Rumor: Intel pulls X299 and Skylake-X release to late June

Seems like this weekend was ripe for rumors. The folks over at BenchLife have some juicy tidbits about Intel's purported X299 platform, along with a little data on the Skylake-X and Kaby Lake-X CPUs that will supposedly go with it. According to the site's sources, the new chipset and its accompanying processors have been rescheduled to launch more than a month before their original launch date.

Source: BenchLife

If this new data is accurate, Skylake-X and Kaby Lake-X are set to launch at some point between the 25th and 27th weeks of 2017. That's toward the end of June or the beginning of July, quite a step forward from what BenchLife believes was originally an August launch window.

Skylake-X and Kaby Lake-X are expected to be Intel's next offerings in its high-end desktop line, and they'll share the same (and as-yet-unannounced) LGA2066 socket. According to the rumors, Skylake-X CPUs should arrive in varieties ranging from six to ten cores with quad-channel DDR4 memory and oodles of PCIe connectivity.

Source: BenchLife

Meanwhile, the more mysterious Kaby Lake-X is purportedly a quad-core design with dual-channel memory and up to 16 lanes of PCI Express from the CPU—numbers that sound an awful lot like Intel might repackage mainstream Kaby Lake quad-core CPUs for the new socket. We'll probably learn more about these processors in the coming weeks, as BenchLife thinks Intel will showcase the new platform and its CPUs at Computex starting on May 30.

Comments closed
    • raddude9
    • 2 years ago

    It strikes me that the Kaby Lake X chip is the the exact opposite of what is needed.

    Instead of wedging a 4-core chip into a big (quad-channel-memory/LGA 2066) socket, they should be doing the opposite, i.e. they should be trying to put a 6-core (or even 8-core) chip into the smaller (dual channel/LG 1151) socket. We’ve recently seen that having 8-core chips on dual-channel memory only hurts a few benchmarks so I don’t see why they don’t just give those people who would benefit from such chips access to the lower cost platform.

    • psuedonymous
    • 2 years ago

    I wonder if ASRock will go out on a limb again and cram LGA2066 onto an ITX board (assuming it gets a similar narrow-ILM model)? The X99-ITX was a huge design challenge with relatively poor sales (no idea how well the ASRockRack EPC612D4I did though), so sadly probably not, but the lure of cramming a Kaby Lake-X into a Dan A4 is attractive, and it even shaves off nearly 30W over the X99 chips you could cram in today.

      • blahsaysblah
      • 2 years ago

      The memory per thread/core ratio made the target market extremely narrow. They should have at least tried to get 4 SO-DIMMs on there. If any of them get an ITX board with 4 (SO-)DIMMs out there, wait and see how much bigger the ITX market gets.

    • the
    • 2 years ago

    These are supposed to be the consumer version of SkyLake-EP. That chip is arriving in servers on the LGA 3647 socket with six memory channels and 44 PCIe lanes plus plenty of on-package options (FPGA, Omnipath, deep learning accelerators etc.). While I wouldn’t expect more than the vanilla offering, it would be nice to have kept the six memory channel configuration for the desktop. Dropping down to pretty much the same configuration as we currently have on the high end desktop isn’t that bad as long as they have all the model sporting the maximum number of PCIe lanes. I loathed the 28 PCIe configuration of the i7 5820K and i7 6800K.

    Kaby Lake-X as rumor is a just a really bad idea, worse than the i7 5820K/6800K. Sure, being inside of a socket that’ll provide up to 160W and having the integrated GPU disabled is going to be great for overclocking but it cuts out so much from the platform: 26 PCIe lanes and two full memory channels. Not a good deal considering that the SkyLake-X (EP) is going to have some performance per clock benefits over KabyLake-X.

      • mganai
      • 2 years ago

      I think this new model has two purposes:

      1) Giving users a cheaper entry path into the HEDT segment.
      2) Get the ball rolling for the -X counterpart for each architecture a year earlier. First they roll out a higher watt equivalent of the highest mainstream chip (in this case the 4c/8t i7-7700k) a year before rolling out the rest of the high end chips. I don’t know yet if there will be any 6/8/10/etc. KBL-X parts within the next year, but it’s a safe bet, plus, a leaked release grid listed a Coffee Lake-X with a 6c alongside Coffee Lake, which will also max out at 6c, with CFL-X of course having a higher TDP.

        • the
        • 2 years ago

        There is not going be >6 core Kaby Lake parts. Sky Lake-EP (and thus -X) is a slightly different core design than consumers got for Sky Lake or Kaby Lake. The cache topology has changed according to rumors and it is confirmed to support AVX-512 instructions. The process of Sky Lake-EP is the same as Kaby Lake on the desktop too.

        The first consumer 6 core part for LGA115X will be part of the Coffee Lake family which will also feature some core tweaks. This chip is due next year. It would be foolish to release this 6 core chip on the high end socket as Sky Lake-EP will already start at 6 core and have higher IPC due to more cache/more memory channels. The only benefit Coffee Lake-X could have would be higher clock speeds and that isn’t going to be that big of an edge with equal core counts vs. Sky Lake-EP.

          • jts888
          • 2 years ago

          Have you heard any specific details about the cache change rumors?

          Haswell needed to move to 64B internal data paths due to its introduction of 256b AVX, and I’d guess that Skylake-EP or whatever would likewise be severely bottlenecked under AVX-512 unless it does something similarly dramatic.

      • ImSpartacus
      • 2 years ago

      When has HEDT ever been a good deal for gamers?

      I see this kinda as Intel’s version of Nvidia’s Titan lineup. It’s not about achieving a realistic perf/$. It’s about winning.

    • chuckula
    • 2 years ago

    The people who look at this rumor in isolation and make clickybaity comments like “Intel is scared” ought to go back to last year, long before anybody was saying “RyZen” and see the rumors where Intel was going to launch these parts at… Computex.

    Then wait a while longer for the [i<]other[/i<] rumors where Intel had [b<]OMG DELAYED[/b<] these parts until August. Then come back to the newest rumors where once again Intel is launching these parts at Computex, just like the first rumors said. Which is why "rumors" are not the same thing as "facts".

      • blahsaysblah
      • 2 years ago

      How dare you use logic.

        • BurntMyBacon
        • 2 years ago

        Pure blasphemy.

      • DavidC1
      • 2 years ago

      Or the rumors just misinterpreted the given information.

      The release was probably always at Computex. I doubt you could buy the actual parts until August or September.

      I remember the Ivy Bridge Ultrabook launch. The launch was Computex in June, the first devices were August, but the 2 in 1s I wanted were November. Even though they all debuted at Computex.

      Older road maps seemed to have indicated the server parts were roughly a quarter faster than HEDT ones. It was with Broadwell.

      “While I wouldn’t expect more than the vanilla offering, it would be nice to have kept the six memory channel configuration for the desktop”

      No one really needs the 6 channels. Heck I think it would have been better if it was 2 or 3. The platform overheads make HEDT a disadvantage in perf/watt compared to Ryzen. Most buyers are gamers pretending they need the 12 cores.

        • w76
        • 2 years ago

        The way YouTube content creators wipe out whole swaths of the used part market whenever they spot a new way to get lots of cores for less than the monopolist cost Intel puts on new HEDT hardware, I’d suspect most buyers are those folks these days. Lots of gamers I’m sure too. Edit: That said, Intel I think I recall still has the advantage on x264 and x265, or rather those projects no longer seem to scale with CPU cores as well, therefore meaning content creators might still be at least equally well served by just a regular i7 instead of Ryzen, unless they process multiple encodes at once.

    • zdw
    • 2 years ago

    That 112W Kaby Lake-X sounds like a heavily binned, very high stock clocked CPU – given the power budget, shipping at a stock 4.4-5Ghz might not be out of line.

    Given their IPC advantage, I’m betting that’s the “maintain highest gaming framerates at all cost over Ryzen” chip that AMD won’t easily be able to come up with a competitor for, and with it being “only” quad core, they wouldn’t eat into their workstation markets.

    So, expensive boards with high end power delivery and the fastest single core performance – sounds like a total gaming play.

      • ImSpartacus
      • 2 years ago

      I believe you’re exactly right.

      This is, “we’re pulling out all the stops to win using what we have available.”

      Also, it’s always been awkward that the HEDT platform kinda sucked at gaming.

    • Clint Torres
    • 2 years ago

    Intel better put the boot down or I might build my first AMD system since the 90s.

    Seems like they’d have to completely restructure their pricing for their HEDT offerings to remain competitive with Ryzen. 8-core Skylake-X would have to fall to somewhere below $600.

      • Magic Hate Ball
      • 2 years ago

      Don’t forget, there is a HEDT Zen coming based on rumors.

      16 core, 32 thread quad channel memory in a workstation mayhaps?

      • ChicagoDave
      • 2 years ago

      Yup, I’ve never built a computer with HEDT chips but I think I will next time (year or two). I want a ton of PCIe lanes for the next server build and I assume by then AMD will have a high end Ryzen with a lot more lanes than the current ones. If Intel’s prices don’t move significantly south, I’ll be switching to AMD for the first time in a long long time.

    • derFunkenstein
    • 2 years ago

    That Kaby Lake-X config is pretty hilarious.

      • chuckula
      • 2 years ago

      It’s not going to be much different than a desktop Kaby Lake although it will likely have a soldered heatspreader that will help in overclocking.

      Skylake X with AVX 512 should be an extremely interesting chip though, especially if all the rumors about the redesigned cache architecture turn out to be true.

        • derFunkenstein
        • 2 years ago

        Doesn’t Knots Landing already do AVX 512? Xeon Phi is kinda pricey, so this will probably bring AVX 512 to “the masses”.

          • chuckula
          • 2 years ago

          [quote<]Doesn't Knots Landing already do AVX 512? [/quote<] Don't be ridiculous! Knots Landing was a cheesy 80's soap opera. You're obviously referring to AVX-512 support in Knott's Berry Farms.

            • derFunkenstein
            • 2 years ago

            Oh, you’re right. A handsome TR writer said [url=https://techreport.com/news/28920/dont-call-it-knots-landing-next-xeon-phi-detailed<]NOT to call it that[/url<].

            • UberGerbil
            • 2 years ago

            I hadn’t even read this exchange yet but when I saw “KBL-X” I immediately translated it as “Knots Berry Landing” 😉

            • derFunkenstein
            • 2 years ago

            That’s way better than my first draft, which read “Don Knots Landing”

        • UberGerbil
        • 2 years ago

        Maybe ECC support and other knob-twists that allow them to position it as a “workstation” offering (where the power savings might have some appeal also)? It is pretty underwhelming compared to Skylake, but then again it’s weird (although not entirely unprecedented) for Intel to have its latest design show up so early for the last-gen-last-hurrah that is normally the X Show. Of course, it’s little more than an updated Skylake anyway, so this was never going to generate much excitement.

      • Ninjitsu
      • 2 years ago

      Quad core Xeon?

        • derFunkenstein
        • 2 years ago

        With only x16 PCIe connectivity? Yeah, that’s what Socket 1151 is for, not the big socket.

      • Bauxite
      • 2 years ago

      I expect lots of gushing about how it is a premium bin (yeah right) along with hand-waving and glossing over how neutered it is in a lot of “reviews”.

      • ImSpartacus
      • 2 years ago

      What makes you say that?

      I think it’s clever. The HEDT will finally have a cpu option that’s strictly better than the -S lineup in every aspect of performance.

      [list<] [*<]Using the 4+2 Kaby Lake die ensures no degradation in performance. [/*<][*<]You get slightly higher clocks at stock (Not much, but it helps). [/*<][*<]No more delidding. Overclocking is enhanced by the solder used in the HEDT platform. [/*<][*<] The slightly higher tdp along with increased ihs surface area will only help overclocking further. [/*<] [/list<] The only downside is cost. Otherwise, it'll be a new "best" from the boys in blue. No more suggesting a 7700K to hardcore gamers because HEDT traditionally lacks in single threaded performance.

    • xeridea
    • 2 years ago

    Sounds like they are scared.

      • Unknown-Error
      • 2 years ago

      more like they are going for the kill. ryzen will endup rysunk

        • jihadjoe
        • 2 years ago

        You make it sound like they’re to steal AMD’s yeast!

        • DoomGuy64
        • 2 years ago

        Not unless there’s some massive price cuts.

      • chuckula
      • 2 years ago

      Or maybe AMD was scared when it rushed the launch of RyZen and didn’t mind dealing with the fallout of motherboard shortages and firmware issues that occurred because the platform wasn’t quite polished yet.

        • derFunkenstein
        • 2 years ago

        I do wonder if there will be a pricing response or if :

        SKL-X will pump up the [s<]jam[/s<] performance enough to keep with current prices. Intel is content to let AMD sell to anyone willing to deal with some funkiness caused by Infinity Fabric pay less. I'm guessing the second thing is true.

          • UberGerbil
          • 2 years ago

          Yeah. The reality has long been that Intel lowers prices because it can, AMD does so because it has to. It would be a huge shift in the market if that — even briefly — ceases to be the case.

            • sreams
            • 2 years ago

            Intel lost a significant amount of market share when Athlon64/Opteron was available, and they may very well lose a measurable amount with Ryzen on the market. Intel lowers prices because they have to, just like AMD. Unless of course they don’t care about double digit market share losses.

            • DancinJack
            • 2 years ago

            You’re missing the point. AMD has to sell low to stay alive.

            Intel CAN lower prices to be more competitive with AMD, but Intel isn’t going bankrupt in 2019 if something doesn’t sell well. AMD could (although I don’t think they will at this point), and has not been in great shape for a long time.

            • derFunkenstein
            • 2 years ago

            Your point about Intel is why I figure they’ll be content to let AMD charge less due to their design weirdness. I’d be surprised if SKL-X is anything but price-equivalent to the current line.

            • blahsaysblah
            • 2 years ago

            Not true. Consumers don’t care, they will pay premium to whomever has better product for their needs.

            • sreams
            • 2 years ago

            I never suggested Intel would go bankrupt. Just that they have to lower prices if they don’t want to lose significant market share… and of course they don’t want that.

            • Klimax
            • 2 years ago

            Correct. From I+A market to I market…

        • xeridea
        • 2 years ago

        Ryzen was a bit rushed, but they needed cash. Intel has been sitting on 4 cores for a decade, they are rushing their higher core parts now because they are getting owned, now they are rushing them out once they accepted Ryzen is better than they thought, they are trying to not loose the HEDT market.

          • DancinJack
          • 2 years ago

          Yeah, i’m sure Intel is shaking in their boots over losing all 179 HEDT users.

            • derFunkenstein
            • 2 years ago

            There are dozens of us. [url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKie-vgUGdI<]DOZENS![/url<]

            • CuttinHobo
            • 2 years ago

            That works on another level considering there’s already a bit of a connection between Tobias and Intel – the Blue Man Group from Intel’s old commercials.

            “I blue myself!” 😀

            • derFunkenstein
            • 2 years ago

            Yeah I forgot they did Intel ads. 😆

            • the
            • 2 years ago

            My ego alone counts for more people than that.

            • DancinJack
            • 2 years ago

            No offense intended 🙂

            Heck, I’d build a X299 system if I didn’t already have Skylake.

            • PainIs4ThaWeak1
            • 2 years ago

            I can’t be the only one who enjoys the extra PCIe lanes, can I?

            • sreams
            • 2 years ago

            I believe AMD’s upcoming 16-core/32-thread CPUs will address this.

          • Klimax
          • 2 years ago

          Losing HEDT is not that probable. Ryzen is not that good. It’s IPC is not there, AVX performance either and it is clocked at its upper range. (The only way AMD could actually get anywhere) Also internal fabric is problematic.

          What might actually happen is Intel adjusting its frequency targets on HEDT.

            • Krogoth
            • 2 years ago

            Ryzen 7 has shaken up the HEDT market. It is almost as fast as i7-6900X and i7-6950X at most workstation-tier workloads for a fraction of the platform cost.

            Internal Fabric is not that problematic either. It is a PITA to keep core to core resource management balanced in these massive multi-core chips. Intel’s own designs have their own issues under certain workloads.

            • Klimax
            • 2 years ago

            maybe some sort of dichotomous “cheap” HEDT part, but that would be the limit. (Something like cheap compile boxes and some other bits — It’s all over the map and most of its performance is from high frequency)

            My expectation is that intel will change policy on frequency portion of performance equation and then Ryzen won’t be competitive. Aka repeat of Bulldozer versus Sandy Bridge.

            Ryzen is not any better then my 5960x @ 4,2GHz, which is trivial overclock (not even close to its limits) at very reasonable clocks and that’s by now old part…

            Noe: I am not even talking about AVX-512. There are some fun things available for high performance code.

            • Krogoth
            • 2 years ago

            5960x is only faster when memory bandwidth is king due to Socket 2011’s quad-channel DDR4. Haswell-E’s architecture does shows it age. Ryzen R7s are actually held by back with dual-channel DDR4 under some HPC workloads, however the upcoming Naples remedies that with its eight-channel DDR4. I’m not certain if AMD is going to make a cut-down version of the platform to go after high-end HEDT market though.

            Intel isn’t going to be changing anything on its HEDT platforms other then price cuts and/or increasing core counts in order to keep up its prestigious position.

          • NoOne ButMe
          • 2 years ago

          Ryzen, 17 months
          BD 16 month
          Nehalem 15 months
          K8 21 months

          Tape out to launch dates I could find. “Rushed” relative to buggy, absolutely. Rushed in terms of tape out to launch. Not so much.

          Things get more complex, but tools/computer power to find also do.

      • Unknown-Error
      • 2 years ago

      Ah, the wonderful AMD fanbois. All you know is how to cry when things don’t go your way. [i<]"Mommy, Mommy! Someone said something bad about AMD. Boooo hooooo. They clearly got paid by Intel or nVidia! Boooo hooooo!"[/i<] But that's OK... on the other hand resorting to things like this - [url<]https://twitter.com/GamersNexus/status/838221363991166981[/url<] is a completely different story. AMD fanbois are true scourge of the IT world. Myself, Neelycam and few other here on TR have also received death threats.

        • xeridea
        • 2 years ago

        Rage any? Just my opinion they are pushing up the launch of more core chips because they realized they need to. They have been sitting on 4 cores for a decade, and now finally they want to give more cores. Just a simple opinion, not raging, threatening, or whining like you are. I have a preference to AMD because they do less shady or dumb stuff than Intel (arbitrary segmentation, crappy thermal material, anticompetitive practices) or Nvidia (proprietary everything, vendor lock, GameWorks, in general holding the industry back).

        I have recommended blue, green, and red branded products to friends and family depending on what would suit them best. I am not a raging fanboy. Just saying in this use case, AMD clearly has better product for the money right now (to those who can benefit from lots of cores), which has caused team blue to shift their plans.

          • Redocbew
          • 2 years ago

          [quote<]They have been sitting on 4 cores for a decade[/quote<] That's not as big of a problem as you seem to think. It's been talked about a fair bit here recently that console CPUs have 8 cores, but they're not nearly as powerful as the cores that make up a recent desktop CPU. 4 skylake cores should be plenty for the majority of common tasks done on a desktop PC. If Intel does release a 6 or 8 core mainstream desktop chip at some point in the near future, then performance won't be the reason for it.

            • w76
            • 2 years ago

            Chicken and egg. There weren’t any reasons for x64 when AMD first brought it to the market as a competitive advantage, either. Get the tools in more consumers hands through affordability, and a potential market opens up for innovative software.

            • Redocbew
            • 2 years ago

            Developers might like having cheaper 6+ core chips for compiling code, but they don’t need one to write it. It’s just really fricken hard to take a complex workload like you find in a game engine and split it up into multiple threads.

          • chuckula
          • 2 years ago

          As for your whole line about Intel “pushing four cores” care to name a real 8 core part* that AMD had on the market for PCs** prior to march of 2017? Doesn’t that mean AMD has been “pushing” 4 core parts just as long as Intel?

          Furthermore, care to name a single Raven Ridge part — which will comprise the large majority of AMD’s sales volume going forward — that has more than 4 cores? Because it doesn’t exist. So in 2018 by the time AMD’s high-volume “RyZen” based silicon is actually on sale, they will most certainly be pushing “4 core” parts.

          * Meaning an 8 core part that performed like one, not an “8 coar” part that routinely lost to Intel’s notebook parts.

          ** Technically the SoCs in consoles had 8 cores, but I don’t think you want to use those cores as a comparison point.

            • BurntMyBacon
            • 2 years ago

            AMD was pushing real 6 core Phenom IIs (Thuban) at the high end before moving “up” to 8 “coar” Bulldozer / Piledriver processors. The next high end release was Ryzen with 8 real cores. Given the ambiguity around what really constitutes a core in bulldozer and derivatives, I think AMD has been trying to push more than 4 cores at the high end for a while. Clearly the effectiveness of the approach has not always reached desired levels.

            Will Raven Ridge make up the majority of AMD’s sales volume? It is unknown, but likely. Budget parts are designed to live off of volume. AMD’s APUs, which were only 4 “coar”, have made up the bulk of AMD sales for a while. Given that mobile has passed up desktop sales significantly and many i7 and i5 mobile parts are 2C/4T, I wouldn’t be surprised if 2 core parts make up the bulk Intel’s consumer CPU sales. It has never been the majority that push for more cores, faster frequencies, higher IPCs, or more features. The majority just wants their “stuff” to work.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This