Intel Adds Core i7-6950X Extreme Edition 10-Core 25MB Cache CPU To Support Site

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Although not officially announced, Intel has added the Core i7-6950X Extreme Edition 10-core 25MB cache Broadwell-E processor to its support website. The key specs that stand out are the ten cores, 25 MB of L3 cache and clock speed of up to 3.50 GHz. Are we taking bets on pricing?
 
I was just speaking with someone over at Intel actually and I asked him how much these were going to be priced at and he told me...how to fix my Intel WNIC issue. He had no clue as he was tech support.

So based on that I'm assuming it'll be around the same price as the current CPU its replacing.:peeking:
 
Last edited:
Teenyman45 said:
I bet Intel will want tree-fiddy for it just like the Loch Ness Monster.
Click to expand...
EiDS7kT.gif
 
32 thread? I don't think most games even use 4 threads well, right? And if so, its better to have four threads processing faster with greater power efficiency than slower with 28 idling.

Am I missing something?

On the other hand, just for the sheer ridiculous sound of it, I would consider throwing my extra 290x from my HTPC back into my multi-purpose gaming rig for quad-290x crossfire with a 32-thread monster in there, if I could find an appropriate PSU.

That just FEELS cool, heh!

Hmmmm... the frames I could get playing freecell!
 
Ducman69 said:
32 thread? I don't think most games even use 4 threads well, right? And if so, its better to have four threads processing faster with greater power efficiency than slower with 28 idling.

Am I missing something?

On the other hand, just for the sheer ridiculous sound of it, I would consider throwing my extra 290x from my HTPC back into my multi-purpose gaming rig for quad-290x crossfire with a 32-thread monster in there, if I could find an appropriate PSU.

That just FEELS cool, heh!

Hmmmm... the frames I could get playing freecell!
Click to expand...

That Xeon build isn't super ideal for gaming (though it would be better than anything from AMD cpu-wise). But its a great cheap encoding PC. I've already built one (got two E5-2670v1s from Ebay for $70 each) to use as the streaming PC for Twitch streaming. It works great and is an unbelievable deal for the money.
 
Ducman69 said:
32 thread? I don't think most games even use 4 threads well, right? And if so, its better to have four threads processing faster with greater power efficiency than slower with 28 idling.

Am I missing something?

On the other hand, just for the sheer ridiculous sound of it, I would consider throwing my extra 290x from my HTPC back into my multi-purpose gaming rig for quad-290x crossfire with a 32-thread monster in there, if I could find an appropriate PSU.

That just FEELS cool, heh!

Hmmmm... the frames I could get playing freecell!
Click to expand...

I have been toying with the idea of building a hypervisor host strictly for gaming/LAN parties. With something like this and GPU passthrough you could probably have 4-8 people play off of the same box and have it provide a rather good experience at that, I suppose it depends on the game though.

I'm glad to see this and I hope if AMD can bring some heat we will finally start to see 8c/16t+ CPU's at a more affordable price. It's been kind of boring getting the same old 4c/8t and 6c/12t variants since Sandy Bridge.
 
Yea I would totally love to be able to build a nice 32 core machine for home use, but I would want 128 gig of ram for that. And I don't really do anything at home that needs that kind of horsepower. But it only makes sense when my damn phone has 8 cpu's.
 
Why would it need to be on the support site? There's currently nothing to download on the page. And what kind of possible downloads could you need for a CPU? Drivers? Firmware? Microcode update?

The CPU compatibility is usually up to the motherboards and that info is provided by them.
 
EODetroit said:
That Xeon build isn't super ideal for gaming (though it would be better than anything from AMD cpu-wise). But its a great cheap encoding PC. I've already built one (got two E5-2670v1s from Ebay for $70 each) to use as the streaming PC for Twitch streaming. It works great and is an unbelievable deal for the money.
Click to expand...
I find your setup very interesting, I hadn't heard of using an alternate PC for Twitch streaming, would you care to elaborate on your setup a bit more? I found this for reference (link), curious how similar it is to yours. As I could see updating my ESXi host with a similiar Xeon and dedicating some resources towards this.
 
Intel is very close to making my current PC obsolete. Dual Xeons X5675 running at 4.4GHz are more or less a match to a 10-core i7. I should start saving money for the i7 7950X replacement of my SR2 build.
 
Grimlaking said:
Yea I would totally love to be able to build a nice 32 core machine for home use, but I would want 128 gig of ram for that. And I don't really do anything at home that needs that kind of horsepower. But it only makes sense when my damn phone has 8 cpu's.
Click to expand...


HP ProLiant DL360P G8 2 x 2.60Ghz E5-2670 Eight Core 192GB 4x 1TB 6G

I mean, it's not 32 but you CAN upgrade this DP rig to get close to that. And it comes with 192GB already. We're getting 2 to offload some stress from our current VM cluster.
 
As an eBay Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
A 10-Core i7 processor from Intel may signal that they are worried that the 8-Core/16-Thread AMD Zen is actually competitive. If the 4-Core/8-Thread and 6-Core/12Thread Zens are also competitive, it'll be nice to see the mainstream socket (1151) get a 6-Core/12-Thread i7 and a Straight 6-Core-i5 from Intel.

A 6-Core/12 Thread Kirbylake i7 would actually be a Sandybridge-like jump from the previous generation. Ironically, it's all up to AMD whether Intel does this or not.
 
Ducman69 said:
32 thread? I don't think most games even use 4 threads well, right? And if so, its better to have four threads processing faster with greater power efficiency than slower with 28 idling.

Am I missing something?

On the other hand, just for the sheer ridiculous sound of it, I would consider throwing my extra 290x from my HTPC back into my multi-purpose gaming rig for quad-290x crossfire with a 32-thread monster in there, if I could find an appropriate PSU.

That just FEELS cool, heh!

Hmmmm... the frames I could get playing freecell!
Click to expand...

I have a few games which use all 8 cores of my 5960x, but they barely tax any of them, thus I'm GPU limited, so they could easily be on a 4 core machine. Anyway, this might hopefully fix a few bugs Intel had with things like TSX, etc., but how useful they would be for games...
 
It will probably take over the 5960X slot in price as merchants kill inventory with slightly lower prices. I'm curious how this will perform on an X99 based platform (got a new build going with an AsRock X99X Killer mobo and am deciding between the 5960X and 6950X depending on how the 6950X stacks up).
 
As you can see by my sig, I've been running a rig that's pretty close to a 6950X, an E5 2960-v2 10 cores/20 threads 3.0 Ghz that I got off of eBay for $800. Lots of threads is great for video transcodeing, and it's fast enough that even single threaded games run just fine. The only place I feel really left behind is on motherboard features. The Sabertooth X79 was good in it's day, but that was years ago, so yeah. I'll run what I brung for at least another year or two. After that who knows where we'll be.
 
Rauelius said:
A 10-Core i7 processor from Intel may signal that they are worried that the 8-Core/16-Thread AMD Zen is actually competitive. If the 4-Core/8-Thread and 6-Core/12Thread Zens are also competitive, it'll be nice to see the mainstream socket (1151) get a 6-Core/12-Thread i7 and a Straight 6-Core-i5 from Intel.

A 6-Core/12 Thread Kirbylake i7 would actually be a Sandybridge-like jump from the previous generation. Ironically, it's all up to AMD whether Intel does this or not.
Click to expand...

These are being sold at a price outside of competition. Plus it's a 10 core mainly due to Intel increasing the core count of broadwell-ep .
 
Ducman69 said:
32 thread? I don't think most games even use 4 threads well, right? And if so, its better to have four threads processing faster with greater power efficiency than slower with 28 idling.

Am I missing something?

On the other hand, just for the sheer ridiculous sound of it, I would consider throwing my extra 290x from my HTPC back into my multi-purpose gaming rig for quad-290x crossfire with a 32-thread monster in there, if I could find an appropriate PSU.

That just FEELS cool, heh!

Hmmmm... the frames I could get playing freecell!
Click to expand...

Unless you spend a lot of time rendering/encoding this CPU is kind of a waste on the desktop.

Heck, even my 6 core 3930k rarely if ever gets to see full load, and I'm a so called "power user".

I just feel like for the overwhelming majority of even gamers/enthusiasts/power users there is little point to having more than 6 cores in a client machine. I'd rather have 6 cores, more of a power envelope per core, and start seeing factory clock speeds start closing in on 5ghz.
 
nepenthe said:
I find your setup very interesting, I hadn't heard of using an alternate PC for Twitch streaming, would you care to elaborate on your setup a bit more? I found this for reference (link), curious how similar it is to yours. As I could see updating my ESXi host with a similiar Xeon and dedicating some resources towards this.
Click to expand...

A dual PC setup has some big advantages, and some disadvantages. You use your main PC to play the game, and output your video to the monitor you play on, and a capture card in the second PC. This shifts the encode load to the second PC (where you run xsplit/OBS/etc.), and can also enable more versatile but complicated higher end audio setups (a massive topic on its own). I thought about going this route as my i5-3570k was definitely restricting streaming more CPU heavy games, but ended up going with a single 5820k build instead. Mainly the reason is to take the encode load off your gaming PC though.
 
webdev511 said:
As you can see by my sig, I've been running a rig that's pretty close to a 6950X, an E5 2960-v2 10 cores/20 threads 3.0 Ghz that I got off of eBay for $800. Lots of threads is great for video transcodeing, and it's fast enough that even single threaded games run just fine. The only place I feel really left behind is on motherboard features. The Sabertooth X79 was good in it's day, but that was years ago, so yeah. I'll run what I brung for at least another year or two. After that who knows where we'll be.
Click to expand...

That's the only reason I decided to upgrade from my 1155 setup. I really needed more sata III ports and the ability to upgrade past 32GB of ram.
 
Beaflag VonRathburg said:
That's the only reason I decided to upgrade from my 1155 setup. I really needed more sata III ports and the ability to upgrade past 32GB of ram.
Click to expand...

For me, the only reason I have a Sandy-E instead of a more mainstream model is not because I need more than 4 cores, but rather because I need the 40 PCIe lanes.

I don't understand how anyone gets by with so few PCIe lanes in a main rig. Desktop computing is all about expansion!
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
For me, the only reason I have a Sandy-E instead of a more mainstream model is not because I need more than 4 cores, but rather because I need the 40 PCIe lanes.

I don't understand how anyone gets by with so few PCIe lanes in a main rig. Desktop computing is all about expansion!
Click to expand...

I went with a 5820k because I don't need more than the 28 lanes and it was cheaper than building a 6700k system at the same time. Now I understand how owner to owner usage can greatly vary, but what's your need for 40 lanes? Perhaps, I'm missing something but two GPU and a sound card do fill forty lanes, but there probably would be little to no difference on a 28 lane system gaming wise. This is a pretty A to B test with two systems and the largest variance was 1.5 FPS with most of the results falling within a margin of error: Impact of PCI-E Speed on Gaming Performance . Are you doing other work with your system where the lanes are needed for a specific workload? In my system I'm only gaming on 1080p with a 290x so the need isn't there. On the weird end though, I understand most people don't need for four 256GB SSD in Raid 0 or a 32GB ram disk for photo editing, but that's my end usage (I also got the SSDs for free).
 
Beaflag VonRathburg said:
I went with a 5820k because I don't need more than the 28 lanes and it was cheaper than building a 6700k system at the same time. Now I understand how owner to owner usage can greatly vary, but what's your need for 40 lanes? Perhaps, I'm missing something but two GPU and a sound card do fill forty lanes, but there probably would be little to no difference on a 28 lane system gaming wise. This is a pretty A to B test with two systems and the largest variance was 1.5 FPS with most of the results falling within a margin of error: Impact of PCI-E Speed on Gaming Performance . Are you doing other work with your system where the lanes are needed for a specific workload? In my system I'm only gaming on 1080p with a 290x so the need isn't there. On the weird end though, I understand most people don't need for four 256GB SSD in Raid 0 or a 32GB ram disk for photo editing, but that's my end usage (I also got the SSDs for free).
Click to expand...


I have a 40 Lane X79 i7-3930k on an Asus P9X79 WS that's laid out as follows:

  • Slot 1 16x/8x (16x unless Slot2 is populated, in which case it becomes 8x)
  • (blank)
  • Slot 2 0x/8x
  • Slot 3 x4
  • Slot 4 16x/8x (16x unless Slot6 is populated, in which case it becomes 8x)
  • Slot 5 x4
  • Slot 6 0x/8x
(all Gen 3)

I currently have PCIe cards installed as follows:

  • Slot 1 GeForce GTX 980ti (PCIe 3.0 x8)
  • (blank)
  • Slot 2 Brocade BR-1020 10Gig Fiber Ethernet (PCIe 2.0 x8)
  • Slot 3 Sound Blaster X-Fi Titanium HD (PCIe 2.0? x1)
  • Slot 4 GeForce GTX 980ti (PCIe 3.0 x8)
  • Slot 5 (Covered)
  • Slot 6 Intel SSD 750 400GB (PCIe 3.0 x4)

So I am using 29 lanes.

I wouldn't mind using 16 more to get the GPU's into x16-x16..

As far as I am concerned, the more lanes the better.

I'd ideally like a motherboard with 8 PCIe slots, all electrically 16x direct to the CPU.

Also,

While I mostly agree with the Impact of PCIe speed on gaming performance article above, it is starting to get a little bit old, and may not necessarily reflect peoples experiences on the most recent hardware and titles.

Personally, I have never been able to tell the difference between PCIe 3.0 x8 (or PCIe 2.0 x16) and PCIe 3.0 x16, but more and more people are starting to claim that with higher end GPU's and certain titles it makes a difference. Like here for instance. I'm not sure if there is more placebo to this than anything else, but it is something that has been coming up a bunch lately.

Maybe it is time to revisit the PCIe scaling tests for the latest titles on high end GPU's in SLI? After all, those Puget Systems tests were done in 2013.
 
Last edited:
britjh22 said:
A dual PC setup has some big advantages, and some disadvantages. You use your main PC to play the game, and output your video to the monitor you play on, and a capture card in the second PC. This shifts the encode load to the second PC (where you run xsplit/OBS/etc.), and can also enable more versatile but complicated higher end audio setups (a massive topic on its own). I thought about going this route as my i5-3570k was definitely restricting streaming more CPU heavy games, but ended up going with a single 5820k build instead. Mainly the reason is to take the encode load off your gaming PC though.
Click to expand...

Why don't you just use the dedicated ASIC in Nvidia's newer cards (if you run Nvidia) via NVENC so you can have your GPU do the transcoding instead of your CPU. With this you don't need to worry about what CPU you have or need to have a 2nd encoding machine. Obs supports NVENC now too so nobody really needs a beefy CPU anymore to stream high res games.
 
PornoSatan said:
Why don't you just use the dedicated ASIC in Nvidia's newer cards (if you run Nvidia) via NVENC so you can have your GPU do the transcoding instead of your CPU. With this you don't need to worry about what CPU you have or need to have a 2nd encoding machine. Obs supports NVENC now too so nobody really needs a beefy CPU anymore to stream high res games.
Click to expand...

I'm running a 290X, so I don't have any experience with Shadowplay or OBS using NVENC, but what I have heard is it works WONDERFULLY for recording gameplay, but has issues with delivering a good looking stream for Twitch. Again, just anecdotal, but that is what I've heard.
 
I wonder if we'll see a refresh on x99 boards to go with the new CPUs?
 
Aahh, looks like Broadwell-E will be arriving on time to replace Haswell-E. Good for those looking to build an X99 system but haven't done so yet. X99 refresh would be cool too, maybe get some USB3.1 directly from the chipset instead of a 3rd-party controller. A chipset refresh would be nice in helping the prosumer platform gain more feature parity with the ever-evolving mainstream chipsets that get updated and replaced on a yearly basis. Would be tight if Zen is awesome enough to get Intel to stop fucking around with thousand-dollar prices on consumer desktop CPUs. I've been really pleased with the X99 system I built in 2014, although those early DDR4 prices were PAINFUL (I usually never buy new platform and new tech at launch, and you can bet your ass I won't be doing that again). MicroCenter always eases the pain of CPU prices. Hopefully after more than a few years from now, when I'm ready to build my next system, AMD will be kicking ass and I'll be able to go back home to them. Still excited to see what 10-core Broadwell-E can do. Mainly I wanna see the TDP, and how high the stable overclocks can get. Is Broadwell-E gonna be the last on X99? I wonder what Skylake-E will be on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top