Intel Creates Cascade Lake-AP with up to 48 cores with Glued-together design

[WYP]

A Multi-Chip Package design from Intel that lacks their high-end EMIB technology. Can anyone smell the glue?



Read more about Intel's Cascade Lake-AP processors.

 

[Dicehunter]

Funny that AMD did the whole multi chip package and Intel kept saying they were "glued together" and now they are following suit, I hope some people at the press events point this out to Intel.

 

[Scoob]

Does anyone else remember when AMD were calling the then new Core2Quads "glued together" (or words to that effect) as they were apparently two Dual Core CPU's on the same Die? At the time AMD were touting their quad cores as "true quad cores" - I remember the hype as I almost fell for it before doing some homework. I was a die-hard AMD fan at the time but took a gamble on the Q6600 when it released. That same CPU is still in regular use today, damn fine bit of kit that.


Basically, I don't really care what the process is - though I am of course interested from a technical stand-point - as long as it delivers. The old Core2Quads delivered back in their day, as has Ryzen though reviewers have noticed the latency issues between the core clusters - sorry, I forget the correct technical term - but Ryzen certainly seems to be delivering, thoroughly embarrassing Intel from a price / performance perspective while still providing excellent performance. I think it's great that they can scare Intel in the server market too, though I do wonder what the actual adoption figures are, and if any large organisations are making the switch to AMD for their servers.



Actually considering my first AMD build in years. Sure, the 9900k is impressive enough, but the price...damn....



Scoob.

 

[AlienALX]

hehe made me smile

They don't have much choice to be fair. They can't shrink so these monolithic dies are costing them an arm and a leg.

 

[grec]

Epyc seems like it's going to be AMD's strongest product in terms of revenue and consistency. They expect to end this year with 5% server share (Starting from essentially nothing at the start of the year, with the vast majority of it expected in the last quarter as their server ramp only really begun in Q2) but they do have adoption from Cisco, Oracle, Dell, HPE, ect (Some possibly by necessity with Intels supply issues) as well as a few of the super eight I believe so it seems likely they'll keep growing strong from there.

It's no surprise Intel has pulled a move like this in response; A big part of the "Cost per cycle" benefit that companies like Oracle were touting for the Epyc-based servers compared to their Intel counterparts were due to the fact that you could stuff many more VMs onto an Epyc-2P board than an Intel equivalent(Due to more cores and memory bandwidth).

While this is likely a sleight of hand on AMDs seemingly imminent Epyc 2 anouncement (Also expected to be 48 core per CPU and dual socket configs), it's largely more an issue of whether Intel can produce enough dies to keep up with demand and price them remotely competitively to avoid too much more haemorrhaging(Though I believe Intel has stated they expect double-digit market share losses at a minimum). But given these are 14nm based parts split into two dies as opposed 7nm parts split into 4 chances are these are going to be both more expensive to produce and less efficient/more expensive to run(But given this is the enterprise market I'm sure AMD would much rather choose to chase Intels pricing brackets and creep up market share than undercut them too massively and end up losing a lot of potential profit for market share).

 

[g0ggles1994]

heh..

https://pics.computerbase.de/7/9/1/0/2/5-1080.743141907.png

 

[AlienALX]

heh..

https://pics.computerbase.de/7/9/1/0/2/5-1080.743141907.png

Irony.....

 

[Avet]

Well... They are like bickering kids. Who called whom what first... Does it matter? Dual CPU systems exist for a long while. Putting them on the same substrate was just a matter of time. The fact that matters is that they are pushing each other.

 

[Emu]

Does anyone else remember when AMD were calling the then new Core2Quads "glued together" (or words to that effect) as they were apparently two Dual Core CPU's on the same Die? At the time AMD were touting their quad cores as "true quad cores" - I remember the hype as I almost fell for it before doing some homework. I was a die-hard AMD fan at the time but took a gamble on the Q6600 when it released. That same CPU is still in regular use today, damn fine bit of kit that.


Basically, I don't really care what the process is - though I am of course interested from a technical stand-point - as long as it delivers. The old Core2Quads delivered back in their day, as has Ryzen though reviewers have noticed the latency issues between the core clusters - sorry, I forget the correct technical term - but Ryzen certainly seems to be delivering, thoroughly embarrassing Intel from a price / performance perspective while still providing excellent performance. I think it's great that they can scare Intel in the server market too, though I do wonder what the actual adoption figures are, and if any large organisations are making the switch to AMD for their servers.



Actually considering my first AMD build in years. Sure, the 9900k is impressive enough, but the price...damn....



Scoob.

I was waiting on the 9th gen Intel CPUs to be released before upgrading my PC but that price tag on the 9900K pushed me towards a 2700x build. With the money I saved I plan on setting up a custom watercooling loop for my CPU and GPU