28 Cores and 56 threads - all at 5GHz! New Intel Desktop CPU on my Most Wanted List.

PC_Ace

Hauling Heavy Pixels
Of course, no idea what it will cost when launched later on this year (Q4). Probably an arm and a leg plus my Firstborn.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/antony...processor-is-most-powerful-ever/#2142b1df4ba3

Going to make AMD's Threadripper 2 upcoming launch an interesting exercise in Marketing Spin, unless they can pull a similar rabbit out of the hat. :)

Trying to think of how on Earth I could fully utilise such awesome compute-power - and apart from SETI@Home or the like - all the horrendous electricity bills that would follow...

Reckon when coupled with a suitable GPU it would probably run T:ANE fairly well with all the wicks turned up!

Edit update: Just announced - the 2nd gen Ryzen Threadripper 2000 from AMD. All 32 cores and 64 threads of it!
 
Last edited:
Given the cost of Intel's CPUs, only corporations with a lot of number crunching or members of the Mines better than yours Overclocking benchmarking club with more money than sense are likely to be wasting money on it. Pretty much pointless for a GPU intensive game / simulator such as TANE, 28 cores / 56 threads just won't be used or needed.
 
The computer-kid-brats who live in their parent's basement and have no living expenses other than their computer parts will buy these for bragging rights.

Speaking of crippling CPUs... I have a couple of programs which would kill this thing and still make it run like a Pentium II with World Builder from Animatek, later Digital Element being one of them. This program would runs at a snail's pace no matter what's thrown at it. When I installed this on my then new PIII, it would render at 20 minutes per frame for an animated landscape. That was at a reasonable resolution and none of the higher cinematic resolutions.
 
I have been playing with computers since 1970 Circa RadioShack ti-99 6 Hertz speed, Tandy if I recall correctly . The thing that has to occur is the computer chip needs to be made for the software currently in the marketplace they need to be able to be compatible with each other and I usually find that software is not up to speed with the newest computer in a lot of ways. I do realize Future needs in Software development is serious requirement as well....

For one thing I find that software Developers either don't have the time or don't want to spend the money don't want to do the proper error-checking etc, etc, because they want their product out quickly too take the newest computers and you can take it from there

I'm sure you all know of some type of software that just didn't live up to what you thought it would do with your new whiz-bang system. That's what happened in Windows in the latest additions, the software is not written to take use of the additional cores so you have a chip that has all the cores and the software can't take advantage of it since the software could move a lot faster if it was programmed to run with multiple cores but then you get into the situation where it's very hard to write the software at least from my standpoint.

I Don't Code, not one of my talents unfortunately, but I do see the horrible mis match UPS between software and I/O systems and it drives folks bananas in frustration.

Hopefully Core design and Software interplay will see better compatibility, reliability and most of all performance.
 
Likewise running at 4.2 GHz, pretty sure some of the overclocking obsessed have achieved 5GHz some time ago.
 
I've set the default processor cache frequency to 4.3Ghz for my Core i7 Devil's Canyon and the turbo to 4.6GHz, which it handles happily all day long whatever the workload.
Cannot overclock this old Haswell to 5Ghz in the way that is easily achieved and exceeded these days by Coffee Lake, but with the new, limited edition i7 8086K running at a standard turbo clock of 5Ghz, newer CPUs from Intel are literally turning up the heat on the competition. Witness the single processor, 28 core, 56 thread beast Intel showed off recently at Computex.
It was able to run Cinebench at 5Ghz or more on ALL cores and threads without exotic cooling systems! Should be available by the end of this year.
We've come a long way from the old 8086 processor which sported around 29k transistors running at 5MHz. :)
 
I was thinking after reading your comments on Coffee Lake Series, about last years I-9 Chip, and came across this article......Interesting read I think, and check below the story to see individual comments on Cyber Hacks to due with I-8 chips..........Etc.

Just Wondering ??? Have any of you had the pleasure of playing with an I-9 Chipped Computer?


It won't be for some time to come, but from what I can garner overall, they (Computer Developers) see the need for beefier
laptops, both Dedicated and Non-Dedicated GPU theater.......After my experience with Integrated HP Envy Laptop I've had for 4 years, I know which Fork in the Road I'll take in the future. Of course nothing comes Cheap for my decision....LOL

https://www.theverge.com/2018/4/3/1...ecture-processor-faster-u-series-i5-i7-optane
 
I'm considering an upgrade for TRS19 but the current crop of I7s don't come close to the 8086 special. I read it's a limited edition so I won't bother chasing it. Maybe I should go back to AMD where I haven't been for about 10 years or so.

Hmm, I can wait as I doubt if TRS19 will be out for a while. My guess is September/October.

My first PC was an 8088 although I did have a TI99/4 and TI99/4a prior to that.
 
pcas1986 - the Core i7-8086K is basically a souped-up i7-8700K - a six-core, 12-thread desktop processor that is currently rated the best gaming CPU out there.
Base and turbo speeds of the 8086K are only ~ 300Mhz higher than the 8700k and obviously the product of a cherry-picked silicon binning process. (However, it's a pretty safe bet that these new limited edition chips should overclock really well, too).
Nice summary at Anand Tech here: https://www.anandtech.com/show/12875/intel-announces-the-core-i78086k-coffee-lake-at-5-ghz

I'm holding off for a little longer to see what the next gen brings. AMD is certainly producing some nicely revamped Ryzens at attractive and competitive prices right now, but none represent the step-change in performance that I'm looking for in my next gaming build CPU. All of the Ryzen 2s have difficulty clocking beyond 4.2GHz, which is less than my base frequency now.
 
A long way is right from the Z-80, 8080, 8085, 8086, and 8088 days. I used to own and repair systems built around these chips back in their heyday. Compared to today's CPUs and computer systems in general, these things are slow and comparatively small dinosaurs, but to us back then they were the whiz bang bees knees systems capable of light speed operations, albeit, with limited graphics.

My Z-80 based Visual V-1050 desktop computer ran CP/M Plus (CP/M 3.0), and sported 32K of video RAM and 64K of system RAM. The system RAM had to be bank switched in and out of addresses space in order to access the 64K because the processor wasn't capable of addressing that high. The 32K of video RAM was driven by another famous microprocessor in its day. A 6502 was used for this and talked to the Z-80 through a PIO interface and DMA. There was no internal hard disk, however, the system had a Centronics port for that. Some people connected a whopping 5 MB or 10 MB hard disks to the system through these ports.

The system came with a bundle of programs that included C-BASIC, Multiplan, DR-Graph, WordStar, and Z-80 Assembler, and a terminal emulator. With the system's emulating capabilities, you could install software written for Osborne, DEC, and Kaypro. I learned a lot about computers and some programming with this system back in 1985 when I got it.

It was this system and Visual's later V-1083, aka Commuter Computer, which got me interested in the underpinnings of the systems beyond the hardware, though, hardware is still my favorite. The Commuter was a transportable fully IBM compatible computer with a flip-up LCD screen. Unlike the Data General DG-1 that competed against it, you could run everything on the Commuter except for BASIC stuff that used the IBM built-in BASIC in their ROMs.

During my tenure at Visual, I got to use some older systems from Ontel whom they purchased in 1983. Ontel used the 8080s and the other earlier chips. Ontel systems were customizable "intelligent-terminals", which could be customized and even turned into small computers depending upon their peripherals.

Oh what fun stuff in those days. I was lucky that I got to work with these early systems back in the teething days before computers became sterile boxes they are today.
 
...

Fascinating!
(Cannot see T:ANE maxing out more than 20 logical processors at any time, even when coupled up with some high-end GPUs in SLI).
PC

Fascinating indeed compared to those processors, video and I/O mentioned by John. I also recall lots of those numbers from the 80's.

It's not TANE specifically that is my target but rather the new image crunching software used to develop PBR textures. These programs can use many image layers, generators (think grunge), masks (for isolating parts of a model for a special paint job), and stencils (think fake screw heads using normal maps). When one presses the button to start all the calculations and burn new images, a fast PC can grind to a halt. TANE merely has to map those textures to a polygon (triangle).

What I don't know is the loading for those programs. i.e. is the CPU used, the GPU, or both, plus the I/O between them. High core counts might be a solution even if TANE can't use them all. BTW, Chris (windwalkr) did say that TANE does use whatever is available. Whether that makes a difference to FPS is another story but it might be useful for scripts using the new Asynchronous Route Streaming API set.

Fascinating indeed. I just wish I had more time to fully explore all this stuff.
 
Back
Top