• 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."
  • Community Question: What makes a good motherboard?

Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread

Page 347 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Asterox

Senior member
May 15, 2012
426
580
136
Viral marketing in daylight, at CES...
Great comedy or Intel and security, .......................but in reality. :grinning:


"Intel currently has 242 publicly disclosed vulnerabilities, while AMD has only 16. That’s a 15:1 difference in AMD’s favor. The gap is just too large to ignore."
 
  • Haha
Reactions: lightmanek

jpiniero

Diamond Member
Oct 1, 2010
8,686
1,558
126

Hulk

Platinum Member
Oct 9, 1999
2,774
172
106
Things are getting really interesting. Intel reports some gaming benchmarks vs the 5800x that show Intel has a 4% average better result. This is just about the clockspeed difference between these two parts.

IPC-wise I think these two cores are going to trade blows pretty evenly.

Of course you can't get more than 8 cores with Intel. And then there's the fact that you need a nuke (and cooling towers) for the Intel.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lightmanek

Hulk

Platinum Member
Oct 9, 1999
2,774
172
106
intel are citing 'up to' 19% . wonder whattheir average is? , @ something less than 19% , IPC should still be a bit below Zen 3
The game benches were directly compared to Zen 3. Zen 3 and RL are going to be close. But AMD will own the core count and the power/efficiency and the price premium for the high end parts.

Basically Intel has to clean up the scraps the way AMD used to. Funny turn of events.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lightmanek

eek2121

Senior member
Aug 2, 2005
729
783
136
I don't participate here much anymore for reasons, but I figured I'd drop a few tidbits of info:

NOTE: before I start, for those of you that are new here, I don't own stock in Intel. I don't have a single Intel CPU or motherboard in my house, etc. In other words, I'm not a fanboy.
  1. Many people think 10nm has yield issues. They have capacity issues. Also, a corporation like Intel does NOT divert from their internal roadmaps. Shoot, you'll find that AMD doesn't either. These products have a LONG lifecycle. It takes years to bring them from the concept stage to production stage. The bottom line is that even if Intel had 10nm ready for the desktop, Rocket Lake is still going out the door.
  2. Intel is positioning itself to be extremely competitive with AMD. AMD is paying almost no attention to client based ML (machine learning) (as far as we know, and if they are, they haven't leaked a thing). Intel is rolling out Xe alongside Rocket Lake, Tiger Lake, and future generations. This is an early attempt at bringing intelligent ML to mainstream platforms. Apple has also done this with the M1 (and other chips) with their "neural engine". It baffles me why AMD is letting themselves be blindsided by this. Xe graphics were never about gaming, they were always about getting stuff done. Machine learning. Yes, HPG is launching later this year, but once again: Intel users will have Xe graphics onboard to handle things like AI upscaling, etc. What will AMD have? It remains to be seen if they will stumble or if they can adapt. The lack of leaks in this regard are pretty scary. They don't even have a decent video encoder or decoder right now...
  3. Rocket lake was originally planned for March. Off the top of my head I believe it was March 17th (but I'd have to dig for the exact date and quite frankly I don't care). It was never slated for January. That leak was fake. There is an IPC increase, and yes, it will be Zen 3 chips *some of the time*. In non gaming tasks (or in gaming tasks that properly utilize cores) Zen 3 will still come out on top. The leaks involving the 5900X weren't necessarily fake or biased, but there are caveats that we'll all find out later on.
One thing I did NOT know, but rather, I learned: The decrease in core count wasn't due to heat or power, it was due to size. The drop in core count was to keep margins consistent. Nothing more. I was under the assumption that it was all about both heat and power. (EDIT: point of clarification: Intel would have pushed chips with higher power consumption or worse thermal performance out the door regardless. It was all about the chip size.)

Anyway, happy commenting. I'm going back into my hole for another 6 months or so (At least. Those of you that know me know where to find me). Happy new year to all!
 

Kocicak

Senior member
Jan 17, 2019
338
213
76
Many people think 10nm has yield issues. They have capacity issues. Also, a corporation like Intel does NOT divert from their internal roadmaps. Shoot, you'll find that AMD doesn't either. These products have a LONG lifecycle. It takes years to bring them from the concept stage to production stage. The bottom line is that even if Intel had 10nm ready for the desktop, Rocket Lake is still going out the door.
The problem is, that Intel CPUs are now so weak compared to AMD products, that they can compete only when insanely clocked, consuming huge amounts of energy.

Rocket lake is not on 10nm, because it cannot clock so high and 14 nm can.

Intel producing CPUs consuming 250W and wanting customers to throw peltier water cooler on it consuming 350W MORE, is a comedy act at this moment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tlh97 and scannall

jj109

Senior member
Dec 17, 2013
386
51
91
Tiger Lake H is going to clock on 5GHz on multiple cores, already confirmed.
Rocket Lake will be easier to cool than Comet Lake because the core is 20% bigger at the same max power levels.
The up to 19% claim is based on SPEC2017 ST based on their fine print.

It is a little wild how the same people who were explaining why Zen3 was only a few % ahead of Zen2 in 1080p max settings gaming benchmarks have forgotten all of that, and are now using that as a bludgeon against Intel's IPC claims.
 

Det0x

Senior member
Sep 11, 2014
448
440
136
I find this very disappointing, 14nm rocket lake can't even beat 10 core skylake, let alone compete with Zen3 o_O

Intel Core i9-11900K qualification sample compared with Core i9-10900K at 5.2 GHz @ https://videocardz.com/newz/intel-core-i9-11900k-qualification-sample-compared-with-core-i9-10900k-at-5-2-ghz

The testing platform features ASUS ROG STRIX RTX 3090, Z490 motherboard, and memory clocked at 3600 MHz (CL16). Both processors have been overclocked to 5.2 GHz and are cooled down by an industrial CPU chiller. The preview has been shared by Bibibili creator 二斤啦啦啦啦.


CPU-Z
In CPU-Z the Core i9-11900K scores 693 points which are around 11% faster than 10900K, however. In the multi-threaded test, the CPU scores 6723 points which means that Comet Lake-S CPU is still 13% faster. This is of course due to the fact that the 10th Gen Core CPU offers more threads (20) than the 11th Gen Core (16).
1.jpg

2.jpg

Cinebench
The CPU has been tested in all three popular versions of Cinbench. It looks that the 11th Gen Core processor has a clear advantage in the single-threaded benchmark while falling to compete with the current flagship in the multi-threaded benchmark.

Cinebench R15Cinebench R20Cinebench R23
Core i9-11900K250 / 2356610 / 56721582 / 13864
Core i9-10900K223 / 2655526 / 63741388 / 16535


3.jpg4.jpg5.jpg

3DMark
Combined ScoresFire StrikeFire Strike ExtremeTime SpyTime Spy Extreme
Core i9-11900K3129419303113398289
Core i9-10900K3022519421114068525
 
  • Like
Reactions: lightmanek

Panino Manino

Senior member
Jan 28, 2017
326
373
106
Why Intel compared this 8 Core with AMD 12 Core? For games?
Shouldn't the comparison be with the 5800X? It's equal or faster than the 5900X and costs U$200 less.
 

exquisitechar

Senior member
Apr 18, 2017
460
533
106
I find this very disappointing, 14nm rocket lake can't even beat 10 core skylake, let alone compete with Zen3 o_O

Intel Core i9-11900K qualification sample compared with Core i9-10900K at 5.2 GHz @ https://videocardz.com/newz/intel-core-i9-11900k-qualification-sample-compared-with-core-i9-10900k-at-5-2-ghz

The testing platform features ASUS ROG STRIX RTX 3090, Z490 motherboard, and memory clocked at 3600 MHz (CL16). Both processors have been overclocked to 5.2 GHz and are cooled down by an industrial CPU chiller. The preview has been shared by Bibibili creator 二斤啦啦啦啦.


CPU-Z
In CPU-Z the Core i9-11900K scores 693 points which are around 11% faster than 10900K, however. In the multi-threaded test, the CPU scores 6723 points which means that Comet Lake-S CPU is still 13% faster. This is of course due to the fact that the 10th Gen Core CPU offers more threads (20) than the 11th Gen Core (16).
View attachment 37630

View attachment 37631

Cinebench
The CPU has been tested in all three popular versions of Cinbench. It looks that the 11th Gen Core processor has a clear advantage in the single-threaded benchmark while falling to compete with the current flagship in the multi-threaded benchmark.

Cinebench R15Cinebench R20Cinebench R23
Core i9-11900K250 / 2356610 / 56721582 / 13864
Core i9-10900K223 / 2655526 / 63741388 / 16535


View attachment 37632View attachment 37633View attachment 37634

3DMark
Combined ScoresFire StrikeFire Strike ExtremeTime SpyTime Spy Extreme
Core i9-11900K3129419303113398289
Core i9-10900K3022519421114068525
Several things are off here, best wait for proper reviews.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tlh97 and coercitiv

Hulk

Platinum Member
Oct 9, 1999
2,774
172
106
I don't participate here much anymore for reasons, but I figured I'd drop a few tidbits of info:

NOTE: before I start, for those of you that are new here, I don't own stock in Intel. I don't have a single Intel CPU or motherboard in my house, etc. In other words, I'm not a fanboy.
  1. Many people think 10nm has yield issues. They have capacity issues. Also, a corporation like Intel does NOT divert from their internal roadmaps. Shoot, you'll find that AMD doesn't either. These products have a LONG lifecycle. It takes years to bring them from the concept stage to production stage. The bottom line is that even if Intel had 10nm ready for the desktop, Rocket Lake is still going out the door.
  2. Intel is positioning itself to be extremely competitive with AMD. AMD is paying almost no attention to client based ML (machine learning) (as far as we know, and if they are, they haven't leaked a thing). Intel is rolling out Xe alongside Rocket Lake, Tiger Lake, and future generations. This is an early attempt at bringing intelligent ML to mainstream platforms. Apple has also done this with the M1 (and other chips) with their "neural engine". It baffles me why AMD is letting themselves be blindsided by this. Xe graphics were never about gaming, they were always about getting stuff done. Machine learning. Yes, HPG is launching later this year, but once again: Intel users will have Xe graphics onboard to handle things like AI upscaling, etc. What will AMD have? It remains to be seen if they will stumble or if they can adapt. The lack of leaks in this regard are pretty scary. They don't even have a decent video encoder or decoder right now...
  3. Rocket lake was originally planned for March. Off the top of my head I believe it was March 17th (but I'd have to dig for the exact date and quite frankly I don't care). It was never slated for January. That leak was fake. There is an IPC increase, and yes, it will be Zen 3 chips *some of the time*. In non gaming tasks (or in gaming tasks that properly utilize cores) Zen 3 will still come out on top. The leaks involving the 5900X weren't necessarily fake or biased, but there are caveats that we'll all find out later on.
One thing I did NOT know, but rather, I learned: The decrease in core count wasn't due to heat or power, it was due to size. The drop in core count was to keep margins consistent. Nothing more. I was under the assumption that it was all about both heat and power. (EDIT: point of clarification: Intel would have pushed chips with higher power consumption or worse thermal performance out the door regardless. It was all about the chip size.)

Anyway, happy commenting. I'm going back into my hole for another 6 months or so (At least. Those of you that know me know where to find me). Happy new year to all!
Thanks for posting this. I have a few follow up questions if you don't mind.

To a non-expert like myself capacity issues and yield issues seem closely related. Are you implying yields are good they just don't have the fabs to get out enough 10nm?

Perhaps AMD isn't focused on ML (future) because they need to survive now? First deal with getting something out the door they can sell now and then deal with ML once they have some breathing room?

I don't think January vs March is a big deal. I think most people think that RL should have probably been out a year ago and at 10nm for Intel to have retained it's normal dominance.
 

inf64

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2011
3,127
2,078
136
Looking at those scores @ 5.2Ghz that OCed Rocketlake part cannot match 5800X @ stock :( in those benchmarks (both ST or MT). It is clear that Zen3 has noticeable IPC advantage that +500Mhz clock cannot compensate. Gaming numbers that intel shared are also very close between 5900X and Rocketlake, so there won't be any noticeable difference.No mention of power draw- 5800X could be drawing HALF of Rocketlake's power while performing better in majority of tasks. The only saving grace is availability as AMD migh struggle supplying Zen3 parts to the market.
 

dmens

Platinum Member
Mar 18, 2005
2,052
456
136
Many people think 10nm has yield issues. They have capacity issues.
LOL, nice spin. One leads to the other. You should be able to figure out which way.

Also, a corporation like Intel does NOT divert from their internal roadmaps. Shoot, you'll find that AMD doesn't either. These products have a LONG lifecycle. It takes years to bring them from the concept stage to production stage. The bottom line is that even if Intel had 10nm ready for the desktop, Rocket Lake is still going out the door.
Anyone seen a Cannonlake lately? 10nm desktop parts were planned and abandoned before the Rocketlake backport was even conceptualized as a reactionary measure. Saying that Intel would have bothered with a 14nm backport if they had 10nm parts ready in 2017 is absurd.
 

Hulk

Platinum Member
Oct 9, 1999
2,774
172
106
Looking at those scores @ 5.2Ghz that OCed Rocketlake part cannot match 5800X @ stock :( in those benchmarks (both ST or MT). It is clear that Zen3 has noticeable IPC advantage that +500Mhz clock cannot compensate. Gaming numbers that intel shared are also very close between 5900X and Rocketlake, so there won't be any noticeable difference.No mention of power draw- 5800X could be drawing HALF of Rocketlake's power while performing better in majority of tasks. The only saving grace is availability as AMD migh struggle supplying Zen3 parts to the market.
I'm sooo curious as to the following:
1. Will AMD catch up with Zen 3 demand by the time RL arrives.
2. RL pricing and will it be affected by #1? If Zen 3 is available then Intel is going to have to get competitive on price.

All of those partnerships AMD was showing today at CES. They're saying "We're here!"
 

ondma

Golden Member
Mar 18, 2018
1,853
617
106
I find this very disappointing, 14nm rocket lake can't even beat 10 core skylake, let alone compete with Zen3 o_O

Intel Core i9-11900K qualification sample compared with Core i9-10900K at 5.2 GHz @ https://videocardz.com/newz/intel-core-i9-11900k-qualification-sample-compared-with-core-i9-10900k-at-5-2-ghz

The testing platform features ASUS ROG STRIX RTX 3090, Z490 motherboard, and memory clocked at 3600 MHz (CL16). Both processors have been overclocked to 5.2 GHz and are cooled down by an industrial CPU chiller. The preview has been shared by Bibibili creator 二斤啦啦啦啦.


CPU-Z
In CPU-Z the Core i9-11900K scores 693 points which are around 11% faster than 10900K, however. In the multi-threaded test, the CPU scores 6723 points which means that Comet Lake-S CPU is still 13% faster. This is of course due to the fact that the 10th Gen Core CPU offers more threads (20) than the 11th Gen Core (16).
View attachment 37630

View attachment 37631

Cinebench
The CPU has been tested in all three popular versions of Cinbench. It looks that the 11th Gen Core processor has a clear advantage in the single-threaded benchmark while falling to compete with the current flagship in the multi-threaded benchmark.

Cinebench R15Cinebench R20Cinebench R23
Core i9-11900K250 / 2356610 / 56721582 / 13864
Core i9-10900K223 / 2655526 / 63741388 / 16535


View attachment 37632View attachment 37633View attachment 37634

3DMark
Combined ScoresFire StrikeFire Strike ExtremeTime SpyTime Spy Extreme
Core i9-11900K3129419303113398289
Core i9-10900K3022519421114068525
Wow, 10 cores are faster than 8 in multi threaded benchmarks. Who would ever have thought that.
You do realize, I hope, that RL would have to have 25% higher IPC to equal CL in multi threaded benchmarks.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY