Discussion i7-11700K preliminary results

[podspi]

We may not even need to go bellow 1080p if Nvidia keeps their hardware & driver model for their 4000 series.

Again, I'm not trying to rain on anyone's parade here, these discounted CPUs are a fine purchase as long as they come with proper expectations. There is obviously a price where even I would bite the bullet and get an unlocked 10 core Skylake, but I wouldn't do so hoping to get relevant flagship performance 2 years from now.

Hopefully the days of buying a flagship CPU and it still having flagship performance 2+ years from purchase are over. I'd rather have rapid progress - I agree that the Zen 2 cores in the PS5 and Series X/S (not to mention the potatoes in the Nintendo Switch) will keep contemporary high core count CPUs relevant for a while.

 

[Mopetar]

The performance may be good for the money NOW. But a lot of people keep the same computer for years. After e.g. three years, they will run 8 years old technology. That is a prehistory in the computer world. If they waited for Alder lake, their computer will not be a historical artifact after 3 years.

In this particular case we're talking about a 10850K. That's a 10-core CPU that can hit 5 GHz. It's not going to be an artifact after 3 years. At worst it might bottleneck a few games at 1080p but that's assuming it's being paired with a top end GPU.

If we were talking about picking up something like a 10300 maybe you'd have a point, but almost any quad core is eventually going to start feeling dated outside of lighter workload like web browsing and casual office work.

Anyone who is really concerned about that could just get a Zen 3 CPU right now, but only if they're actually that worried about future performance. Besides, Skylake and its descendants are one of the most prolific architectures of all time and the massive user base likely means software will continue to support it or even optimize for it for some time to come.

 

[DrMrLordX]

How soon do we really expect Alder Lake to reach significant levels of retail availability? Intel just released Rocket Lake. It's probably going to be their top-end CPU for at least 9 months.

 

[Dave2150]

In this particular case we're talking about a 10850K. That's a 10-core CPU that can hit 5 GHz. It's not going to be an artifact after 3 years. At worst it might bottleneck a few games at 1080p but that's assuming it's being paired with a top end GPU.

If we were talking about picking up something like a 10300 maybe you'd have a point, but almost any quad core is eventually going to start feeling dated outside of lighter workload like web browsing and casual office work.

Anyone who is really concerned about that could just get a Zen 3 CPU right now, but only if they're actually that worried about future performance. Besides, Skylake and its descendants are one of the most prolific architectures of all time and the massive user base likely means software will continue to support it or even optimize for it for some time to come.

A 10850K won't be useless after 3 years, but already it's old hat. It makes no sense to buy into a PCI-E gen3 platform, on a very old architecture, just because of being a lowest common market configuration statistic, IMO.

I believe the majority believe this, hence why the prices on Cometlake are so low right now. Some will see that as a bargain and that's perfectly fine. Others, see how much use their tech equipment gets these days (covid era) and would prefer to enjoy the new architectures, technologies, faster transfers, more convenience etc.

 

[moinmoin]

I am impressed by Intel's ability to keep it relevant this long.

You are impressed Intel squandered its half a decade process and design lead by continuously launching refreshes with a couple more MHz and cores? I mean, I'm impressed as well, but not in a good way. Now Intel is on somewhat equal footing at best (AMD) or has to catch up quite some gap at worst (Apple).

 

[gdansk]

You are impressed Intel squandered its half a decade process and design lead by continuously launching refreshes with a couple more MHz and cores? I mean, I'm impressed as well, but not in a good way. Now Intel is on somewhat equal footing at best (AMD) or has to catch up quite some gap at worst (Apple).

No, I'm more impressed by the fact that 14nm scaled up such that Skylake was competitive until Zen 3 launched. I do not describe their 10nm failures as impressive but I thought the following sentence made it clear what I was talking about

But then again other companies wouldn't be in this situation because they're fabless.

 

[Hulk]

The performance may be good for the money NOW. But a lot of people keep the same computer for years. After e.g. three years, they will run 8 years old technology. That is a prehistory in the computer world. If they waited for Alder lake, their computer will not be a historical artifact after 3 years.

Thing is the apps that most people use, Word, Excel, Powerpoint, Web browsing, Photoshop, aren't changing much or at all in terms of compute. They are pretty much topped out. It's not like 25 years ago when the software compute required for snappy performance was far ahead of the hardware compute available.

SSD's helped a great deal as well of course.

 

[Dave2150]

Thing is the apps that most people use, Word, Excel, Powerpoint, Web browsing, Photoshop, aren't changing much or at all in terms of compute. They are pretty much topped out. It's not like 25 years ago when the software compute required for snappy performance was far ahead of the hardware compute available.

SSD's helped a great deal as well of course.

I think your a bit out of touch with reality, if you believe those apps you mentioned are the most popular. Also if you believe people are buying i7's/i9's to power such apps... They're not.

The applications for which people still buy high end CPU's are very much capable of using their horsepower/connectivity.

 

[blckgrffn]

I think your a bit out of touch with reality, if you believe those apps you mentioned are the most popular. Also if you believe people are buying i7's/i9's to power such apps... They're not.

The applications for which people still buy high end CPU's are very much capable of using their horsepower/connectivity.

You're right. Chrome spanks the crap out of any CPU I use it on!

Really, I read this and laughed. Plenty of people are buying current i7 and i9 CPUs for "gaming" with tiny GPUs and probably spending way more time in a web browser than any other app, hands down. Many of them will use integrated graphics for their entire life spent plugged in and doing whatever.

If you are buying an i7/i9 CPU for any scientific or heavy lifting, non-gaming purpose then you are already doing it wrong. But most consumers don't read benchmarks, they buy what's available. And cheap. Cheap helps a lot.

 

[Mopetar]

If it's an AVX workload then Intel may be the better option, but I trust anyone who falls into that niche to be aware of what they should be buying.

 

[Dave2150]

You're right. Chrome spanks the crap out of any CPU I use it on!

Really, I read this and laughed. Plenty of people are buying current i7 and i9 CPUs for "gaming" with tiny GPUs and probably spending way more time in a web browser than any other app, hands down. Many of them will use integrated graphics for their entire life spent plugged in and doing whatever.

If you are buying an i7/i9 CPU for any scientific or heavy lifting, non-gaming purpose then you are already doing it wrong. But most consumers don't read benchmarks, they buy what's available. And cheap. Cheap helps a lot.

Instead of laughing out loud, I suggest you brush up on English comprehension. 'Gaming' wasn't mentioned by the poster I quoted. They mentioned MS Office applications, web browsing and photoshop.

Gaming is obviously one of the most popular use cases of a high end CPU, as some of these games can actually leverage a benefit from a high end CPU, compared to a mid - range one.

You mention "scientific or heavy lifting, non-gaming purpose" type software. I agree that it's obvious, even to a small child, that such tasks are either best suited to cloud compute, or a Xeon/threadripper based workstation solution.

Again, brush up on your reading comprehension, it's a skill you'll find useful to not put yourself in embarrassing situations.

 

[Hulk]

You're right. Chrome spanks the crap out of any CPU I use it on!

Really, I read this and laughed. Plenty of people are buying current i7 and i9 CPUs for "gaming" with tiny GPUs and probably spending way more time in a web browser than any other app, hands down. Many of them will use integrated graphics for their entire life spent plugged in and doing whatever.

If you are buying an i7/i9 CPU for any scientific or heavy lifting, non-gaming purpose then you are already doing it wrong. But most consumers don't read benchmarks, they buy what's available. And cheap. Cheap helps a lot.

Hi Dave,

I think "out of touch with reality" is a little harsh. I mean I can function in society, take care of my kids, etc.. I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed but I'm not out of touch with reality.

Anyway what apps do you think most people are using? Out of those which ones wouldn't be suitable on an 8 core granddaddy Skylake CPU?

As far as games that's mostly GPU once you are over 4 cores.

 

[blckgrffn]

Instead of laughing out loud, I suggest you brush up on English comprehension. 'Gaming' wasn't mentioned by the poster I quoted. They mentioned MS Office applications, web browsing and photoshop.

Haha, OK. These CPUs will still be sold by the truck load to those users, especially the i7's.

I am not saying you have to like it. 2 minutes on Google showed me models by major OEMs like Dell HP selling 10700 PCs in their mainstream consumer product lines with no dedicated graphics card. Woo!

I still agree with @Hulk that the vast majority of these things are under-tasked.

 

[Racan]

 

[moonbogg]

This thing is almost literally a 10700K with more power draw. If they try to charge $400+ for this thing, I'll definitely be delivering more lolz to this thread than Intel delivers 11700k's to consumers.

 

[TheELF]

This thing is almost literally a 10700K with more power draw. If they try to charge $400+ for this thing, I'll definitely be delivering more lolz to this thread than Intel delivers 11700k's to consumers.

It's about 7% faster in "productivity" with 100Mhz slower clocks and 10W less power draw, it's about what one would expect from intel.
Prices have released and the 11700F is going to be $298 and with MCE enabled and PL1 PL2 limits tweaked you would get higher performance than the 11700K stock that GN shows wile power would still be under control with the PL1 PL2 tweaks in place.

Intel 11th Gen Core "Rocket Lake" series official specifications and pricing - VideoCardz.com

Intel Core i9-11900K to cost 539 USD We have the final specification and pricing for the upcoming 11th Gen Core series. The flagship 8-core i9-11900K SKU will retail at 539 USD (pricing per 1000 units), an increase of 51 USD per CPU compared to Core i9-10900K. This CPU will boost up to 5.3 GHz...

videocardz.com

 

[jpiniero]

So it is the Tau then. The frequency readings is really what Ian should have done in his review. I guess you shouldn't really be shocked at enforcing the 125 W TDP it's no faster than the 10700K.

 

[Racan]

So it is the Tau then. The frequency readings is really what Ian should have done in his review. I guess you shouldn't really be shocked at enforcing the 125 W TDP it's no faster than the 10700K.

Yes, though Tech Jeebus also said he had trouble getting a meaningful OC so how much does this limit hold back the CPU anyway.

 

[JoeRambo]

Intel outdid themselves this time. Managed to increase performance where it does not matter - in Cinebenches and CPU-Z synthetics, and decrease performance where it does - in gaming and general use like web browsing. Not a coincidence that tasks that show great gains are not memory sensitive at all, and those who do are.

A shame really, to regress in L3 and memory latency so much. Did they forget that unlike certain other vendor they have just 16MB of L3, and out of that ~4MB already contains inclusive lower levels of all cores in chip? Can't afford AMD like latencies without having AMD sized cache.
One has to wonder, how did that happen? Actual memory speed increased to 3200 from 2933. How did IMC got limited to ~3733 in 1:1 mode? Lots of questions that have nothing to do with 14nm process, backporting and more with Intel's failures.

 

[tamz_msc]

Prices have released and the 11700F is going to be $298.

Prices in retail will be closer to $350 because of the current situation and because $298 is 1K unit price.

with MCE enabled and PL1 PL2 limits tweaked you would get higher performance than the 11700K stock that GN shows wile power would still be under control with the PL1 PL2 tweaks in place.

You sure about that? Consider the 10700F in the same situation:

Intel Core i7-10700 Review - Way to Overclock without the K

In our Intel Core i7-10700 review, we're taking a look at one of Intel's most affordable 8-core/16-thread processors. Its low TDP of 65 W makes it power-efficient, but also limits performance. We unlocked that limit and gained up to 30% real-life performance without ever risking an unstable system.

www.techpowerup.com

CPU Tests - +10%

Game test at 720p - +2%

Power Consumption - Cinebench MT - +59%

 

[jpiniero]

One has to wonder, how did that happen? Actual memory speed increased to 3200 from 2933. How did IMC got limited to ~3733 in 1:1 mode? Lots of questions that have nothing to do with 14nm process, backporting and more with Intel's failures.

Sunny Cove only supports LPDDR4 3733 so it's possible that Intel did something to the IMC.

 

[Racan]

 

[coercitiv]

So it seems Rocket Lake benefits from unlocked TDP even in gaming, where more power allows it to sit slightly above the competition. I would have liked to see power consumptin data from a game, but as long as they benchmarked with the same BIOS and different power settings... power is the only variable. This is good news for 11900K, since it shows there's potential here for a better binned chip. It's also quite the warning sign for those hoping to see low power consumption in gaming.

PS: @Racan - forum rules require us to add a minimal comment when posting videos/pics/links etc

 

[tamz_msc]

So it seems Rocket Lake benefits from unlocked TDP even in gaming, where more power allows it to sit slightly above the competition. I would have liked to see power consumptin data from a game, but as long as they benchmarked with the same BIOS and different power settings... power is the only variable. This is good news for 11900K, since it shows there's potential here for a better binned chip. It's also quite the warning sign for those hoping to see low power consumption in gaming.

PS: @Racan - forum rules require us to add a minimal comment when posting videos/pics/links etc

What would have been interesting to see is the i7-10700K with "power limits disabled", as it has a 100 MHz higher all-core turbo than the i7-11700K. Of course we haven't even got to memory overclocking, where preliminary accounts suggest that Rocket Lake is at a definite disadvantage compared to Comet Lake.

 

[IntelUser2000]

I mean how long did it take from inception to a product? 2 years?

That's pretty much a straight backport with no optimization.

It's a backport to an older, worse process, and they rushed it doing so. No wonder it's so bad. Also tells us how important process is and it'll get even more important as shrinks get harder.

They have a presentation about Rocketlake and the team that made it happen, and it sounded like they were pretty proud about it. Not sure if they should have bothered, because there's nothing to be proud about this product.

Yea sure you got it done, but it's questionable if it's better. It's a "we did it cause we can" chip.

Good thing it didn't end up worse. Imagine this chip on mobile.