• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Discussion i7-11700K preliminary results

Page 10 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

jpiniero

Diamond Member
Oct 1, 2010
9,144
1,787
126
Intel choosing to say nothing knowing poor performance results will be published is a PR nightmare, if the performance figures are not accurate. You can already see the Intel marketing machine managing to get all kinds of attacks on Ian, his results, and his process by seemingly independent actors. I ask, why?
Oh I dunno about that. Other review sites have to be livid over what Ian has done. A lot of people won't read their reviews now.
 

blckgrffn

Diamond Member
May 1, 2003
7,687
914
126
www.teamjuchems.com
Oh I dunno about that. Other review sites have to be livid over what Ian has done. A lot of people won't read their reviews now.
Yeah, it's quite a scoop. They will probably own "Rocket Lake CPU reviews" and associated keywords now for organic results for some time.

That said, Anandtech has ranked pretty well for lots of stuff for quite some time.

All these places angry and linking back to the review? LOL. That feeds the beast (search algo) like nothing else can. That's epic. Even without a link "Anandtech" and "Rocket Lake Review" in a sentence is enough of a reference for Google.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tlh97 and Makaveli

AdamK47

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
13,527
937
126
I'd like to see reviews where they use memory at a frequencies above 4000. It's a fair comparison to run CPUs with memory frequencies each are capable of.
 

dullard

Elite Member
May 21, 2001
22,739
989
126
OEMs will probably run their motherboards with properly configured power limits. It's usually enthusiast boards that see this really insane power consumption, because they basically break Intel and AMD's power limiting mechanisms in order to win benchmarks.
Exactly. I really wish more reviewers would review both situations: (1) in spec in an OEM box with OEM cooling and (2) rip off the heat sink, put on your best cooling possible, and run the CPU to the limit. Both scenarios have valid merits.

Most people run #1 since most people run OEM computers. But almost all reviews are #2. It leads to a mismatch between expectations and reality. That is, most people will see Rocket Lake using 125 W (not 225+ W). But, most people will also not see the performance shown in the reviews due to thermal limitations.
 

jj109

Senior member
Dec 17, 2013
387
51
91
Oh I dunno about that. Other review sites have to be livid over what Ian has done. A lot of people won't read their reviews now.
ComputerBase's CPU editor is livid for sure. He made a colorful post on their forum and the summary is he is not pleased about Anandtech deciding to bypass the NDA.
 

Kocicak

Senior member
Jan 17, 2019
405
317
106
...he is not pleased about Anandtech deciding to bypass the NDA.
How can you bypass something that does not exist?

Journalism is about bringing news to the audience and if you have something interesting to report and can legally report it, why not to publish it?

As I understand it Intel had the whole text of the review in advance and could comment about anything they wanted. Fair play in my opinion.
 

Hitman928

Diamond Member
Apr 15, 2012
3,477
3,709
136
It's not like Anandtech made some shady back door deal with a distributor or something, they literally just bought a part that was sold at a retail store. Fair game in my book. Others (non pro reviewers) were already posting lots of benchmarks and such anyway, so it's not like the performance wasn't already going to be known.
 

JoeRambo

Golden Member
Jun 13, 2013
1,074
889
136
Kinda strange that people are still in the dark about what is going on with 11700K and Z590 and those gear modes.

1615238343609.png


Hilariuosly bad latency for clocks involved on Z590.

Compare to the following i've already posted from same forum, at more reasonable mem clocks:
1615238010055.png


Gear mode seems to be different in these images and Z590 vs Z490. But 12ns of extra latency??? Full retard mode for engineers involved in this disgrace of a product launch.
I don't care what,where and why, these guys have set up RocketLake for a failure. Your average web/youtube reviewer won't really bother with BIOS settings, they will proceed to test at DDR4 3200 XMP, and boom, AMD like latency with half the L3 cache will hurt gaming performance bad and give chip bad reputation.

Intel (I)MC department 2008-21 R.I.P.
 

Attachments

Makaveli

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2002
4,295
481
126
Kinda strange that people are still in the dark about what is going on with 11700K and Z590 and those gear modes.

View attachment 40760


Hilariuosly bad latency for clocks involved on Z590.

Compare to the following i've already posted from same forum, at more reasonable mem clocks:
View attachment 40759


Gear mode seems to be different in these images and Z590 vs Z490. But 12ns of extra latency??? Full retard mode for engineers involved in this disgrace of a product launch.
I don't care what,where and why, these guys have set up RocketLake for a failure. Your average web/youtube reviewer won't really bother with BIOS settings, they will proceed to test at DDR4 3200 XMP, and boom, AMD like latency with half the L3 cache will hurt gaming performance bad and give chip bad reputation.

Intel (I)MC department 2008-21 R.I.P.
There is far too many differences in these screenshots for this to be comparable. A comparison will have to be done on the same board with the same memory modules and settings. Which I hope to see in the RL full review.
 
Last edited:

JoeRambo

Golden Member
Jun 13, 2013
1,074
889
136
There is far too many difference in these screenshots for this to be comparable. A comparison will have to be done on the same board with the same memory modules and settings. Which I hope to see in the RL full review.
3733C14 is 7.5ns first word
4400C16 is 7.27ns first word

And Uncore @ 4ghz vs 4.5Ghz is ~1ns of L3 latency ( shown in Aida test too ). If anything 4400C16 should be faster, but it is 25% slower. Does not bode well for getting tested by your average web reviewer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tlh97 and uzzi38

Panino Manino

Senior member
Jan 28, 2017
400
486
136
It's not like Anandtech made some shady back door deal with a distributor or something, they literally just bought a part that was sold at a retail store. Fair game in my book. Others (non pro reviewers) were already posting lots of benchmarks and such anyway, so it's not like the performance wasn't already going to be known.
This is only controversial because the results are bad that there are people who refuses to accept these bad results. The problem isn't the review, is the CPU not performing as expected.
In the past anyone publishing benchmarks earlier was something to be celebrated. Remember CanardPC that published a early review of Zen² No one got mad and wanted their heads, even though the results that the magazine publish could put AMD's survival at risk. What's happening now is not usual, pure fanboyism.

Intel choosing to say nothing knowing poor performance results will be published is a PR nightmare, if the performance figures are not accurate. You can already see the Intel marketing machine managing to get all kinds of attacks on Ian, his results, and his process by seemingly independent actors. I ask, why?
Or it's a trap to damage Anandtech?
There's still a real possibility that performance can increase with new BIOS. Keep silent and let "Anandtech hurt itself" would be excellent news for Intel because of all those other "incidents" with other sites supposedly favoring Intel's CPUs since Ryzen launched.
 

JoeRambo

Golden Member
Jun 13, 2013
1,074
889
136
Or it's a trap to damage Anandtech?
There's still a real possibility that performance can increase with new BIOS. Keep silent and let "Anandtech hurt itself" would be excellent news for Intel because of all those other "incidents" with other sites supposedly favoring Intel's CPUs since Ryzen launched.
The only performance upgrades that can come with new BIOS are:

1) If somehow Anandtech bungled and tested DDR4 3200 in 2:1 gear mode that has nasty latency penalty, 1:1 would improve gaming results. ( doubt it, Anandtech is known for orthodox ways with memory setup, but not stupid )
2) If there was some sort of problem with Uncore clock ramping, that could also explain some results and could improve things. quite a lot. Inter core comm test is a test of round trip to L3 on inclusive cache system + ring distance between core, and those extra ns are really unwelcome there.

But with so many chips in the hands of the people, it seems that RocketLake is dead for enthusiasts due to having a ceiling of 3733 in 1:1 memory mode. And that 2:1 mode is completely and utterly useless.
What a way to squander the only remaining advantage versus AMD. What do you do when competitor has twice the L3? You throw a wrench into your IMC. ©Intel 2021
 
Last edited:

dullard

Elite Member
May 21, 2001
22,739
989
126
3733C14 is 7.5ns first word
4400C16 is 7.27ns first word
I'm not very knowledgeable about RAM. I get those two calculations. 14 / 3733 * 2000 = 7.50. 16 / 4400 * 2000 = 7.27. But why do your first images report different speeds than the calculations?
 

JoeRambo

Golden Member
Jun 13, 2013
1,074
889
136
I'm not very knowledgeable about RAM. I get those two calculations. 14 / 3733 * 2000 = 7.50. 16 / 4400 * 2000 = 7.27. But why do your first images report different speeds than the calculations?
I was just showing that for latency those settings were comparable, in same ballpark, both should have been ~40ish ns. Yet due to 2:1 gear mode one was way worse than the other.
 

dullard

Elite Member
May 21, 2001
22,739
989
126

Det0x

Senior member
Sep 11, 2014
502
604
136
He is talking about this: https://www.overclock.net/threads/overclocking-11700k-11900k-results-bins-and-discussion.1777365/page-11
1615243396089.png1615243410113.png
Crappy latency, even with a all new bios he got it from Shamino himself. (Biosdate is from today)
Yes Intel IS a joke :)

I even got bios today from Shamino, and I tried to overclock memory and cpu/ring "to the max"
It's impossible to fix Rocketlake. Well it's pretty fast with 3733c14 tweaked (why not faster than 3733mhz *** !) in 1:1 mode with 5.1 ghz all core, but it's not even close to "max" overclocked 10900k in games with 4700c17 memory.
L1 cache is about 20% slower ! than 10900k LOL ***?
I can run 4533c14 1:2 mode, but still latency is pretty bad and bandwidth is average. Maybe I'm not a pro Rocketlake overclocker, but it looks like it's unfixable.
Compared to the latency with hes skylake setup:
1615243599851.png

Rocket Lake will be a bad gaming plattform, really cant understand why Intel marked it as such.. But i guess its no better in productivity with 8 cores VS 16 cores there.
 

dullard

Elite Member
May 21, 2001
22,739
989
126
He is talking about this: https://www.overclock.net/threads/overclocking-11700k-11900k-results-bins-and-discussion.1777365/page-11

Crappy latency, even with a all new bios he got it from Shamino himself. (Biosdate is from today)
I was more curious as to why JoeRambo's first images said DDR4-7467 but the calculations were with DDR4-3733. I didn't know about the new 2:1 memory ratio feature.

The question then is 3733 MHz a hard cap limited by hardware? Or a soft cap limited by the BIOS?
 

ondma

Platinum Member
Mar 18, 2018
2,060
742
106
This is only controversial because the results are bad that there are people who refuses to accept these bad results. The problem isn't the review, is the CPU not performing as expected.
In the past anyone publishing benchmarks earlier was something to be celebrated. Remember CanardPC that published a early review of Zen² No one got mad and wanted their heads, even though the results that the magazine publish could put AMD's survival at risk. What's happening now is not usual, pure fanboyism.



Or it's a trap to damage Anandtech?
There's still a real possibility that performance can increase with new BIOS. Keep silent and let "Anandtech hurt itself" would be excellent news for Intel because of all those other "incidents" with other sites supposedly favoring Intel's CPUs since Ryzen launched.
That is the risk you take with early reviews. Do you really think Intel should help someone who broke their NDA?
 

Zucker2k

Golden Member
Feb 15, 2006
1,375
720
136
That is the risk you take with early reviews. Do you really think Intel should help someone who broke their NDA?
This is exactly it. Why should Intel lend any kind of legitimacy to this ill-conceived move when they had already made their position clear that they disapprove of what Mind Factory did? This was just a bad call but it's good in a way, because now everyone knows Anandtech will not hesitate to ignore NDA given the opportunity.
There are lots of German reviewers who probably bought the chips but are holding off because they signed NDAs and knew to take the high road. We all know if this was AMD hardware being "reviewed" on non final motherboard and bios with sketchy details, all hell would've broken loose by now. The double-standards is just sickening.





Inflammatory posting is not allowed.


esquared
Anandtech Forum Director
 
Last edited by a moderator:

ASK THE COMMUNITY