Coffee Lake Thread

[SteelCrysis]

Now ASUS is saying that Z270 could work with Coffee Lake: https://www.techpowerup.com/237957/asus-...-lake-cpus

[SteelCrysis]

Intel's working on boosting Coffee Lake production: https://www.extremetech.com/computing/25...-shipments

[SteelCrysis]

The next wave of Coffee Lake is coming: https://www.anandtech.com/show/12077/int...ke-refresh

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.techpowerup.com/242073/modde...s-chipsets

It turns out that "Coffee Lake" is pin-compatible with older LGA1151 motherboards based on 200-series and 100-series chipsets after all, as modders got some of these chips to work on the older platforms. Intel is using software to prevent Coffee Lake from working on older motherboards. This software comes in the form of the CPU's microcode, the iGPU's UEFI GOP driver, and certain Management Engine bootstraps on the side of the motherboard BIOS that lets it recognize the new chips. With the safe transplanting of these pieces of software, Overclock.net modders rootuser123, LittleHill, dsanke, elisw, Mov AX, and 0xDEAD; succeeding in not only getting the chips to work on older platforms, but also found ways to iron out several stability and compatibility issues. They've published a guide at this page.

[SickBeast]

Wow. Intel should not be doing this.

[SteelCrysis]

Possible 8-core Coffee Lake CPU: https://www.techpowerup.com/242544/intel...n-the-wild

[SteelCrysis]

Z390 confirmed: http://www.tomshardware.com/news/biostar...36798.html

[SteelCrysis]

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/core-i7...36826.html

Multiple rumors and leaks strongly indicate that the ostensible Core i7-9700K will sport eight CPU cores and 16 threads, in contrast to the six cores and 12 threads on the Core i7-8700K. If this turns out to be true, it will be a first for Intel on a mainstream-grade CPU platform—as opposed to the enthusiast-targeted Core X-Series platform, which goes all the way up to 18 cores (if you can afford to drop a couple of grand on a CPU). But the eight cores on the Core i7-9700K, if that turns out to be accurate, only just matches what AMD has to offer in terms of cores and threads on its mainstream Ryzen CPUs; it doesn’t surpass the competition.

Of course, a shift to the long-promised 10nm process node would help Intel move further ahead of AMD without necessarily adding more cores. But that’s looking increasingly unlikely with Intel’s next round of desktop chips. Intel’s Gregory Bryant (senior vice president and general manager of the Client Computing Group) proclaimed at CES 2018, back in January, that 10nm chips were shipping to customers. But documents released weeks later seem to confirm that those 10nm “Cannon Lake” parts that shipped in 2017 were low-power, dual-core parts without integrated graphics. These aren’t the Cannon Lake chips that enthusiasts and gamers are looking for.

In fact, it’s looking likely that the Core i7-9700K will be a so-called “Coffee Lake Refresh” chip built around Intel’s 14nm++ process. Why do we say that? For starters, we have heard persistent rumors and leaks around an upcoming Z390 chipset. Most recently, a listing for "motherboard-specific sensor info for MSI B360/H310/H370/Z390-Series," showed up in a recent AIDA64 update. (AIDA64 is a benchmark and diagnostic suite often used to test pre-release hardware.)
...
Now, the “3” in the Z390 name almost certainly indicates that the chipset is aimed at Coffee Lake CPUs, just like the other 300-series chipsets. What does that tell us? If Intel knew it was going to have 10nm "Cannon Lake" desktop chips ready sometime in 2018, it seems extremely unlikely—though certainly not out of the question—that the company would be launching yet another high-end chipset for its current-generation processors halfway through the year.

If we were placing bets, we’d put our chips (pun intended) on the likelihood that Z390 was designed specifically for a line of Coffee Lake Refresh chips, which would include the Core i7-9700K. Alternately, the Core i7-9700K could be a limited stop-gap between chip generations, just like the pair of "Devil’s Canyon" chips were back in 2014.
...
But while Koduri is certainly an interesting hire, a socketed Kaby Lake-G is extremely unlikely, given that AMD makes the Vega graphics in those chips. It was surprising to see AMD selling Intel its graphics silicon for comparatively low-volume products such as the new Intel NUC and high-end convertibles like the Dell XPS 15 Convertible. But we highly doubt that AMD is desperate enough to cut into its own core desktop-CPU and graphics businesses by helping Intel compete against itself and its own socketed graphics-equipped products, like the "Raven Ridge" AMD Ryzen 5 2400G.

[SteelCrysis]

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-d...36895.html

All this leaves us speculating on what the first eight-core Coffee Lake processor will be called. If it is to launch with Z390, we find it unlikely that it’ll be the i7-9700K. It could slot in above the i7-8700K and be a range-topping model for Intel’s 8th-gen products. In this scenario, the processor could adopt the “i9” brand and would be both a selling point for the Z390 chipset and a stop-gap product between Intel’s 8th- and 9th-gen products. The formally labelled 9th-gen products would then probably have eight-core Coffee Lake (or Coffee Lake Refresh) parts in its lineup at launch.

Intel has undoubtedly made some significant changes to its product lines in response to AMD’s return to competitiveness in 2017. AMD’s 2nd-Gen Ryzen chips are clocked higher and are cheaper than their 1st-gen counterparts. Intel might have held back on releasing its eight-core 8th-gen processors to save them for dulling AMD’s impending release of 2nd-Gen Ryzen chips.

[SteelCrysis]

Z390, X399 on the way: https://www.techpowerup.com/243671/intel...-documents

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.techpowerup.com/243877/bluec...s-for-2018

On Intel's side of the camp, some ill-kept secrets have apparently been confirmed: the launch of the company's Z390 chipset, for instance, is expected to happen in Q3 2018 - some time after Computex, which might mean a relatively sparse landscape when it comes to teases and new product announcements based on Intel's upcoming top of the line chipset. Oh, and that unicorn of an 8-core Coffee Lake part is apparently being prepped for 4Q 2018, with silicon being moved to partner hands as early as June.

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.techpowerup.com/244021/a-pus...10-chipset

A report straight out of DigiTimes, citing industry sources, says that Intel has discontinued production of its H310 chipset. The decision has apparently stemmed from lower than expected production capacity for chipsets on the 14 nm process. When that happens, production focus must shift to a specific part: in this case, Intel obviously went with the option with the lower opportunity cost, and increased production of the Z370 chipset: the one with the increased feature-set, and, most likely than not, higher margins.

[SteelCrysis]

Actually, the previous was an inaccuracy by TPU, the cited source indicated a pause: https://www.digitimes.com/news/a20180508PD211.html

[SickBeast]

TPU has become completely unreliable in terms of news and rumors. It's kind of sad. But I no longer read their site. Their GPU BIOS database is outstanding, though.

[SteelCrysis]

Intel releases info about Z390: https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-...37046.html

[SteelCrysis]

Possible 8C/16T Coffee Lake CPU: https://www.techpowerup.com/244412/possi...a-database

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.techpowerup.com/245090/intel...processors

In related news, the company is giving finishing touches to a new 8-core "Coffee Lake" die for the mainstream-desktop platform (LGA1151 socket, 300-series chipset). This die features 8 cores, and likely 16 MB of shared L3 cache, while retaining the iGPU and uncore components from the existing Coffee Lake-S die. The chip could retain the classic "Ring Bus" design. The new 8-core mainstream-desktop SKUs, and at least two new high-end desktop SKUs (20-core and 22-core), could be launched in September 2018. The "Basin Falls" refresh, coupled with the new LGA3647 "Purley" derivative for the 28-core monstrosity, will be all Intel has to face AMD this year, with the company's next HEDT silicon, "Cascade Lake-X" being reportedly delayed to the second half of 2019, probably due to foundry problems.

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/int...638-9.html

Unfortunately, the decision to bundle Core i7-8700 with an all-aluminum heat sink means that you may not always get the chip's most aggressive Turbo Boost frequencies under taxing workloads. You'd assume that a CPU with 50% more cores would also dissipate more heat than its predecessor. And yet Intel didn't think to include a cooling solution with enough thermal headroom to realize its peak performance. This is especially perplexing given the praise AMD received for packaging its processors with beefy heat sinks.
...
...which you'll want to turn around and spend on a better thermal solution than what Intel includes with its -8700. That heat sink and fan combination is obviously a poor fit, and better thermal paste won't fix the issue. By stepping up to a sufficient third-party cooler, you won't have to worry about artificially clipping the -8700's top-end Turbo Boost bins due to overheating. A six-core, Hyper-Threaded CPU rated for 65W sounds great for performance-sensitive applications in small form factors. But power consumption definitely spikes higher under load. Apparently, many low-profile coolers lack the headroom for Core i7-8700, so do your homework before replacing the stock sink in a space-constrained environment.

In the past, we recommended Ryzen 7 2700X over Intel's Core i7-8700K due to AMD's lower price point, similar gaming performance, bundled cooler, and better benchmark results in threaded applications. We expected Core i7-8700's comparable performance and pricing advantage to level the field. However, Intel's sub-standard cooling solution means we can't recommend the -8700 without a suitable replacement, adding to the CPU's overall cost.

[SteelCrysis]

Z390 Express is rumored to be cancelled and and replaced by Z370 Express: https://www.techpowerup.com/245456/intel...70-as-z390

[SteelCrysis]

https://techreport.com/news/33874/intel-...-core-cpus

As part of its latest microcode update guidance document for the Spectre vulnerability, Intel may have intentionally or inadvertently tipped off the existence of several ninth-generation Core processors. The microcode update guidance reveals that the Core i5-9400, Core i5-9400T, Core i5-9500, Core i5-9600, and Core i5-9600K are in the pipe. Those chips will all use the current Coffee Lake die in a so-called "6+2" configuration, or six CPU cores and Gen9.5 GT2 graphics.

Other ninth-generation Core products could include the Core i3-9000 and Core i3-9100. Those parts will be quad-core chips with GT2 graphics, if Intel's documents are final. The guidance also reiterates the existence of as-yet-unreleased eighth-generation Core parts, including the i5-8650 and i5-8650K. Those parts have been in Intel CPU lists since late last year, but they haven't come to market yet.

[SteelCrysis]

https://techreport.com/news/33870/mindfa...ed-in-june

Overall, it's clear from Mindfactory's numbers that the i7-8700K was both a necessary response to AMD's Ryzen onslaught and an enduring smash hit among enthusiasts. Even the introduction of Pinnacle Ridge Ryzen CPUs hasn't done much to slow the most-caffeinated Coffee Lake part's roll. It's worth remembering that these numbers are a look at activity from one retailer in one region only, but it's still fascinating to see how the battle between a newly-competitive AMD and a playing-catch-up Intel has run its course over the past year. We can't wait to see the developments this competitive pressure has yet to yield from both companies.

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.extremetech.com/computing/27...ation-cpus

There is one interesting implication of the fact that no new Core i7 CPUs were listed under the 6+2 moniker, while a number of Core i5s are. There’s been a rumor in the industry that Intel might be preparing to release eight-core Core i7 CPUs later this year. Intel obviously knew for quite some time that its 10nm process wasn’t yielding up to desired specifications and could have planned an eight-core 14nm CPU for desktop as a potential response.

There are several reasons why the company might take this step. First, it puts them on an even core-for-core footing with AMD. Right now, AMD’s Ryzen 7 2700X has ExtremeTech’s nod over the Core i7-8700K, precisely because two more cores give the CPU the headroom it needs to take the multi-processing lead over Intel. Second, bumping up core counts lets Intel keep talking up the efficiency of its 14nm process. If you’ve paid any attention to the company’s messaging around 14nm in the wake of the 10nm delay, it’s talked up how it delivered a 70 percent performance improvement over the life of 14nm to date. Most of that improvement arrived in mobile, courtesy of a shift from high-clock dual-core parts to lower-clocked quad-cores. We think there’s basically no chance of 15W six-core CPUs in mobile, but Intel could drop an eight-core desktop chip into the same TDP brackets it uses now and claim a performance and efficiency improvement as a result.

Third, bumping up core counts in mainstream desktop gives Intel reason to trim prices overall and talk up its own improved value as opposed to looking weak by cutting prices in response to AMD. We’ve already talked about how AMD’s 32-core Threadripper is virtually certain to force Intel to slash its own core counts. If it doesn’t, it’ll be putting an 18-core chip at $2000 up against a 32-core CPU at a presumed MSRP of $2000 – $2500. That’s not going to end well for Intel. But if eight-core CPUs go mainstream, the company can trim the entire rest of its stack accordingly.

All of this is speculation based on what was clearly information Intel didn’t intend to include in this presentation, combined with some rumors from earlier in the year, so I wouldn’t hang much weight on it — and it’s my theory. But given the competitive pressure on Intel this year, this kind of shift would make sense.

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.techpowerup.com/246038/intel...os-updates

A variety of motherboards based on Intel Z370 Express chipset began receiving the first BIOS updates that add compatibility with upcoming Intel 8-core processors. The updates are flagged "beta" by the manufacturers. Given that only Z370 (and not other 300-series chipset models) have such updates, it's possible that Intel could restrict the first socket LGA1151 8-core processor SKUs (which could be unlocked "K" variants with higher TDP) to Z370 chipset, as the chipset has stronger VRM requirements than other chipset models that don't support CPU overclocking.

[SteelCrysis]

Core i9-9900K, Core i7-9700K, Core i5-9600K on the way: https://www.techpowerup.com/246230/top-t...s-detailed

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/int...679-9.html

In games, a $100 Ryzen 3 2200G trailed Intel's Pentium Gold G5600 just barely at its stock settings. But overclocking the Ryzen made it competitive with the $117 Core i3-8100. As such, we're doubling down on our recommendation to pair the Ryzen 3 2200G up with an add-in graphics card for gaming. And it's even more convincing across our application tests. The 2200G's four physical cores and AVX support provide superior performance in threaded workloads. The chip even fares well in many lightly-threaded tasks—and that's before we take overclocking into account.

Due to a slightly lower clock rate, the Pentium Gold G5400 can't quite match the G5600's performance. It doesn't trail by much in our gaming and application tests, though. Although the Pentium sold at a premium immediately after launch, it's now available for $64. That $30 savings is worth considering, particularly if you reinvest those funds into a faster graphics card or larger SSD. Intel's Pentium Gold G5400 looks like a great choice for builders on tight budgets, and AMD has nothing to compete against its price point. At least for now, the Pentium Gold G5400 reigns uncontested.

[SteelCrysis]

Core i9-9900K could have soldered IHS, could come as early as August 1: https://www.techpowerup.com/246251/intel...e-revealed

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/2742...om-core-i7

But by positioning the Core i9-9900K at the top of its own stack in an eight-core / 16-thread configuration, Intel is basically daring AMD to try and bring Ryzen CPUs with higher core counts to the desktop as well. It’s not clear if such chips would fit into AMD’s existing socket infrastructure or not (Threadripper motherboards are typically more expensive than your standard AM4 products). There’s unquestionably room in AMD’s product line for a higher core count chip — the eight-core 1900X is $329, while the 12-core Threadripper 1920X is $785. But taking on Intel’s eight-core means AMD either needs a 10-core chip that can drop into that $450 price range or it needs a hell of a price cut on a 12-core chip.

And this raises another question: Which company currently has more long-term headroom? Unofficial rumors suggest Zen 2 will target a 10-15 percent IPC uplift, but AMD is still trying to close the gap with Intel overall, not surpass it. With Intel stuck on 14nm the momentum advantage is very much on AMD’s side of the equation, but given the fundamental problems with improving silicon performance, it isn’t clear how much daylight the two companies can create between each other, in the final analysis. We’re going to need to see someone jockeying with Intel for the pole position before we can tell to what extent Intel’s silicon scaling problems are unique to Intel or common to the entire industry. Right now, we think those problems tend to be common to the industry and a function of clock speeds and material properties. Based on how the next 18 months plays out, that could change.

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.techpowerup.com/246354/intel...en-7-2700x

Some of the first benchmark numbers of Intel's upcoming 8-core/16-thread socket LGA1151 processor, the Core i9-9900K, surfaced, from Thai professional overclocker TUM APISAK. A 3DMark database submission sees the processor score 10,719 points in the CPU tests, with an overall score of 9,862 points, when paired with a GeForce GTX 1080 Ti graphics card. According to WCCFTech, the CPU score is about 2,500 points higher than the 6-core/12-thread Core i7-8700K, and about 1,500 points higher than the 8-core/16-thread AMD Ryzen 7 2700X.

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-...37544.html

What's true, what's not? Well, that's anyone's guess. According to an older report from pcbuildersclub.com, the Coffee Lake Refresh processors should have landed yesterday. Apparently, everyone else is running late.

The reinvigorated processor market has led to a flurry of rushed launches from both Intel and AMD, so it is reasonable to assume that roadmaps change frequently. That could explain away the differences between the rapidly-released roadmaps, but it's possible there is some fabrication involved. We've certainly seen it before.

Are any of the sites right? Who knows. For now, we'll wait for more definitive leads. Meanwhile, we'll continue wandering through the land of leaked roadmap confusion trying to suss out what's real and what's fake, albeit while chewing on a big mouthful of salt.

[SteelCrysis]

Paper launch of Coffee Lake refresh reportedly coming on August 14: https://www.techpowerup.com/246491/intel...in-q4-2018

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.extremetech.com/computing/27...ntel-chips

That’s a comprehensive list of all Gigabyte’s 8th Generation hardware, so it looks like Intel will introduce 9th Generation chips with one new top-end chipset (the Z390), with the older 8th Gen boards presumably falling in for now. Intel may increment the family numerically at a later date as new 9th Gen 14nm chips appear, though we aren’t expecting much in the way of a refresh cycle below the Core i9.

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.techpowerup.com/246765/finer...00k-emerge

Taiwanese tech site BenchLife.info scored finer details of Intel's upcoming premium LGA1151 processors through screenshots of leaked documents; revealing more about the Core i7-9700K 8-core/8-thread processor, and the top-dog 8-core/16-thread Core i9-9900K. The i7-9700K has the QDF number QQPK, and the i9-9900K "QQPP." The tables below also reveal their extended product code, CPUID, and iGPU device ID. There's also a confirmation that the TDP of both parts is rated at just 95 W. The next table provides a great insight to the clock speeds of the two chips.

[SteelCrysis]

Rumor states that at least the i9-9900K will use solder: https://www.extremetech.com/computing/27...use-solder

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-...37695.html
I can't insert a table, so you'll have to check the link for the prices.

With the technical specifications out of the way, let's look at the most important factor: pricing. After some diligent investigative work, the three processors showed at a few European retailers: Alza.cz, PC21.FR and Informaticazone. After subtracting the VAT and making the necessary currency conversions, here are the estimated prices of the upcoming processors.

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.techpowerup.com/247132/intel...inebenched

Intel's upcoming Core i7-9700K processor is the first Core i7 SKU to lack HyperThreading, but that isn't stopping the chip with 8 physical cores from edging past its predecessor posting strong multi-threaded performance. Chinese publication ZOL managed to overclock the chip to 5.50 GHz under liquid cooling with all its cores enabled, by simply dialing up the unlocked multiplier to 55.0X, and a rather high 1.535V core voltage.

The overclocked i7-9700K was put through Cinebench R15, where it scored 250 points in the single-threaded test, and 1827 points in the multi-threaded one, a 7.31x multiprocessing ratio. A current-generation 6-core/12-thread Core i7-8700K typically manages around 1550 points at stock speeds (at least 4.30 GHz all-core Turbo Boost frequency), in the multi-threaded test. The i7-9700K could hence be less ahead of its predecessor than hoped. It's the 8-core/16-thread Core i9-9900K, which could grab enthusiasts' attention (and monies).

[SteelCrysis]

i9-9900K confirmed to be using soldered IHS: https://www.techpowerup.com/247301/intel...-confirmed

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.techpowerup.com/247308/intel...otherboard

The Core i7-9700K yielded a single-core score of 6,297 points, which is marginally higher than that of a stock Core i7-8700K (3.70 GHz to 4.70 GHz), owing to a higher boost frequency. The i7-8700K averages 6,000 ±100 points in this test. Multi-threaded performance is where the i7-9700K comes alive, scoring 30,152 points, which is about 12 percent higher than the 27,000 ±500 points the i7-8700K scores; and about 4-5% higher than the 28,000 ±1,000 points the AMD Ryzen 7 2700X manages in this test. The lack of HyperThreading seems to be more than compensated by the two extra cores the i7-9700K has over its predecessor. The i9-9900K maxes out the silicon with HyperThreading and 16 MB L3 cache, which could enable Intel to target a higher price-point.

[SteelCrysis]

This is what happens when you bring back soldered IHSes: i7-9700K is able to reach 5.3 GHz on mainstream air cooler: https://www.techpowerup.com/247337/intel...ghz-on-air

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/14nm-p...37746.html

The first signs of the shortage emerged in May. Intel's chipsets typically lag a node behind the flagship processors. meaning that until recently, Intel fabbed its chipsets on the 22nm process. Intel's recent 300-series chipset refresh found its new chipsets coming to market with the 14nm process, which is necessary to meet California's new power standards. Shortly after that, several vendors reported that Intel's H-series chipsets were in short supply, or simply not available, due to overbooked 14nm production.

In July, Intel finally confirmed the 14nm supply challenges during its earnings call, saying, "Our biggest challenge in the second half [of 2018] will be meeting additional demand, and we are working intently with our customers and our factories to be prepared so we are not constraining our customers' growth."

The company cited an unexpected $4.5 billion increase in demand as a key contributor, but other aspects, such as the delay of the company's 10nm node, likely play a role. Planning silicon production capacity is a multi-year process that involves getting the production facilities and tooling in place for mass production, but Intel fully planned to be in high volume production of 10nm processors at this point. As a result, the delayed 10nm process has likely exacerbated production challenges by pushing more unanticipated demand back to the 14nm production lines.

DigiTimes reported on September 1 that Acer chairman and CEO Jason Chen confirmed that tight supply of Intel's 14nm processors is already impacting supply chains. CP Wong, president of notebook ODM Compal Electronics, also told DigiTimes that 14nm supply issues could have more of an impact on the PC industry during the latter half of the year than the U.S.-China trade war.
...
Meanwhile, AMD has a seemingly solid supply of 14nm and 12nm chips from GlobalFoundries as it heads into the holiday season, and the company is working to transition quickly to the 7nm node early next year. GlobalFoundries recently abandoned the 7nm node, which might eventually create challenges for AMD as it competes with Nvidia, Apple and Qualcomm for production capacity at TSMC. But the short-term outlook for AMD's production capacity looks strong headed into the holiday season, while Intel could struggle. That could lead to a repeat of AMD's strong holiday performance last year.

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.extremetech.com/computing/27...ghz-on-air

Hitting 5.3GHz on air is a real achievement, but WCCFTech notes that other leaked chips have been hitting 5.5GHz with water cooling and a CPU voltage of 1.536 volts. I mention this not because 5.5GHz on water is a bad achievement — it absolutely isn’t — but 1.536v is an insane amount of voltage to pump through a CPU. By contrast, 5.3GHz on 1.25v with an entry-level cooler is a very good result. What this means, in aggregate, is that we don’t actually know much about how much headroom these cores will practically have. The 5.5GHz chip could be a bad overclocker, while the 1.25v CPU @ 5.3GHz might represent a semi-mythical “golden sample.” Said samples aren’t actually mythical but your chances of acquiring one are as bad as you think they are. The actual amount of improvement compared to a standard CPU or GPU always varies depending on the particulars of the manufacturing process and the characteristics of the product in question.

But the implication of these results, at least, is that Intel’s decision to move to solder could pay some modest dividends for enthusiasts and overclockers when these cores launch later this year. Overall performance on the 9700K is also said to be better than the 8700K, even at stock, which should help make them an overall upgrade — though the 8700K is an excellent chip in its own right and unlikely to drive much in the way of an upgrade cycle. We’d expect most buyers to come from customers using Skylake or older CPU cores.

Don’t expect solder to fundamentally change the physics of CPU scaling, however. Even if Intel’s manufacturing tweaks move the bar outwards by a few hundred MHz, just using solder between an IHS and die won’t magically make silicon scale more effectively above 5GHz. Enthusiasts may be able to scale their CPUs higher by 5-8 percent, but Intel won’t be riding this change to another GHz of clock — or even another 500MHz.

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.extremetech.com/computing/27...rices-rise

There are a variety of factors that could be in play here. Intel ran out of H310 chipsets after launching them on a 14nm process earlier this year (previous chipsets were built on 22nm). Transitioning its chipset business to 14nm is part of Intel’s regular strategy to move its non-CPU hardware to older process nodes and keep fab utilization high, but it may have put more pressure on the company’s foundries thanks to — you guessed it — the delays to 10nm.
...
That’s the downside to missing your roadmap when the roadmaps are drawn up 3-5 years in advance. There’s no way to untangle the impacts of that miss from the knock-on effects they cause down the chain. Delaying 10nm hurts EUV deployment. It also puts at least some degree of increased pressure on Intel’s fabs, which should be fully converted to 10nm by now and instead are continuing to build out on 14nm while fixing 10.

Keep all this in mind when considering the 9th Generation Core CPUs after they launch. Practical availability matters more than formal MSRP statements, and we’ll be considering the launch from that perspective as well when the day arrives. As for Intel’s availability crunch, it could cause some short-term sales loss to AMD in the retail channel, but Intel will presumably prioritize the most profitable orders and customers it has to keep cash flowing — and with an expected $70B in yearly sales this year, there’s plenty of cash in the pipeline.