
Monitor
40"tv
CPU
4980hq
Motherboard
Asus H81T/CSM
RAM
8Gb 1600 samsung
Hard Drive
Samsung 850 evo 120gb
Power Supply
Skyvast 90w brick for hp pavilion something
Cooling
SilverStone Tek Super Slim
Case
SilverStone Tek PT13B
Operating System
W10 64 pro
Monitor
24" samsung 1080p
Keyboard
Logitech K400+
Other
Intel wifi ac card and noname antennas
▲ hide details ▲
rluker5 is offline  
post #26 of 45 (permalink) Old 08-05-2019, 04:26 PM - Thread Starter
sudo apt install sl
 
WannaBeOCer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 5,154
Rep: 168 (Unique: 120)
Quote: Originally Posted by rluker5 View Post
Here's an example of that trick I told Hwgeek: I ran my living room itx at 4.2ghz with xtu internal benchmark then cpuz benchmark, but it wasn't long enough so I stressed it for a while to get stable values. I then reduced the core clock to 3.3ghz and adjusted the volts to be the same and ran the xtu bench, then cpuz stress test. The xtu bench is all jumpy so I'll use the cpuz stress test numbers as an example.

Core tdp during 4.2Ghz stress was 85w, during 3.3Ghz was 68w. (85/68)*3.3=4.125 so apparently the chip is more efficient at 4.2ghz at the same volts, but not by much. The power scaling with instructions per second is near linear with the same cpu, software.

How does a higher ipc, with all else equal, resulting in higher ips consume power differently than higher clocks, with all else equal, resulting in higher ips? I've seen with my various atom mini pcs(z8300,z8500,n4100) that their performance scales close to linear with power. This 5775c test seems to agree. Maybe I'm missing something. It's easy to replicate with all sorts of software and hardware though. Makes the problem of making cpus go faster a little tougher if every instruction carries heat with it.

Intel has been getting more efficient over the years and AMD really has with Zen. And once they get the bugs ironed out 10nm should be able to efficiency away the extra heat from extra ips.
You're overclocking, hwgeek was referring to a new process(14nm+++) that might not even exist.

I already provided examples of how IPC increasing doesn't increase power/heat.

14nm
14nm+
14nm++

Silent
(20 items)
CPU
Core i9 9900K... CoffeeTime! @ 4.2Ghz w/ 1v
Motherboard
Maximus VIII Formula
GPU
Radeon VII @ 1900Mhz/1250Mhz w/ 1v
RAM
TeamGroup Xtreem 16GB 3866Mhz CL15
Hard Drive
Samsung 850 Evo 1TB
Hard Drive
Samsung 850 Evo 1TB
Hard Drive
Samsung 850 Evo 500GB
Power Supply
EVGA SuperNova 1200w P2
Cooling
EK Supremacy Full Copper Clean
Cooling
XSPC D5 Photon v2
Cooling
Black Ice Gen 2 GTX360 x2
Cooling
EK-Vector Radeon VII - Copper + Plexi
Case
Thermaltake Core X5 Tempered Glass Edition
Operating System
Clear Linux
Monitor
Acer XF270HUA
Keyboard
Cherry MX Board 6.0
Mouse
Logitech G600
Mouse
Alugraphics GamerArt
Audio
Definitive Technology Incline
Audio
SMSL M8A
▲ hide details ▲
WannaBeOCer is online now  
post #27 of 45 (permalink) Old 08-06-2019, 02:09 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
SwitchFX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 747
Rep: 14 (Unique: 11)
Won't the 9900KS offer multi-core boost to 5 Ghz and some at 4.5 Ghz? I could see Intel figuring out a way to push a 10 core 20 thread 10900K to 5 Ghz on multiple cores and capping at 4.5 Ghz with switch off. Just wonder if you'd need to update your home insurance's fire policy.

Quote: Originally Posted by Liranan View Post
If an asteroid hits the earth and kills us all we won't have to care about whether Intel could have been better if someone else hadn't been.

If is an entirely nonsensical proposition to start with. If Netburst had scaled to the 10GHz Intel were aiming at AMD would never have annihilated them, causing Intel to resort to crimes to still beat AMD. And if the BD uArch had scaled to 10GHz, as AMD were hoping, we wouldn't be having this discussion either.
Okay I vaguely remember this claim being made in 2002-2003? But even they had to know it simple wasn't feasible given thermal output and power draw, right?

SwitchFX is offline  
post #28 of 45 (permalink) Old 08-06-2019, 02:13 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
SwitchFX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 747
Rep: 14 (Unique: 11)
Quote: Originally Posted by m4fox90 View Post
Unless you need more FPS at 720p, get a 3900X.
LOL, nope. I've been watching performance videos for a week now. Gaming performance at 1080p is so minimal unless a game is/was developed to favor Intel. Differences thin out further as you bump the rez and become more gpu bound. The motherboards I want for my use case are pricier than some of the HEDT Intel boards from a few years ago. I'll probably wait until the holiday period or Zen3 which is supposed to focus on power improvements and reducing thermals, supposedly. Should knock the prices down or make it so I can pickup a 3950X and a quality X570 for under a grand before other parts.

Only game I see myself playing is probably AC Odyssey. A fan of the series.

SwitchFX is offline  
post #29 of 45 (permalink) Old 08-06-2019, 10:24 AM
Not a linux lobbyist
 
rluker5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,676
Rep: 43 (Unique: 34)
Quote: Originally Posted by WannaBeOCer View Post
You're overclocking, hwgeek was referring to a new process(14nm+++) that might not even exist.

I already provided examples of how IPC increasing doesn't increase power/heat.

14nm
14nm+
14nm++
My comparison has same node, same volts, same hardware, same software, same external environment. Yours spans over modified process nodes and different volts. With all else equal, except for instructions per second, my comparison still stands and you can verify it yourself on any cpu (that you have) you choose. More instructions per second means more power consumed. More ipc is more instructions per second just like higher clocks or higher load.

Edit: After another quick test it appears that some methods of increasing ipc may be more efficient. I did a similar test ht on vs off to just increase ipc with a particular method and got a 26% performance improvement for 15% more power. Which is better than the closer to near 0 performance/power improvement I see comparing a z8500 atom to a n4100 atom I have. They would still need a more efficient node if you were to increase the heat output of a 9900ks by 10% though.
Pics of my quick test below.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Screenshot (4).png
Views:	5
Size:	860.4 KB
ID:	286660  

Click image for larger version

Name:	Screenshot (3).png
Views:	6
Size:	902.1 KB
ID:	286662  


L5
(17 items)
Lea2
(11 items)
L7
(11 items)
CPU
5775c
Motherboard
Maximus VII Hero
GPU
Aorus 1080ti Waterforce
RAM
16 Gb Gskill Trident @ 2400,cas10,1.575v
RAM
8 Gb Gskill Trident @ 2400,cas10,1.575v
Hard Drive
1Tb Team ssd
Hard Drive
seagate barracuda 3T
Hard Drive
Optane 900p 480G OS
Optical Drive
Asus BW-16D1HT
Power Supply
EVGA Supernova 1300 G2
Cooling
Cooler Master MasterLiquid Pro 120 (cpu)
Cooling
2 140mm case fans, 2 120mm
Case
Fractal Design R4 (no window)
Operating System
W10 64 pro
Monitor
panasonic TC-58AX800U
Audio
Focal Elear, Nova 40, 598se, HE4xx, DT990pro w b.boost earpads
Audio
SoundbasterX AE-5, onboard
CPU
4770k
Motherboard
Asus Z87 Deluxe
GPU
Fury Nitro
RAM
8Gb klevv urbane 2133
Hard Drive
ROG Raidr 240Gb pcie
Hard Drive
1Tb WD blue
Power Supply
Pc Power&Cooling silencer Mk2 950w
Cooling
Deepcool Lucifer V2
Case
DIYPC P48-W
Operating System
W10 64 pro
Monitor
40"tv
CPU
4980hq
Motherboard
Asus H81T/CSM
RAM
8Gb 1600 samsung
Hard Drive
Samsung 850 evo 120gb
Power Supply
Skyvast 90w brick for hp pavilion something
Cooling
SilverStone Tek Super Slim
Case
SilverStone Tek PT13B
Operating System
W10 64 pro
Monitor
24" samsung 1080p
Keyboard
Logitech K400+
Other
Intel wifi ac card and noname antennas
▲ hide details ▲

Last edited by rluker5; 08-06-2019 at 12:02 PM.
rluker5 is offline  
post #30 of 45 (permalink) Old 08-06-2019, 07:25 PM - Thread Starter
sudo apt install sl
 
WannaBeOCer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 5,154
Rep: 168 (Unique: 120)
Quote: Originally Posted by rluker5 View Post
My comparison has same node, same volts, same hardware, same software, same external environment. Yours spans over modified process nodes and different volts. With all else equal, except for instructions per second, my comparison still stands and you can verify it yourself on any cpu (that you have) you choose. More instructions per second means more power consumed. More ipc is more instructions per second just like higher clocks or higher load.

Edit: After another quick test it appears that some methods of increasing ipc may be more efficient. I did a similar test ht on vs off to just increase ipc with a particular method and got a 26% performance improvement for 15% more power. Which is better than the closer to near 0 performance/power improvement I see comparing a z8500 atom to a n4100 atom I have. They would still need a more efficient node if you were to increase the heat output of a 9900ks by 10% though.
Pics of my quick test below.
Your comparison is overclocking not a more efficient process like Comet Lake. Intel's main goal after Skylake was to improve on power efficiency. They've done a tremendous job at that. The 9900k is able to run at a higher frequency than a 6700k and use less power with double the amount of cores. Comet Lake will most likely be on 14nm+++. @Hwgeek was just referring to 14nm+++ not an overclocked CPU.

https://www.pcworld.com/article/3031...fficiency.html

Silent
(20 items)
CPU
Core i9 9900K... CoffeeTime! @ 4.2Ghz w/ 1v
Motherboard
Maximus VIII Formula
GPU
Radeon VII @ 1900Mhz/1250Mhz w/ 1v
RAM
TeamGroup Xtreem 16GB 3866Mhz CL15
Hard Drive
Samsung 850 Evo 1TB
Hard Drive
Samsung 850 Evo 1TB
Hard Drive
Samsung 850 Evo 500GB
Power Supply
EVGA SuperNova 1200w P2
Cooling
EK Supremacy Full Copper Clean
Cooling
XSPC D5 Photon v2
Cooling
Black Ice Gen 2 GTX360 x2
Cooling
EK-Vector Radeon VII - Copper + Plexi
Case
Thermaltake Core X5 Tempered Glass Edition
Operating System
Clear Linux
Monitor
Acer XF270HUA
Keyboard
Cherry MX Board 6.0
Mouse
Logitech G600
Mouse
Alugraphics GamerArt
Audio
Definitive Technology Incline
Audio
SMSL M8A
▲ hide details ▲
WannaBeOCer is online now  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off