i9-13900K "unlimited power"

[c-o-pr]

I'm intrigued at how Intel is building a pyramidal response to increasing performance: a peak of 2 cores going all out, a middle layer of 6 power hungry P-cores, and a base of 16 low-clocked E-cores. This gives a mix of responsiveness that's overtly marketable as advancing on all fronts.

Does anyone think ECC RAM should become standard for this scheme, or does the performance envelope depend on ignoring errors, or something else re DDR5?

No story here on improved coupling of heatsink to package, nor of wild new temp limit, so I am wondering how the heat is moved out of the die? Maybe it's covered by increased die area alone (a huge chip with a lot of E-cores)

Intel Core i9-13900K Raptor Lake CPU Comes With "Extreme Performance" Mode, Up To 350W Power On High-End Z790 Motherboards

Intel's Raptor Lake flagship, the Core i9-13900K, is going to feature a new "Extreme Performance" mode on high-end Z790 motherboards.

wccftech.com

As to what sales angle is gated by 7zip performance...?

Intel Core i9-13900K Raptor Lake CPU Shows Huge Increase In Compression & Decompression Benchmark, Up To 60% Faster Than 12900K

New benchmarks of Intel's Core i9-13900K Raptor Lake CPU have appeared, showcasing the compression & decompression performance.

wccftech.com

Progress marches on.

 

[c-o-pr]

As a cross-reference, I find the list of top GB5 multicore performers very interesting:

128 core EPYC 7000 series at 1250 single, 75,000 multi-core:

Geekbench 5 Results - Geekbench Browser

Gigabyte Rack Server:

R282-Z90 (rev. 100) | Rack Servers - GIGABYTE Global

Dual AMD EPYC™ 7002 series processor family8-Channel RDIMM/LRDIMM DDR4 per processor, 32 x DIMMs2 x 1Gb/s LAN ports (Intel® I350-AM2)1 x Dedicated managemen...

www.gigabyte.com

The barebones chassis is $3K, add components to build your hack.

Given that a Mac Pro hits $55K at top end, this is not an unfair study from standpoint of base tech and application.

So I stand back and consider again how the offerings split the desktop productivity, gaming, and server markets and see specific species of systems that inhabit these market zones.

IOW, what is a Mac Studio, vs a top-tier gaming rig, vs a unit in a render farm?

When the i9-10900 came out, Apple put a power limited version into iMac. Hackintoshers had to edit the power vectors in macOS to get full performance of i9-10900K, because Apple couldn't fit 250–300 watts of CPU plus 150W of W5700 Pro in that case.

Apple would have seen Intel's 11th and 12th gens on horizon at that time and thought 'Intel power future is anathema to our designs, we gotta roll our own' And here we are.

So what is a i9-13900K? What market is it made for?

I like it. It's a very Intel design with the sorts of excesses that company takes pride it. 30 years ago everyone thought the x86 had no future due to byzantine architecture and complexity. But here we are.

At same time, Apple's new direction looks very sane. They're reaching in scale from wristwatch to server with sublime power/performance compromises. Smart.

Will Intel make it to the 14900, or is 13 an unlucky number?

 

[pastrychef]

Source:https://wccftech.com/intel-core-i9-13900k-cpu-extreme-performance-mode-350w-power-z790-motherboards/

 

[Jamesbond007]

"Extreme Performance" very likely means "Extremely Hot" (even if the performance is really there, which I am skeptical without third party confirmation). I definitely won't be interested in this thing.

In my view power efficiency is at least as important, if not more important, than the so-called quest for "extreme performance".

 

[c-o-pr]

"Extreme Performance" very likely means "Extremely Hot" (even if the performance is really there, which I am skeptical without third party confirmation). I definitely won't be interested in this thing.

In my view power efficiency is at least as important, if not more important, then the so-called quest for "extreme performance".

I take your point...

The article is very clear that "power" means 350+ watts. Intel is unlocking TDP.

I'm wondering how they are engineering the thermal coupling of the heatsink to the package! Maybe sheer die area accounts for the 40% increase in heat across that boundary? Or active cooling with a fridge inside drawing another 50W?

It's grossly excessive, but Intel is determined to stay out in front on bragging rights for raw compute.

It's making PC even more awkward.

We can surmise why Apple ditched them: security nightmare and so power hungry design options are greatly compromised.

Apple is trying to make their garden less breakable and more svelt while Intel and AMD are throwing in the kitchen sink with plumbing hanging out all over.

Nonetheless I think it's kind of cool.

Next stop 1000W system thermals!

 

[pastrychef]

Next stop 1000W system thermals!

An overclocked RTX-4080 + i9-13900K will already exceed that.

 

[c-o-pr]

All that juice is so you can run more like this:

Not this... Lol!

 

[pastrychef]

All that juice is so you can run more like this:

Not this... Lol!

View attachment 553593

I can't wait for Facebook to go the way of MySpace.

 

[craighazan]

All that juice is so you can run more like this:

You don’t need that much juice to run Microsoft flight simulator!. My AM5G5 kicks out an impressive flight experience with just 500W.