Linus Has Some Things to Say about Core i9 and X299

DF-1 said:
plus, i sorta feel if we dont AMD is gonna say like: Well, we've put EVERYTHING we had into it. I guess people just dont want our CPUs anymore, screw it.
Click to expand...

Worse is what Intel does... they'll keep doing what they've been doing as long as people keep buy their stuff. Nothing will change until people stop buying Intel.
 
5icko said:
It's about value. And Intel has proven time and again that they'll absolutely punish you for your loyalty, beating you like a nasty gramma (with switches that she makes you pick).
Click to expand...

This I don't get. Their old chips have held incredible value for over half a decade. How is this a bad thing. Their chips from 2010 are still getting 60fps in gaming. You can but a complete i5-2500 system for $75 and run almost every common ap now and game if you add a $100 graphics card. How is that not value?

There's also an incredible resale market where chips still hold great value for more current ones.

Mind yout guys I think aMD and Intel should exist. I just don't understand why people feel like they were violated by Intel when it's not been the worst thing in the world.

For those who are clomplaining that intel didn't revolutionize enough. I think we are all spoiled by a company releasing something every year. We literally had it good and complain like millenials not getting the right grade of silk milk in their latte.
 
a420c3ca-9dc6-42cf-94b0-375d6d550174.gif
 
I am not sure why he had to walk with a shaky-cam for this video, but other than that he had some good points. For most people though they will buy the processor they want, with the features they want and then get a MoBo that goes with it that has those capabilities turned on, so it will not be that big of a deal in the end. Not having complete specs for their product line is nothing new either. It is a roadmap, so there is bound to be some missing info. The RAID keys on the other hand, that is some top shelf bullshit.
 
trentchau said:
This I don't get. Their old chips have held incredible value for over half a decade. How is this a bad thing. Their chips from 2010 are still getting 60fps in gaming. You can but a complete i5-2500 system for $75 and run almost every common ap now and game if you add a $100 graphics card. How is that not value?

There's also an incredible resale market where chips still hold great value for more current ones.

Mind yout guys I think aMD and Intel should exist. I just don't understand why people feel like they were violated by Intel when it's not been the worst thing in the world.

For those who are clomplaining that intel didn't revolutionize enough. I think we are all spoiled by a company releasing something every year. We literally had it good and complain like millenials not getting the right grade of silk milk in their latte.
Click to expand...

It’s not about HOLDING value, but a purchase proposition. And what you can buy today, particularly in the multi core segment.

How much did Broadwell E cost again??
 
5icko said:
trentchau said:
This I don't get. Their old chips have held incredible value for over half a decade. How is this a bad thing. Their chips from 2010 are still getting 60fps in gaming. You can but a complete i5-2500 system for $75 and run almost every common ap now and game if you add a $100 graphics card. How is that not value?
Click to expand...

It’s not about HOLDING value, but a purchase proposition. And what you can buy today, particularly in the multi core segment.
Click to expand...

Of course, the counterpoint to all this would be that the reason Intel chips have held there value so well the last few years has been because the next generation chips have shown so little improvement over the previous generation! Which is not a good thing, but is simply a sign of the stagnation caused by lack of competition.

Other than from a benchmarking standpoint, in day to day use, the difference between an i7-37xx, i7-47xx, i7-67xx, and i7-77xx are, quite frankly, pretty negligible (especially if you are running them at the same clock rates and just comparing IPC).
Heck, for that matter, even one of my old i7-2700K desktops still does very nicely running Windows 10 and doesn't "feel" any different than my more recent machines do. The newer ones get a bit better framerates when gaming (which has more to do with the video card anyway) and they get a bit better performance on other tasks (handbrake, 7-zip, etc) but it's not night and day different, even between the i7-27xx series and an i7-77xx series.

Then AMD comes along and releases the R7-1800X I'm using right now -- which I got for only a little over $100 more than the 7700K would have set me back. And guess what, it doesn't "feel" any different than my i7 Intel systems do either -- but in stuff like handbrake, I'm getting around a 2:1 improvement in transcode time. Now that is something I take notice of!

And, sure, I could have gotten this same improvement by going with one of Intel's 8-core offerings like the 6900K -- but for $1100 freaking dollars!
 
Last edited:
AMD at least kicked the software industry where they didn't want to go... and Intel didn't want them to go... multi-thread.

So when AMD finally has a competitive IPC and they start spamming cores at you, it's going to really pay off with modern software.

Intel would have always been happy shilling out low-core CPUs for "lightly threaded" programs.
 
JustReason said:
I doubt it has been planned, at least not in its complete form. If planned then it wouldn't be missing specs on the 12+ core counts. It is that part that garners the "knee-jerk" designation.
Click to expand...

The delay for 12+ cores is a minor thing.

The real brain dead part is not an AMD competitor.

It's Kaby-X. WTF is that about? Kaby-X is useless and really screws up the platform.
 
Shmee said:
For most people though they will buy the processor they want, with the features they want and then get a MoBo that goes with it that has those capabilities turned on, so it will not be that big of a deal in the end. Not having complete specs for their product line is nothing new either.
Click to expand...

Therein lies the problem. If I understood him correctly, and I sincerely hope I am utterly wrong: As it currently stands, MoBo makers will have to support everything out of box for the entire lineup out of the box on the board, instead of building boards for those particular processors that only have those specific features. There will be no budget/value-grade, mid-grade, high end and BBD (Budget-Be-Damned) motherboards like we have now. What we will have is a selection of boards that offer minimal difference from one another in features, aside from aesthetics and maybe numbers of connectors, and there will be almost no difference in pricing. I sincerely hope I am honestly wrong about that. I would be overjoyed if I were, because that would be absolutely ludicrous and counter-productive to consumers. And because Intel has the stronger marketing arm than AMD, they could easily set this as the new standard. Being fucked on RAID is just icing on the shit cake.

As I said, I would be very happy to know I have that completely wrong.
 
trentchau said:
Uhm what about every other innovation like new ports. Etc. Are those just unremarkable throwaway's and speed is the only thing that matters?
Click to expand...

Most of the "new ports" aren't truly that big a deal.

X299:
Integrated graphics? Nope

PCI-E? 3.0, just like everyone else, and only some CPU's will have a reasonable number of lanes.

SATA? 8x 6.0Gbs, just like usual

Optane? uh, so far a big "who gives a shit"

M.2? old hat

U.2? nice, but not unique and could easily be added to almost any board (i.e. it's just 4x PCI-E lanes)

NVMe? ditto (and may end up crippled/brand locked by Intel if rumors are true)

USB 3-3.1? same old same old

USB 3.1 Gen 2? Nice, but truthfully only really matters with external SSD's, when most external drives are offline/secondary storage (i.e. high capacity platter drives)

Thunderbolt? Once again, same value proposition as USB 3.1 -- faster, but what are you going to hook to it that needs that much speed? Plus it's just one more different port to have to worry with on a device. At least with at USB 3 device plugged into a Thunderbolt port, it will work, but not vice versa.

RAID? used to be standard in the BIOS of most AMD and Intel machines for free, now a rarity, and Intel is talking about making us buy a dongle to add a RAID license? and even more for RAID 5, etc? screw that! I'll spend a bit more and buy a dedicated card with caching and hardware ECC if I want to spend that much.

So, yes, pretty "unremarkable" IMHO.
 
5icko said:
It’s not about HOLDING value, but a purchase proposition. And what you can buy today, particularly in the multi core segment.

How much did Broadwell E cost again??
Click to expand...

Enough for me to afford it, use it, and make a shit ton more money off of it to pay it over and over. And if didn't need the newest of the new I could get an extremely capable i3, g4560 or i5 for pretty cheap.
 
KazeoHin said:
Stop trying to be Shintai, that guy's a pro.
Click to expand...

Heh that guy and I had an argument once, but I also agree with a bunch of things he's written. But what am I saying that's unreasonable? It's another side of the arguement and perspective. Why should I stop being part of the discussion? I wouldn't ask the same from you.
 
mdburkey said:
Most of the "new ports" aren't truly that big a deal.

X299:
Integrated graphics? Nope

PCI-E? 3.0, just like everyone else, and only some CPU's will have a reasonable number of lanes.

SATA? 8x 6.0Gbs, just like usual

Optane? uh, so far a big "who gives a shit"

M.2? old hat

U.2? nice, but not unique and could easily be added to almost any board (i.e. it's just 4x PCI-E lanes)

NVMe? ditto (and may end up crippled/brand locked by Intel if rumors are true)

USB 3-3.1? same old same old

USB 3.1 Gen 2? Nice, but truthfully only really matters with external SSD's, when most external drives are offline/secondary storage (i.e. high capacity platter drives)

Thunderbolt? Once again, same value proposition as USB 3.1 -- faster, but what are you going to hook to it that needs that much speed? Plus it's just one more different port to have to worry with on a device. At least with at USB 3 device plugged into a Thunderbolt port, it will work, but not vice versa.

RAID? used to be standard in the BIOS of most AMD and Intel machines for free, now a rarity, and Intel is talking about making us buy a dongle to add a RAID license? and even more for RAID 5, etc? screw that! I'll spend a bit more and buy a dedicated card with caching and hardware ECC if I want to spend that much.

So, yes, pretty "unremarkable" IMHO.
Click to expand...

Lol if anything at least they will be available at launch and there will be an itx version for some reason :)
 
Usually his videos (except the wan cast or whatever I don't watch) are entertaining. This one wasn't.

Main point, this platform has loose specifications, is expensive and it poorly executed, possibly a knee jerk reaction to AMD.
 
Wow, Kaby Lake X is like the Tooth Fairy showing up to your house. You think everything is fine until there's money missing from your wallet and your daughter's knocked up. What an abortion of a platform. The Raid keys and limiting them to only Intel NVME storage is beyond insane. BTW I ripped off a little of the beginning of this post from a movie. I hope you get it.
 
SamuraiInBlack said:
Therein lies the problem. If I understood him correctly, and I sincerely hope I am utterly wrong: As it currently stands, MoBo makers will have to support everything out of box for the entire lineup out of the box on the board, instead of building boards for those particular processors that only have those specific features. There will be no budget/value-grade, mid-grade, high end and BBD (Budget-Be-Damned) motherboards like we have now. What we will have is a selection of boards that offer minimal difference from one another in features, aside from aesthetics and maybe numbers of connectors, and there will be almost no difference in pricing. I sincerely hope I am honestly wrong about that. I would be overjoyed if I were, because that would be absolutely ludicrous and counter-productive to consumers. And because Intel has the stronger marketing arm than AMD, they could easily set this as the new standard. Being fucked on RAID is just icing on the shit cake.

As I said, I would be very happy to know I have that completely wrong.
Click to expand...

The way I thought it worked is that all chips had to had to work on all boards. Not that all features of all the chips had to work on all boards. So sure all boards will have to have some sort of dual / quad RAM setup, but other things they can leave off provide the chip "works".
 
X299 does look like an afterthought. The RAID key idea is...something I expect Intel to abandon after a tidal wave of pushback. I don't see them being crazy enough to limit m.2 SSD brands for boot drives. But yes, it's poorly designed and poorly executed, and mobo manufactures are going to catch a lot of flak for stuff that they have exactly zero responsibility for.
 
Overall I think he had some good points. As someone who has supported Intel's HEDP for quite some time. I admit I'm a little bitter about how Nahalem / X58 basically broke incredible barriers, but then they jacked prices and made mediocre platform progress at least until X99 annoyed me; they basically capitalized on having no real competition by resting on their laurels. Haswell-E was the next big step forward in my opinion with Broadwell-E offering little unless you bought the highest end Extreme Edition part at a higher price than ever before. So now it finally looks like Intel is about to make the progress they should have made years ago with X299. However between the potential prices of all these items potentially being higher than ever and total foolishness like requiring a "$100 RAID key Lite or $300 Real Raid Key" to enable features on what are likely boards that cost upwards of $500, plus processors that are easily over $1000 if not $2000, is absolutely insane.

I am excited to see AMD's launch of their own HEDP and hope Threadrypper really scares the hell out of Intel, but more importantly I want it to actually deliver on the features and performance. Ryzen was certainly a good competitor for Intel mainstream and I'm glad its here, but I don't want to see a situation where AMD core-by-core performance is lacking significantly compared to Intel. If Threadrypper is basically the AMD hallmark of 10% less overall performance for like half or a third the price,that would be knocking it out of the park. However, Threadrypper can't afford to falter at getting high performance out of even single/double threaded workloads, gaming, or miss other features either compared to the i9s and X299 platform. If they come up too short, people will just bit the bullet and buy Intel yet again and I want to see AMD offer a real threat, but when someone is spending for a HEDP their threshold for limitations will be relatively well..limited!

Best of luck to AMD and Intel should realize this is a cautionary tale not to rest on their laurels and jack prices. Lets see how it develops...
 
This is going to be a very interesting volley between AMD and Intel. Even though I really prefer Intel, it looks like AMD will be the value leader. I also see a decent market for buying old xeon rigs on the cheap as they come off lease too.. Intel better be careful, they might just price / feature gimp themselves out of a significant number of sales.
 
Reminds me of when A64 and later C2/DC2Q introduction. Intel just doesn't have a answer to what AMD is doing moving forward at this moment they are trying to slow the bleeding basically. If AMD can build off of this they could really pick up steam going forward.
 
I would laugh is AMD's X399 boards offer NVM express RAID 1/10/0/5 out of the box. A big middle finger to intel.
 
Galvin said:
Intel was stupid thinking a competitor would never catch up. This goes for any business, you get complacent you'll get run over eventually.

Anyone buying these new boards and cpu's, better double triple check your purchase or you may find your self having to return what you bought.

The good news is that many cores is finally going mainstream.
Click to expand...

pretty much like AMD did during their athlon hayday when they were repeatedly kicking intel's ass then all of a sudden out of no where the core 2 architecture appeared. who knows maybe we'll see that cycle happen again here with ryzen.
 
In theory, you could fit an X399 board into an ITX form factor. The power delivery would probably have to go on a daughterboard and you would need to use SO-DIMM slots if you wanted quad channel, but it's possible.
 
Trimlock said:
No, but is that all that's to it?
Click to expand...
What? That you have to pay 90 to unlcock RAID 1 and 10, and you have to pay an additional 300 to unlock Raid 5? That's fucking bullshit and I hope intel burns for trying to pull something like that.
 
Talk about nickel & diming, now you gotta fork over more money to "unlock" certain raid configurations ... wow. Linus just destroyed Intel in this video and yet AMD is coming in with a kidney shot with their 64 pcie lanes support on all their X399 chips XD. God I can't wait for Threadripper/Epyc reviews.

Edit: Typo
 
  • Like
Reactions: Qchan
like this
Corporate greed just keeps getting better and as consumers we're too hopeless to do anything about it, some of us actually make up excuses defending such garbage decisions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Qchan
like this
This video gives me confirmation that I can wait another 2 ~ 3 years for my next build. This competition will drop prices and hopefully improve quality and higher cores more mainstream. By then Star Citizen will be near the 50% playable point and I will very excited to enter the VR arena.
 
I've always had mix feelings towards Linus' stuff. I have friends that are totally addicted to his feeds and I do respect how quickly he often gets his reviews out with credible and some useful insights. That being said its pretty obvious how Intel's lack of innovation has become conquered by their greed. I can't help but think that at some point they had engineers who proudly explained that the 2nd, 3rd, 4th gen cpu's were so well designed they could perform competently for decades, Then an exec say, hey we may have a problem here. 5th gen were still solid but at that point improvements were really leaning towards single digit percentages for many vs. 3rd/4th.

I can easily say, that outside of major hardware failure, I have no reason to build a new rig for some time to come. PCIe3.0/SATA III/USB3.0 provide all I really need at this point. My 2600k(4.2ghz) is barely hitting 50-60% during most gaming sessions with it's 1080ti barely using 20-35% of the PCIe2.0x16 bus in 1440p/144hz or 4k/60hz. My 4930k(4.1ghz) averages 20-30% with its 1080SLI barely using 20-25% of PCIe3.0x16 at Cinema 4k(4096x2160)/60hz. Either rig has more OC headroom if I really feel the need but both are stable and happy and it's obvious it will take ~8k resolutions before PCIe3.0 really starts to hit a limit for GPU's.

I like DDR4 and USB3.1-Thunderbolt looks cool but's about it and neither they nor anything else Intel has done in the last 3-4 years is really worth it to me anymore. The immediate future doesn't look any more promising either at this point. All this talk about more cores is nice but we still face the issue that many programs can't properly use what they're given now physical or virtual.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top