Haswell-E/x99 coming September confirmed

geok1ng

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 28, 2007
Messages
2,129
What kind of gaming performance increase is expected with their next generation CPUs?

None to negligible. I know ZERO games that are CPU limited at 4k/60Hz or 1080p/120hz. maybe some titles are CPU limited at 720p/240hz, but any such scenario is better served by a higher clocked chip than more cores.
 

lutjens

Gawd
Joined
Feb 18, 2013
Messages
792
http://ark.intel.com/pt-br/products/family/78584/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E7-v2-Family#@Server

looking at current E7 v2 prices, TDPs and speeds, I highly doubt that the 18 core Xeon would sell for a penny less than $6841, the price Intel asks today for top shelf SKUs.

Looking at TDPs and clocks on that list, it quickly becomes clear that power draw raises very quickly for measly clock bumps. an E7 8880L v2 has 15 cores @ 2.20GHz fitting a 105w TDP, but an E7 8890 v2 at 2.8GHz requires a TDP of 155w. Even if one makes the dubious assumption that such chip would scale power draw linearly, the practical limit of 250w for the CPU would limit clock bumps at 4GHz, and that on the most optimistic scenario.

Multi cores are exponentially harder do increase clock. an 18 core would most certainly hit a wall closer to the aforementioned 3.1GHz mark than the dreamed 4GHz for 24x7 operations on realistic builds.

The $6841 Xeon is a member of the E7 family and is multi-cpu (4 CPUs and more) capable, things that Intel charges a substantial premium for. The E5 Xeons are nowhere near as expensive. Using the E5-2697V2 (which is a harvested E7 Xeon) as an example has an MSRP of $2620. The equivalent E7 Xeon, the E7-4860V2, has an MSRP of $3840 for nearly the exact same specs. Nearly 50% more and just because it's an E7 Xeon. So an MSRP of approx $4K USD for the top 18-core E5 Xeon (a harvested Haswell-EX) isn't unrealistic.

The E7-8890V2 has a very generous all core turbo of 3.2GHz, which is what it's 155W TDP is based on, so making the jump to 4GHz shouldn't exceed 250W (with 200W being more likely) on the 18-core, which is easy for a typical water cooling system to handle. Also, given the fact that the 6-cores easily overclock as well as the quad cores suggests that a larger core count isn't the enormous impediment to clock speed increases that some folks think it is.
 

AgentQ

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 16, 2000
Messages
1,568
Occasional parallel task? It's running multiple tasks (with many of them multithreaded themselves) that will see the greatest benefit.

That still goes back to my point: The average enthusiast is rarely going to be able to use 18 cores. I would love to have 18 cores for highly parallel build processes, but there's no way I'd take an 18-core CPU over a higher-clocked 4 or 6 core CPU for my desktop.

An unlocked 18-core CPU will allow the benefit of many cores without the penalty in single threaded performance that comes with a typical locked high core count (HCC) CPU that's clocked very low to meet a certain TDP envelope. Also, a clock speed bump ensures that even faster performance in a multithreaded environment is obtained. For the people who fit this usage scenario, an unlocked 18-core will be a godsend and in a dual CPU configuration, they will raise performance to new heights never before seen.

Just because it's unlocked doesn't mean that you'll be able to reach clock speeds similar to 4/6 core CPUs. Given the same voltage and speed, you'd have to dissipate a whopping three times as much heat on an 18-core CPU as the equivalent 6-core CPU. Compared to an equivalent 4-core, that's four and a half times as much heat for the same clock speed and voltage.

Also keep in mind that it's significantly harder to overclock all 18 cores than it is to overclock just four cores. You can only clock as high as your slowest core, so the lowest of those 18 cores sets your overclocking limit.

Even with an unlocked 18-core and crazy overclocking, it's doubtful that you'll come anywhere near the performance of an overclocked top-of-the-line 4 or 6 core enthusiast CPU.



Based on early postings from European retailers, the 18-core Xeon will sell for roughly $4K USD.

Do you have a source for this? Because that would be surprising.



Highly unlikely. The current high core count chips are clocked very low, not because of an inability to clock at a faster speed, but to stay within a specific TDP envelope. The extraordinarily vast majority of cores today on an unlocked CPU will support at least 4GHz in clock speed. The only issue with an 18-core unlocked CPU is the fact that the heat it kicks out will increase much faster per MHz than a CPU with fewer cores. If this additional heat load is addressed with better cooling, the chip should still clock reasonably well, probably not to the level of a 6-core, but not far from it.

See above. Binning four core CPUs at high clock speeds is a lot easier than binning 18 core CPUs, because you have 4.5 times as many opportunities for one of those cores to hold you back.

Also note that heat removal isn't the only issue here. For the same clock speed and voltage as a 4-core CPU, you need 4.5 times as much current to supply an 18-core CPU. Modern enthusiast motherboards have overkill power supply sections, but that's still asking a lot.



The overclockable 18-core CPU makes for a great pipe dream, but it's unlikely to work out well in reality.
 

geok1ng

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 28, 2007
Messages
2,129
The $6841 Xeon is a member of the E7 family and is multi-cpu (4 CPUs and more) capable, things that Intel charges a substantial premium for. So an MSRP of approx $4K USD for the top 18-core E5 Xeon (a harvested Haswell-EX) isn't unrealistic.
The E7-8890V2 has a very generous all core turbo of 3.2GHz, which is what it's 155W TDP is based on, so making the jump to 4GHz shouldn't exceed 250W (with 200W being more likely) on the 18-core, which is easy for a typical water cooling system to handle. Also, given the fact that the 6-cores easily overclock as well as the quad cores suggests that a larger core count isn't the enormous impediment to clock speed increases that some folks think it is.

E7 2890 v2 is a 2p CPU at $6451. Unlocked 18 core will not be cheap, even by Titan standards, if we ever see one.

Again, power draw does NOT scale linearly with clock. going from 3.2Ghz to 4Ghz will not increase power draw by 25%, most likely 50+%. 3.1-3.2 GHz appears to be the start of upper limit of diminishing returns of frequency/power in Xeons E7 v2, it would be quite a surprise if Intel manages to squeeze in 2 more cores AND improve power efficiency without resorting to 14nm silicon.
 

AgentQ

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 16, 2000
Messages
1,568
Again, power draw does NOT scale linearly with clock. going from 3.2Ghz to 4Ghz will not increase power draw by 25%, most likely 50+%.

Power does scale linearly with clock speed as long as the voltage and temperature stay the same.

In reality, you're going to have to raise the voltage to achieve higher clock speeds. Or from another angle, an 18-core part is likely going to run at a lower voltage at factory clock speeds to keep TDP in check.

Great thread here on the topic: http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2195927
 

lutjens

Gawd
Joined
Feb 18, 2013
Messages
792
That still goes back to my point: The average enthusiast is rarely going to be able to use 18 cores. I would love to have 18 cores for highly parallel build processes, but there's no way I'd take an 18-core CPU over a higher-clocked 4 or 6 core CPU for my desktop.

Some game-centric enthusiasts perhaps, but there are people outside of the game-centric enthusiast that can easily take advantage of such a chip. The point of such a chip is to have a machine with multiple cores that can be competitive for single-threaded tasks, as well as bring unrivalled multi-threaded power to the table.


Just because it's unlocked doesn't mean that you'll be able to reach clock speeds similar to 4/6 core CPUs. Given the same voltage and speed, you'd have to dissipate a whopping three times as much heat on an 18-core CPU as the equivalent 6-core CPU. Compared to an equivalent 4-core, that's four and a half times as much heat for the same clock speed and voltage.

You'll have three time the cores, not three times the heat. A significant portion of a CPU's heat production has to do with overhead components that are a constant, like the IMC. Additional cores will add considerable heat, sure, but if this heat can be managed, the additional heat that these cores will emit won't be an issue. The only real concern will be ensuring that the motherboard is capable of handling the increased load and any good motherboard (like most X79 motherboard today) will have the VRM capacity necessary to handle such a chip.

Also keep in mind that it's significantly harder to overclock all 18 cores than it is to overclock just four cores. You can only clock as high as your slowest core, so the lowest of those 18 cores sets your overclocking limit.

Sure, but how many marginal cores do you think end up enabled on a typical high end Xeon CPU? Likely not very many. I'm willing to bet that even if a core was functional, but clocked poorly on a Haswell-EX die, it would be disabled, due to the increased likelihood of it failing in the future and a core failure on a high-end Xeon die simply won't do.

Even with an unlocked 18-core and crazy overclocking, it's doubtful that you'll come anywhere near the performance of an overclocked top-of-the-line 4 or 6 core enthusiast CPU.

It might not offer identical single-threaded performance as a 4 or 6 core enthusiast CPU. However, I'm willing to give up a small amount of such performance in exchange for the absolutely devastating multi-threaded performance that a 4GHz 18-core CPU would bring. There isn't a 4 or 6 core CPU that'll come anywhere near the multi-threaded performance of an overclocked top-of-the-line 18-core unlocked CPU.


Do you have a source for this? Because that would be surprising.

Very old news. The original mitasworld.it link has been taken down (big surprise) but the report remains. Keep in mind the price quoted included an insane 22% VAT tax, so when taking that into account, the end price is in the ballpark of $4K USD.

http://wccftech.com/intel-haswell-e...enched-haswellep-xeon-e5-cpus-spotted-retail/


See above. Binning four core CPUs at high clock speeds is a lot easier than binning 18 core CPUs, because you have 4.5 times as many opportunities for one of those cores to hold you back.

Also note that heat removal isn't the only issue here. For the same clock speed and voltage as a 4-core CPU, you need 4.5 times as much current to supply an 18-core CPU. Modern enthusiast motherboards have overkill power supply sections, but that's still asking a lot.

The overclockable 18-core CPU makes for a great pipe dream, but it's unlikely to work out well in reality.

This has been hashed out above. The point isn't to match or exceed a 4 or 6 core CPU in overclock, the point is to narrow the gap considerably, while gaining multi-threaded performance that's unequalled. I'm not willing to tolerate a CPU with a clock speed of 2.3GHz and the corresponding horrible single threaded performance. But if this clock speed was increased to 4 GHz, it narrows the single-threaded gap enough to make what remains far less of a concern. The massive multi-threaded performance of such a chip more than offsets the slight disadvantage in single-threaded performance.

The bottom line is though, that if someone shells out $4K USD for one of these chips, should that outlay not buy him (or her) the ability to change the clock speed of the chip as they so desire? I think it should.
 

Tych-0

Gawd
Joined
Jul 7, 2010
Messages
544
None to negligible. I know ZERO games that are CPU limited at 4k/60Hz or 1080p/120hz. maybe some titles are CPU limited at 720p/240hz, but any such scenario is better served by a higher clocked chip than more cores.

I'll be shooting for 1440p/144Hz (ROG SWIFT) myself. I'm hoping a water cooled 5930K and 3 GTX 880s can get me there before Christmas. Of course, none of that is out yet, but this is about as excited as I've been in a while about computer hardware. In the mean time it looks like I'll be slowly piecing a whole new system together over the coming months as the release dates for everything approaches.
 

SpeedyVV

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 14, 2007
Messages
4,211
I have a feeling that somewhere in Intel land, there is an engineer laughing at this thread.

And someone from [H]ardocp too ;)
 

CoreStoffer

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
242
3.0 GHz for the 8 core part seems too low.

You can already get a Xeon 8 core with 3.4 GHz (and nice Max Turbo Frequency at 4 GHz). Sure, the E5-2687W V2 http://ark.intel.com/products/76161 is expensive today, but it is an E5-26xx part which work with dual CPU mobos.

I would be very surprised if there wont be an Xeon E3-16xx part with 8 cores on Haswell-EP that goes over 3.0 GHz.
 

lutjens

Gawd
Joined
Feb 18, 2013
Messages
792
3.0 GHz for the 8 core part seems too low.

You can already get a Xeon 8 core with 3.4 GHz (and nice Max Turbo Frequency at 4 GHz). Sure, the E5-2687W V2 http://ark.intel.com/products/76161 is expensive today, but it is an E5-26xx part which work with dual CPU mobos.

I would be very surprised if there wont be an Xeon E3-16xx part with 8 cores on Haswell-EP that goes over 3.0 GHz.

There is, the E5-1680 V3, which clocks at 3.2GHz, but will go for quite a bit more, around $1700 IIRC (the 3.0GHz E5-1660 V3 is approx. $1.1K). Keep in mind that although the i7-5960X will be an 8-core, it definitely won't be the best 8-core die. It'll be a die that didn't make the cut as a Xeon. The best dies usually become Xeons. We've seen how good Xeons are with the overclocking prowess of the 5600 series, so hopefully the rumors of Intel unlocking the top SKUs of the Haswell-EP Xeons are true and we can finally find out what their best CPUs are truly capable of.
 

CoreStoffer

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
242
Keep in mind that although the i7-5960X will be an 8-core, it definitely won't be the best 8-core die. It'll be a die that didn't make the cut as a Xeon. The best dies usually become Xeons. We've seen how good Xeons are with the overclocking prowess of the 5600 series, so hopefully the rumors of Intel unlocking the top SKUs of the Haswell-EP Xeons are true and we can finally find out what their best CPUs are truly capable of.

Good point. Yeah, if they make an unlocked 8 core Xeon Haswell-EP - well, here I come! :D
 

lutjens

Gawd
Joined
Feb 18, 2013
Messages
792
We need a 200W TDP CPU, like the latest AMD FX.

14-18 cores at maximum speed. And to top it off, an integrated FPGA for specific algorithms (http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer...om-xeon-processor-line-for-cloud-data-centres).

We also need a 14-18 core CPU that's just plain unlocked. Then, we can set whatever TDP we want.;) But a 200W TDP CPU does have a great deal of merit for watercooled servers. A very high validated default clock speed, with a very high TDP rating. The onus is then on the user/server maker to ensure proper watercooling is used to ensure stability in exchange for unrivalled performance without actually overclocking. I hope this concept manifests itself at Intel in the form of the rumored watercooling edition of the Xeon.
 

HardLiner

Gawd
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
734
Do you think the 6-core or 8-core would be any good for 3d max or Maya? I've been thinking about getting into it as a hobby.

How much do you think the 8-core will be going for?
 
Last edited:

DejaWiz

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 15, 2005
Messages
20,584
If intel keeps their EE pricing model, then I would expect the 6 core models to be $350-700 and the 8 core to be $1100+

And, yes, they would be good fits for that kind of use.
 

Pdwe

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 20, 2007
Messages
308
How I'm figuring x99 ddr4 prices

MB: 600.00
8 core CPU: 1200.00
16 GB DDR4 400.00
 
Last edited:

melk

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 21, 2014
Messages
1,054
You can only clock as high as your slowest core, so the lowest of those 18 cores sets your overclocking limit

Hmmm, smells ripe for some innovation.

What would it take to get cores running at different clock speeds?
 

octoberasian

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 13, 2007
Messages
4,082
If intel keeps their EE pricing model, then I would expect the 6 core models to be $350-700 and the 8 core to be $1100+

And, yes, they would be good fits for that kind of use.

How I'm figuring x99 ddr4 prices

MB: 600.00
8 core CPU: 1200.00
16 GB DDR4 400.00
That is what I'm figuring with my last post here if I went the "midrange" route on the board and processor.

The 5820K should cost somewhere closer to $400 so as to not cut into the 4790K pricing. Likely $375 to $399 for an "entry level" 6-core CPU with a base speed of 3.2 GHz to 3.5GHz.

5930K should be over $500 and likely closer to $550 given that the 4930K is around there as well. Higher base and turbo speed, this 6-core will be higher priced.

The 5960X will likely be between $999 and $1299 given the pricing of the 4960X, and being an Extreme Edition 8-core processor it'll command a higher price.

A midrange X99 board likely be around $300 to $350 given current X79 pricing. 16GB (8GB x2) DDR4 RAM likely to be around $350 to $375 given a single stick of 16GB DDR4 memory (in Japan) is around $350.

All in all, likely I'm spending a touch over $1000 for the midrange route for being an X99 and DDR4 early adopter.
Hmmm, smells ripe for some innovation.

What would it take to get cores running at different clock speeds?
If AMD and Intel can power gate individual cores and clock them down, it's possible to clock them up individually. That'll likely take some engineering innovation to get there. Imagine if you could get 4 cores at 4.0GHz and the other 2 cores in a 5930K at 3.2GHz.
 
Last edited:

RanceJustice

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 9, 2003
Messages
5,972
It would be a complete money-grubbing shame if the only way to get an 8-core Haswell-E is to buy a ~$1000 EE part. At very bloody least they could do as they've done with Sandy-E and Ivy-E (I wouldn't dream of asking them to go back to the practices of the Nahalem days that launched their Enthusiast platform to such success) and ensure that the 5930K has the same amount of cores, in this case 8, as the EE. Intel has been getting worse and worse with the pricing without AMD's competition at the high end, but this would be a new step in the wrong direction.
 

octoberasian

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 13, 2007
Messages
4,082
It would be a complete money-grubbing shame if the only way to get an 8-core Haswell-E is to buy a ~$1000 EE part. At very bloody least they could do as they've done with Sandy-E and Ivy-E (I wouldn't dream of asking them to go back to the practices of the Nahalem days that launched their Enthusiast platform to such success) and ensure that the 5930K has the same amount of cores, in this case 8, as the EE. Intel has been getting worse and worse with the pricing without AMD's competition at the high end, but this would be a new step in the wrong direction.

Yeah, an 8-core 5930K would have been nice, but all leaked slides and graphs sadly point to a 6-core processor. I guess if we wanted an affordable 8-core consumer CPU, we'll have to wait for AMD's new architecture in 2016. Excavator sounds like it'll be another APU release. :(
 

RamonGTP

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Nov 9, 2005
Messages
8,150
It would be a complete money-grubbing shame if the only way to get an 8-core Haswell-E is to buy a ~$1000 EE part. At very bloody least they could do as they've done with Sandy-E and Ivy-E (I wouldn't dream of asking them to go back to the practices of the Nahalem days that launched their Enthusiast platform to such success) and ensure that the 5930K has the same amount of cores, in this case 8, as the EE. Intel has been getting worse and worse with the pricing without AMD's competition at the high end, but this would be a new step in the wrong direction.

Maybe, but can you blame them? When their 4 cores blow anything out of the water as it is, anyone buying an 8 core is doing it because they're a big time enthusiast and willing to pay, or the small fraction of the population who need that power, in which case they're probably doing something important enough and lucrative enough that they can afford it and will gladly pay up.

If I was Intel, I'd do the exact same thing.
 

octoberasian

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 13, 2007
Messages
4,082
Maybe, but can you blame them? When their 4 cores blow anything out of the water as it is, anyone buying an 8 core is doing it because they're a big time enthusiast and willing to pay, or the small fraction of the population who need that power, in which case they're probably doing something important enough and lucrative enough that they can afford it and will gladly pay up.

If I was Intel, I'd do the exact same thing.

In other words, you get what you pay for especially if going for an 8-core CPU from Intel. You're paying for the level of performance that CPU offers, and that is more than what is currently available. And, there will be people willing to pay for it.
 

lutjens

Gawd
Joined
Feb 18, 2013
Messages
792
The 8-core is a sick joke compared to the monster CPUs that are coming out on the Xeon side.

Personally, I don't care much about the i7, just as long as the top SKU of the Xeons are unlocked (as has been rumored). Then we can have a proper chip that is truly Extreme (although it won't be called as such) that we can overclock to a nice, healthy 4GHz+...;)
 

BladeVenom

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 29, 2005
Messages
7,707
Maybe, but can you blame them? When their 4 cores blow anything out of the water as it is,

Except it doesn't. Their current quad core isn't that much better than their previous one, and that one was also barely better than the one before it. Intel needs reasonably priced 8 core processors to make it worth an upgrade. Otherwise there's no reason for any of us to get a new CPU. They are competing against themselves.
 

RamonGTP

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Nov 9, 2005
Messages
8,150
Except it doesn't. Their current quad core isn't that much better than their previous one, and that one was also barely better than the one before it. Intel needs reasonably priced 8 core processors to make it worth an upgrade. Otherwise there's no reason for any of us to get a new CPU. They are competing against themselves.

Except that they do.... Not everyone has a Sandy Bridge, Ivy Bridge or Haswell processor. Not to mention that a jump from an i5 2500k which is arguably one of the most popular CPU's in recent memory, to something like a Haswell i7 is actually quite substantial. Few people upgrade every year, even among us enthusiasts.
 

KazeoHin

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
8,237
Intel has no competition in the prosumer/ultra-enthusiast market. You will pay what they tell you to pay, or else you keep your current setup and buy second hand after the next new hotness comes out.
 

lutjens

Gawd
Joined
Feb 18, 2013
Messages
792
Where does this rumor come from? I don't want to get my hope up for nothin! ;)

From VR-Zone, middle of May.

http://vr-zone.com/articles/computex-will-show-desktop-alive-well/77282.html


It may be BS, but gives us something to hope for. The guy who wrote it was the same guy who wrote regarding Intel's supposed willingness to release unlocked SB-EP Xeons back in 2011 (which never happened). His credibility is therefore suspect (not to mention the fact that he knows he'll likely be lynched by enthusiasts if it turns out he's spouting BS this time). However, the recent launch of the HP Apollo water cooled supercomputing rack gives some credence to the likelihood of the watercooled SKUs mentioned in the article and therefore to the possibility of having the top SKUs of the Xeon lineup unlocked.

I, for one, am praying fervently that this rumor is true....;)
 

futchi

n00b
Joined
Apr 5, 2014
Messages
6
From VR-Zone, middle of May.

http://vr-zone.com/articles/computex-will-show-desktop-alive-well/77282.html


It may be BS, but gives us something to hope for. The guy who wrote it was the same guy who wrote regarding Intel's supposed willingness to release unlocked SB-EP Xeons back in 2011 (which never happened). His credibility is therefore suspect (not to mention the fact that he knows he'll likely be lynched by enthusiasts if it turns out he's spouting BS this time). However, the recent launch of the HP Apollo water cooled supercomputing rack gives some credence to the likelihood of the watercooled SKUs mentioned in the article and therefore to the possibility of having the top SKUs of the Xeon lineup unlocked.

I, for one, am praying fervently that this rumor is true....;)
The rumor from vrzone seems unreliable. It mentions that Haswell-EP has "three main die flavours 10-core, 14-core and 18-core".

According to recent docs from intel, the 3 flavours of Haswell-EP dies are 8, 12 and 18 core.
https://qdms.intel.com/cn/YDkAGpBRyUejMdjAP7TBTA==
Page 2.
 

lutjens

Gawd
Joined
Feb 18, 2013
Messages
792
The rumor from vrzone seems unreliable. It mentions that Haswell-EP has "three main die flavours 10-core, 14-core and 18-core".

According to recent docs from intel, the 3 flavours of Haswell-EP dies are 8, 12 and 18 core.
https://qdms.intel.com/cn/YDkAGpBRyUejMdjAP7TBTA==
Page 2.

That document is very, very interesting. It would mean that all 14, 16 and 18-core Haswell-EP Xeons are derived from Haswell-EX. I still hope they end up being unlocked, though.

If not, it means that the best chip you'll be able to overclock will again be based on the weakest die that is produced. Which would be greatly disappointing. If the top SKUs aren't unlocked, they will be much less attractive to many people (and Intel would shoot themselves in the foot yet again)...:rolleyes:
 

futchi

n00b
Joined
Apr 5, 2014
Messages
6
That document is very, very interesting. It would mean that all 14, 16 and 18-core Haswell-EP Xeons are derived from Haswell-EX. I still hope they end up being unlocked, though.

If not, it means that the best chip you'll be able to overclock will again be based on the weakest die that is produced. Which would be greatly disappointing. If the top SKUs aren't unlocked, they will be much less attractive to many people (and Intel would shoot themselves in the foot yet again)...:rolleyes:
The SKUs based on 18-core Haswell-EP die are already announced by intel.
http://qdms.intel.com/dm/d.aspx/BCA8C029-1771-4BE9-A192-6AF55BF1ABB5/PCN113043-01.pdf
E5-2699v3, 2698v3, 2697v3, 2695v3, 2683v3.

From some leaked threads: 2699v3 18-core; 2698v3 16-core; 2697v3, 2695v3, 2683v3 14-core.

They are not haswell EX, and there is still no information about haswell ex.
 

lutjens

Gawd
Joined
Feb 18, 2013
Messages
792
The SKUs based on 18-core Haswell-EP die are already announced by intel.
http://qdms.intel.com/dm/d.aspx/BCA8C029-1771-4BE9-A192-6AF55BF1ABB5/PCN113043-01.pdf
E5-2699v3, 2698v3, 2697v3, 2695v3, 2683v3.

From some leaked threads: 2699v3 18-core; 2698v3 16-core; 2697v3, 2695v3, 2683v3 14-core.

They are not haswell EX, and there is still no information about haswell ex.

They are based on Haswell-EX, just like the E5-2697 V2 is based on Ivy Bridge-EX. I was aware of the five SKUs you mentioned, but your post regarding the native core sizes of Haswell-EP really was the missing piece of information, and allows Intel's previous PCN to make much more sense.

If the native core size divisions for Haswell-EP are indeed 8 and 12 cores (up two cores from each of Ivy-EP's native die sizes of 6 and 10 cores), all five of the SKUs mentioned in Intel's PCN are Haswell-EX derivatives that have been harvested. All SKUs based off Haswell-EP's 8 and 12 core dies aren't included in the PCN.

This leads to an interesting question...why are they singled out? The PCN says that their manufacturing site has been transferred to Malaysia to "ensure a continuous supply" of the specific SKUs. I find it odd, however, that it's only the Haswell-EX derived chips that are being relocated.

Another interesting thing is the S-specs themselves of these chips. SR1XD for the E5-2699 V3 up to SR1XH for the E5-2683 V3.

Last summer, the same guy from VR-Zone apparently visited Intel's facilities in Malaysia and saw some parts referencing a "Haswell-X EP". The "X" in the S-specs and now Intel's singling out of these specific SKUs may indicate that they may be a new sub-line in the Haswell-EP lineup...perhaps these are the CPUs that may end up being unlocked.

http://vr-zone.com/articles/haswell...campaign=haswell-x-xeon-ep-sighting-in-penang

Of course, this is simply an unproven, wild guess based on information provided from someone who already got it wrong once. So it remains to be seen what, if anything, ends up being reality.

All we can do is wait and see. Once thing's for sure...if the rumors of unlocked Xeons turns out to be complete BS, this guy will be receiving some hate mail from a fair number of enthusiasts and other folks who'd love to be able to buy an dual capable, unlocked, high core count Xeon.
 

KazeoHin

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
8,237
A dual-socket overclocked Xeon setup with quad SLI/CFX, all water cooled... I'd go into debt for that.
 

lutjens

Gawd
Joined
Feb 18, 2013
Messages
792
A dual-socket overclocked Xeon setup with quad SLI/CFX, all water cooled... I'd go into debt for that.

And buy shares in your local electricity provider...but it would be worth it. The power of such a system would be truly sickening. It would be like a supercharged Mack truck with nitrous...;)

I'll gladly pay whatever the cost for a pair of unlocked 18-core Xeons on a good overclockable motherboard....;)

I'd even fly to Santa Clara to pick them up...:D
 
Top