Intel Launches Core i9 14900KS, Clocking Up To 6.2GHz

[avis]

All architectures are "ulimately abandoned". Intel did a good thing when they presented the Pentium 4 Northwood, which was decent, then to run frequencies higher decided to go from a 20-stages pipeline (Northwood) to 31-stages pipeline (Prescott), skyrocketing with power absorpion and losing performance per clock.
Prescott although was not the last of the family; then came Presler, which was the same but built on 65nm, reducing a bit the power usage, but still with ridicolous performances against the really multicore cpus like Athlon64.

It's a bit nowadays: when Intel loses on the architecture, frequencies and power absorpion go higher and higher...

RPL still uses a ton of things and features found as early as in the Pentium M lineup in 2003 which in its turn was a successor to Pentium III which was based on Pentium II and so on. No, not all architectures are abandoned. Some just get decent updates/reworks/tuning and keep on churning on.

The NetBurst microarchitecture was on the other hand largely abandoned as it had some intractable deficiencies.

[commodore256]

6.2Ghz? Will your computer burst into flames?

[blackshard]

As i have said a number of times, I would much rather see a much lower clocked processor with many smaller cores, for instance, if Intel brings a version of their E-core only Xeon to the desktop, with say 100 E-cores at 1-2Ghz, I would be all over that, especially if it had a bunch of accelerators onboard.

Of course i also think that in 2025 we may all very well be looking at x86 like a box of moldy sdram modules, so...

I don't think too many people will be buying this processor, just intel trying to clean out some inventory.

They exist though, some people call them GPUs!

Irony apart, GPUs are no more and no less than pletora of (not-so-anymore-)specialized cores and yes, I would also love to see what E-cores can do, but yet E-cores are way limited in single-threaded tasks, no AVX-512, so meh, Zen4c sounds way better in any case.

[avis]

People is not "wound up" because a new cpu is presented, people just discuss of what is being presented.

In this case, it is more of the same overclocked and insane power absorbing jokes Intel is providing in the last couple of years.

So, instead of focusing to real market, lowering their prices and trying to have some good competition, Intel is rather pushing the limits of ridicolousness to appear on top of the benchmark charts and stretch their product price list.

I was considering an i5-14500 for my next setup, yet it costs like a ryzen 7700 and the ryzen is superior by far in all tasks.

The choice of words matter and your counter argument doesn't apply to my statement. Many people here have indeed let their emotions run wild and we are discussing a very niche processor for overclockers.

And indeed Intel has had multiples sales recently, so your statement about Intel not "lowering their prices" or "trying to have some good competition" is outright false.

If you don't follow the market, sites like slickdeals, newegg and Amazon, it doesn't mean that Intel CPUs are sold at MSRP.

So, not only you didn't address my comment, your added some deceitful extra.

As of this very moment, https://www.amazon.com/Intel-i7-1370.../dp/B0BCF57FL5 $369, i.e. a 12% discount. There have been much deeper price cuts recently.

Again, it's a topic about Intel, we have a sort of AMD cult here, so slamming Intel is just a way of breathing. I get it. You just don't need to look overtly "rational" and "logical" if you're anything but.

6.2Ghz? Will your computer burst into flames?

Yes, please, you're so funny. You could also check this for even more fun:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4Bm0Wr6OEQ

Here's a nice pic from this video:

[blackshard]

RPL still uses a ton of things and features found as early as in the Pentium M lineup in 2003 which in its turn was a successor to Pentium III which was based on Pentium II and so on. No, not all architectures are abandoned. Some just get decent updates/reworks/tuning and keep on churning on.

The NetBurst microarchitecture was on the other hand largely abandoned as it had some intractable deficiencies.

"Ton of things" can mean anything, if you look into, you probably will find some residuals of netburst too (Hyperthreading?), as well as I can imagine the Pentium Pro/P2/P3/Pentium M architectural material is residual in current architectures.

[avis]

"Ton of things" can mean anything, if you look into, you probably will find some residuals of netburst too (Hyperthreading?), as well as I can imagine the Pentium Pro/P2/P3/Pentium M architectural material is residual in current architectures.

Media and Intel representatives have stated on multiple occasions that the Core uArch lives on and the NetBurst was a failure and was abandoned. As to how much, I won't/can't claim.

And the first Core uArch didn't even feature HyperThreading, in fact it only reappeared years later, so I wouldn't be so brave as to claim that HT from NetBurst was borrowed/reapplied/whatever. To the contrary, considering how long it took Intel to get it back, it was Nehalem in 2008 (according to AI, I'm too lazy to look it up), it looked like they totally reworked it. It took them two generations to add it back. Core and Core 2 CPUs didn't have it.

[avis]

Google's Gemini:

Intel's newest architectures, Golden Cove and Gracemont, represent a significant shift from previous Core architectures, but they still retain some core concepts:

• Instruction set: Both Golden Cove and Gracemont are compatible with the x86-64 instruction set, which allows them to run the same software as previous Core processors.
• Out-of-order execution: Both architectures maintain the concept of out-of-order execution, where instructions can be reordered for optimal performance.
• Pipeline structure: The basic concept of a pipeline for fetching, decoding, executing, and writing back results is still present in both Golden Cove and Gracemont, although the specifics of the pipeline stages have been improved.

However, there are also major changes:

• Micρόarchitecture: Golden Cove and Gracemont represent entirely new microarchitectures with significant improvements to the front-end (instruction fetching and decoding) and back-end (execution) compared to previous Core architectures like Skylake or Cypress Cove.
• Focus: Golden Cove prioritizes performance with a wider decode, larger buffers, and more execution ports, while Gracemont focuses on efficiency with a smaller design optimized for lower power consumption.
• Manufacturing process: Both Golden Cove and Gracemont are built on the Intel 7 process (previously 10nm Enhanced SuperFin), which offers improvements in transistor density and performance compared to previous 14nm processes used in older Core architectures.

Overall, while Golden Cove and Gracemont maintain some core concepts from previous Core architectures for compatibility, they represent a significant leap forward in design and performance with a new focus on either high performance (Golden Cove) or efficiency (Gracemont).

Here's a great continuation:

Quantifying the exact percentage of Netburst or Core architecture carried over to Golden Cove and Gracemont is difficult. Here's a breakdown:

• Netburst (P68): Almost None Directly
  • Netburst's focus on high clock speeds and a very long pipeline proved inefficient.
  • Golden Cove and Gracemont prioritize efficiency and use shorter, more balanced pipelines.
  • Specific Netburst features like branch prediction hints are not present in these new architectures.
• Core Architecture (P6 lineage): Foundational Concepts
  • Golden Cove and Gracemont borrow core concepts from the P6 microarchitecture (Pentium Pro, II, III, M), which is the foundation of the Core line (e.g., Core 2). These concepts include:
    • Out-of-order execution
    • Caches and branch prediction (improved upon from Core architectures)
    • x86-64 instruction set compatibility
• Golden Cove and Gracemont: New Designs
  • Both represent significant advancements over prior Core architectures with:
    • New microarchitectures with optimized pipelines
    • Focus on either high performance (Golden Cove) or efficiency (Gracemont)
    • Built on a more advanced manufacturing process (Intel 7)

In essence:

• Golden Cove and Gracemont don't directly use much of Netburst's design.
• They borrow core concepts from the P6 lineage that forms the foundation of Core architectures, but with significant improvements.
• The majority of the design in Golden Cove and Gracemont is new and optimized for their specific performance/efficiency goals.

So, while some foundational ideas from Core's P6 lineage are present, it's more accurate to say Golden Cove and Gracemont are new architectures inspired by and building upon prior concepts, not directly carrying over large portions of either Netburst or Core design.

[blackshard]

And indeed Intel has had multiples sales recently, so your statement about Intel not "lowering their prices" or "trying to have some good competition" is outright false.

If you don't follow the market, sites like slickdeals, newegg and Amazon, it doesn't mean that Intel CPUs are sold at MSRP.

So, not only you didn't address my comment, your added some deceitful extra.

As of this very moment, https://www.amazon.com/Intel-i7-1370.../dp/B0BCF57FL5 $369, i.e. a 12% discount. There have been much deeper price cuts recently.

America is not my market and I don't care about i7-13700k, I need a midrange CPU and my market is Europe.

On my market, currently an i5-14500 is priced a 235€, i5 14600k is priced at 298€ and Ryzen 7 7700 is priced 249€. As you see, no deceitful extra from me, I was looking the market for weeks, but sorry if I don't look on amazon.com for a heater, as I require just a modest midrange cpu.

Again, it's a topic about Intel, we have a sort of AMD cult here, so slamming Intel is just a way of breathing. I get it. You just don't need to look overtly "rational" and "logical" if you're anything but.

Yeah sure, I have three machines are all of them are Intel, but hey I'm part of the AMD cultists I look on the market equally for Intel and AMD cpu to renew one of them, compare features and prices, but I'm illogical and irrational.

I instead see some of the classical "victimism of the perpetrator", where there is an attempt to instillate the doubt of a ridicoulous conspiracy in the reader, telling that others are taking the thing emotionally, while instead you are taking the thing emotionally. Intel is a company that makes thousand of billion of $$$, why do you care about Intel being slammed on a niche forum?

[avis]

America is not my market and I don't care about i7-13700k, I need a midrange CPU and my market is Europe.

On my market, currently an i5-14500 is priced a 235€, i5 14600k is priced at 298€ and Ryzen 7 7700 is priced 249€. As you see, no deceitful extra from me, I was looking the market for weeks, but sorry if I don't look on amazon.com for a heater, as I require just a modest midrange cpu.



Yeah sure, I have three machines are all of them are Intel, but hey I'm part of the AMD cultists I look on the market equally for Intel and AMD cpu to renew one of them, compare features and prices, but I'm illogical and irrational.

I instead see some of the classical "victimism of the perpetrator", where there is an attempt to instillate the doubt of a ridicoulous conspiracy in the reader, telling that others are taking the thing emotionally, while instead you are taking the thing emotionally. Intel is a company that makes thousand of billion of $$$, why do you care about Intel being slammed on a niche forum?

You've been here for 15 years and you're really asking these questions? Anything Intel or NVIDIA is slammed here, anything AMD is praised or if AMD releases suboptimal products, people don't even talk about their issues too much.

And I don't understand how posting a ton of information and arguments can be considered "emotional". Maybe you're looking into my messages too much?

As for Europe, yeah, you've got peculiar pricing. You still can solve it by purchasing stuff from the US or even China (aliexpress, JD, taobao, alibaba, etc.)

And https://geizhals.eu/ doesn't show any deals either. Weird.

[coder]

I read somewhere that CEP is an internal feature of the Intel processors that is keeping the frequency higher but throttles the CPU when there is a sudden voltage drop that could disrupt signals and cause corruption. I am afraid that disabling CEP may, in such cases, cause instability. Looks like on Intel processors you can choose what source of instability you prefer; they will also sell that as a feature

I'm not an expert on these things, but my limited understanding is that undervolting is one way people managed to tame the instability problems. However, that can also cause CEP to become overactive. Because CEP throttles the CPU when it thinks there's an over-current event, you needlessly lose performance if you leave CEP enabled when undervolting.

So, disabling CEP isn't the solution to the instability, but rather something you'd do to mitigate the side-effects of undervolting.