Intel launches Xeon W processors with up to 18C / 36T

[HEXUS]

These new Intel Xeon Scalable processors are aimed at traditional workstation users.

Read more.

[Tabbykatze]

So basically they have created another product segment to sit between i9 and Xeon Server cores...wha...?

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

No ECC support apparently.

[azrael-]

No ECC support apparently.

Except for the "Four channel DDR4 2666 ECC memory support" in the bullet points (second image).

I wonder if the new W series replaces the E3 series. If so, entry level Xeons processors suddenly got a lot more powerhungry ...and quite a bit more expensive. At least Intel didn't repeat the Kaby Lake X gaffe...

[DanceswithUnix]

Charlie really isn't a fan

https://semiaccurate.com/2017/08/29/...kstation-cpus/

So 14C less, higher base clocks, slightly higher turbo, and a crippled memory subsystem for your hard-earned dollars.

edit:

Except for the "Four channel DDR4 2666 ECC memory support" in the bullet points (second image).

Yeah, lack of ECC would be instant game over in this market, but apparently they rate their chances with restricting the RAM size to 756GB. Have they seen how much RAM you need to compile one of their really big FPGAs these days? Would be amusing if they force customers over to AMD processors to use Intel's own Altera FPGA tech

[Ozaron]

Compared to Intel's oh so welcoming marketing, the GoCompare man doesn't seem so annoying. At least he doesn't ask you to spend £1300 on a CPU with ECC, 36 threads, 25mb cache that struggles against itself to not cause global warming and requires a premium motherboard, just to sell you short by calling it "mainstream".

[azrael-]

Charlie really isn't a fan

https://semiaccurate.com/2017/08/29/...kstation-cpus/

So 14C less, higher base clocks, slightly higher turbo, and a crippled memory subsystem for your hard-earned dollars.

As always I love Charlie's wording. However, is he or Hexus wrong on the number of sockets. Charlie talks about Xeon-W as a dual socket (2S) solution while Hexus in this article states they are single-socket processors. I can't really see anyting in the above slides/images to suggest dual socket configurations.

EDIT: My bad. Apparently there are both 2S and 1S Xeon-Ws. Hexus only seems to cover the latter, though.

2ND EDIT: Seems I cannot read (and apparently neither can Charlie D). As DanceswithUnix and DR correctly point out below Xeon W is strictly single-socket. For dual-socket you need to look at Xeon SP (with Intel muddying the information further by expressly depicting and mentioning Xeon Platinum processors).

[DanceswithUnix]

EDIT: My bad. Apparently there are both 2S and 1S Xeon-Ws. Hexus only seems to cover the latter, though.

Are there? Looking over the original Intel press release there is mention of Xeon Platinum but I can't see what is being released right now. Not that I am in the market, my time would be better spent on xkcd than trying to work out what Intel are saying here

[DR]

Intel's blurb: The single-socket Intel Xeon W processor delivers mainstream performance optimized for the needs of traditional workstation professionals. The Intel Xeon W processor features up to 18 cores and up to 36 threads, with an Intel Turbo Boost Technology frequency up to 4.5 GHz. Mainstream workstations will experience up to a 1.87x boost in performance compared to a 4-year-old system and up to 1.38x higher performance compared to the previous generation

... Unless others have seen something else (bar SA)

[lumireleon]

intel will confuse customers further. PANIC ATTACK? i-sheep chronicles

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Except for the "Four channel DDR4 2666 ECC memory support" in the bullet points (second image).

Oops!

[Tabbykatze]

Intel exploded when Threadripper happened and panic drew up the i9 series not even knowing what they wanted to do, what the specs would be or what the price would be but they internally had to do it to compete with AMD. Which amusingly in turn, Ryzen has impacted Intel again with a fairly solid processor with higher core counts and lower costs which although didn't beat Intel completely it basically jumped in the boat and played who can hold on the longest while it rocks.

And then we have Epyc which was ripe for taking the server crowns. The server processor targeted at messing up the SMB markets while creating havoc in the large markets by distinctly showing the Intel have really been squeezing everyones goolys and proving what can be done with todays technology. At the sub $5000 market Intel really does lose out a lot here due to AMDs pricing and phenomenal multi threaded core capabilities (and lets not get started on the actual feature comparisons).

That's 3 Processor market segments that have been disrupted by AMD this year and have forced Intel to trip (which I don't think they'll truly recover from till next year). The next area to win is in the low power APU marketing which is currently dominated by Atoms, *coughinghackingand death* Celery sticks and cut down i-series. If they can mess up that product segment with another disruptive product then we can safely say the major foundation of Intel is about to be re-evaluated and put back into "design and build" mode, rather than just "tweak that a little, put an artificial block, release".

[KN1GHT]

Sorry, but I can't see how this compares well against Epyc especially price considered.

[KN1GHT]

Intel exploded when Threadripper happened and panic drew up the i9 series not even knowing what they wanted to do, what the specs would be or what the price would be but they internally had to do it to compete with AMD. Which amusingly in turn, Ryzen has impacted Intel again with a fairly solid processor with higher core counts and lower costs which although didn't beat Intel completely it basically jumped in the boat and played who can hold on the longest while it rocks.

And then we have Epyc which was ripe for taking the server crowns. The server processor targeted at messing up the SMB markets while creating havoc in the large markets by distinctly showing the Intel have really been squeezing everyones goolys and proving what can be done with todays technology. At the sub $5000 market Intel really does lose out a lot here due to AMDs pricing and phenomenal multi threaded core capabilities (and lets not get started on the actual feature comparisons).

That's 3 Processor market segments that have been disrupted by AMD this year and have forced Intel to trip (which I don't think they'll truly recover from till next year). The next area to win is in the low power APU marketing which is currently dominated by Atoms, *coughinghackingand death* Celery sticks and cut down i-series. If they can mess up that product segment with another disruptive product then we can safely say the major foundation of Intel is about to be re-evaluated and put back into "design and build" mode, rather than just "tweak that a little, put an artificial block, release".

(XD) yebo well said, I can't agree more.
And now the eyes of the world are on Intel waiting for them to start with their illegal anti-competitive practices to push AMD down like in the Athlon 64 and Optiron days.

They've burned their bridges, I'd love to see them try again and get destroyed in the process. People are already calling them out for slandering AMD's name in their presentations.