Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread

Page 329 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Gideon

Golden Member
Nov 27, 2007
1,501
3,129
136
Based on the competitive gaming performance of the old Skylake architecture it wouldn't surprise anyone if RKL would retake the gaming crown.
I don't doubt RKL will compete wit Zen 3 in games, maybe even pull off a small win, but considering where Zen 3 currently stands, it won't be a 10-15% win, as was the case with Skylake vs Zen 2.

One thing I'm 100% sure of though, is the shifting of goal posts that will happen immediately after RKL release:

Currently (according to this Tom's article) AMD has a:
  • ~9% performance lead in Cyberpunk 2077 vs Intel @ 1080p Ultra (not low or medium, mind you)
  • That shrinks to just ~3% @ 1440p
  • And is pretty much gone @ 4K (~1%)
1608306111200.png

Current Verdict by Intel fanboys:
"Wat? such a small lead at low resolution? I game at 1440P/4K! Besides Comet Lake is cheaper anyway, much better to save for a GPU and use Intel CPUs instead. Zen 3 is an expensive POS nobody should buy, who cares about 10% at 1080p?"

Verdict after RKL pulls off a 2-3% win @ 1080p tieing at higher res:
"OMG, Intel has the gaming lead! What fail from AMD, can't even compete on a process advantage! You should only buy Intel CPUs for gaming. If you even consider Zen 3 for gaming you're a total idiot and need to be shot, Intel is faster after all!"
 

Hulk

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
3,397
904
136
I've been an admirer of Intel for a long time but I have to admit there is a tiny bit of schadenfreude when the champ starts to take some serious blows. First Zen 3 beats them on the desktop, then they lose Apple to the M1, now getting smashed in the server space with Ampere. Of course they aren't going to lose big contracts anytime soon (except for Apple) due to their reputation and production capacity, but if this goes on too long they might not be able to avoid the iceberg.
 

ondma

Platinum Member
Mar 18, 2018
2,455
1,064
136
I don't doubt RKL will compete wit Zen 3 in games, maybe even pull off a small win, but considering where Zen 3 currently stands, it won't be a 10-15% win, as was the case with Skylake vs Zen 2.

One thing I'm 100% sure of though, is the shifting of goal posts that will happen immediately after RKL release:

Currently (according to this Tom's article) AMD has a:
  • ~9% performance lead in Cyberpunk 2077 vs Intel @ 1080p Ultra (not low or medium, mind you)
  • That shrinks to just ~3% @ 1440p
  • And is pretty much gone @ 4K (~1%)

Current Verdict by Intel fanboys:
"Wat? such a small lead at low resolution? I game at 1440P/4K! Besides Comet Lake is cheaper anyway, much better to save for a GPU and use Intel CPUs instead. Zen 3 is an expensive POS nobody should buy, who cares about 10% at 1080p?"

Verdict after RKL pulls off a 2-3% win @ 1080p tieing at higher res:
"OMG, Intel has the gaming lead! What fail from AMD, can't even compete on a process advantage! You should only buy Intel CPUs for gaming. If you even consider Zen 3 for gaming you're a total idiot and need to be shot, Intel is faster after all!"
Oh, you mean just like low resolution gaming is now somehow important (instead of a "corner case") to the AMD camp since they have the lead? Both sides do it.
 

Ajay

Lifer
Jan 8, 2001
11,576
5,267
136
I've been an admirer of Intel for a long time but I have to admit there is a tiny bit of schadenfreude when the champ starts to take some serious blows. First Zen 3 beats them on the desktop, then they lose Apple to the M1, now getting smashed in the server space with Ampere. Of course they aren't going to lose big contracts anytime soon (except for Apple) due to their reputation and production capacity, but if this goes on too long they might not be able to avoid the iceberg.
In this analogy, Intel already hit the ice berg. Can the emergency pumps keep the ship afloat till they get to port for repairs? I really don't know, seems like they'll need to get leaner and have a major shake up from the top to middle management to get back on track. They got fat and lazy. @dmens and others have described internal conditions that have led to a brain drain within Intel. There are grumblings that 7nm isn't going as well as Intel touted (even worse than the delay admitted by Intel).

I think the lack of greater penetration into various markets by AMD is being driven by lack of supply at this point. I also wonder if the lack of consumer SKUs for Ryzen 5K is due to demands of filling increasing OEM contracts. They are sort of stuck with the same situation they were in the Athlon 64 days - thought that was partly their own fault. I'm sure they wish Samsung was competitive, so they could move some products onto their nodes (console SoCs?).

All that said, I don't have a problem with people who still prefer Intel, it's their money, not mine; buy whatever you want if it makes you happy. I'm am getting tired of people saying 'you're and idiot if you choose Intel over AMD right now'. If the 10700K had been on the market when I built my last system - I would have considered Intel, and probably been very happy. I use 12 cores a lot less than I thought I would.
 

Edrick

Golden Member
Feb 18, 2010
1,914
205
106
Current Verdict by Intel fanboys:
"Wat? such a small lead at low resolution? I game at 1440P/4K! Besides Comet Lake is cheaper anyway, much better to save for a GPU and use Intel CPUs instead. Zen 3 is an expensive POS nobody should buy, who cares about 10% at 1080p?"

Verdict after RKL pulls off a 2-3% win @ 1080p tieing at higher res:
"OMG, Intel has the gaming lead! What fail from AMD, can't even compete on a process advantage! You should only buy Intel CPUs for gaming. If you even consider Zen 3 for gaming you're a total idiot and need to be shot, Intel is faster after all!"
I think people sometimes lose sight of the fact that gaming benchmarks are not the only decision factor that goes into selecting a CPU for many users.
 

lobz

Platinum Member
Feb 10, 2017
2,041
2,785
136
Oh, you mean just like low resolution gaming is now somehow important (instead of a "corner case") to the AMD camp since they have the lead? Both sides do it.
It's still not nearly as cringe as the phenomenon of Intel having the 'value proposition' in some cases, suddenly meaning 'real value' now, while just a couple of months ago when someone said AMD offers more value, the answer you got made you feel like you were a peasant for even bringing that up.
 

Hulk

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
3,397
904
136
In this analogy, Intel already hit the ice berg. Can the emergency pumps keep the ship afloat till they get to port for repairs? I really don't know, seems like they'll need to get leaner and have a major shake up from the top to middle management to get back on track. They got fat and lazy. @dmens and others have described internal conditions that have led to a brain drain within Intel. There are grumblings that 7nm isn't going as well as Intel touted (even worse than the delay admitted by Intel).

I think the lack of greater penetration into various markets by AMD is being driven by lack of supply at this point. I also wonder if the lack of consumer SKUs for Ryzen 5K is due to demands of filling increasing OEM contracts. They are sort of stuck with the same situation they were in the Athlon 64 days - thought that was partly their own fault. I'm sure they wish Samsung was competitive, so they could move some products onto their nodes (console SoCs?).

All that said, I don't have a problem with people who still prefer Intel, it's their money, not mine; buy whatever you want if it makes you happy. I'm am getting tired of people saying 'you're and idiot if you choose Intel over AMD right now'. If the 10700K had been on the market when I built my last system - I would have considered Intel, and probably been very happy. I use 12 cores a lot less than I thought I would.
Well said. I'm only saying they haven't hit the iceberg yet because earning reports are still good. Unfortunately if/when earning reports turn and there aren't competitive parts/process in the works that's when they actually hit the iceberg.

And I agree, whatever works for you. I'm enjoying the competition as a guy that follows the tech and a buyer of the tech. There's a lot of action right now and that's fun to follow.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tjf81

CP5670

Diamond Member
Jun 24, 2004
5,123
351
126
I wonder if this will be worth getting for people like me who already have a Z490/Comet Lake. I suspect it might be too little of a performance increase to bother with, unless you have a specific need for PCIE 4.
 

jpiniero

Lifer
Oct 1, 2010
12,220
3,632
136
Well said. I'm only saying they haven't hit the iceberg yet because earning reports are still good. Unfortunately if/when earning reports turn and there aren't competitive parts/process in the works that's when they actually hit the iceberg.
Intel's own Q4 forecast is for a16% revenue drop YoY. On top of that, anything 10 nm is a margins disaster so far.
 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
19,948
8,919
136
I think people sometimes lose sight of the fact that gaming benchmarks are not the only decision factor that goes into selecting a CPU for many users.
Rocket Lake-S won't make sense for much of anything except:

MT workloads that spawn 16 or fewer threads
Games

And that assumes it makes sense for anything.

I wonder if this will be worth getting for people like me who already have a Z490/Comet Lake. I suspect it might be too little of a performance increase to bother with, unless you have a specific need for PCIE 4.
That's what I was speculating earlier.
 

jpiniero

Lifer
Oct 1, 2010
12,220
3,632
136

Base clock on the 11700 is 2.5, down from 2.9 on the 10700, while the 11400's is 2.6, down from 2.9 on the 10400. Also the i3 and below still have the same Comet Lake core/thread configuration.
 

mikk

Diamond Member
May 15, 2012
3,641
1,507
136
I don't doubt RKL will compete wit Zen 3 in games, maybe even pull off a small win, but considering where Zen 3 currently stands, it won't be a 10-15% win, as was the case with Skylake vs Zen 2.

The problem for AMD is they have a RAM speed advantage in almost all gaming comparisons. The RAM speed greatly affects the gaming performance when it isn't GPU bound. With the same RAM speed there is almost no gaming advantage for Zen3 over CML-S. RKL-S will have a RAM parity which means reviewers have to use the same RAM if they want test according to spec. This alone makes a big difference. No RAM advantage anymore and it will be a real CPU comparison.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: shady28

cortexa99

Senior member
Jul 2, 2018
228
353
136

Base clock on the 11700 is 2.5, down from 2.9 on the 10700, while the 11400's is 2.6, down from 2.9 on the 10400. Also the i3 and below still have the same Comet Lake core/thread configuration.
No RKL i3?? CML refresh with i3-11100 to i3-11300 is a disappointment...... why intel do this when 14nm is already yielding good???
Also the author seems pessimistic and doesn't put much hope on RKL, price/performance ratio won't be better than CML..... at last he say they will post benchmark of RKL next week.....
 

ondma

Platinum Member
Mar 18, 2018
2,455
1,064
136
No RKL i3?? CML refresh with i3-11100 to i3-11300 is a disappointment...... why intel do this when 14nm is already yielding good???
Also the author seems pessimistic and doesn't put much hope on RKL, price/performance ratio won't be better than CML..... at last he say they will post benchmark of RKL next week.....
AFAIK no one expected RL on the low end. Performance isnt a priority there, and die size will be smaller for the same core count with CL, so margins will be better.
 

lobz

Platinum Member
Feb 10, 2017
2,041
2,785
136
The problem for AMD is they have a RAM speed advantage in almost all gaming comparisons. The RAM speed greatly affects the gaming performance when it isn't GPU bound. With the same RAM speed there is almost no gaming advantage for Zen3 over CML-S. RKL-S will have a RAM parity which means reviewers have to use the same RAM if they want test according to spec. This alone makes a big difference. No RAM advantage anymore and it will be a real CPU comparison.
You have to be joking there. Any media outlet whose gaming tests can be taken seriously by an enthusiast, tested the CPUs with the same RAM speed and timings, whether they were low or high, slow or fast, tight or loose. What feeling or thought exactly did you want to express with your post?
 

shady28

Platinum Member
Apr 11, 2004
2,520
396
126
I can't tell if you're serious. Except for Anandtech, all important review outlets tested gaming performance using the same memory kits, with the same memory clocks.
Not strictly true, Tom's uses 2933 for stock config on intel, at least during the 5600X review

The sites that used same speed RAM also tended to get different results from sites like AT that used the chipsets certified JEDEC settings. The win for Zen 3 *mostly* still there, but it is a lot less clear cut, and in some cases Intel wins.

TPU used exactly the same DDR4-3200 RAM settings, using what is a Zen 2 friendly FlareX CL14 kit, and got raked over the coals for it by the AMD crowd when it showed Comet Lake winning in the aggregate with a 2080 Ti.

One has to wonder what would have happened if someone used an Intel friendly RAM kit, stuck that into a Zen 3, and then ran those benchmarks.

Tom's test setup, using 2933 on Intel, 3200 on Zen for stock :

1608396770655.png

Computerbase.de also uses MFR rated RAM speeds :

1608397884921.png
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Executor_ and mikk

dmens

Platinum Member
Mar 18, 2005
2,271
917
136
No RKL i3?? CML refresh with i3-11100 to i3-11300 is a disappointment...... why intel do this when 14nm is already yielding good???
Also the author seems pessimistic and doesn't put much hope on RKL, price/performance ratio won't be better than CML..... at last he say they will post benchmark of RKL next week.....
Because Rocketlake power consumption is completely out of control. They cannot sell a low-tier i3 and tell people to spend another $50-$100 on an aftermarket cooler just to match prior gen performance.
 

Exist50

Golden Member
Aug 18, 2016
1,142
1,140
136
Because Rocketlake power consumption is completely out of control. They cannot sell a low-tier i3 and tell people to spend another $50-$100 on an aftermarket cooler just to match prior gen performance.
No, they just don't have anything but an 8c die, and it makes no sense cutting it down for the low end market given 14nm yields. Comet Lake S serves that market fine as is.

And we can see with the 11700T leak that there's nothing stopping them releasing a low TDP chip if they want.
 

dmens

Platinum Member
Mar 18, 2005
2,271
917
136
No, they just don't have anything but an 8c die, and it makes no sense cutting it down for the low end market given 14nm yields. Comet Lake S serves that market fine as is.

And we can see with the 11700T leak that there's nothing stopping them releasing a low TDP chip if they want.
Heh. Wait until you see the sustained performance of a ”low power” Rocketlake chip. If anyone even bothers testing it, that is.
 

jpiniero

Lifer
Oct 1, 2010
12,220
3,632
136
Heh. Wait until you see the sustained performance of a ”low power” Rocketlake chip. If anyone even bothers testing it, that is.
Just from the base clocks given it's probably not slower than Comet Lake at the same power. Faster is questionable though, and since Comet Lake is going to be way smaller it makes more sense to just continue to sell Comet Lake at the lower end.
 

uzzi38

Platinum Member
Oct 16, 2019
2,327
4,822
116
Not strictly true, Tom's uses 2933 for stock config on intel, at least during the 5600X review

The sites that used same speed RAM also tended to get different results from sites like AT that used the chipsets certified JEDEC settings. The win for Zen 3 *mostly* still there, but it is a lot less clear cut, and in some cases Intel wins.

TPU used exactly the same DDR4-3200 RAM settings, using what is a Zen 2 friendly FlareX CL14 kit, and got raked over the coals for it by the AMD crowd when it showed Comet Lake winning in the aggregate with a 2080 Ti.

One has to wonder what would have happened if someone used an Intel friendly RAM kit, stuck that into a Zen 3, and then ran those benchmarks.

Tom's test setup, using 2933 on Intel, 3200 on Zen for stock :

View attachment 36001

Computerbase.de also uses MFR rated RAM speeds :

View attachment 36004
Lol that's not why TPU "got raked over the coals", they acknowledged themselves their results weren't accurate and were a result of what looked like a driver bug between Zen 3 and Turing.

Also, "Zen 2 friendly RAM kit"? It's a memory kit lol, there's no magic AMD favouring or Intel favouring kits.

Btw, Gamer's Nexus use DDR4-3200 for both AMD and Intel and get some of the best results for Zen 3 vs Comet Lake. So much so that an overclocked 10900K (including memory and cache OC) can't match stock Zen 3 results.
 

Exist50

Golden Member
Aug 18, 2016
1,142
1,140
136
Heh. Wait until you see the sustained performance of a ”low power” Rocketlake chip. If anyone even bothers testing it, that is.
Aa pointed out several times, we know the base clocks, and rough IPC increase. This just reads as denial at this point.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY