More defective Xeons incoming from Intel...

[lutjens]

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/dis...fications.html

Why am I not surprised? Same old crap from Intel....defective chips for a premium price. I hope people are less willing to buy these turds this time around...

[kromosto]

Brace yourselves.... you forgot to put brace yourselves at the beginning of the title.

And don't expect much from people intel will sell enough of them.

[Andi64]

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/dis...fications.html

Why am I not surprised? Same old crap from Intel....defective chips for a premium price. I hope people are less willing to buy these turds this time around...

You can always buy a Xeon with 12C/24T 30MB and use it on your desktop X79 board. There's absolutely no competition to the 3930K/4930K, that explains the price.

[zanzabar]

You can always buy a Xeon with 12C/24T 30MB and use it on your desktop X79 board. There's absolutely no competition to the 3930K/4930K, that explains the price.

and it will be clocked so low that it will be useless and much slower than an overclocked 6 core.

at this point i think intel needs some assets seized, and i really hope that the jaguar is a usable part from amd.

[Aberration]

With ARM/Mobile gaining traction, you probably wont see any action against Intel.

[repman]

You can always buy a Xeon with 12C/24T 30MB and use it on your desktop X79 board. There's absolutely no competition to the 3930K/4930K, that explains the price.

There are no 12 core Xeon CPUs. You probably meant the 10c/20t Xeon E7, those are LGA 1567 only. The highest for the LGA 2011 is 8c/16t.

[zanzabar]

With ARM/Mobile gaining traction, you probably wont see any action against Intel.

i dont see why that matters, that has nothing to do with workstations or desktops. intel is clearly price fixing and making a monopoly by not letting anyone who can compete license x86.

There are no 12 core Xeon CPUs. You probably meant the 10c/20t Xeon E7, those are LGA 1567 only. The highest for the LGA 2011 is 8c/16t.

they were "supposed" to add 12core to the IB-e.

[kromosto]

There are no 12 core Xeon CPUs. You probably meant the 10c/20t Xeon E7, those are LGA 1567 only. The highest for the LGA 2011 is 8c/16t.

vaow never noticed 10c 20t procs are 1567 only... it seemed impossible to acquire 4 memory channels with 1567 pins but intel didn't think like that. thank you for pointing.

[K404]

So....10-15% higher stock performance between MHz and architecture. Much as expected really. Same as Sandy->Ivy and Ivy->Haswell.

Heat will probably make these chips pretty poor air/water OCers....same as Sandy-> Ivy.

Under LN2 however..........




As for the "defective Xeon" comments.....who cares? Do you want us to have our own dedicated production line? Intel are in this for the bottom line. If they can satisfy demands and offer a warranty, everything is fine. Joe Average doesn't care about engineering purity, they care about having a product they can use. Here is a product we can use. We buy it or we don't. What exactly have we done to EXPECT Intel to give us 30-40% better performance and/or lower power consumption with each new series of chips?

[STEvil]

technically they may not be defective either, anyways, just partially disabled for model specs.

[naokaji]

Must be a slow news day...
Rather obvious that Ivy-E won't be much faster than Sandy-E, just like Ivy wasn't much faster than Sandy.

[Chrono Detector]

Very disappointing from Intel indeed, I was hoping for a nice 22nm 8 core CPU but I guess that won't happen anytime soon. Guess because there is no competition in the market and demand, if AMD could get back into the high end CPU market.

[Sparky]

I'm missing why they are "defective"?

[m_jones_]

I'm missing why they are "defective"?

Most likely can't reach their power consumption target for the server market so instead of scrapping them they disable a few features and sell it off to enthusiasts.

[xVeinx]

i dont see why that matters, that has nothing to do with workstations or desktops. intel is clearly price fixing and making a monopoly by not letting anyone who can compete license x86.

I don't think anyone wants to invest billions, several years, etc. to enter the market with viable designs when the profit and margins are shrinking for both Intel and AMD. x86 isn't about to die, but the market is shifting and the cost to start from scratch would be astronomical. Buying AMD would be about the only way that anyone would enter the market. You'll see new companies working on new architectures before you see another in x86.

[zalbard]

And who told you they were defective? They are very likely to be very capable units with functional parts disabled.

These fine gentlemen I agree with:

technically they may not be defective either, anyways, just partially disabled for model specs.

I'm missing why they are "defective"?

[lutjens]

I'm missing why they are "defective"?

Nearly all the Ivy-E desktop chips will be defective Xeons that have defective cores and/or cache. It's highly unlikely Intel would neuter a fully functional Xeon processor into a desktop i7, because the MSRP for even the slowest fully functional chip that Intel has a SKU for (currently) is higher than the price for a (so called) "Extreme" model CPU. The only scenario I can image where this would be the case would be if a CPU was fully functional, but had a few VERY poorly clocking core or two (like unable to hit 2GHz) would Intel consider cutting it down. I entirely understand why they do this and that it allows them to recover some money out of defective cores, but what irritates me greatly is the fact that the top bin, fully functional chips are multiplier locked. An unlocked, fully functional chip that is properly cooled would be a monster and would sell like hotcakes. People are buying unlocked desktop chips to use in servers, because they can be overclocked, and Intel could instead be selling them Xeons chips that are over $2k instead. All that's standing in the way is Intel's ego...

The only reason why we even have "Extreme" (or desktop chips for that matter) that use the 2011 socket is so that Intel can sell dies that have insufficient demand on the Xeon side.

[Kain665]

I still don't see why you guys are whining.

Maybe you think it's your right to demand certain products for companies?

Who the hell cares if Intel doesn't release 8 core consumer models? It's not like the current 6 cores are slow for anything you'd like to do in the consumer realm.

[Utroz]

I still don't see why you guys are whining.

Maybe you think it's your right to demand certain products for companies?

Who the hell cares if Intel doesn't release 8 core consumer models? It's not like the current 6 cores are slow for anything you'd like to do in the consumer realm.

This forum is called Xtremesystems not Joeblowsystems.... We are not your typical consumers, trust me many users here can find a real use for a 8 or 10 or 12 core cpu, thats why some of the people on this forum have had to get 2p and even 4p server systems to get enough cpu power to do what they want. I have seen threads here about 12 and 16 core AMD's being OCed on Ln2, we keep it Xtreme..... Intel is purposely slowing down progress on consumer Cpu's, it is BS so they can stuff their fat wallets.....

[THX1138]

"More defective Xeons incoming from Intel... "

Back it up with facts

[Kain665]

This forum is called Xtremesystems not Joeblowsystems.... We are not your typical consumers, trust me many users here can find a real use for a 8 or 10 or 12 core cpu, thats why some of the people on this forum have had to get 2p and even 4p server systems to get enough cpu power to do what they want. I have seen threads here about 12 and 16 core AMD's being OCed on Ln2, we keep it Xtreme..... Intel is purposely slowing down progress on consumer Cpu's, it is BS so they can stuff their fat wallets.....

That's great, no reason you can't overclock the 6 core parts

I hate to break it to you, but nobody out there is innovating for the fun of it. Intel's just ahead of the curve enough that they can relax, ride out their lead and not have to best anyone. It's great being at the top.

[mbreslin]

For someone who lives in the valley and posts on XS you're pretty far off base.

Let me break it to you. (and I don't hate to break it to you ):

Nine of every ten processors sold are mobile. It is a pipe dream to think they will ever make enthusiast desktop processors a priority. But it's also a pipe dream to think they're way out in front in a market that has anything close to the same upside it once did. If they "ride out their lead" they will lose.

[Ace123]

I love it when people about the single fastest processor available on the market for desktop use. I'm not ing, my 3930k smokes everything else on the planet at 5.2ghz. come at me with All your ivybridge Haswell crap. I remember back in the core 2 days, we were deliberately buying up Xeon x3220s or whatever they were because it was better silicone. Give me more incredible Xeon stuff, its Adonis, and I love it.

[zanzabar]

I love it when people about the single fastest processor available on the market for desktop use. I'm not ing, my 3930k smokes everything else on the planet at 5.2ghz. come at me with All your ivybridge Haswell crap. I remember back in the core 2 days, we were deliberately buying up Xeon x3220s or whatever they were because it was better silicone. Give me more incredible Xeon stuff, its Adonis, and I love it.

what good is a xeon when they are clocked to be slower than a diesel civic. if intel sold unlocked xeons i dont think anyone would care about them only selling xeons they broke to make a new bin for i7s.

[Aberration]

Nearly all the Ivy-E desktop chips will be defective Xeons that have defective cores and/or cache. It's highly unlikely Intel would neuter a fully functional Xeon processor into a desktop i7, because the MSRP for even the slowest fully functional chip that Intel has a SKU for (currently) is higher than the price for a (so called) "Extreme" model CPU. The only scenario I can image where this would be the case would be if a CPU was fully functional, but had a few VERY poorly clocking core or two (like unable to hit 2GHz) would Intel consider cutting it down. I entirely understand why they do this and that it allows them to recover some money out of defective cores, but what irritates me greatly is the fact that the top bin, fully functional chips are multiplier locked. An unlocked, fully functional chip that is properly cooled would be a monster and would sell like hotcakes. People are buying unlocked desktop chips to use in servers, because they can be overclocked, and Intel could instead be selling them Xeons chips that are over $2k instead. All that's standing in the way is Intel's ego...

The only reason why we even have "Extreme" (or desktop chips for that matter) that use the 2011 socket is so that Intel can sell dies that have insufficient demand on the Xeon side.

You do realize the engine in your car is capable of putting out more horse power, if only they would unlock the computer for you...