Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Tuesday January 15 2019, @08:55AM   Printer-friendly
from the Not-available-in-stores! dept.

Intel Core i9-9990XE : Up to 5.0 GHz, Auction Only

AnandTech has seen documents and supporting information from multiple sources that show that Intel is planning to release a new high-end desktop processor, the Core i9-9990XE. These documents show that the processors will not be sold at retail; rather they will only be sold to system integrators, and then only through a closed online auction.

This new processor will be the highest numbered processor in Intel's high-end desktop line. The current top processor is the i9-9980XE, an 18 core part with a base frequency of 3.5 GHz and a turbo frequency of 4.0 GHz. The i9-9990XE, on the other hand, is not simply the 9980XE with an increase in frequency.

The Core i9-9990XE will be a 14 core processor, but with a base frequency of 4.0 GHz and a turbo frequency of 5.0 GHz. This makes it a super-binned 9940X.

AMD Radeon VII: less than 5000 available, no custom cards

The new Radeon VII otherwise known as Radeon 7 is a revamped Vega graphics card, where at the end of the day it's just a Radeon Instinct MI50 accelerator that was released in November last year. We have the same Vega 20 GPU on the fresh new 7nm node, the same 16GB of HBM2 memory, and similar GPU clocks to the new Radeon VII graphics card.

Since the announcement I reached out to some industry contacts who said there will be "less than 5000" made. The same source said AMD is losing money on each card sold as they are, as I said before, just Radeon Instinct MI50 cards that are being re-purposed into 'new' Radeon VII cards.

The improved cooler will keep it cooler than the Radeon Instinct MI50, while the same 300W TDP applies. Even the Radeon Instinct MI50 performance falls between the GeForce RTX 2070 and RTX 2080, while the new Radeon VII has performance that equals and will sometimes (higher resolutions like 4K and beyond) beat the RTX 2080.

Previously: AMD Announces Radeon VII GPU, Teases Third-Generation Ryzen CPU


Original Submission #1   Original Submission #2

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1) by pTamok on Tuesday January 15 2019, @01:56PM (9 children)

    by pTamok (3042) on Tuesday January 15 2019, @01:56PM (#786883)

    Fewer than 5,000 available.

    If it is easily countable, its fewer, if it is a continuous quantity, or at least, not easily countable, it is less.

    And for those of you who don't care, the phrase is couldn't care less, not could care less, which makes no sense*.

    *Merriam-Webster sit's with it's butt firmly divided by the fence [merriam-webster.com], but mishandling of negatives aitn't not right, so I could care fewer about what you think.

  • (Score: 2) by ledow on Tuesday January 15 2019, @02:41PM (8 children)

    by ledow (5567) on Tuesday January 15 2019, @02:41PM (#786899) Homepage

    It was always couldn't care less.

    The "could care less" thing is people just parroting it incorrectly, it's an entirely American invention too (OED marks it as North American only).

    If you COULD care less, that means you care some amount already - i.e. you do care to some extent.
    If you COULDN'T care less, that it's literally impossible for you to care at a lower level than you already do... i.e. you care precisely zero.

    It always sounds like a child parroting a misheard phrase whenever I hear it.

    Fewer/less is just ignorance of a particular rule. "Could care less" is just "I haven't thought about what that phrase means at all" - like flammable / inflammable meaning the same thing, which also makes no sense.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 15 2019, @03:40PM (3 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 15 2019, @03:40PM (#786930)

      "flammable / inflammable" hahaha that's funny.
      i thought "flammable" is used for stuff that is supposed to be lite on fire ... whilst "inflamable" is used when you wan to use it but it
      might not be the best thing/material to use because it can (but should not) catch fire?
      nevermind, lame on!

      • (Score: 3, Informative) by pTamok on Tuesday January 15 2019, @05:49PM (1 child)

        by pTamok (3042) on Tuesday January 15 2019, @05:49PM (#786977)

        World Wide Words: Flammable [worldwidewords.org]

        The problem with inflammable is the in- at the front. English has many words in which it means “without” or “not”. A majority have been imported from Latin with the prefix already attached, such as infertile and inarticulate. Others, such as inexpensive and invariable, have had it added in English. We don’t turn words into their negatives using in- any more; we prefer un- or non-, or sometimes a-, but the aura of negativity surrounding in- is still very strong in our minds.

        Unfortunately, Latin had another in- prefix, whose root sense was the same as English in but which could sometimes strengthen the meaning of the word it was attached to, as in indoctrinate and incantation and also in inflammable. This is much less common or obvious, so much so that inflammable can all too easily be taken to mean “not capable of burning”, when it really means “very easily set on fire”.

      • (Score: 2) by takyon on Tuesday January 15 2019, @06:24PM

        by takyon (881) <{takyon} {at} {soylentnews.org}> on Tuesday January 15 2019, @06:24PM (#786986) Journal

        oblig [youtube.com]

        --
        [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
    • (Score: 2, Insightful) by NateMich on Tuesday January 15 2019, @04:04PM (2 children)

      by NateMich (6662) on Tuesday January 15 2019, @04:04PM (#786945)

      it's literally impossible for you to care at a lower level than you already do

      It always sounds like a child parroting a misheard phrase whenever I hear it.

      And I remember as a child, correcting people using the very same explanation. It's a battle that can't be won.

      Now if I could just get my girlfriend to stop saying "exscape".

    • (Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 17 2019, @07:08AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 17 2019, @07:08AM (#787809)

      I always used 'I could care less' to tell people to keep talking about something I still have room to care less about. Usually that gets them to shut up and stomp off in a huff, but sometimes they keep discussing it until I really couldn't care less, and then I just walk off :)