Intel's Skylake-X, Kaby Lake-X Rumored to Arrive Ahead of Schedule

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,003
Originally pegged for August, Intel's next offerings in its high-end desktop line may now be debuting more than a month sooner, between June 19 and July 9. The company should be showing these off at Computex, which kicks off May 30. I wonder what could have prompted this.

The folks over at BenchLife have some juicy tidbits about Intel's purported X299 platform, along with a little data on the Skylake-X and Kaby Lake-X CPUs that will supposedly go with it. According to the site's sources, the new chipset and its accompanying processors have been rescheduled to launch more than a month before their original launch date. If this new data is accurate, Skylake-X and Kaby Lake-X are set to launch at some point between the 25th and 27th weeks of 2017. That's toward the end of June or the beginning of July, quite a step forward from what BenchLife believes was originally an August launch window.
 

Denpepe

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 26, 2015
Messages
1,992
I'm looking to get more cores, price/performance neds to be decent though, otherwise there is still the upcomming coffee lake.
 

ChadD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
5,475
I really hope AMD drops a few official releases with ship dates for some of their upcoming massive core chips the same day. Stealing a bit of Intels thunder with some official press on the 16core 32 thread ryzen chips is exactly what Intel deserves.
 

cyberguyz

Gawd
Joined
Aug 28, 2014
Messages
710
They'd only need to lower prices on their current offerings, no need for new hardware. They're still king of the hill.

Intel is king of the hill for gaming only... for now and only due to pure mhz per core. I suspect that can change as software developers further optimize their code to be more multi-thread aware.

Ryzen is already eating Intel's lunch in multithreaded applications and they are looking to do the same in the x86 server market.

Really once games get more thread-savvy you will see these dynamics things change in a big way.


But yeah lowering their inflated prices will make them more competitive.
 

ChadD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
5,475
They'd only need to lower prices on their current offerings, no need for new hardware. They're still king of the hill.

They are... last I checked AMD was kicking Intel in the backside in regards to 3d rendering.

Gaming, isn't nearly as big a market as many of us gamers would like to believe. I pointed out in an earlier thread today. AMD and Nvidia sold a combined 13 million GPUs in 2016, considering the industry still sold 280 million PCs... either gamers account for 0.5% of the market, or a lot of people are gaming on terrible integrated solutions. Not to mention that a lot of those GPUs where sold to one of Ryzens most interested markets right now... I'm sure at least 10% of those GPUs sold are being used to push Photoshop and 3d Renders.

The fact that Ryzen comes up short by a few frames in 1080p gaming isn't really all that important to people looking for a brute force CPU.
 

cyberguyz

Gawd
Joined
Aug 28, 2014
Messages
710
What prompted this? Core i-ryzen of course

lol yeah I suppose so :D

Otherwise Intel would keep sitting in it. They have pretty much had the market to themselves for way too long.

It is good to see AMD coming back in with some real competition. The real winners will be us as they try to one-up the other.

competition = good
 

kohl

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 5, 2004
Messages
289
I am very interested in the HEDT platform, but bummed that the CPU is always a generation or two behind :(
 

M76

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
12,512
They are... last I checked AMD was kicking Intel in the backside in regards to 3d rendering.

Gaming, isn't nearly as big a market as many of us gamers would like to believe. I pointed out in an earlier thread today. AMD and Nvidia sold a combined 13 million GPUs in 2016, considering the industry still sold 280 million PCs... either gamers account for 0.5% of the market, or a lot of people are gaming on terrible integrated solutions. Not to mention that a lot of those GPUs where sold to one of Ryzens most interested markets right now... I'm sure at least 10% of those GPUs sold are being used to push Photoshop and 3d Renders.

The fact that Ryzen comes up short by a few frames in 1080p gaming isn't really all that important to people looking for a brute force CPU.

Price / Performance they do. But the absolute performance is still with intel, and they only need to lower their prices to be competitive again in bang for buck as well. I said nothing more nothing less. I don't know what part of my statement do you think was wrong ?
 

TechLarry

Can't find the G Spot
Joined
Aug 9, 2005
Messages
30,464
So, what does X give us?

Oh, and thanks Intel for allowing me to be up to date for at least 23 days LOL
 

Merc1138

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 25, 2010
Messages
2,128
Intel is king of the hill for gaming only... for now and only due to pure mhz per core. I suspect that can change as software developers further optimize their code to be more multi-thread aware.

Ryzen is already eating Intel's lunch in multithreaded applications and they are looking to do the same in the x86 server market.

Really once games get more thread-savvy you will see these dynamics things change in a big way.


But yeah lowering their inflated prices will make them more competitive.

Even if AMDs server offerings are amazing, it's going to take years of solid product releases from AMD to make a dent in the server market. Home built HEDTs and even possibly serious workstations are one thing, but with server applications out there costing lots of money with relatively slow development cycles at times compared to desktop apps or games, and companies unwilling to risk cheaping out on another solution, it's going to be a while. Saving a few bucks on the hardware(even a few hundred dollars or a couple grand) is insignificant when the software running has license fees including a couple dozen clients is in excess of $200,000 and this is essential to your business. You likely(hopefully) aren't scratch building boxes at that point yourself and likely need to integrate it into an existing environment. The fact that anything else is iffy, is why Intel has such a hold on the server market for so long.
 

Ultima99

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 31, 2004
Messages
4,905
I am very interested in the HEDT platform, but bummed that the CPU is always a generation or two behind :(

It actually seems to be catching up for once. We'll have every HEDT version of currently release mainstream chips except for the more cores Kaby-X, but we all know it will be about the same as Skylake-X. Not really even sure why they're not just making them one and the same for HEDT.

This isn't surprising at all. I called that these wouldn't be late and it turns out they'll actually be early. I'm betting Cannon and Coffee won't be late either.
 

Budwise

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Dec 7, 2004
Messages
1,833
If its just a Skylake with more cores and quad channel memory then yawn. I hope Intel does something more creative than Optane...
 

Bankie

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 27, 2004
Messages
1,855
They are... last I checked AMD was kicking Intel in the backside in regards to 3d rendering.

Gaming, isn't nearly as big a market as many of us gamers would like to believe. I pointed out in an earlier thread today. AMD and Nvidia sold a combined 13 million GPUs in 2016, considering the industry still sold 280 million PCs... either gamers account for 0.5% of the market, or a lot of people are gaming on terrible integrated solutions. Not to mention that a lot of those GPUs where sold to one of Ryzens most interested markets right now... I'm sure at least 10% of those GPUs sold are being used to push Photoshop and 3d Renders.

The fact that Ryzen comes up short by a few frames in 1080p gaming isn't really all that important to people looking for a brute force CPU.

The amount of people looking for a "brute force CPU" in a desktop is going to be even less than the amount of gamers out there. To the general public, AMD releasing a competitor to Intel is about as important as a sports car being released by Daewoo. AMD has a LONG way to go to attain good will in the corporate market where reliability is the most important factor.

The only markets that Ryzen really helps right now are independent content creators that do it mainly as a hobby and the people that get off on running benchmarks. If I were building a new PC right now I'd likely build it with Ryzen just because it's different while being pretty equal to Core. Although I'd wait until AMD and the mobo manufacturers can figure out the memory issues (and make some decent mITX boards).
 

Chebsy

Gawd
Joined
Jan 24, 2013
Messages
523
Can't think what prompted Intel to release these CPU's earlier than planned !!! (ahem... RYZEN..)
 

Darkswordz

Gawd
Joined
Jan 5, 2016
Messages
716
A month early, yay.

I'm sure they're still going to be charging $1,000.00+ for their 8-core chip that only performs 2% faster than the previous model. :bored:
 

toddw

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 9, 2004
Messages
1,374
I thought I would upgrade to 7700K and Z270, nope.
Then I thought it would be Ryzen... was oh so close... but... nope.
So this is interesting... and coming relatively soon. Though the effort they put into having a Kaby Lake X seems strange. Why bother?
Any chance they price the 8 core 16 thread model $399 and it o/c's decent?
 

EvilWays

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 9, 2006
Messages
1,507
Why bother with a Kaby-X? How the hell is that even in the HEDT CPU category? There doesn't seem to be much offered in a Kaby-X that one couldn't already get in a standard Kaby, and appears it will be 4C only vs. Skylake-X which looks like the plan is 6C to 10C (and up to 44 PCIe 3.x lanes). If I didn't already pull the trigger on a Broadwell-E build, I'd consider the Skylake-X but definitely not a Kaby-X.
 

Semantics

2[H]4U
Joined
May 18, 2010
Messages
2,811
8c/16t with 45w tdp @ 4.0ghz for $299. I'm in!!!!
8ct/16t 5w TDP at 5Ghz and it fits in phones and prints money!
If it beats AMD, Intel prices higher than AMD, Intel knows it has name value so all things equal Intel prices higher.
 

Unoid

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Feb 4, 2003
Messages
1,049
They'd only need to lower prices on their current offerings, no need for new hardware. They're still king of the hill.

King of the hill? In what besides being highest FPS in games but with more stutter?

high performance workstations desktops are now going ryzen, especially with the 16 core platform that amd will release.
 

Astral Abyss

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 15, 2004
Messages
2,920
I would sure like to know more about the processor speeds and prices, not to mention motherboard features and prices. 2 to 2.5 months isn't that far away.
 

M76

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
12,512
King of the hill? In what besides being highest FPS in games but with more stutter?

high performance workstations desktops are now going ryzen, especially with the 16 core platform that amd will release.
LOL @ "will".
I'm eagerly awaiting when AMD releases 16 core parts and at what price. But until they're actually here intel is still faster.

Don't tell me you'd choose a ryzen 1800x over a 6950x if price was irrelevant. Performance is still about 25-30% faster with Intel if you compare those. That's what I meant by "king of the hill".
 
Last edited:

DuronBurgerMan

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
1,340
LOL @ "will".
Can you also predict next week's winning lottery numbers? I'm more interested in that.

Don't tell me you'd choose a ryzen 1800x over a 6950x if price was irrelevant.

I'd go 6950X if the price was the same. The price is not the same, however. One can be had for $500 (or a cheap equivalent that OCs more or less the same for $329), the other costs $1,649. You could build an entire, substantial, fast Ryzen system for the cost of the 6950X *ALONE*.
 

M76

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
12,512
I'd go 6950X if the price was the same. The price is not the same, however. One can be had for $500 (or a cheap equivalent that OCs more or less the same for $329), the other costs $1,649. You could build an entire, substantial, fast Ryzen system for the cost of the 6950X *ALONE*.
But my original point was exactly that. That intel only needs to lower their prices to be ahead in the game again, they don't need new parts. In fact if they only bring out new parts but refuse to lower their prices I'm certain I'd switch to AMD I might even do it well before I expected to do my next build.
 

DuronBurgerMan

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
1,340
But my original point was exactly that. That intel only needs to lower their prices to be ahead in the game again, they don't need new parts. In fact if they only bring out new parts but refuse to lower their prices I'm certain I'd switch to AMD I might even do it well before I expected to do my next build.

My point is that it doesn't work that way in practice. Let's try it from a different angle. Let's say, for a moment, that GM did not sell Camaros right now. Ford comes out with a fast Mustang for $30k, and it's faster than every GM offering, except the $70k Corvette, and let's say, further, that the Mustang *APPROACHES* the Corvette's performance, but doesn't quite meet it. And finally, let's say Ford is teasing a faster derivative of that Mustang that will compete with the Corvette, but hasn't released it yet.

The solution isn't to cut the price of the Corvette to $30k. The solution is to create the Camaro, a car designed to compete with the Mustang. And further, perhaps, the solution will be to quickly up the Corvette's game a little, to distance it more and prepare it for competition from the car designed to compete with it directly.

In the context of CPUs, this would mean Intel might be well advised to release a mainstream 6-core Kaby Lake part (something like this is on the Intel long term roadmap), and of course, move up the release date of their Skylake-X chips, which will replace the Broadwell-E line (supposedly, they did exactly this, if today's news is any indication).

The solution will NOT be to flood the market with cheap Broadwell-E chips, which will cut directly into their profits. You don't start selling 'vettes for cheap, after all... not if you want to maintain their exclusivity.

TL;DR: Intel is not going to cut prices that much on the HEDT parts because profit. Therefore price will remain a huge factor in Ryzen's short-term and mid-term success. Long-term, AMD needs to up the clock speeds and IPC a bit.
 
Top