30 months ago
What do you think about it? :)
High end Skylake X will have both more cores and higher IPC in many workloads and possibly higher clock speed capability than threadripper. It will be the only product offering all of this, and as such, they can charge a huge premium for it and plenty of people will pay the premium. The fact they are launching 12 cores at the price point they used to sell 8 cores, and 16 cores at the price they used to offer 10, tells us that they do indeed feel some pressure from incoming threadripper, as these "jumps" in value are larger than with previous generations, but they aren't going to give up the premium people are willing to pay for the absolute top end.
I'm super enthusiastic about both threadripper and skylake X. The Core wars are now ramping up. The "core war" battle is what will drive this industry for the next many years, and will lead to proper multi-threading optimization (and stop-loss optimization) being built right into more and more software.
I can see Threadripper and i7X being competitive in the entry-level workstation market, but I don't see a plausible market for i9s. Reason? Epyc.
Epyc has 128 PCIe lanes, octa-channel RAM, and 32 cores. Not to mention ECC which is very important to professionals doing scientific computing. Word on the street is that it's going for around $2000, which is the same you pay for the top of the line i9 with 18 cores. The reasoning goes that, if your work depends on high thread count, and you can benefit from 36 threads, wouldn't 64 threads serve you better? Also, serious professionals don't give a **** about IPC or overclocking. The extra cores do way more to help their workflow than individual core performance ever will. If I were that serious about professional CAD work, I would not even consider the i9. I don't see any value in a professional computer user going with an i9 over an Epyc or maybe a Xeon.
not anything i'll use, but definitely has its purposes.
Someone will buy it. And to them it probably will be. For most? Not a chance.
I don't know why they made so many, if people are gonna spend $1500 on a cpu, they most likely won't mind spending $2000. I think its a bit silly the amount there are tbh
I have the same question with Nivida. Why make a x80ti? They cannablize the Titan every year.
From a business perspective its absolutely perfect. People who cannot wait for the Ti card will pay a hefty premium for effectively what is early access and Nvidia gets to make a killing. There is a segment of the market not happy to wait and they will pay a steep premium for the best, even if in terms of price/performance it is terrible.
Yeah but my point is more like this. The 1080 was $700. The Titan was $1100. If they had left it there those who want the better performance than the 1080 pay for the Titan.(or an AMD card which at this point doesnt exist in the market.) Now they can just pay the same $700 for the 1080ti.
If I was a stock holder I might be a bit perplexed.
That is not how I would look at it.
First off all the key point here is the Titan XP, Quadro card and 1080Ti are all made from the same wafer. However due to imperfections in the process they will not all be produced perfect. When the initial Titan XP was launched, the imperfect chips went to the Titan XP (with its cut down core) while the Quadro card retained better silicon with the initial Titan XP commanding the hefty $1100.
Few months on and with the Titan XP being out, those who can afford the card or want it will likely have already purchased it, Similar to the Quadro cards. At the same time as the process and yields improve in manufacturing you are getting more chips being produced. At this point everyone who will buy a Titan XP already has hence the release of the 1080Ti with chips that went to the initial Titan XP going into the 1080Ti's and the better Silicon going to the Quadro cards still being produced and the new Full fat 2017 Titan Xp. Now people who could not afford the $1100-$1200 price tag find the $700 price tag of the 1080Ti more palatable and it sells in droves. Heck plenty of 1080 owners (myself included) moved from the 1080 to 1080Ti netting Nvidia double sales and I know plenty of people who picked up the initial Titan XP as they want the best upgrade to the 2017 Titan Xp for that reason. So while Nvidia are not making the same massive premium as they are with the Titan XP as they are on the 1080Ti, they are putting the chips to use which and still making a significant profit on each Ti sold and selling it in much higher numbers.
This is nothing new, Nvidia pulled this process with the Titan, Titan Black and 780Ti and the cycle is now repeating and Nvidia's stock has only gone one way. I imagine they would have done the same with Maxwell if not for the fact the initial Titan card released was already the full fat GM200 core. As a shareholder I would be extremely delighted with the business acumen and as mentioned there share price suggests Nvidia know's what there doing.
I dont doubt that Nvidia knows what they are doing. They are a billion dollar company after all, and Im a hundredaire. Also I see your point on the lesser chips, I guess. And even the people who "upgraded and thus paid twice". But I would argue those who paid twice are very few, in the grand scheme of those that made the initial investment.
But again, even if I dont fully get the idea, it has been their thing few a few generations and they arent losing profit thus far. Perhaps they know know best eh?
Not for me.... But I'm sure some subset of users has a use for it...
For me the starting price of $1000 to start with the i9 processors no way worth it for me as i can't afford that pricing and am still glad i will have my x99 system up in a few days.
I kind of doubt it, especially where Treadripper is a thing and AMD is actually competitive for less. Bit I promise people will probably still eat them up.
I doubt it will be worth it for most people, but for those with very CPU intensive tasks it will be worth. As someone who was underwhelmed by Ryzen, the top Threadripper will probably be the better buy for someone who is looking in that range.
I don't think so. People who can benefit from those 16/18 cores will benefit more from the up to 32 cores offered on an Epyc CPU.
Absolutely not! I'll buy one anyway though.
Where have you been for a month? =P
Probably not, unless something like the i7-6950X becomes the i9-7950X
doing homework and collecting cds :p
prog rock/jazz rock cds