Besides Xeon processors that are officially mentioned on its website and price list, Intel has tens of ‘off roadmap’ server CPUs only available to select customers that have special requests. Recently journalists from ComputerBase discovered that Intel has Xeon Platinum 8284, the company’s fastest 28-core chip for multi-socket servers. The CPU runs 300 MHz faster than the ‘official’ Xeon Platinum 8280, but costs considerably more.

Intel’s Xeon Platinum 8284 packs 28 cores with Hyper-Threading that run at 3.0-4.0 GHz, feature a 38.5 MB cache, a six-channel memory controller supporting up to 1 TB of DDR4-2933 with ECC, 48 PCIe 3.0 lanes, and other capabilities found in codenamed Cascade Lake CPUs. Since the chip runs at 300 MHz higher base frequency when compared to the Xeon Platinum 8280, it has a 240 W TDP, up from 205 W. Meanwhile, Tcase of the CPU (the maximum allowed temperature on the IHS of the processor) was reduced to 65°C (down from 84°C), so the CPU requires a very sophisticated cooling system that can take away 240 W at the aforementioned temperature.

Being Intel’s fastest 28-core CPU for multi-socket servers, the Xeon Platinum 8284 processor costs $15,460 (recommended customer price for 1k unit order, RCP), whereas the Xeon Platinum 8280 that runs at a 300 MHz lower frequency, costs $10,009 for 1ku.

Intel Second Generation Xeon Scalable Family
(Cascade Lake)
  Cores Base
Freq
Turbo
Freq
L3
Cache
TDP
(W)
Optane Price
(1ku)
Xeon Platinum 8200
8284   28 3.0 4.0 38.50 240 Yes $15460
8280 L 28 2.7 4.0 38.50 205 Yes $17906
8280 M 28 2.7 4.0 38.50 205 Yes $13012
8280   28 2.7 4.0 38.50 205 Yes $10009
8276 L 28 2.2 4.0 38.50 165 Yes $16616
8276 M 28 2.2 4.0 28.50 165 Yes $11722
8276   28 2.2 4.0 38.50 165 Yes $8719
8270   26 2.7 4.0 25.75 205 Yes $7405
8268   24 2.9 3.9 35.75 205 Yes $6302
8260 L 24 2.4 3.9 25.75 165 Yes $12599
8260 M 24 2.4 3.9 25.75 165 Yes $7705
8260   24 2.4 3.9 25.75 165 Yes $4702
8260 Y 24 2.4 3.9 35.75 165 Yes $5320
8256   4 3.8 3.9 16.50 105 Yes $7007
8253 L 16 2.2 3.0 35.75 165 Yes ?
8253 M 16 2.2 3.0 35.75 165 Yes ?
8253   16 2.2 3.0 35.75 165 Yes $3115

The Xeon Platinum 8284 is not mentioned in Intel’s pricelist, and not under Cascade Lake on Intel's ARK database, but it is searchable if you know the exact number. This typically means that the CPU is only available to select customers or even a customer. That said, it is possible that apart from higher clocks, this 'semi-custom' off-roadmap processor may come with features that go beyond that and this might explain the huge price difference when compared to the model 8280.

Related Reading

Source: Intel’s ARK (via ComputerBase)

POST A COMMENT

81 Comments

View All Comments

  • Xyler94 - Monday, July 22, 2019 - link

    I dare you, even double dare you, to use X86 without the 64 bit instruction these days. Intel or AMD.

    even if X86-64 needs the base X86 instruction set, Intel would be useless today without the 64bit extension. There's one huge factor you're forgetting about X86, it's limited to roughly 4GB of ram. AMD beat Intel to the punch, it's a simple fact of life.
    Reply
  • sa666666 - Thursday, July 18, 2019 - link

    > As for my thought process, you have no idea what experience I have, just to let to know I once work for an operating system and found a bug in IBM 486SLC cpu where chip add it address lines inverted when switching between 286 and 386 protected modes. This was at my first job for almost 7 years and there are few developers on this planet that can even comprehend what I am discussing.

    Your 20-30 year old experience is irrelevant to the current predicament that Intel is in. AMD is winning this generation. Accept it. Intel will come back eventually; there's no doubt about that. But they are not in the winning position RIGHT NOW. And nothing you can say will change that.

    And you're not the only one on these boards with 20-30 years experience in these issues. Most of us just don't feel the need to brag about it, nor use it as a blunt hammer to try to force people to think that you know what you're talking about.
    Reply
  • Santoval - Thursday, July 18, 2019 - link

    "There is no irrational bias - in fact it very rational - I prefer Intel because they are the one that actually create the x86 based CPU and was not cloned from it."
    Bias is bias, whether you consider it rational or irrational. Actually by definition every bias is irrational, so "rational bias" is functionally equivalent to "logical prejudice". They are both contradictions.

    The reason you "prefer Intel" is irrational (though most of our choices are irrational). The creator of an ISA, whether it's x86 or ARM or anything, *can* fall behind some other company which licensed that ISA. Intel are much bigger than AMD so they did not fall behind AMD (yes, they did - not in market share, of course, I mean in desktop CPU performance. AMD has now surpassed Intel in IPC and power efficiency, *almost* matched them in single core performance and continues to surpass them in multicore performance) due to lower funding.

    In fact their much bigger size and much more money available for R&D are precisely what made them fall behind : it made them overconfident enough to try multiple new technologies at the same time with their 10nm node, making it so immensely complex that they still have not managed acceptable yields with it, not even with its supposedly "fixed" 2nd gen 10nm+ iteration that Ice Lake is to be fabbed with.

    Intel fell behind due to node issues, not μarch issues. If they had faced no issues with their 10nm node -for instance if they had made it quite simpler and less dense- they would have already released Ice Lake (Sunny Cove + Gen11 iGPU), Tiger Lake (Willow Cove + Gen12 iGPU and even Alder Lake (Golden Cove + Gen13? iGPU).

    No comment about your computing experience, which I fail to see its relevance here. In this context it smells a bit like an argument from authority fallacy to me.
    Reply
  • blppt - Thursday, July 18, 2019 - link

    What is truly remarkable about this guy is that every single desktop chip we run nowadays is based on an AMD design. If Intel had its druthers, we'd all be running IA-64 Itaniums right now.

    So, I guess in this case, he should be shunning EMT64 as a 'clone', right?

    LOL
    Reply
  • Qasar - Thursday, July 18, 2019 - link

    HStewart " I prefer Intel because they are the one that actually create the x86 based CPU and was not cloned from it. " so does that mean if AMD released a cpu that was in EVERY way better then what intel has, in performance, power usage, cores, etc, while costing much less, you would still buy the intel chip, just be cause of the above quote ?? if your answer is yes, then im sorry, but that is the dumbest thing i have ever seen, and shows you either really are the biggest intel fan on here, or, you have more money then you know what to do with it.

    Skeptical123. " in his criticism that every almost every story is inundated with comments praising AMD and bashing Intel. " have you NOT seen his previous posts ?? in practically EVERY article about AMD, that is good news for the company, HStewart will post some crap about how its not a big deal, and then go on to try to turn the good amd news, into bad, then go and praise intel in some way, what you are saying in your 1st paragraph, is the EXACT same thing HE DOES.
    Reply
  • duploxxx - Friday, July 19, 2019 - link

    so HStewart is only running 32bit code? since the 64bit code that Intel is using is actually sourced from AMD :D Reply
  • Spunjji - Monday, July 22, 2019 - link

    "they are the one that actually create the x86 based CPU and was not cloned from it" isn't a rational basis for a bias. The property of 'who did the thing first' has no bearing whatsoever on how good these companies are currently.

    Given that AMD created the x64 superset of x86 that Intel subsequently borrowed back, even according to your way of seeing things Intel and AMD are now arguably even.

    I'm forced to conclude that you really don't have a rational basis for your preference.
    Reply
  • FreckledTrout - Thursday, July 18, 2019 - link

    Except AMD is expected to do very well against Intel in the high core count chips. I think it's perfectly reasonable to mention AMD here. Seeing the 3700x/3900x reviews in multithreading I think Intel is about to get stomped in the server space. AMD's SMT looks very nice this generation. With that said I still am reserved and will wait to see reviews. Reply
  • sa666666 - Thursday, July 18, 2019 - link

    We'll keep our comments on topic when you do. Guess when that will be; somewhere north of 10 years after hell freezes over.

    And you admit that you only respond when someone speaks against Intel (and don't even care whether they deserve it). And saying "I knew it was going to cause a response from AMD bias fan person" proves that you're just trolling, and that's all you ever do. Don't be butthurt that you're being called out on it.

    Look, we all get that Intel is the Lord and Saviour to you. But this isn't about Intel. It's about your blind zealotry of a company that doesn't care about you, and you EXTREMELY ANNOYING and TROLLING comments. You are looking to get a rise out of people, and we will keep calling you out for it.
    Reply
  • Qasar - Thursday, July 18, 2019 - link

    sa666666666 you are also forgetting that he will also speak against AMD if they announce some good news, and say some BS about it to make it look bad, then right after, praise intel in some form, the announcement a bit ago about the Cray supercomputer is and example of that. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now