Bad news: No 10nm Intel CPU till or after 2021.

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by mavericks7913, Apr 29, 2019.

  1. mavericks7913 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 17, 2014
    Location:
    NY
    #1
    Intel canceled 10nm for this year and 14nm will remain until 2021. Btw 14nm used since Broadwell micro-architecture from 2014~2015.

    This is very disappointing news since Intel is not able to develop new CPU lineups and they are having serious security issues. They supposed to make 10nm CPU in 2015 and they kept delayed 10nm. Now, 10nm is gone base on their CPU roadmap.

    What's the problem with keeping 14nm?

    No PCIe 4.0 till 2021.
    Overheating.
    Poor performance enhancement.


    Meanwhile, AMD Ryzen and Threadripper with 7nm will have more cores and faster clock speed with low price in this year. At this point, Apple will suffer from poor performance because of Intel CPU because they are not able to improve and make better CPU with 10nm. Even Jim Keller mentioned that Intel needs to new CPU architecture like AMD Ryzen and it will take more than 3 years.

    I really wish Apple to switch from Intel to AMD because Intel is totally messed up.
     

    Attached Files:

  2. JeffPerrin macrumors 6502

    JeffPerrin

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2014
    #2
    Yeah, I wouldn't hold my breath. We'll probably be seeing ARM-based macs start filing in by 2021.
     
  3. Blair Paulsen macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2016
    Location:
    San Diego, CA USA
    #3
    This could be an interesting development if Apple is counting on Intel for CPUs. It also makes theories about an all AMD/Apple mMP more plausible. Could this impact the timeline for getting the mMP to market???
     
  4. mavericks7913 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 17, 2014
    Location:
    NY
    #4
    Well Im not sure because Mac Pro 2019 being hidden for a long time without any leaks. But even now, Intel is not able to beat AMD Threadripper and Epyc in terms of performance and price. Since Apple can just optimize whatever they have, AMD would be a nice choice since Intel wont gonna make 10nm till or after 2021.
    --- Post Merged, Apr 29, 2019 ---
    MacBook only. Not for MacBook Pro, iMac, Mac Mini, and Mac Pro.
     
  5. JronMasteR macrumors 6502

    JronMasteR

    Joined:
    May 4, 2011
    Location:
    Switzerland
    #5
    Well, Intel still is dominating per core performance. And if you look at the 9900k, it is a beast. And if Intel comes up with a 10 or 12 core 5Ghz CPU, they could still dominate.
    We will see if AMD can hold up to the huge expectations... The Ryzen 3000 leaks were just leaks, nothing confirmed yet.
    Its not clear whether or not AMD can come up with a 16 core 5Ghz CPU.

    And there is more than just die shrinks.

    ARM CPU's are another matter. Apple will for sure go ARM on their mobile lineup. But who cares about Apple these days. They are not even able to refresh the Mac Pro... Or make a Macbook that is not limited by overheating...
     
  6. mavericks7913 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 17, 2014
    Location:
    NY
    #6
    Clock speed is not that important for professional software since they are more optimized with the number of cores. 5ghz clock speed is nothing because Intel is having issues with overheating and broken CPU. That's not dominating. We already faced the maximum clock speed for x86. This is why more cores is important.

    Also, from CES 2019, AMD Ryzen 3rd gen sample actually got the same or slightly better performance with 9900K at low power. Intel 9900K is not a beast anymore and 3rd gen will have up to 16 cores.
     
  7. JeffPerrin macrumors 6502

    JeffPerrin

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2014
    #7
    Initially. You can bet that Apple is aiming to eventually design & control ALL their own CPUs. That much is a given.
     
  8. JronMasteR macrumors 6502

    JronMasteR

    Joined:
    May 4, 2011
    Location:
    Switzerland
    #8
    Agreed.
     
  9. mavericks7913 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 17, 2014
    Location:
    NY
    #9
    Yeah but the problem is that if they optimize only for their software, then it will be useless.
     
  10. AidenShaw macrumors P6

    AidenShaw

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2003
    Location:
    The Peninsula
    #10
    And isn't this more important than what the lithography is?
     
  11. JronMasteR macrumors 6502

    JronMasteR

    Joined:
    May 4, 2011
    Location:
    Switzerland
    #11
    Which CPU's by Intel are "broken" by overheating issues? And in which case does clock speed not matter?
    Yeah, Clock speed by itself is not everything, the 9590 proved that when it came out.

    Do you have a 16 core 3rd gen Ryzen? Can you show benchmarks?
    I hope it will be as good as everyone says, but as long as it is not out...
     
  12. mavericks7913 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 17, 2014
    Location:
    NY
    #12
    All 9th gen CPU. There are several reports about it on Google. Tell me which software take advantage of the clock speed? Adobe is getting criticism because they are optimized only with high clock speed. Even games these days require at least 6 cores to 10 cores, especially with 4K games.

    The one I mentioned was 8 core version from CES 2019. Check their video. Also, there is a space to put an additional 8 core chip.
     
  13. bodonnell202 macrumors 65816

    bodonnell202

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2016
    Location:
    Calgary, Alberta, Canada
    #13
    10 nm mobile intel chips are expected to ship this year:
    https://www.anandtech.com/show/1427...tion-of-10nm-ice-lake-cpus-raises-10nm-volume
    Desktop intel chips are expected to stay on 14 nm for a couple more years as it would seem they are still having issues with 10 nm for higher power parts, but it looks like Xeons will be going to 10 nm sooner rather than later as well, which is likely what Apple will be looking to use in the Mac Pro.
     
  14. JronMasteR macrumors 6502

    JronMasteR

    Joined:
    May 4, 2011
    Location:
    Switzerland
    #14
    Every software takes advantage of the clock speed. Tasks get completed faster... In any App. Professional grade and consumer grade. You should ask that question about the number of cores. Cores matter if the software can run tasks in parallel, which is often not the case.
    The 9900k is a warm CPU, but by all means not overheating. 5ghz all core is pretty much achievable on all the chips. If you want 5g on all cores sure, you need a decent cooling solution. I have a 280 AIO and mine runs well on 5g all core with prime 95. I had it running for 10 hours. It is an impressive CPU.

    And about the ryzen, yeah saw that... looks promising. And hypothetically, there is space to put additional 8 cores, but again, this has not been confirmed. Just rumors.
     
  15. mavericks7913 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 17, 2014
    Location:
    NY
    #15
    "Every software takes advantage of the clock speed. Tasks get completed faster... In any App. Professional grade and consumer grade. You should ask that question about the number of cores. Cores matter if the software can run tasks in parallel, which is often not the case."
    Then explain why several professional software rely more on core counts than clock speed which is around 2ghz only?

    "The 9900k is a warm CPU, but by all means not overheating. 5ghz all core is pretty much achievable on all the chips. If you want 5g on all cores sure, you need a decent cooling solution. I have a 280 AIO and mine runs well on 5g all core with prime 95. I had it running for 10 hours. It is an impressive CPU."
    It's base on overall data. Your own experience does not make it better. Even Gigabyte mentioned that the 9th gen CPU requires a water cooler because of their terrible overheating temperature. Check youtube videos and you will surprise.

    "And about the ryzen, yeah saw that... looks promising. And hypothetically, there is space to put additional 8 cores, but again, this has not been confirmed. Just rumors."
    AMD already mentioned about adding more cores.
     
  16. AidenShaw, Apr 29, 2019
    Last edited: Apr 29, 2019

    AidenShaw macrumors P6

    AidenShaw

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2003
    Location:
    The Peninsula
    #16
    Can you name those "several", and compare to the thousands of softwares that prefer faster cores?

    "Professional" is the most useless adjective in the Apple lexicon. The writer thinks that it means something, but the reader sees it as pointless hand-waving.

    Have you been trained at the Sarah Huckabee Sanders School of Public Falsehoods and Misleading Statements?

    Xeon W2145. 8 cores. Base frequency 3.7 GHz. Turbo frequency 4.5 GHz.

    That's not "around 2 GHz". Lying is not a good tactic for winning arguments, except with "the base".
     
  17. mavericks7913 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 17, 2014
    Location:
    NY
    #17
    WTH are you saying? Faster cores? Be specific about the clock speed and cores.


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epyc
    lol you are the one lying in here saying that there is no CPU around 2ghz.

    https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/processors/xeon/d-processors.html
    Even Intel Xeon has CPU around 2ghz clock speed. Do you dare me now?
     
  18. AidenShaw, Apr 29, 2019
    Last edited by a moderator: May 1, 2019

    AidenShaw macrumors P6

    AidenShaw

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2003
    Location:
    The Peninsula
    #18
    Yes, I dare you. Follow the link in my post.

    w2145.jpg

    3.7 GHz, turbo to 4.5 GHz. Not "around 2GHz".

    Intel has better single thread (and handfuls of threads) performance. AMD throws a lot of slow cores into the mix, and is good for the rare embarrassingly parallel workflow.

    Few workstation applications scale to many-core. (Many server applications do - but wouldn't you buy a server instead of a workstation to run server apps?) 32-core performance for a single-user workstation is of no consequence for the vast majority of users.
     
  19. mavericks7913, Apr 29, 2019
    Last edited by a moderator: May 1, 2019

    mavericks7913 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 17, 2014
    Location:
    NY
    #19
    Did you even check those links? Both Intel and AMD HAVE CPU with slow clock speed and yet you just ignored it. My point is there are software which cares about the number of core than the clock speed and there they are. Im not talking about your god damn CPU. How can you explain about those CPU with slow clock speed around 2ghz?

    Also, Threadripper has high clock speed with multi-cores and they are going to release 3rd gen soon. Intel is no longer known for having better clock speed per core.
     

    Attached Files:

  20. startergo macrumors 6502a

    startergo

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2018
    #20
    What is the point in high clock speeds if they cannot be achieved due to thermal throttling? This is the case with the latest mbp. And worst it is not possible to override the stupid fan schedule in Windows with MFC because of the T2 sequriy chip.
     
  21. Kpjoslee macrumors regular

    Kpjoslee

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2007
    #21
    https://www.intel.com/content/www/u...sipp-intel-stable-image-platform-program.html

    Seems like OP has no knowledge about what SIPP roadmap is. They require driver comparability from previous platform and guaranteed availability for at least 12 months, so they don't use latest parts from Intel, so it is usually several quarters behind and irrelevant to the regular client roadmap schedule. Intel actually started ramping up 10nm for low power mobile parts starting last quarter and Ice Lake SP is still slated for late 2020.
    Most expecting Intel to stay with 14nm for client desktop for next 1-2 years since they are going to be clocked higher than their 10nm (Since clock speed is still important factor vs core count for client desktop), and move to 10nm on mobile and servers as density and power efficiency are more important there.
     
  22. mavericks7913 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 17, 2014
    Location:
    NY
    #22
    Yeah... 10nm was planned to release in 2015 but now, they delayed till 2021. Do you aware that 14nm was used since Broadwell micro-architecture in 2014? This is why it's bad news. Because all they did was enhancing their CPU.

    https://www.anandtech.com/show/13405/intel-10nm-cannon-lake-and-core-i3-8121u-deep-dive-review
    Also, 10nm CPU for mobile is already released in 2018.

    https://ark.intel.com/content/www/u...-8130u-processor-4m-cache-up-to-3-40-ghz.html
    https://ark.intel.com/content/www/u...-8121u-processor-4m-cache-up-to-3-20-ghz.html

    Sadly, 10nm version has slow performance and consume more power than 14nm lolol.

    Which means, even 10nm mobile CPU is poorly designed.
     
  23. Kpjoslee macrumors regular

    Kpjoslee

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2007
    #23
    Intel spent $500m ramping up and producing 10nm Ice lake mobile CPUs last quarter, lot more than a limited release 10nm cannonlake parts last year. Most likely, some of the problem plagued with initial 10nm most likely have been fixed (otherwise, no reason to start ramping up 10nm). so we will likely see those parts starting fall of this year.
     
  24. JronMasteR macrumors 6502

    JronMasteR

    Joined:
    May 4, 2011
    Location:
    Switzerland
    #24
    Every app that can run tasks in parallel or can split task onto multiple threads benefit from more cores. However, that doesn't mean that clock speeds don't matter.
    Get a 2990WX and clock it to 2ghz vs. 3ghz and check which is faster... Seriously, is that even a question.

    And no, 9900k's do not suffer from overheating issues. They run well within spec. You don't need a Watercooler at all if you run them stock or with a slight overclock. If you overclock them to the limit and put AVX loads on it, yeah, it gets very warm. But also, I'm talking prime 95 torture tests.
    It's warmer than its 6 core predecessor, sure, because cramped 2 additional cores in there. But just because it runs warm, does not mean its overheating.

    And which game requires 6-10 cores? Games almost always rely on performance per core. So modern quad cores run every game just fine. Check benchmarks. And 4k Games are 99% limited by the gpu... 1080p and 1440p high refresh rate enthusiasts with the best gpu's get bottle necked by the cpu.

    And for Ryzen 3000, again, no 16 core cpu has been announced yet. So again, just rumors.
    We'll see how it performs when it comes out.
     
  25. mavericks7913, Apr 30, 2019
    Last edited by a moderator: May 1, 2019

    mavericks7913 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 17, 2014
    Location:
    NY
    #25
    "Every app that can run tasks in parallel or can split task onto multiple threads benefit from more cores. However, that doesn't mean that clock speeds don't matter.
    Get a 2990WX and clock it to 2ghz vs. 3ghz and check which is faster... Seriously, is that even a question."
    Faster lol. I guess you know nothing about multi-cores CPU.

    "And no, 9900k's do not suffer from overheating issues. They run well within spec. You don't need a Watercooler at all if you run them stock or with a slight overclock. If you overclock them to the limit and put AVX loads on it, yeah, it gets very warm. But also, I'm talking prime 95 torture tests.
    It's warmer than its 6 core predecessor, sure, because cramped 2 additional cores in there. But just because it runs warm, does not mean its overheating."

    There are tons of videos and links about 9th gen CPU issues. Go check them

    "And which game requires 6-10 cores? Games almost always rely on performance per core. So modern quad cores run every game just fine. Check benchmarks. And 4k Games are 99% limited by the gpu... 1080p and 1440p high refresh rate enthusiasts with the best gpu's get bottle necked by the cpu."
    Both PlayStation 4 and Xbox support 8 cores already. For 4K games, it is necessary to have 8~10 cores. Division 2 is an example. Battlefield 5 uses all 8 cores.
     

Share This Page

45 April 29, 2019