CPUs will be revealed during American eclipse.

[Geek-9pm]

The coming great American eclipse will expose ...
 -- the deep dark  secretes of the new
Coffee Lake CPU family from Intel.  (Talk about Press Release!  )

In PC World. By Brad Chacos, Senior Editor, PCWorld | Aug 8, 2017
-Intel's 8th-gen 'Coffee Lake' Core

Intel’s response to AMD’s disruptive Ryzen processors is soon to get its time in the sun. Well, sort of. On Tuesday, Intel announced plans to livestream the launch of its 8th-generation “Coffee Lake” processors on August 21

We’ve heard rumors of six-core chips and quad-core Core i3 chips finally cracking into Intel’s mainstream lineup,

[DaveLembke]

Thanks for sharing that.... I found this other part that is linked within that also interesting: http://www.pcworld.com/article/3197184/components-processors/amd-ryzen-threadripper-prices-specs-release-date-and-more.html

[Geek-9pm]

Yeah, Intel is plaything catch me if you can with AMD
The new AMD chip, already in the market place, comes in three models
The 16 core, the 12 core and a 8 core. All have the name Threadripper .

The Ryzen Threadripper 1900X will feature 8 cores with SMT for 16 threads of compute power, similar to the Ryzen 7 1800X but slotting into more capable X399 motherboards. The 1900X's base clock speed is 3.8GHz with a 4GHz boost speed.

Some other odd details:
 Memory: Quad-channel DDR4
 Can’t be “delided” easily as it uses a solder thermal interface material.
 Alienware has the worldwide exclusive on Threadripper systems
 Threadripper will not ship with an included liquid-cooled cooled.

I don't understand. Who needs this?     If it will not fit in my shirt pocket. 

[BC_Programmer]

I don't understand. Who needs this?     If it will not fit in my shirt pocket.

Is this part of your ongoing "Desktop PCs are dead" thing?

Anyway ThreadRipper is their highest end Ryzen offering. Alongside the  i9 this is going to be the chip "to have" for vain gamers and system builders alike as well as people into Cryptocurrency MLMs.

It likely also has uses in compute, both because of it's CPU performance as well as the added PCI-E capabilities, which allow many more GPUs to be connected at full speed for more compute power for rendering, scientific applications, and so forth.

Intel has finally gotten some real competition for high-end performance again which they hadn't seen since the Athlon destroyed the Pentium 4. It's great because, either way- consumers win. We get access to cheaper, faster chips, as well as more choice. A few years ago, if somebody was building a new high-end PC, it was basically a choice between Intel chips. Now AMDs new offerings add additional value propositions and Intel chip prices have slashes as well.

[Geek-9pm]

Right. I can not imagine a 16 core thing on a Desktop PC.
Once upon a time they made 12sylinder automobiles. Never ought on.

Cryptocurrency MLMs.   On my! Is that even legal? So if I am the first in my neighborhood to get a 16 core CPU and I spend a few days trading Cryptocurrency will I become rich overnight? Tell me more.

Otherwise, stock trading can be done on almost any common desktop CPU. The average user, and even the above average user, does not a conceivable need for the kind of horsepower AMD and Intel now offer.

If I even could imagine such power would improve my life, I would wait in line to get one. But I just don't believe it could benefit me in any way.

A desktop PC with four to eight  video cards? How work that work 

[BC_Programmer]

"Cryptocurrency MLM" was my half-joking way of describing bitcoin, etherium, litecoin, and any number of other cryptocurrencies. I consider them MLMs because the earlier you get into them, the more money you get out of it and you do so at the expense of later investors. It's not a perfect analogy to, say, Amway, but it's close enough IMO to avoid it.

it is not related to stock trading. You get cryptocurrency by "Mining". This is effectively performing hash calculations on a larger blockchain, which takes computing power and time. But faster GPUs and CPUs means less time to mine and you mine faster, so you get more of the cryptocurrency. Thus dedicated miners create massive rigs with ridiculous amounts of computing power specifically to perform pointless computations in order to get more of various cryptocurrencies, known as "mining rigs".

Crypto Mining is surprisingly large market- There have been graphics cards shortages on new releases because Crypto miners have pretty much bought them all. And then even more issues because they get sold on the used market and end up as a factory warranty return because the stress of being used as a compute unit 24/7 with borderline cooling causes it to fail to work properly as a graphics card.

The average user, and even the above average user, does not a conceivable need for the kind of horsepower AMD and Intel now offer.

There is a sizable market of consumers who aren't interested in purchasing merely what they need. Average and most above average users don't need an i7 or a GTX 1080, either. Nobody needs to buy or play PC Games or the hardware to play them. I don't think "Needs" are really applicable as a barometer to judge high-end chips designed for that marketplace. It's sort of like criticizing a new brand of Caviar by saying "nobody needs to eat caviar" because it ignores that it's hardly aimed at some general market. Intel i7's and even high-end Nvidia 1080ti's practically fly off shelves, as have Ryzen chips, Vega GPUs, and as will Threadripper. it is a market of "Wants dictate" more than "needs dictate".

[DaveLembke]

it is a market of "Wants dictate" more than "needs dictate".

I so agree with this... I'd love to have the best out there system as a WANT, but I know that what I have is plenty for my NEEDS.

I think the fact that I dont like to waste money because Im far from rich also comes into play as well as I can be a penny pincher and as long as a system plays games ok even if all cores are running 95-100% utilization there is no need to spend money on newer hardware! Additionally if your not a gamer, you can get by with a Pentium 4 still with a video card upgrade for video content to play well with streaming movies and other online video content.

My daughter for example I gave the choice of an upgrade from her Celeron D 335J 2.8Ghz single-core which has a 8x AGP GeForce 6200 256MB video card, 2GB RAM, and 160GB IDE HDD running Windows XP SP3 fully patched to a newer Quadcore Intel Q6600 2.4Ghz computer. And she said... she was happy with the computer she had and she doesnt feel she needs an upgrade. It plays her internet games just fine and the older game SPORE with no problems. I said are you sure, its way more powerful than the computer your currently using and she said she doesnt see any problem with this computer. It plays games that she likes to play and it plays streaming video from youtube and hulu and netflix with no problems onto her 17" flatscreen.

A long time ago ( almost 25 years ago ) this one guy who was 20 years older than me and had been working with computers since the early 1970s warned me about speed. Speed comes at a price and speed can be addicting! He was talking from experience that if you dont expose yourself to top of the line computers then you will probably be satisfied with what you already have. You wont have a reference to compare to that suddenly makes your computer that you were satisfied with feel like your in a Model T Ford on the autobahn with everyone else passing you like your standing still in which then your very likely to suddenly have impulse urges to buy a newer faster computer. So if your happy on the back roads with the Model T then stay on them, as for once you turn onto the autobahn and see everyone else zooming by, then you will likely be hooked on speed to have to be like them and as fast as them or faster.

He gave me his 386 SX 40Mhz computer and bought a Pentium 60Mhz around 1993. I said cool thanks for the 386 and so what games are you playing that the Pentium 60Mhz will be needed? He paused and said well.... I dont play any games, but I am addicted to fast computers because at work I work with fast computers as a programmer. So to me that 386 is slow. But to you it will be fast since your now able to get away from your slow 286 12Mhz and use this much better 386sx40Mhz. It lit up a light bulb in my head right there ..... " Perception of Speed " ... wow if I had this 286 all my life and never saw any faster computer, Id probably be happy with it because it does what I want and need. But when exposed to faster and more realistic graphics, suddenly the computers and games of years past start to feel old not as fun and I feel a need to play on a faster computer with quicker load times and better graphics. Well for some people like my friend Steve the programmer this can snowball to where the minute you see something better in a computer magazine with all the advertising speed brag hype you have an urge to replace what you have, that you were happy with until exposed to faster and newer either in advertising or hands on in demo or at work as was Steves situation.

Prior to that realization I didnt care much about speed.... 286  10Mhz, 12Mhz, and 386 16Mhz, 25Mhz, 33Mhz and 40Mhz clocked CPUs, the games I played felt like they ran the same when same graphics card was used. It was all just will this system run the games I want to play such as Wolfensten 3D, and if it ran them I was happy if it didnt run them I was looking for cheap or free upgrades from those who were bitten by the speed bug who would unload their prior system or pieces and parts inexpensively or free etc.

Today I still have this behavior of using old computers as well as taking parts donations from people who no longer have a need for parts after upgraded etc, and I still use my older computer even when I have newer available. Some of it is, why run the newer computer when the older runs whatever I am doing just fine and the other part of it is that I feel that run hours on a computer are like an odometer in a car which eventually leads to failure, so might as well use the older system still while it hasnt fallen way behind the times for what its still currently plenty of processing power for and keep the usage/operating time mileage off of the better newer computer. BUT.... If I need a ton of processing power for a game that needs it, or a program i wrote that is crunching numbers and I want the end result sooner vs later, and I want that 4.0Ghz clock, I can turn on the heavier AMD FX-8350 8-core 4Ghz system and use that as needed. Lastly the older system I have runs on less electricity than the current gaming/crunching computer so I save on my electric bill by using the older system as well.

So I guess I am running my older computers until hardware failure or obsolescence of my needs in which they get retired. These days I rarely turn on a computer lesser than a Dual-Core CPU system. As time goes by eventually the older Quadcore systems will follow to where its not economical to run them and never will be needed on a daily basis mainly as the internet or games I run become more complex and they eventually lag out, but I guess I am not in any rush to have the latest and greatest because to me it would be costly. Its cheaper for me to stick with buying reduced cost hardware when better becomes available and I buy a few generations behind the times and able to build what would have been a $1000 computer when parts came out 2 years later for around $300 or $400. Sort of the same as not buying that brand new car for $30,000 but buy the one that is discounted because its old stock and needs to go so I am able to get it at a heavy discount at say $19,000 for a 1 year old but brand new car that just wasnt bought up because more cars made then the demand, so wait to buy up the excess inventory item at much lower than retail new. And with computer hardware there is always excess inventory at bargain prices as say they created 300,000 of a CPU and only sold 289,000 and the remainder 11,000 of them are sold at ever increasing discounts until all is sold or they get destroyed and recycled

[Geek-9pm]

Why do we want more?

Maybe this article will explain this better.

Why Employees At Apple And Google Are More Productive
https://www.fastcompany.com/3068771/how-employees-at-apple-and-google-are-more-productive

Companies like Apple, Netflix, Google, and Dell are 40% more productive than the average company, according to research f

“They get more done by 10 a.m. Thursday morning than the others do in a week, but they don’t stop working,” says Mankins. “This difference compounds every year; over a decade, they can produce 30 times more than the rest, with the same number of employees.”

So, are the people more productive? Is this relevant?

[patio]

Look up Bain & Company...the team that did the research...

You are an inch away from being blocked with news posts...

Consider the title of this Post.

[Geek-9pm]

Patio, it was Intel that decided to use the upcoming astronomical event to draw attention to an effort to eclipse AMD. Pun intended.
I had nothing do with it. They never consulted me at all.

Many industry watches see this as a major event and speculate Intel must fell there is a threat of losing market share to AMD.

As we all know, AMD and Intel designs are NOT pin compatible. Not even close.  So it matters to system builders which company to follow. Most likely a small number of people w ill buy such a system for playing games. But those people may also be the IT people who make decisions about what brand of computers to put into the company servers. The server Industry pays  a lot of money for up-to-date computer systems. And that is where the speed can make a difference.

Here is a recent article from the The Motley Fool:

https://www.fool.com/investing/2017/06/21/intel-tries-to-one-up-amd-in-the-cpu-battle.aspx

Intel is feeling the heat
Intel has tightened its grip on the CPU market over the past decade, currently estimated to hold an almost 80% share. But the chip giant has started feeling the heat from AMD's latest Ryzen CPU lineup, which PassMark, according to tweaktown.com, estimates gained 2% market share during the first quarter of 2017.

Intel might hole their big market share. Maybe not. 

[BC_Programmer]

People buying hardware for Games is something I think you've vastly underestimated by effectively dismissing it as a tiny niche of the market. PC Gaming was worth over 36 Billion USD in 2016. Just this past January, Sales research showed that in 2016, the Hardware market exclusively for gaming hardware- including high-end CPUs and GPUs- was worth over 30 billion dollars.; which is a significant chunk of the entire PC hardware industry.

People who buy gaming Graphics cards and CPUs are not really statistical outliers anymore, and are themselves a core business.

[Geek-9pm]

People buying hardware for Games is something I think you've vastly underestimated by effectively dismissing it as a tiny niche of the market.
...  30 billion dollars which ...

I had no idea. 

Of 160 countries of the world, the top 60 have a GDP over $30 billion. That means  about 100 countries have a GDP under $30 billion.  So the games buying high power PCs have more money that what about 100 countries have individually.

So when I dismiss The game PC market s, it is like as if I would dismiss
Ecuador       24.5 billion $
Kazakhstan     24.4 billion $
Slovakia       23.7 billion $
Syria                 22.1 billion $
Dominican R.     21.8 billion $

My bad.   

[BC_Programmer]

Just to add some more info on the new chips being released by both sides. It seems that perhaps information was leaked or Intel released the info early as it is being reported on.

Found here

As you mentioned, Geek-9pm, both are using different sockets. The new Intel CPUs use Socket 2066. The AMD CPU's use a socket called TR4.

Intel's Highest-end upcoming chip is the i9 7980XE, using the new Socket 2066. It has 18 cores and 36 threads (!), a standard clock frequency of 2.6Ghz that can turbo boost as high as 4.4Ghz, a 24MB Cache, support  for DDR4 Quad Channel RAM, 44 PCI-E Lanes, and a Power consumption rated for 165 Watts. For all this power you need to lay down $1999 USD. That's right- 2 thousand Dollars for JUST the CPU!

AMD's highest end offering is the ThreadRipper 1950X. It has 16 Cores and 32 threads, a 3.4Ghz Stock speed that can boost to 4.0Ghz under load with adequate cooling, a 40MB Cache, support for DDR4 Quad Channel RAM, 64 PCI-E Lanes, and a 180 Watt power consumption rating. This one retails for $999.

IMO these are ridiculous CPUs; Far overpowered for anything anybody will ever need, pretty much what Geek-9pm was saying. But they are marketed towards vain gamer types; the sort that think that what CPU they have or how many flashy Rainbow LEDs they have in their Case is some kind of Status symbol. Basically, the same type of people who they marketed their special Gaming Edition CPUs to previously, with perhaps a bit of workstation types going for them as well.

To me, it's the lower chips that I think are more sensible. I'd also expect Intel to have i5 and i3 chips as well, which I expect to have much more budget-friendly price points.

For an interesting perspective, from what I can find Intel's Pentium 4 Extreme Edition CPUs at the top end were sold for about $935 USD in 2003, which adjusting for inflation is equivalent to the buying power of  $1,234 USD today. (which