Intel To Infuse Second-Gen Xeon Purley Platform With 3D XPoint, Tightens Data Center Stranglehold

Intel CEO Brian Krzanich provided an update on its 3D XPoint efforts during the company's Q3 2016 earnings call and also noted that 3D XPoint would come to the second-generation Purley platform.

In the past, Krzanich has publicly outlined Intel's plan to leverage its 99.8% control of the data center CPU market as a beachhead to assault other segments; namely networking, memory, and storage. The company's revelations indicate that it is moving ahead with several initiatives that could bring key portions of these realms firmly under its control.

Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware
Paul Alcorn
Editor-in-Chief

Paul Alcorn is the Editor-in-Chief for Tom's Hardware US. He also writes news and reviews on CPUs, storage, and enterprise hardware.

  • jasonelmore
    Intel is doomed. Over the next 20 years, you will see that company fall apart because they try to force proprietary interfaces when the whole market wants open ones. AMD will start shipping 8 core consumer chips, while intel keeps selling dual core skylake/kabylake for over $300 in mobile.. Hopefully zen can at least match Broadwell performance, all these companies want, is something semi-competitive, and the know they will win on price.
    Reply
  • Norcen
    https://semiaccurate.com/2016/09/12/intels-xpoint-pretty-much-broken/

    We'll see what happens.
    Reply
  • Mac266
    "Intel employs the LAG 3647 socket"

    Er...
    Reply
  • memadmax
    AMD's(xpoint like) idea is better.
    It works with current architechure so that I don't have to throw away tons of hardware to get what intel is doing.

    Looks like intel didn't learn anything from the RDRAM fiasco...
    Reply
  • beayn
    "Looks like intel didn't learn anything from the RDRAM fiasco..."

    They didn't have the market pretty much cornered at that time. They probably think with their huge market share they can force it on people now.
    Reply
  • bit_user
    I'm still waiting for 1st gen Purley, dang it!

    Actually, I'm planning on replacing my Sandybridge-E workstation with Kabylake-X. So, even after it arrives, perhaps I'll still have a bit of a wait.

    Just bought a DC P3500 PCIe SSD to take advantage of my abundant PCIe 3.0 lanes. That should hold me over, a bit longer.
    : )
    In either case, we weathered a barrage of takedown requests associated with our article, and more specifically, the pictures.
    ThankYouThankYouThankYou. Many internets to you, good sirs!
    Reply
  • jasonf2
    I disagree on the concept that Intel is doomed. The propitiatory interface push is going to give them a short term advantage which will continue to lock market share. Even without significant processor performance gains the overall marriage and bottleneck reductions will give them a significant performance gain that will give them dominance without the need for die shrink cycles that can't be maintained. Gen-Z may eventually catch up, but all Intel would have to do is tack the interface on the side of their hardware at that point (even though I don't think they will). Rambus didn't work out, but the primary reason was that DDR (And its evolving products) offered on par performance for commodity pricing and both were on the market together. Gen-Z is years off from real world application where the Intel interconnects are due out in the next calendar year. Along with that the Gen-z hardware will be data center oddities to begin with while the Intel interconnects will have already trickled down to be part of the PC ecosystem long before. With the speed of technology development the first to market always has an advantage and product life cycle is measured in months. Gen-Z risks being obsolete before it even sees the light of day. In the places that Intel is viable it can only lose, because they have so much of the market share. Gen-Z represents a significant threat to Intel as it would homogenize the data center backbone in such a way that competing CPU architectures would be able to coexist on a shared hardware fabric level with no cost penalty to change CPU Architecture other than software. As Moore's Law is reduced to a failed hypothesis (due to the size of the atom) manufacturing process is bound to no longer define performance. Highly specialized core structure and parallelism will be the only direction to go and I highly doubt that Intel's dominance will remain (as design refinement seems to doing pretty well in the fab-less areas) without propitiatory isolation of its architecture. Intel isn't stupid and will protect itself. As said before I wouldn't hold my breath for Intel to jump on the Gen-z bandwagon anytime soon.
    Reply
  • bit_user
    18756747 said:
    I disagree on the concept that Intel is doomed.
    I agree with your wall of text.

    Just because their competitors are organizing doesn't mean they're automatically doomed. It does mean they'll face pricing pressure and will possibly be forced to add standard interfaces to certain SKUs. But if they can penetrate new markets or grow their share of existing ones faster than their margins decrease in their existing cash cows, they can maintain and even grow.

    BTW, I'd like to see Intel be half as enthusiastic about PCIe 4.0 as OmniPath or the rest of these proprietary interfaces.
    Reply
  • Paul Alcorn
    18756747 said:
    I disagree on the concept that Intel is doomed. The propitiatory interface push is going to give them a short term advantage which will continue to lock market share.

    I agree with most of this as well. The strategy is smart (actually, brilliant), well planned and well timed, which are the kind of characteristics that have propelled Intel into its dominating position in the first place. Intel executes so well, they are certainly going to make a lot of headway before the competition even gears up. In fact, much of the foundation for all of this is already there; they began Omni-Path, for instance, several years ago. I do hope, in the interest of fair play and pricing, that at least one of the three new consortium's gains traction.
    Reply
  • Paul Alcorn
    18752544 said:
    "Intel employs the LAG 3647 socket"

    Er...
    Who writes this stuff? :pt1cable:

    Fixed, thanks!
    Reply