MMM
    X

    Subscribe to New Ads!

    Receive weekly ads in your inbox!



Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 34

Thread: Intel To Launch Xeon E7 Ivytown ?Ivy Bridge-EX? Processor With 15 Cores and 30 Thread

  1. #1
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Toronto ON
    Posts
    566

    Intel To Launch Xeon E7 Ivytown ?Ivy Bridge-EX? Processor With 15 Cores and 30 Thread

    Intel has announced that they would soon launch their latest 15 core Xeon E7 Ivytown processor for high-end servers. Only a few month back at IDF13, Intel announced their latest Xeon E5-2600 V2 processors based upon the Ivy bridge architecture.

    Intel To Launch Xeon E7 Ivytown ?Ivy Bridge-EX? Processor With 15 Cores

    The Xeon E7 processors would be part of Intel?s Ivy Bridge-EX lineup which includes the flagship Xeon E7-8800 processor with 15 cores and 30 threads. Till now, Intel only had 12 cores and 24 threads on their Xeon E5 based Xeon E5-2697 v2 and Xeon E5-2695 v2 processors. While the flagship chip would debut under the Xeon E7-8800 branding, Intel would also launch several Xeon E7 8800/4800/2800 v2 based processors which will hit market soon.
    Read more at WCCDtech
    Last edited by Heinz68; 12-06-2013 at 08:23 AM. Reason: fixed the link
    Core i7-4930K LGA 2011 Six-Core - Cooler Master Seidon 120XL ? Push-Pull Liquid Water
    ASUS Rampage IV Black Edition LGA2011 - G.SKILL Trident X Series 32GB (4 x 8GB) DDR3 1866
    Sapphire R9 290X 4GB TRI-X OC in CrossFire - ATI TV Wonder 650 PCIe
    Intel X25-M 160GB G2 SSD - WD Black 2TB 7200 RPM 64MB Cache SATA 6
    Corsair HX1000W PSU - Pioner Blu-ray Burner 6X BD-R
    Westinghouse LVM-37w3, 37inch 1080p - Windows 7 64-bit Pro
    Sennheiser RS 180 - Cooler Master Cosmos S Case

  2. #2
    I am Xtreme
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    France
    Posts
    8,832
    It's a shame they are so expensive, I really need more parallel processing power.
    Donate to XS forums
    Quote Originally Posted by jayhall0315 View Post
    If you are really extreme, you never let informed facts or the scientific method hold you back from your journey to the wrong answer.

  3. #3
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    In the space between...
    Posts
    345
    Man...what a beasty cpu. heh...I wish I needed that much processing power.
    'Best Bang For The Buck' Build - CM Storm Sniper - CM V8 GTS HSF
    2500K @ 4.5GHz 24/7 - Asus P8Z68-V Pro Gen3 - GSkill 2x4GB DDR3-2400 C10
    Sapphire Vapor-X 7770 OC Edition - PC Power & Cooling Silencer MkIII 600W
    Boot: 2x 64GB SuperSSpeed S301 SLC Raid 0 Work: Intel 520 120GB
    Storage: Crucial M500 1TB - Ocz Vertex 4 128GB - 4x 50GB Ocz Vertex 2
    HDDs: 2 x 1TB WD RE4 Raid0 - Ext.Backup: 2 x 1.5TB WD Blacks Raid 1

  4. #4
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Saskatchewan, Canada
    Posts
    2,208
    I wish AMD's core were faster per core, Intel would be forced to give us more cores. One thing Intel has completely held back at with its consumer processors is the number of cores. We had quadcores 7 years ago and for the most part that's what Intel is still giving us today. When we want 6, they more than double the price.

    AMD gave us 8 cores(or 4 depending on how we look at it) a while back but the problem is their 8 cores don't perform like 8 cores. AMD processors perform more along the lines of 3 of Intels cores with a little bit of overclocking to make up for the deficit for 90% of the tasks out there. I thought we were going to see piledriver shine with atleast battlefield 4, but they lose pretty badly to Intel processors.

    Once something beyond 4 cores becomes mainstream, then maybe we can see more programming for it. But with Intel dominating this market and rightfully so, they have grown complacent with only giving 4 cores, when it should be more at this point. I don't think it cost's Intel that much to manufacture an extra couple cores. I think Intel spends most of its money on R and D and the Fab plant itself.
    Core i7 920@ 4.66ghz(H2O)
    6gb OCZ platinum
    4870x2 + 4890 in Trifire
    2*640 WD Blacks
    750GB Seagate.

  5. #5
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    US, MI
    Posts
    1,678
    I didn't know they were coming out with a 15 core chip...
    I knew of a 12 core.

    Kinda odd though, you'de think it was a 16 core, I think it is..., but is yield that bad or are they holding back even on these parts?

    @tajoh111
    I don't think the avg person needs anything past a quad or a quasi 8 core, at least not right now.

    It would be cool if we had 64 core chips right now though lol .
    Or maybe 128, and 256 threads...
    Past that you may need some os updates .


    CPU: Intel Core i7-4930k [3332B054]
    CPU Heatsink: NZXT Kraken X60
    Mobo: ASUS Rampage IV Black Edition (0507 BIOS)
    MEM: 4x 4gig G.Skill [F3-2400C9Q-16GTXD] (Dual Sidded Samsung of Some Sorts)
    PSU: Antec HCP-850 Platinum
    VGA: nVidia Grid VGX K2 (WIP with 2x 680 lightnings)
    Monitor: ASUS VG278HE & 3DVision2 Kit
    Drives: 2x WD Red 2TB Drives [WDBMMA0020HNC-NRSN] (RAID 0), Corsair Force Series 3 CSSD-F60GB3A-BK 60GB SATA3 SSD, Pioneer BDR-2208 Blue Ray Burner
    Case: Rosewill Blackhawk Ultra
    OS's: Windows 2003 Enterprise x86 SP2-R2 VLM, Windows 7 Standard Embedded x86 SP1 EVL (128GB Patched), Windows 7 Standard Embedded x64 SP1 EVL
    Mouse: Using generic mouse for now...
    Arm:Samsung Galaxy S IV i9500 Octo-Core Quad Band 16gb Unlocked and 2x 64gig sd cards
    777

    Sig is slightly out of date, I'll update it later ^^


  6. #6
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    川崎市
    Posts
    2,076
    Quote Originally Posted by NEOAethyr View Post
    Kinda odd though, you'd think it was a 16 core, I think it is..., but is yield that bad or are they holding back even on these parts?
    Its likely three 6 cores with one each disabled, I'd suspect they are holding back to meet TDP targets rather than due to yields.

  7. #7
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    In the space between...
    Posts
    345
    Bet it's got a truck load of cache too...
    'Best Bang For The Buck' Build - CM Storm Sniper - CM V8 GTS HSF
    2500K @ 4.5GHz 24/7 - Asus P8Z68-V Pro Gen3 - GSkill 2x4GB DDR3-2400 C10
    Sapphire Vapor-X 7770 OC Edition - PC Power & Cooling Silencer MkIII 600W
    Boot: 2x 64GB SuperSSpeed S301 SLC Raid 0 Work: Intel 520 120GB
    Storage: Crucial M500 1TB - Ocz Vertex 4 128GB - 4x 50GB Ocz Vertex 2
    HDDs: 2 x 1TB WD RE4 Raid0 - Ext.Backup: 2 x 1.5TB WD Blacks Raid 1

  8. #8
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    567
    Am waiting for MM to chime in on his pair he will be testing (hopefully).

  9. #9
    Xtreme Guru
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Ace Deuce, Michigan
    Posts
    3,956
    Quote Originally Posted by naokaji View Post
    Its likely three 6 cores with one each disabled, I'd suspect they are holding back to meet TDP targets rather than due to yields.
    While that seems possible, I'm not sure I've ever heard of 3 dies slapped together before. I'm wondering if it's two 8 core cpus slapped together, but with one core disabled to improve yield. Eitherway 15 is still a rather odd number (no pun intended)
    Quote Originally Posted by Hans de Vries View Post

    JF-AMD posting: IPC increases!!!!!!! How many times did I tell you!!!

    terrace215 post: IPC decreases, The more I post the more it decreases.
    terrace215 post: IPC decreases, The more I post the more it decreases.
    terrace215 post: IPC decreases, The more I post the more it decreases.
    .....}
    until (interrupt by Movieman)


    Regards, Hans

  10. #10
    I am Xtreme
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    France
    Posts
    8,832
    Quote Originally Posted by AliG View Post
    While that seems possible, I'm not sure I've ever heard of 3 dies slapped together before. I'm wondering if it's two 8 core cpus slapped together, but with one core disabled to improve yield.
    Most likely the case.
    Donate to XS forums
    Quote Originally Posted by jayhall0315 View Post
    If you are really extreme, you never let informed facts or the scientific method hold you back from your journey to the wrong answer.

  11. #11
    Xtreme Legend
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Plymouth (UK)
    Posts
    5,285
    Quote Originally Posted by NEOAethyr View Post
    I didn't know they were coming out with a 15 core chip...
    I knew of a 12 core.

    Kinda odd though, you'de think it was a 16 core, I think it is..., but is yield that bad or are they holding back even on these parts?

    @tajoh111
    I don't think the avg person needs anything past a quad or a quasi 8 core, at least not right now.

    It would be cool if we had 64 core chips right now though lol .
    Or maybe 128, and 256 threads...
    Past that you may need some os updates .
    I first heard about the proposal for a 15core cpu about a year ago so I doubt that yield is in question here. tdp target maybe.

    I'm a pretty average guy, I just crunch a lot so I want MOAR COARZ

    I also think it would be nice to see 32core and 64 core sooner rather than later or how about developing cpus that will run in multi processor mode so that all you need is motherboard(s) with lots of sockets


    My Biggest Fear Is When I die, My Wife Sells All My Stuff For What I Told Her I Paid For It.
    79 SB threads and 32 IB Threads across 4 rigs 111 threads Crunching!!

  12. #12
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    At work
    Posts
    1,381
    This processor is basically the full meal deal, with all cores enabled (and hopefully all 37.5MB of cache as well). The existing 12 core chips are likely harvested versions of these. These processors will be very nice chips for servers, but their locked multiplier and BCLK straps unfortunately guarantee that their full potential will never be reached, which is truly sad.

    A pity too, as I'd gladly pay their MSRP if they were unlocked. In their locked configuration, however, they are about as exciting as a Bugatti Veyron that has been detuned to 1/3 of its horsepower and governed to 55mph.
    Server: HP Proliant ML370 G6, 2x Xeon X5690, 144GB ECC Registered, 8x OCZ Vertex 3 MAX IOPS 240GB on LSi 9265-8i (RAID 0), 12x Seagate Constellation ES.2 3TB SAS on LSi 9280-24i4e (RAID 6) and dual 1200W redundant power supplies.
    Gamer: Intel Core i7 6950X@4.2GHz, Rampage Edition 10, 128GB (8x16GB) Corsair Dominator Platinum 2800MHz, 2x NVidia Titan X (Pascal), Corsair H110i, Vengeance C70 w/Corsair AX1500i, Intel P3700 2TB (boot), Samsung SM961 1TB (Games), 2x Samsung PM1725 6.4TB (11.64TB usable) Windows Software RAID 0 (local storage).
    Beater: Xeon E5-1680 V3, NCase M1, ASRock X99-iTX/ac, 2x32GB Crucial 2400MHz RDIMMs, eVGA Titan X (Maxwell), Samsung 950 Pro 512GB, Corsair SF600, Asetek 92mm AIO water cooler.
    Server/workstation: 2x Xeon E5-2687W V2, Asus Z9PE-D8, 256GB 1866MHz Samsung LRDIMMs (8x32GB), eVGA Titan X (Maxwell), 2x Intel S3610 1.6TB SSD, Corsair AX1500i, Chenbro SR10769, Intel P3700 2TB.

    Thanks for the help (or lack thereof) in resolving my P3700 issue, FUGGER...

  13. #13
    Xtreme Mentor
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    2,589
    Quote Originally Posted by lutjens View Post
    This processor is basically the full meal deal, with all cores enabled (and hopefully all 37.5MB of cache as well). The existing 12 core chips are likely harvested versions of these. These processors will be very nice chips for servers, but their locked multiplier and BCLK straps unfortunately guarantee that their full potential will never be reached, which is truly sad.

    A pity too, as I'd gladly pay their MSRP if they were unlocked. In their locked configuration, however, they are about as exciting as a Bugatti Veyron that has been detuned to 1/3 of its horsepower and governed to 55mph.
    '

    INTC has to make money...an unlocked version wont be seen for a while I think and the price tag will be sky high on those chips.

    But anyways 15 core is a beast..... and if the motherboard is Dual CPU this means your getting 30 cores (or 32 cores total if it ends up being true that 1 core per physical chip is disabled taking it from 16 to 15 cores) which is just about at the 32 mark someone mentioned earlier. And if the board supports 4 CPUs (hey its possible...) then its 60 cores (or 64 cores depending on how it turns out to be) and that will be an enormous amount of raw CPU horse power!

    Its too bad a lot of the software dev are not catching up to this kind of processing power. But then again these chips are for server configurations not desktop haha although you can still use it as a desktop cpu

    Personally I run complex financial modeling software along with a lot of other memory and cpu intensive applications so I may just try this chip out for my next upgrade.

    I run multiple monitors also each running its own set of programs and tasks so this CPU should really help.

    I bet it will cost like $4,000 hahaha

  14. #14
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    At work
    Posts
    1,381
    Quote Originally Posted by hecktic View Post
    '

    INTC has to make money...an unlocked version wont be seen for a while I think and the price tag will be sky high on those chips.

    But anyways 15 core is a beast..... and if the motherboard is Dual CPU this means your getting 30 cores (or 32 cores total if it ends up being true that 1 core per physical chip is disabled taking it from 16 to 15 cores) which is just about at the 32 mark someone mentioned earlier. And if the board supports 4 CPUs (hey its possible...) then its 60 cores (or 64 cores depending on how it turns out to be) and that will be an enormous amount of raw CPU horse power!

    Its too bad a lot of the software dev are not catching up to this kind of processing power. But then again these chips are for server configurations not desktop haha although you can still use it as a desktop cpu

    Personally I run complex financial modeling software along with a lot of other memory and cpu intensive applications so I may just try this chip out for my next upgrade.

    I run multiple monitors also each running its own set of programs and tasks so this CPU should really help.

    I bet it will cost like $4,000 hahaha
    Intel definitely wouldn't sell fewer of these chips if they were unlocked, on the contrary, they would probably sell a few more. Not an earth-shattering amount more, but a few more, nonetheless.

    I'm sure there will be neutered versions of this chip that will cost $4,000, but the fully-fledged flagship is going to go for much more than that price. I'm not sure what difference there is (if any) between this chip and the E7-8890 V2 that is slated to become the flagship of the Ivy Bridge-EX lineup, but the latter's MSRP is rumored to be north of $7,000 USD. Whatever the difference (again, if any...they may be the same chip with simply a new name) between them ends up being technologically will determine how much less the new chip will potentially be.

    The best we can hope for as enthusiasts is a high TDP version (although such a version, if part of the production SKU stack, is highly unlikely to be the full 15C/37.5MB cache version). I do hope that I'm very wrong though and that Intel pulls out the stops and surprises us with something truly drool worthy.
    Server: HP Proliant ML370 G6, 2x Xeon X5690, 144GB ECC Registered, 8x OCZ Vertex 3 MAX IOPS 240GB on LSi 9265-8i (RAID 0), 12x Seagate Constellation ES.2 3TB SAS on LSi 9280-24i4e (RAID 6) and dual 1200W redundant power supplies.
    Gamer: Intel Core i7 6950X@4.2GHz, Rampage Edition 10, 128GB (8x16GB) Corsair Dominator Platinum 2800MHz, 2x NVidia Titan X (Pascal), Corsair H110i, Vengeance C70 w/Corsair AX1500i, Intel P3700 2TB (boot), Samsung SM961 1TB (Games), 2x Samsung PM1725 6.4TB (11.64TB usable) Windows Software RAID 0 (local storage).
    Beater: Xeon E5-1680 V3, NCase M1, ASRock X99-iTX/ac, 2x32GB Crucial 2400MHz RDIMMs, eVGA Titan X (Maxwell), Samsung 950 Pro 512GB, Corsair SF600, Asetek 92mm AIO water cooler.
    Server/workstation: 2x Xeon E5-2687W V2, Asus Z9PE-D8, 256GB 1866MHz Samsung LRDIMMs (8x32GB), eVGA Titan X (Maxwell), 2x Intel S3610 1.6TB SSD, Corsair AX1500i, Chenbro SR10769, Intel P3700 2TB.

    Thanks for the help (or lack thereof) in resolving my P3700 issue, FUGGER...

  15. #15
    I am Xtreme
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    France
    Posts
    8,832
    Intel has to keep people upgrading. And since there is no competition, they have to artificially limit their chips to make each new iteration more attractive.

    I don't see them offering full performance versions.
    Donate to XS forums
    Quote Originally Posted by jayhall0315 View Post
    If you are really extreme, you never let informed facts or the scientific method hold you back from your journey to the wrong answer.

  16. #16
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    323
    Intel should AT LEAST fully unlock their top processor... hell when you pay 7k$ for a CPU, you deserve it.

  17. #17
    Xtreme Guru
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Ace Deuce, Michigan
    Posts
    3,956
    Quote Originally Posted by vitchilo View Post
    Intel should AT LEAST fully unlock their top processor... hell when you pay 7k$ for a CPU, you deserve it.
    I don't think this is aimed at general consumers lol. Eitherway, I'm sure if you called Intel you could probably get an unlocked one directly through them (it may end up being an engineering sample though)
    Quote Originally Posted by Hans de Vries View Post

    JF-AMD posting: IPC increases!!!!!!! How many times did I tell you!!!

    terrace215 post: IPC decreases, The more I post the more it decreases.
    terrace215 post: IPC decreases, The more I post the more it decreases.
    terrace215 post: IPC decreases, The more I post the more it decreases.
    .....}
    until (interrupt by Movieman)


    Regards, Hans

  18. #18
    Crunching For The Points! NKrader's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Vancouver WA, USA
    Posts
    2,900
    next question,

    when is dave getting his pair?

    Catfood Shotgun
    Motherboard : Asus Strix z370i | CPU : Intel i7 8700k | Ram : 2x16GB Crucial DDR4 3000 | Heatsink : Noctua NH-U14S
    Storage - Boot: 960 PRO 512GB STEAM: 960 EVO 1TB | PSU : Corsair SFX 600w
    Monitor : Samsung Samsung S34E790C 34" Curved (3440x1440)

  19. #19
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    AB. Canada
    Posts
    827
    is it possible that there are only 15 cores because they had to set aside a some die space for GPU?


    "Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds" - (Einstein)

  20. #20
    Xtreme Guru
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Ace Deuce, Michigan
    Posts
    3,956
    Quote Originally Posted by MadHacker View Post
    is it possible that there are only 15 cores because they had to set aside a some die space for GPU?
    I personally don't see it happening, considering none of the current E7 processors have an igp and last I heard their big project was eventually cancelled. However I wouldn't put it past them to strike a deal with NVIDIA to integrate a specialized GPGPU processor into to die. I have no idea how they would deal with the thermals and power consumption, but that would provide a tremendous amount of theoretical server performance.
    Quote Originally Posted by Hans de Vries View Post

    JF-AMD posting: IPC increases!!!!!!! How many times did I tell you!!!

    terrace215 post: IPC decreases, The more I post the more it decreases.
    terrace215 post: IPC decreases, The more I post the more it decreases.
    terrace215 post: IPC decreases, The more I post the more it decreases.
    .....}
    until (interrupt by Movieman)


    Regards, Hans

  21. #21
    I am Xtreme
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    France
    Posts
    8,832
    Quote Originally Posted by AliG View Post
    I personally don't see it happening, considering none of the current E7 processors have an igp and last I heard their big project was eventually cancelled. However I wouldn't put it past them to strike a deal with NVIDIA to integrate a specialized GPGPU processor into to die. I have no idea how they would deal with the thermals and power consumption, but that would provide a tremendous amount of theoretical server performance.
    That's not happening, they already promote their own MIC arch as GPGPU.

    Besides, Nvidia is more interested in ARM right now (Project Denver).
    Donate to XS forums
    Quote Originally Posted by jayhall0315 View Post
    If you are really extreme, you never let informed facts or the scientific method hold you back from your journey to the wrong answer.

  22. #22
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Australia / Europe
    Posts
    1,309
    Quote Originally Posted by NKrader View Post
    next question,

    when is dave getting his pair?
    I think the questions begs to be made as follows "when will Dave tell us about how well these bad boys overclock"?
    この世界には 人の運命を司る 何らかの超越的な 〝律〝...... 〝神の手〝が 存在するのだろうか? 少なくとも 人は 自らの意志さえ 自由にはできな

  23. #23
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Australia / Europe
    Posts
    1,309
    Quote Originally Posted by tajoh111 View Post
    I wish AMD's core were faster per core, Intel would be forced to give us more cores. One thing Intel has completely held back at with its consumer processors is the number of cores. We had quadcores 7 years ago and for the most part that's what Intel is still giving us today. When we want 6, they more than double the price.

    AMD gave us 8 cores(or 4 depending on how we look at it) a while back but the problem is their 8 cores don't perform like 8 cores. AMD processors perform more along the lines of 3 of Intels cores with a little bit of overclocking to make up for the deficit for 90% of the tasks out there. I thought we were going to see piledriver shine with atleast battlefield 4, but they lose pretty badly to Intel processors.

    Once something beyond 4 cores becomes mainstream, then maybe we can see more programming for it. But with Intel dominating this market and rightfully so, they have grown complacent with only giving 4 cores, when it should be more at this point. I don't think it cost's Intel that much to manufacture an extra couple cores. I think Intel spends most of its money on R and D and the Fab plant itself.
    I hope you understand that this is SERVER CPU's news, not desktop CPU's.

    Intel has been giving us quad core Xeons since Nov 2006, however things work differently in the commercial sector, when you say "when we want 6, they more than double the price". well I have many colleagues who do not run a single Xeon in their company, I also know some that run several. however I do not see the retail market saying they want six cores plus since most workloads are not optimised for it.

    You're talking about AMD's bulldozer, I think you should look at opteron's magny-core processors which if you read the article properly state that they're still competitive in their industry which is where they're being sold.
    この世界には 人の運命を司る 何らかの超越的な 〝律〝...... 〝神の手〝が 存在するのだろうか? 少なくとも 人は 自らの意志さえ 自由にはできな

  24. #24
    Xtreme Mentor
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    2,589
    what is the expected price tag at launch ?

  25. #25
    I am Xtreme
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    France
    Posts
    8,832
    Quote Originally Posted by hecktic View Post
    what is the expected price tag at launch ?
    An arm for the low-frequency version, and a leg for the high-frequency one.
    Donate to XS forums
    Quote Originally Posted by jayhall0315 View Post
    If you are really extreme, you never let informed facts or the scientific method hold you back from your journey to the wrong answer.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •