Intel Core i9 Cascade Lake-X thread

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
56,205
at this point im mostly interested in clocks and OCing but i think im going to have to wait for a few real overclockers to get their hands on them. Regardless i think im going to bump up from a 10 to 18 core. Just need to find out which of the 3 chips i want.
I don't know about the rest of the Cascade Lake-X family, but the 10980XE should top out around 4.7GHz. I got it to 4.7GHz (all core) at 1.165v and that's pretty much the ceiling. It will POST and even get into Windows at 5.1GHz, but anytime you do more than the most basic tasks thermal protection kicks in. Some extremely lucky few might see a bit more, but based on what little information I've seen from other reviewers on the topic, 4.7GHz seems to be about the maximum you'll get from these. From what I can tell, it should compete well if not edge out the 3950X, but obviously there are some major caveats to going with an Intel 10980XE over a 3950X.

I won't say that the platform cost is necessarily higher. X570's do start out at a lower price but your scraping the bottom of the barrel. On the upper end of the spectrum X570 and X299 top out at similar prices. The 10980XE will cost you more for three reasons. You will need four sticks of RAM, not two. You will also need a much beefier power supply. The power draw on the 10980XE is far greater than that of the 3950X.
 

German Muscle

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 2, 2005
Messages
6,212
I already have a X299 setup so the comparo to AMD doesnt matter to me because im not going to jump ship on this platform to spend more to get into an AMD system.

I saw luumi got one up to 4.9GHz on water. I think bearded hardware is also going to get one as well in a few weeks so he will definitely lap it and put it through the paces on water then LN2.
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
56,205
I already have a X299 setup so the comparo to AMD doesnt matter to me because im not going to jump ship on this platform to spend more to get into an AMD system.

I saw luumi got one up to 4.9GHz on water. I think bearded hardware is also going to get one as well in a few weeks so he will definitely lap it and put it through the paces on water then LN2.
And people like yourself are who I think will mainly buy this particular CPU or one from the Cascade Lake-X family. I'd like to get my hands on a few of the others to see what they can do overclocking wise. The 10980XE I got from Intel isn't as good as some of them I guess. 4.7GHz @ 1.17v is the best I can achieve. I can get it to run some tests at 4.9GHz or 4.8GHz, but nothing heavily multi-threaded. Of course, that tracks as the boost clocks are up to 4.8GHz for four cores.
 

Nightfire

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 7, 2017
Messages
2,364
I think Intel put some especially crappy solder on these things. They would have been better off letting people delid them to hold higher clocks.
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
56,205
I think Intel put some especially crappy solder on these things. They would have been better off letting people delid them to hold higher clocks.
I don't know that this is true given that they can out clock both their predecessors. The problem is they simply get too hot to clock as high as the silicon is capable of. You can't get enough voltage in them to do much.
 

Nightfire

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 7, 2017
Messages
2,364
I don't know that this is true given that they can out clock both their predecessors. The problem is they simply get too hot to clock as high as the silicon is capable of. You can't get enough voltage in them to do much.
Well they absolutely should considering this is basically CFL-like silicon compared to SKL-like silicon. Even then, I doubt the 10940x could outclock the 9990xe.

A delid would probably not change the max clocks on these things much. But as they are configured now, 4.9+ ghz is just not a realistic 24/7 setup when they run 90*+ with serious custom loops. Real-world 24/7 clocks are not much better than a delided 7980xe (4.5-4.6 ghz).
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
56,205
Well they absolutely should considering this is basically CFL-like silicon compared to SKL-like silicon. Even then, I doubt the 10940x could outclock the 9990xe.

A delid would probably not change the max clocks on these things much. But as they are configured now, 4.9+ ghz is just not a realistic 24/7 setup when they run 90*+ with serious custom loops. Real-world 24/7 clocks are not much better than a delided 7980xe (4.5-4.6 ghz).
Like I said, my sample seems to be able to do 4.7GHz on any work load. Serious benchmarks push the temps past 90c. However, the water cooling on my test bench is decent, but not on the level of what's in my personal machine as an example. There I have a more modern water block and a 480mm radiator. That said, I think 360mm is enough, but I could benefit from a nice block. That would shave a few degrees off the temps. I actually plan on doing just that and trying the chip out on a board with better VRM's and seeing if I can get more out of it.
 

Ruined

n00b
Joined
Dec 1, 2019
Messages
17
Baby TR as in 3900x/3950x.
Those are mainstream Ryzen parts,.not baby TR. One of the main differentiators between mainstream and HEDT is PCIe lanes and the 3900x/3950x have the same limited amount as other mainstream Ryzen parts.

Right now the baby threadrippers in production are TR2 parts like the 2950X, as they maintain the large # of pcie lanes needed by HEDT users (one of the big reasons 3950x is not designated TR by AMD). 2950x TR2 is primarily what Intel is competing against with Cascade Lake X line given the new price. That being the case, Cascade Lake compares favorably with these processors.

It will be interesting to see how the 3950x fares in sales, as internet hype doesn't necessarily translate to large swaths of mainstream customers willing to pay $750 for a cpu that is matched or outpaced in gaming by other cheaper mainstream CPUs, or HEDT customers willing to downgrade to 24 pcie lanes even if raw speed increases. Intel tried this strategy of higher priced pseudo-HEDT with Kaby Lake X a couple years ago and it miserably failed.
 
Last edited:

Ruined

n00b
Joined
Dec 1, 2019
Messages
17
After looking at the benchmarks, it looks to me like the 10940X is actually the most well-rounded of the Cascade Lake X processors when using stock turbo tables. The 10980XE seems to suffer in light workloads while the 10900X/10920X don't appear to offer enough benefit in light workloads to offset their lesser multi-core performance; those two only selling point seems to be that they are cheaper than the 10940X/10980XE.

Overclocked the 10980XE is the best choice but it draws so much power and generate so much heat that it basically forces water cooling if you want to go this route.

For an air-cooled stock-ish setup that is going to see both light and heavy workloads, and for the user that wants 48 CPU PCIe lanes, the 10940x looks like it might be the pick of the litter and a good value for the price.
 

one swell foop

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 16, 2004
Messages
1,091
For an air-cooled stock-ish setup that is going to see both light and heavy workloads, and for the user that wants 48 CPU PCIe lanes, the 10940x looks like it might be the pick of the litter and a good value for the price.
Well, hell, I'm looking at doing a new gaming build and don't have a huge interest in overclocking these days. Then I took a look at the price on the 10940x and nearly spit out my coffee. I've had an intel rig for almost all of the last 20 years, but it looks like this generation of hardware might get me back on the AMD train.
 

IdiotInCharge

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
14,240
Well, hell, I'm looking at doing a new gaming build and don't have a huge interest in overclocking these days. Then I took a look at the price on the 10940x and nearly spit out my coffee. I've had an intel rig for almost all of the last 20 years, but it looks like this generation of hardware might get me back on the AMD train.
If you don't need the HEDT platform, Ryzen 3000 is where you should be looking.
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
56,205
If you don't need the HEDT platform, Ryzen 3000 is where you should be looking.
Agreed. Even with Intel being slightly faster in games, overall the Ryzen 3000 series is the better buy. It has a more modern platform if you look at X570 and it has more longevity and far better performance per dollar or outright better performance on the high end. I mean, the 3950X competes well against the much more expensive 10980XE. It manages this with far less power consumption, heat and two fewer cores. The 10980XE really needs to be overclocked to be a worthy contender, and most would argue that its not even worth it outside of very specific circumstances.
 

one swell foop

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 16, 2004
Messages
1,091
Thanks for the info and opinions! I've been out of the hardware and overclocking game for long enough that looking at all the options and the cost/benefit ratio can be a little overwhelming.
 

Ruined

n00b
Joined
Dec 1, 2019
Messages
17
Well, hell, I'm looking at doing a new gaming build and don't have a huge interest in overclocking these days. Then I took a look at the price on the 10940x and nearly spit out my coffee. I've had an intel rig for almost all of the last 20 years, but it looks like this generation of hardware might get me back on the AMD train.
Perhaps you spit out your coffee but this is the best Intel HEDT CPU pricing since 2015.

HEDT not designed for strictly gamers, that's the mainstream line. Intel 9900KS and 9900K/KF are the fastest gaming processors available from anyone currently and cost $470-$525+ depending on model. Even the Intel 9700k at $299-$349 is faster in most cases than what competition offers for games.

The difference between mainstream (Intel:, Core K AMD: Ryzen) and HEDT (Intel Core X; AMD Threadripper) lines is both Intel/AMD HEDT offers double+ the full speed cpu pcie lanes, quad channel memory, and Intel hedt also offers avx512. However, if you don't care about any of that you are better saving money on a mainstream part.
 
Last edited:

Ruined

n00b
Joined
Dec 1, 2019
Messages
17
Agreed. Even with Intel being slightly faster in games, overall the Ryzen 3000 series is the better buy. It has a more modern platform if you look at X570 and it has more longevity and far better performance per dollar or outright better performance on the high end. I mean, the 3950X competes well against the much more expensive 10980XE. It manages this with far less power consumption, heat and two fewer cores. The 10980XE really needs to be overclocked to be a worthy contender, and most would argue that its not even worth it outside of very specific circumstances.
If you need the pcie lanes of a typical HEDT user the mainstream 3950x and it's 24 CPU lanes is not a viable option . That is one of the major reasons amd doesn't classify the 3950x as a Threadripper, it's only got mainstream Ryzen features. 10980xe on the other hand has 48 CPU PCIe lanes, avx512, quad channel memory, etc, at least some of which almost all HEDT users require. The 2950X is a viable HEDT option but it's got bad performance with lightly threaded apps/games, and the 3960X/3970X are great but start at $1400. In the new reduced pricerange of the 10900X-10980X, there is not a comparable performance HEDT option offered by AMD.

Many people want those HEDT features, but if all one cares about is gaming the 9700k/9900k is the best bet.
 
Last edited:

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
56,205
If you need the pcie lanes of a typical HEDT user the mainstream 3950x and it's 24 CPU lanes is not a viable option . That is one of the major reasons amd doesn't classify the 3950x as a Threadripper, it's only got mainstream Ryzen features. 10980xe on the other hand has 48 CPU PCIe lanes, avx512, quad channel memory, etc, at least some of which almost all HEDT users require. The 2950X is a viable HEDT option but it's got bad performance with lightly threaded apps/games, and the 3960X/3970X are great but start at $1400. In the new reduced pricerange of the 10900X-10980X, there is not a comparable performance HEDT option offered by AMD.

Many people want those HEDT features, but if all one cares about is gaming the 9700k/9900k is the best bet.
Upon looking at it, my post wasn't all that clear. I never said the 3950X was a viable alternative to HEDT. I simply said, that the Ryzen 3000 series is the better buy over Intel's equivalent options. I pointed out that even though it isn't HEDT, AMD does compete fairly well with the 10980XE given the price difference. The latter only being worth while in specific instances, such as those who need its higher end platform features.
 

Ruined

n00b
Joined
Dec 1, 2019
Messages
17
Upon looking at it, my post wasn't all that clear. I never said the 3950X was a viable alternative to HEDT. I simply said, that the Ryzen 3000 series is the better buy over Intel's equivalent options. I pointed out that even though it isn't HEDT, AMD does compete fairly well with the 10980XE given the price difference. The latter only being worth while in specific instances, such as those who need its higher end platform features.
I guess what I am wondering is who the market for the 3950x is at $750.

You would think a content creator would want the expansion capabilities HEDT brings (multiple NVMe drives, TB pcie card, pcie sound card, storage pcie cards, etc, all with no bottlenecks), and for a gamer the extra cores of the 3950X don't propel it above the 9900KS since games don't use that many cores/threads and probably won't anytime soon.

I guess main targets would be an enthusiast who likes to have a lot of cores just because (fair enough) or content creator that doesn't need that much storage flexibility. Hardcore calcs probably still favor the 10980xe due to avx512 and the pcie lanes allowing for SLI 2080ti cards with no bottlenecks.

Obv 3960x/3970x are also excellent choices/value for those who want 10940x/10980xe HEDT features but only if you can justify the upfront cost .
 
Last edited:

PhaseNoise

2[H]4U
Joined
May 11, 2005
Messages
2,765
I guess what I am wondering is who the market for the 3950x is at $750.

You would think a content creator would want the expansion capabilities HEDT brings (multiple NVMe drives, TB pcie card, pcie sound card, storage pcie cards, etc, all with no bottlenecks), and for a gamer the extra cores of the 3950X don't propel it above the 9900KS since games don't use that many cores/threads and probably won't anytime soon.

I guess main targets would be an enthusiast who likes to have a lot of cores just because (fair enough) or content creator that doesn't need that much storage flexibility. Hardcore calcs probably still favor the 10980xe due to avx512 and the pcie lanes allowing for SLI 2080ti cards with no bottlenecks.

Obv 3960x/3970x are also excellent choices/value for those who want 10940x/10980xe HEDT features but only if you can justify the upfront cost .
There is a spectrum of needs, and it really depends upon the specific workload. I have a mix of jobs which are best used on various setups: some love GPUs, some love AVX[512], and some just need as many fairly simple cores (low ILP) as they can get (branchy stuff, prototype code, etc).

This isn't content creation, I can't speak to that. This is scientific / engineering crunching - and I do like having this as an option for some things.
 
Last edited:

Stryker7314

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 22, 2011
Messages
386
Any technical/performance downsides to getting a 10980 (or any CLX) and turning it down to say 8 cores to get a higher overclock and have the cache/pcie-lanes/less heat etc.. ?

Considering this over the neutered mainstream cpu's. Rig mainly for gaming, but want moar pcie lanes for add-in cards.
 
Joined
Jun 20, 2004
Messages
787
Considering pcie is taped out till pcie6. 6 having network error correcting PAM. Not surprised Intel is skipping pcie4. Probabily wait for pcie5.
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
56,205
Any technical/performance downsides to getting a 10980 (or any CLX) and turning it down to say 8 cores to get a higher overclock and have the cache/pcie-lanes/less heat etc.. ?

Considering this over the neutered mainstream cpu's. Rig mainly for gaming, but want moar pcie lanes for add-in cards.
If you don't need the cores, you can just buy a different 109x0 CPU rather than a more expensive 10980XE. There is no guarantee that disabling cores will get you the higher overclocks. According to Intel, the higher end parts basically clock as well as the lower end ones. Reduced heat may get you a 100MHz or so. I doubt it would give you more than that. I haven't tried that on my 10980XE, so that's conjecture on my part.
 

D-EJ915

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 31, 2003
Messages
1,164
On my 9900X disabling cores all the way down to 4 active didn't give me higher oc capability but that is just sample of one cpu so others may benefit. I've not bothered with any chips since then.
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
56,205
On my 9900X disabling cores all the way down to 4 active didn't give me higher oc capability but that is just sample of one cpu so others may benefit. I've not bothered with any chips since then.
That's generally how it seems to work with Intel's CPU's.
 

Stryker7314

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 22, 2011
Messages
386
On my 9900X disabling cores all the way down to 4 active didn't give me higher oc capability but that is just sample of one cpu so others may benefit. I've not bothered with any chips since then.
What clocks are yall getting?
 

evilmedic

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 17, 2005
Messages
184
I wonder what the actual power consumption with 22 Cores at 5Ghz would be? I would think over 1/2 Kilowatt.
 

German Muscle

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 2, 2005
Messages
6,212
not sure, but im curious on price. This is a nice filler between 10980xe and W-3175x. I might get one of these instead of 10980xe.

my 10 core pulls 360w and im running a 240 aio and its fine. With a custom loop should cool fine so long as you get a good block.
 

D-EJ915

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 31, 2003
Messages
1,164
The 9990 was limited run sold via auction only so if this does exist it'll be pretty difficult to get.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mikeo
like this

Sorameth

n00b
Joined
Oct 11, 2016
Messages
32
They have made this die for nearly three years and apart from it being hilariously power hungry and desperate nothing is stopping them from using the XCC dies on X299 which is what it is rumored to use.
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
56,205
That 10990XE is a hoax a fake non exists. You can not physically add another 4 cores to the chip because of how it is designed and a bunch of science to back it up but Im to lazy to look it up for you, you can do that. It is not possible which is why its a hoax a lie a fake. I can't believe some of you fell for it. Keep dreaming! It's called Photoshop hehehe.
You have no science and nothing to back up such a claim because the scientific reason you speak of doesn't exist. I have no idea where you came up with this idea, but it is unequivocally incorrect. All of Intel's HEDT models are effectively Xeon variants. CPU's such as Intel's 22 core / 44 thread Xeon E5 2699v4 have existed for some time now as that CPU launched over two years ago. The one thing that I will say makes the idea of a 22 core part on X299 suspect is the supposed 5.0GHz clock speed. This is already beyond what the Core i9 10980XE can do with fewer cores and the same process node. I'm not saying its impossible, but it is the one red flag that makes me somewhat suspicious of the claim.
 
Last edited:

German Muscle

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 2, 2005
Messages
6,212
Someone on reddit said the same thing. Their source article has a Xeon Gold 6161 listed with 22c :LOL:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dan_D
like this

nealx01

n00b
Joined
Feb 12, 2019
Messages
46
has anyone used a U.2 NVME drive on their cascadelakex CPU? i have a x299dark (latest bios installed) and it wont post at all with the drive plugged in. i have all the settings enabled in bios for it to work. ive used the drive on my z390dark mobo so i know the drive works, the x299dark works completely normally when i unplug the U.2. but with it plugged in, it doesnt do ANYTHING.
i noticed many or, all, the x299x (3rd gen refreshed) x299 mobos have not included onboard u.2 ports. so that got me wondering if these U.2 drives might somehow not be supported with the 10980xe(my cpu)

if anyone has any guesses or knows about U.2 support on 10th gen, im all ears... thanks
 

German Muscle

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 2, 2005
Messages
6,212
u.2 shares lanes with pcie slot number 4 and a m.2 slot on x299 dark. Did you change these in the bios for u.2?

u.2 is unchanged to CCLX.
 

German Muscle

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 2, 2005
Messages
6,212
Have you tried both ports?

What drive and what cable are you using? Does it show in one place and not the other? Not detecting at all?
 

D-EJ915

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 31, 2003
Messages
1,164
It's probably the cable if you got it off amazon, the amphenol one is the only one that works in the bottom U.2 port while all of my amazon ones work in the top port.
 
Top