Skylake-X And Kaby Lake-X Thread

[SteelCrysis]

Skylake-X could go up to 20 cores: https://www.techpowerup.com/235977/intel...t-wants-to

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.extremetech.com/computing/25...3465843525
Interesting. If this guy is right, then Skylake-X is doing better now thanks to UEFIs that have had their problems worked out.

[SteelCrysis]

http://play3r.net/reviews/cpus/intel-cor...pu-review/
Let this be the final word on Kaby Lake-X:

I’m not going to be handing out any awards for the Kaby-X CPUs as I do not deem them worthy. Gavin felt the same way. My personal feeling is that this is still just a chip that should never have been brought to life. It serves nearly no purpose to anyone wanting to actually make use of HEDT systems, and the chances are that by the time you want to upgrade, Intel will have moved on to another new socket/chipset making your board/CPU change more difficult in the long run. Sorry, Intel, but you really have left me feeling rather speechless here.

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.techpowerup.com/237158/intel...ks-surface

A user on Coolenjoy has apparently gotten his hands on Intel's upcoming i9-7980XE silicon, putting it through its paces on Cinebench and a number of other benchmarks. The 18-core, 36-thread Core i9-7980XE is set to be Intel's most advanced HEDT processor of all time by a wide margin - both in number of cores and pricing. It seems that even in the face of a competitive AMD, that puts value towards core counts with its $999 Threadripper 1950X 16-core, 32-thread CPU, Intel still sees it fit to charge an arm, a leg, and both of your kidneys for a 2-core advantage. Intel's XE processors have become more synonymous of eXtremely Expensive and less about being eXtreme Edition over the years, and the i9-7980XE, with its $1999 price-tag, does nothing to alleviate the issue. This is a halo product, though - the most advanced HEDT processor in the world. And with it being as niche a product as it is, it actually makes some kind of sense for it to be so expensive - an immoral, "where has the world gone" kind of sense, but still, some measure of it.

On to the issue at hand and leaving that price tangent, results are, naturally, pretty impressive for an 18-core processor. Intel still clearly - and undeniably - has the upper hand in both manufacturing process and capabilities, as well as single-core performance, compared to AMD's offerings. Single-core performance of the 7980XE seems to be on par with its lower-core, higher-clocked siblings such as the i9-7900X and i7-7820X, but multi-core performance is through the roof, besting AMD's top of the line Threadripper 1950X - expected, since Intel's offering has 2 more cores and 4 extra threads.

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/3064-...arks-7900x

We want to make clear – primarily for Intel – that this isn’t just looking at CPU thermal performance from the perspective of overclocking. Yes, a higher frequency can be had more easily by driving down temperatures, but that’s not the core of this. Intel has a few classes of users with these HEDT CPUs, one of which includes professional workstation users, another includes enthusiasts, and then some smaller grouping of “I want the best and have lots of money” users.

For almost all of these, perhaps excluding overclocking enthusiasts, noise is a concern. Cost of the cooling solution is a concern. The near-necessity to purchase high-end 240 & 280mm coolers and run them at max or near-max fan speeds means that there is a hidden cost to these CPUs, and it’s in the cooler. Overclocking starts demanding exotic solutions, custom loops, or 360-420mm radiators with high-end fans. Prices are high on all of these components and noise is high, and yet, not one of these solutions is remotely as efficient at improving thermal performance as a $5 liquid metal application. We are not asking Intel to use liquid metal, but we’d ask that the company considers something between the current Dow Corning TIM and our liquid metal stand-in as “anything better.” Solder has been done in the past, but it may be out of the cards depending on the real reason for sticking to TIM – this could be a matter of grants and environmental impact, it could be engineering challenges (that somehow exist now and not previously, granted), it could be cost, or it could be something else altogether. We don’t know.

What we do know is that, just from the above testing, Intel isn’t doing the best it can, and the company is failing to exploit its biggest advantage over AMD – significant overclocking headroom given controlled thermals. For non-overclocking workstation users, we defer to this chart from one of our previous noise tests on CLCs:

Intel HEDT parts would put you, if we’re being generous, in the range of the ~50dBA CLCs at max RPMs. Existing in an ambient environment greater than ours (24C), like a case (we’ve seen up to 40C internal case ambient in some units), means that the cooler requirement boosts along with noise output.

There are more arguments for Intel to consider than just “we want to overclock higher because we’re enthusiasts,” and those arguments must be made to convince a giant like Intel to listen. Enthusiast overclocking is insignificant. Noise emissions, higher cooler costs, OEM fear of high liquid temperatures that could breach Asetek specification – these are all strong arguments against Intel’s present HEDT TIM practices. Just looking at some of the liquid temperatures hitting the 50-55C range, it’s clear that we’re rapidly approaching the 60C limiter before tripping Asetek’s out-of-spec concerns. Inside of a case, that’s easily done in heavy load scenarios (like AVX workloads). We’d implore OEM giants like Dell and HP to perform internal testing of CLC-enabled HEDT products under various workloads, particularly AVX, to determine if Intel’s TIM is forcing those companies to border on the cooler spec or forcing higher-end cooler purchases, thus potentially losing competitive edge.

If Intel is going to listen to anyone, it’s going to be OEMs.

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.extremetech.com/computing/25...0xe-review

The Core i9-7980XE occupies an odd position. It’s the fastest “desktop” CPU you can buy today and it combines Intel’s strong single-core performance with the huge thread counts that were recently the sole province of AMD in this market. Compared strictly with Intel’s own HEDT processors, it’s a much better value than any HEDT chip Intel has ever launched, right back to Intel’s first Westmere six-core CPUs. The Core i7-6950X (Broadwell-E) debuted on May 31 2016 and cost ~$1,799 for a 10-core chip. Most of Intel’s relevant customers likely didn’t pay anywhere near that much for the CPU, but the list price was still $180 per core. The Core i7-5960X (Haswell) was $1,000 for eight cores, or $125 per core. Intel, therefore, can spin this as an improvement on its own per-core pricing — and it is.

The problem for Intel’s triumphant narrative is, well, AMD. The Core i9-7980XE is unquestionably fast, but it’s not 2x faster, or even 50 percent faster than Threadripper in any test we ran. CPUs above $1,000 are going to be less elastic than the conventional desktop market, but cost always matters to some extent. Just because companies or individuals can afford to pay top dollar for a CPU doesn’t mean they don’t care about price at all. When Intel had the high-end market entirely to itself, the company could afford to set its own prices. With AMD’s Threadripper 1950X already in market, it’s harder to justify the cost.

Customers who want the absolute highest-end CPU and can afford to pay for it will prefer the Core i9-7980XE. But anyone who doesn’t fit into that market is going to be hard-pressed to opt for the Core i9-7900X when the Threadripper 1950X offers higher workstation performance at the same price. Intel has retaken the performance crown, but it hasn’t swept the workstation field — not by a long shot.

[SteelCrysis]

http://www.pcgamer.com/intel-core-i9-796...-105-each/

I do wonder how long it will be before 16-core processors go 'mainstream.' The first quad-core $1000 CPUs like the Core 2 QX6700 were eclipsed by the Core i7-920 after only a few years, and by 2010 quad-core processors were pretty common. 8-core chips have been around in various forms since the FX-8150, but those eight cores were slower than Intel's four cores and don't really count. Meanwhile, Intel has offered 'consumer' 6-core CPUs since 2010 and 8-core parts since the i7-5960X in 2014, but neither category has become anything close to typical. With Coffee Lake finally bringing 6-core to Intel's mainstream platform, that hurdle may finally fall, but it could a decade or more before 16-core solutions are remotely common.

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/30...wer-review

Intel does manage to definitively claim the highest performing slots in our benchmarks, but also manages to claim the award for consuming the most power, using the worst stock thermal solution, and requiring more money to be spent on CLCs or high-end coolers. Where the company gains single to low double-digit percentage performance jaunts, it also gains triple-digit power consumption increases. Overclocking headroom is tremendous, making the Intel i9-7960X a serious enthusiast option and a lot of fun to work with, but it does require modifications to truly tap into performance. Yes, 4.6GHz overclocks can be achieved stock – but not easily, and often with loud cooling solutions. With liquid metal, we dropped those cooler requirements down to 280mm X62 units with reasonable noise levels. With LM, we were pushing 4.7GHz to 4.8GHz on 1.24-1.25VID, reaping remarkable performance leaps of ~25-30% over stock. That’s impressive.

But again, it’s at the cost of 500W down the EPS12V cables, upwards of 615W, in some tests. It’s also at the cost of $700 more than a Threadripper 1950X CPU. If you’re the type to genuinely overclock a CPU and leave it at the upper-end of its clocks and performance, the i9-7960X runs away from the TR 1950X. If you’re the type to use a CPU stock, well, depending on the test, the TR 1950X may be a better value for money. This even applies to the type who might not care about initial cost: We’re talking single-digit percentages in some cases, but for significantly more power consumed. Overclocking is a different story, as is Premiere. Our Premiere benchmark is a major shining light for the CPU (but also shows the 7980XE as producing diminishing returns), roughly halving the render time with CUDA from the 1950X results we have. But this is also heavily project-oriented, and our project is not representative of all performance in Premiere. Please keep that in mind.

It’s hard to outright recommend either of these two CPUs. There are places where they’re good, and the above data should help you determine whether that fits your needs. There are also places where they’re woefully power inefficient compared to nearby rival Threadripper, which also must factor into the decision.

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/3070-...-and-power

The only real conclusion here is to be on the lookout for auto voltage supplied by a motherboard. If you have the time, we’d recommend manually tuning voltage down until the threshold of instability is found, then increment until the platform becomes stable. This will reduce power consumption and temperatures directly, while remaining just as functional as with the overvolted configuration of most stock boards.

[SteelCrysis]

Unbelievable. Delidding and swapping out the thermal paste cut 7900X temperatures at stock by 22C. Intel has made a massive mistake in its use of thermal paste:

[SteelCrysis]

As part of its Best CPUs of 2017, Gamers Nexus declares Kaby Lake-X to be the biggest CPU disappointment of 2017, and "the single biggest CPU disappointment since Bulldozer": https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/3130-...r-premiere

[SteelCrysis]

Kaby Lake-X discontinued: https://techreport.com/news/33582/intel-...e-i7-7740x

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.techpowerup.com/244853/intel...-processor

It was only a matter of time before Intel maxed out the "Skylake-X" silicon on the client segment, by bringing its "Skylake XCC" (extreme core count) 700 mm² die on a client-segment package, and here we are. Without taking model names, Intel made it clear that it's launching a new client-segment 28-core/56-thread processor.

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-...37201.html

Intel's keynote address at Computex 2018 came with a few surprises, but none were more surprising to the crowd than the demonstration of a 28-core workstation-class processor running at 5GHz. Intel says the new chip will come to market in Q4 of 2018. Before the event, Intel pre-briefed us about the 28-core model, but the company didn't disclose that it would come bearing a beastly all-core 5GHz frequency. The impressive display of multi-threaded performance probably consumed a hideous amount of power, which wouldn't lend itself well to a reasonable TDP rating for the processor. As such, we assume the processor was overclocked for the presentation.

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-...37213.html

But Intel's demo didn't tell the full story. Many in the press mistakenly assumed the new processor runs at 5.0 GHz at stock settings, but we carefully analyzed video from the event and spotted a few obvious signs that the processor was overclocked. Intel apparently was running some sort of closed-loop cooling that required insulating material around the tubing. This turns out to be a water chiller that was hidden under the table. We also spot more shielding over the long rectangular waterblock and what appears to be six sticks of RAM flanking the processor on each side. We theorized that this platform is based on the (until now) enterprise-class LGA3647 socket, and that has proven to be true. This means the processor could be a variant of the $8,700 Xeon Platinum Scalable processor we reviewed here, albeit with an unlocked multiplier.

Intel's new 28-core processor is very likely similar to the Xeon Platinum 8180. This processor lands with a $10,000 MSRP for data center users, and given its target market, it doesn't come with an unlocked multiplier. Releasing an enterprise model with an unlocked multiplier to the general market is a tricky proposition for Intel, as data center and high performance computing users will jump on the unlocked models, thus plundering sales of high-margin Xeon models. As such, we can expect Intel will charge a hefty premium for its new 28-core models and employ some type of defeaturing, such as removing AVX-512, ECC, and multi-socket support to discourage the practice.

[SteelCrysis]

Skylake-XCC has 6-channel memory: https://www.techpowerup.com/244918/asus-...nel-memory

[SteelCrysis]

The previous Tom's article has been updated again, to indicate what water chiller was used:

The one-horsepower Hailea HC-1000B is a beefy water chiller that can dissipate tremendous amounts of waste heat, but it also requires more than 1,000W for operation. We were originally going to witness the demo first hand, but there wasn't enough power handy to run both the chiller and the system simultaneously.

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-...37244.html

We met with the company last night, and while Intel didn't provide many details, a company representative explained to us that "in the excitement of the moment," the company merely "forgot" to tell the crowd that it had overclocked the system. Intel also said it isn’t targeting the gaming crowd with the new chip.

The presentation did take place in front of a crowd of roughly a hundred journalists and a few thousand others, not to mention a global livestream with untold numbers watching live, so perhaps nerves came into play. In the end, Intel claims the whole fiasco is merely the result of a flubbed recitation of pre-scripted lines, with the accidental omission of a single word: "Overclocked." Maybe that's the truth, but there's a lot of room for debate considering how convenient an omission this is.
...
Companies always try to game demonstrations to some extent. Overall, Intel's demo setup isn't too far out of bounds for what we expect from tech demonstrations. There's always some detail or information left out, or some type of system gaming to squeeze out the best performance under unrealistic scenarios. That applies to many companies the world over, and not "just" Intel.

According to Intel, the accidental omission of a single word skewed the entire demo. For now, the popular sentiment is that Intel is pushing the boundaries of the demo game a bit too far as it competes fiercely with the resurgent AMD. In this case, we think Intel's demo disaster was a bit of both.

[SteelCrysis]

• The 28C/56T CPU is basically a rebadged Xeon
  
• It's probably going to become Cascade Lake
  

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.techpowerup.com/246774/intel...t-platform

With the 2990WX out, the fate of the client-segment cousin of the Xeon Platinum 8180 is sealed, and so is that of the C629. In its client-segment avatar, the chipset will be branded "Intel X599 Express." This chipset will support new SKUs derived from the "Skylake-X" XCC silicon (probably 24-core, 26-core, and 28-core), in the LGA3647 package. The platform features not just up to 28 cores, but also a 6-channel DDR4 memory interface, which will probably support up to 192 GB of memory on the client-platform. There's also a rumor that Intel could launch new 20-core and 22-core LGA2066 processors. Those, coupled with the 8-core LGA1151 processor, will be Intel's fig-leaf until late-2019.

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.techpowerup.com/248075/intel...9-and-x599

Intel could very soon fork its high-end desktop platform into two, with the introduction of the new Z399 socket LGA2066 chipset later this quarter; and the fabled X599 chipset powering LGA3647 processors. The move is probably triggered by AMD's introduction of new 24-core and 32-core Ryzen Threadripper processors that wipe out competitiveness of its existing "Basin Falls" X299 platform. The X599 could essentially be a C629 with the addition of some client-segment features (and the subtraction of some enterprise-segment ones), whereas the Z399 is a whole different beast.

[SteelCrysis]

The refreshes have been launched: https://www.techpowerup.com/249508/intel...y-launched

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/int...902-8.html

AMD leaves ECC memory support enabled, if that's important to you. Intel disables it in an effort to protect the Xeon family. Intel leaves all of its PCIe connectivity turned on across the refreshed Skylake-X chips, but AMD already does the same thing. Solder-based thermal interface material was a good choice on Intel's part this time around. However, we consider it less of a luxury and more of a necessity. Meanwhile, Ryzen Threadripper 2950X costs half as much as the Core i9-9980XE and serves up competitive performance in a great many workloads. We think that makes it the obvious value choice for high-end desktop enthusiasts who play games, stream video, create content, and crunch code.

If you're not ready to sink thousands of dollars into a HEDT CPU, compatible motherboard, premium power supply, and water-cooling loop, consider a Core i9-9900K instead. It'd give you a taste of the high-end desktop life using a mainstream platform. The Core i9-9900K isn’t going to win any value awards, but it's an attractive option for well-heeled enthusiasts looking for the fastest gaming platform out there.

While we aren’t particularly excited about the Core i9-9980XE's iterative improvements, more aggressive Turbo Boost bins, larger caches, and full access to the PCI Express controller make downstream models more interesting than their previous-gen equivalents. The Core i9-9980XE itself is a powerful piece of hardware for heavy computing. There's a lot to like if you really do need high-end accommodations. We're simply turned off by Intel's unwillingness to budge on pricing versus the competition.

https://techreport.com/review/34253/inte...reviewed/9

The only complaint some may harbor about Intel's refreshed Core X chips is that the company didn't see any cause to cut prices on its high-end chips this time around. The reason, I imagine, is that AMD and Intel are trying to sell high-end desktop buyers two different stories of performance as competition heats up at the top of the CPU heap.

In the $1200-and-up range we're concerned with today, AMD seems plenty willing to make chips that really rip in workloads where sheer core count dominates, like rendering and some varieties of scientific computing. The tradeoff is that Threadripper WX chips can fall far behind in other tasks. That inconsistency leads to Threadripper WX chips' lower-than-might-be-expected standings in our overall value chart, even as they excel in a few particular workloads.
...
Ultimately, AMD's X399 platform still offers higher core counts for the dollar and fewer restrictions on RAM capacity or types (including ECC support), but thanks to that renewed competition, fans of the blue team are undoubtedly getting more for their money than they were a year ago, whether in higher clocks, a better process technology, the potential for cooler operation, or more CPU-connected PCIe lanes in lower-end parts.

Whether those improvements are enough to draw buyers back into the Skylake-X fold as excitement builds around AMD's next-generation server CPUs—and the potential Threadrippers derived from them—is a chapter yet to be written. For the moment, though, Intel is doing its best to put a happy ending on this chapter of its highest-end desktop chips, and a Core i9-9980XE ticking away at 4.5 GHz or better will make even the most demanding enthusiasts quite happy indeed.

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.extremetech.com/computing/28...9980xe-cpu

If you wanted proof that Intel is manifestly unconcerned about Threadripper, well, this is it right here. Intel might be offering higher frequency chips for the same amount of money with more L3 cache and PCIe lanes in some cases, but it isn’t budging on its pricing stack. Intel has changed which Xeon silicon it’s using for some of its HEDT parts, however, which is why you see the sharp L3 cache increases on multiple parts. Intel has also gone back to using solder for its HEDT chips after using paste on the stack last year, which probably also explains some of the frequency improvements, along with the shift to using 14nm++ for these CPUs rather than its older 14nm process. All parts now also offer 44 PCIe lanes, whereas previous CPUs used a mixture of 44 PCIe lanes at the top end and 28 PCIe lanes farther down the stack.
...
More generally, reviewers aren’t satisfied with Intel’s efforts to mark time. It’s a sentiment I share. It’s also a consequence of the fact that Intel has spent years trying to fix its 10nm process, continually shoving off architectural changes and product launches in an effort to bring order to the largest derailment of its manufacturing plans in the past 20 years. It’s not surprising that people feel as if most of the energy in the proverbial room is coming from AMD’s side of the equation. As things stand, the Core i9-9980XE feels like yet another modest iteration on a product rather than a true step forward.

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-...38446.html

AnandTech also reported that the Core i9-9990XE would not have a fixed price. Instead, the processor's price will vary hugely depending on how much the system integrator is willing to fork over. Intel will reportedly hold the online auctions once every quarter, and apparently, the first auction will take place on the third week of 2019 at an undisclosed website address.

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-...39050.html

The Intel Core i9-9990XE, which was only previously available via a secret auction, is now available in the retail channel. Major German retailer Caseking is currently selling the previously auction-exclusive Intel Core i9-9990XE individually for €2,999 (~$3,380), and also as part of the high-end King Mod CKPC-843 gaming and streaming PC that's currently going for €12,999.90 (~$14,650).

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-...39535.html

According to its latest Product Change Notification (PCN) document, Intel has decided it's finally time to discontinue its Skylake-X (SKL-X) processors, which debuted just two years ago.
...
Intel's decision to retire its Skylake-X processors might have something to do with AMD's recently announced Ryzen 3000-series family, which arrives with models that span up to 12 cores. Or perhaps Intel just wanted to free up production capacity, since Skylake-X chips jump out of the 14nm+ griddle, and the chipmaker is still struggling to get out of its 14nm slump. Either way, Intel officially discounted Skylake-X yesterday. Customers can place their last orders for what's left of the Skylake-X chips before December 27, with the final shipment going out on June 5, 2020.

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.techpowerup.com/256147/x499-...ew-chipset

All these details lead us to wonder if GIGABYTE tried to cover up that these boards are in fact based on the unannounced X499 Express chipset, and made to appear like they are X299. We only have paper stickers and the booth placards that indicate "X299," while a metal embossing on the Designare 10G's VRM heatsink reads X499. Intel in its Computex 2019 keynote announced that it will introduce new Core X HEDT processors. It's been over 2 years since the first Core X "Skylake-X" processors launched in Q2-2017. Intel refreshed the lineup in 2018 with 9th generation branding and soldered TIM, with a few specification improvements across the product-stack, but a largely unchanged silicon. It's likely that the Fall 2019 release could see new chips with increased core counts, perhaps even the fabled 22-core die, and some hardware mitigation against recent security vulnerabilities.

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/x299-b...ake-x-cpus

However, this week Intel published a note stating that if you update your X299 motherboard to support Cascade Lake-X ,the motherboard will no longer support two Kaby Lake-X processors: the i5-7640X and the i7-7740X.

To be fair, the Kaby Lake-X family was basically a flop and has been removed from all retailers, so it’s no surprise that Intel picked these two chips to remove from support.

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-...ade-lake-x

Respected German media outlet Computerbase.de reported this week that it is monitoring pricing for Intel's current-gen Skylake-X processors and has seen price reductions up to 50% in the European market. The site also claims that Intel will extend those price reductions to other models in the coming days.

The purported price reductions would make sense, given that Intel's new Cascade Lake-X models arrive soon with up to a 50% reduction in price-per-core. The new Cascade Lake-X models drop into the same motherboard socket as Skylake-X processors, meaning customers would obviously opt for the faster, less-expensive models instead, thus leaving retailers saddled with older (and slower) Skylake-X models that would languish on the shelves due to higher pricing.
...
Computerbase noted that many of the Skylake-X models appear to be in short supply already, suggesting that Intel is restricting supply to reduce the impact of the coming price cuts. The site posits that, in the end, the price cuts may exist more on paper than in retail outlets due to the dwindling supply. Only time will tell, but we'll keep an eye on pricing and update as necessary.

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-...ade-lake-x

Update, 10/29/19 4:48am PT: Computerbase.de has updated its article with new pricing found at several retailers, which indicates that more models Skylake-X Refresh models have experienced drastic price cuts.

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/mythic...the-camera

Legend has it that Intel prepared the Core i5-7660X three years ago, but never officially released the processor. A Chinese Twitter user recently obtained a working sample of the forgotten child from the Skylake-X family.
...
At the end of the day, the Core i5-7660X is essentially a Core i7-7800X with higher clock speeds but without Hyper-Threading. It's rated with the same 140W TDP (thermal design power), but by disabling Hyper-Threading, Intel could jack the Core i5-7660X's boost clock through the roof.

As a matter of fact, the Core i5-7660X could have been a product of Intel recycling subpar silicon that didn't meet the standards for a Core i7-7800X. This would certainly explain the close similarity between the two HEDT processors.
...
It remains a mystery why Intel never released the Core i5-7660X to the public. Probably Intel was concerned with either lack of interest, or it wanted to keep HEDT as a platform for Core i7 and above (never mind the short-lived i5-7640X). Word on the street is that some i5-7660X samples actually made it to the hands of a few selected overclockers.

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.extremetech.com/computing/31...-available

Intel has published a new set of Product Change Notifications (PCNs) for the Skylake-X platform as well as a number of Xeon processors. The boxed and unboxed versions of the Core i9-9980XE, i9-9960X, i9-9940X, 9-9920X, i9-9900X, i9-9820X, and i7-9800X are all headed for that great CPU tray in the sky. Several Xeon W CPUs are also being discontinued, including the W-2102, W-2104, W-2123, W-2125, W-2133, W-2135, W-2145, W-2155, and W-2195.
...
There are two ways to read this news. The optimistic read says that Intel is discontinuing its 9th Gen CPUs now because it has solved the product inventory problem that was keeping 10th Gen out of market. Either that or Intel wants to swap 9th Gen parts for 10th Gen, bringing the price of 10th Gen down to expected MSRP in the process. Either of these is a win for users.

The cynical read is that Intel is killing off 9th Gen because it wants to dedicate some of that capacity to higher-profit server chips, and that the company will keep HEDT supplies low for a while to maximize its overall revenue at an uncertain time. It’s not clear what the explanation is, but 10th Generation CPUs either will or will not start selling in greater volume and quantity after the 9th Gen is shut down. If part availability dries up altogether, it’ll be evidence that Intel is devoting those resources elsewhere. If it improves, we’ll know this was a standard transition away from older hardware.