Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 18 submissions in the queue.
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This discussion has been archived.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: 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”.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Informative=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 1) by pTamok on Thursday January 17 2019, @05:13PM

    by pTamok (3042) on Thursday January 17 2019, @05:13PM (#787941)

    To reply to my own posting, the removability, or not, of the prefix 'in' from inflammable reminded me of a well known piece of prose: 'How I met My Wife' by Jack Winter (The New Yorker, July 25, 1994 P. 82 [newyorker.com]). This The Guardian Notes and Queries web-page [theguardian.com] reproduces it, together with some other examples. Wikipedia calls them Unpaired Words [wikipedia.org].