- Oct 9, 1999
- 4,730
- 2,949
- 136
With the release of Alder Lake less than a week away and the "Lakes" thread having turned into a nightmare to navigate I thought it might be a good time to start a discussion thread solely for Alder Lake.
It's the Pentium 4 EE again, maxed beyond reason to try to fend off a very competitive CPUI never understood these kind of parts, but someone must buy them...
It's the Pentium 4 EE again, maxed beyond reason to try to fend off a very competitive CPU
Intel loves Super Mario so much, they searched extensively for the right CEO to feature in their Mario clone.
I don't think the 12900KS is meant for the 5800X3D, more for Intel to take some of the remaining benchmarks that the 12900K currently loses to the 5950X. If they worried about the 5800X3D, a 12600KS would be the better counter (given how well the 12600K currently competes with the 5800X), or perhaps a hypothetical 8+0 part.Intel must really be fearing the 5800X3D.
Either way its an act of desperation. The 5950x wins in almost everything except gaming at 142 watts. This monster does at least 241 watts or more and still looses most other than gaming(well, the 12900k+4%). And the 5800X3D will take care of that. So it makes it useless, and expensive. The P core is strong, and for single threaded apps, it is great. But consider this, if you are a gamer ? the 5800X3D will be the thing to get, and if you are a productivity person, the 5950x will be the thing to get. So that makes the single P core use case pretty niche.I don't think the 12900KS is meant for the 5800X3D, more for Intel to take some of the remaining benchmarks that the 12900K currently loses to the 5950X. If they worried about the 5800X3D, a 12600KS would be the better counter (given how well the 12600K currently competes with the 5800X), or perhaps a hypothetical 8+0 part.
I re-iterate what you wrote:One could argue that the problem isn't Intel's technology. The actual problem is their insistence to be on top and their refusal and self-denial in accepting defeat. This is what is forcing them to create power hogging products. If they simply accept that they have a good product and their product is good at doing certain stuff, then they can simply market it as such and keep power levels in check because then they don't have to prove anything to anyone. People who see value in their product will still buy it.
Case in point: their ARC GPU. They know it can't compete on performance with the established players so they are being creative in their marketing and showing users what they would gain from their product. This same approach on the CPU side would benefit them too, if they can somehow overcome their massive ego.
You don't see ARM running ads showing how their CPU designs are better than Intel or AMD CPUs. They created their own niche and became successful as a result.
It wasn't for lack of trying. Multiple CEOs have tried their best to sink this ship. It's too bigThis kind of stupidity in a corporate environment is what makes companies go bankrupt.
You know, I think you could have described Nvidia here as well. They just have this mentality that no matter what, they cannot concede in anything. And when I say anything, I mean it. AMD announces Smart Access Memory, and Nvidia immediately announces reBAR. Microsoft announce Direct Storage, and Nvidia announces RTX IO. Intel and AMD work on their upcoming DLSS competitors, and Nvidia announce Streamline. RTX IO is nowhere to be seen, and Streamline came out of the blue as open source. And now, with RDNA 3 on their heels, they are rumored to adopt the same approach as Intel's 12900KS by taking what is going to be largely the same architecture but ramping up clocks out the wazoo so that they do not concede the crown. This mentality can only be ascribed to market leaders, because they have far more to lose than to gain by simply not competing.One could argue that the problem isn't Intel's technology. The actual problem is their insistence to be on top and their refusal and self-denial in accepting defeat. This is what is forcing them to create power hogging products. If they simply accept that they have a good product and their product is good at doing certain stuff, then they can simply market it as such and keep power levels in check because then they don't have to prove anything to anyone. People who see value in their product will still buy it.
Case in point: their ARC GPU. They know it can't compete on performance with the established players so they are being creative in their marketing and showing users what they would gain from their product. This same approach on the CPU side would benefit them too, if they can somehow overcome their massive ego.
You don't see ARM running ads showing how their CPU designs are better than Intel or AMD CPUs. They created their own niche and became successful as a result.
BUT... Companies buying server hardware are not so dumb.... Anymore. And between the people that have a clue on hardware, and the companies that have a clue buying server hardware, it can really hurt over time. Today is an example. Microsoft, and several businesses buying supercomputers are buying AMD. Many users are still buying AMD. If Intel doesn't "wake up and smell the roses" and stop with the marketing crap, and actually start providing some good hardware, their days are numbered.@igor_kavinski
Stirring the pot doesn't achieve much. For nerds that look at the low level specs know what is what and ignore the marketing. When you dive into the specs and benchmarks those things are usually pointed out. The average consumer though doesn't care and buys whatever the under informed sales person advises them on.
Sales people in most environments don't know jack about the technology beyond the tag on the shelf. Some might have a small amount of info if they're interested enough to dig deeper but, stores don't provide much info on products. If someone is spending $400 on a CPU they probably did some homework on it before doing so. Or they're buying some prebuilt POS from Best Buy or Wal-Mart.
I steer clear of sales people and avoid them like the plague. Once I saw a really good deal on an HP tablet with the Tegra SoC. I kept thinking about it so went back to the store to buy it. Except it wasn't where I had seen it. So I asked a salesperson to tell me where it was. He said "sorry but we don't have that here". I said I saw it not two days ago! He said "oh maybe we are out of stock then" and proceeded to try to sell me on some crappy chinese tablet. I said I want Full HD and that HP tablet had a Full HD display. He pointed to the tablet in his hand and said this one has it. I looked at the specs and it was 720p. I told him you don't know the meaning of Full HD. He told me to google it I told him, NO! YOU google it! and walked away. Thankfully, after walking around a bit, I found a whole pile of those HP tablets and bought it. To this day, I behave in a dismissive manner what most would consider rude, whenever a salesperson asks if I need help. I almost feel like shouting, No, but maybe YOU need help?Sales people in most environments don't know jack about the technology beyond the tag on the shelf.
Buddy, you're wasting your time here. It's a lost cause trying to get certain people to understand the mass consumer market vs. a niche product. All the bankruptcy and Intel is dead! talks have been going on for a good 5 years. Not to mention that it's totally derailing the thread regarding the actual product and technology that people want to talk about. It's also spun into some Intel vs. AMD non-sense that has nothing to do with the actual conversation in general.@Markfw
It's all relative to the current market desires. When you talk about DC operations and multiples it's a different story compared to the consumer market. There's a threshold to what people are willing to spend no matter the specs spectrum at the time of purchase. Consumers vary in price points from the sub $1000 to sub $2000 and prosumers up to $3000 for systems.
@igor_kavinski
That's the proper response. Like I said.. they don't know jack but the commissions they stand to make from uninformed buyers.
Buddy, you're wasting your time here. It's a lost cause trying to get certain people to understand the mass consumer market vs. a niche product. All the bankruptcy and Intel is dead! talks have been going on for a good 5 years. Not to mention that it's totally derailing the thread regarding the actual product and technology that people want to talk about. It's also spun into some Intel vs. AMD non-sense that has nothing to do with the actual conversation in general.
One could argue that the problem isn't Intel's technology. The actual problem is their insistence to be on top and their refusal and self-denial in accepting defeat. This is what is forcing them to create power hogging products. If they simply accept that they have a good product and their product is good at doing certain stuff, then they can simply market it as such and keep power levels in check because then they don't have to prove anything to anyone. People who see value in their product will still buy it.
Case in point: their ARC GPU. They know it can't compete on performance with the established players so they are being creative in their marketing and showing users what they would gain from their product. This same approach on the CPU side would benefit them too, if they can somehow overcome their massive ego.
You don't see ARM running ads showing how their CPU designs are better than Intel or AMD CPUs. They created their own niche and became successful as a result.
Derailing the thread ? Talking about Alder Lake, right ? Yes, the insanity behind the 12900KS ? Why don't you respond with something on-topic about this product, instead of personal insults. I guess you can't do that, as you have a personal agenda here.Buddy, you're wasting your time here. It's a lost cause trying to get certain people to understand the mass consumer market vs. a niche product. All the bankruptcy and Intel is dead! talks have been going on for a good 5 years. Not to mention that it's totally derailing the thread regarding the actual product and technology that people want to talk about. It's also spun into some Intel vs. AMD non-sense that has nothing to do with the actual conversation in general.
Here we go again. The 12900K(S) is "useless" because 8p+8e cores don't beat a 16c 5950x in overall multithreaded workloads, and it loses to a yet to be reviewed 5800X3D. Are you seeing your bias here? I mean do you read what you type? Or, do I always have to step in and point out the bias to you? Whether you like it or not, the best all-round processor right now is ADL. Usually, you want to see reputable reviews before making your opinion known, right? RIGHT? Biased much?Either way its an act of desperation. The 5950x wins in almost everything except gaming at 142 watts. This monster does at least 241 watts or more and still looses most other than gaming(well, the 12900k+4%). And the 5800X3D will take care of that. So it makes it useless, and expensive. The P core is strong, and for single threaded apps, it is great. But consider this, if you are a gamer ? the 5800X3D will be the thing to get, and if you are a productivity person, the 5950x will be the thing to get. So that makes the single P core use case pretty niche.
Either way its an act of desperation. The 5950x wins in almost everything except gaming at 142 watts. This monster does at least 241 watts or more and still looses most other than gaming(well, the 12900k+4%). And the 5800X3D will take care of that. So it makes it useless, and expensive. The P core is strong, and for single threaded apps, it is great. But consider this, if you are a gamer ? the 5800X3D will be the thing to get, and if you are a productivity person, the 5950x will be the thing to get. So that makes the single P core use case pretty niche.
I actually think it will be a tight contest in gaming, considering the 12900KS has a 15% clockspeed advantage over a 5800X3D (5.2GHz vs 4.5GHz).
What matters for gaming is not all out all core speed of 5.2Ghz, but more likely 5.5Ghz ST core, so advantage in clock speed is in range of 15-22% in gaming, probably nearer 22% in most games.
Still 96MB of L3 has merits of it's own, and i fully expect some games will love it, and there will still be more games where 99 percentile FPS will be better on X3D chip.
I'm sure the 96mb cache is going to ensure the 5800X3D is going to have a different IPC than regular desktop Zen 3.True, I'm just using the all core turbo as a baseline figure, the 5800X3D will also have a higher ST boost as well, but its just the relative difference in clockspeed/IPC vs the 96MB L3 that will determine which CPU comes out ahead in games.
But only in cache sensitive workloads.I'm sure the 96mb cache is going to ensure the 5800X3D is going to have a different IPC than regular desktop Zen 3.
I'm sure the 96mb cache is going to ensure the 5800X3D is going to have a different IPC than regular desktop Zen 3.
Look at the posts below yours. Many here think the 5800X3D may very well beat the 12900KS, not just me. I am a realist, not a blinded Intel fan.Here we go again. The 12900K(S) is "useless" because 8p+8e cores don't beat a 16c 5950x in overall multithreaded workloads, and it loses to a yet to be reviewed 5800X3D. Are you seeing your bias here? I mean do you read what you type? Or, do I always have to step in and point out the bias to you? Whether you like it or not, the best all-round processor right now is ADL. Usually, you want to see reputable reviews before making your opinion known, right? RIGHT? Biased much?