Come on, Rocket Lake does not perform "horribly". If tuned properly, it comes very close to Zen 3 in gaming and productivity. If RL performs "horribly", they Zen 3 is only some percent above "horrible". I will grant that performance per watt is very poor, and Zen 3 is clearly a better processor, but RL is a very powerful chip.
I don't know why people ignore the multi-threaded benchmarks as if it's nonexistent. Even the 5900X is often 30% faster in such scenarios. That meets every definition of horrible.
If those tests don't matter to you then, you won't have in mind the 5900X or 11900K, you will get something like the 5600X.
And Zen 3 isn't any slower in those low threaded scenarios either. In some cases like gaming it's just as fast/faster than Rocketlake.
Not just AMD. How is it better than Cometlake?
Tigerlake-H at least keeps up with Zen 3 mobile, and laptops have wildly varying setups and configurations and optimizations that can skew to it's favor.
@uzzi38 I don't think it's just caches. The mobile chips perform less per clock than desktops. Plus most Zen mobile configurations are very conservative in it's boost.
I honestly don't understand how much more performance Intel is supposed to squeeze from an aged process on a back-ported design.
Are we really excusing Intel for screwing up transition to future processes? Because it doesn't matter they've achieved being able to backport - it shouldn't have happened.
So it looks like Rocket Lake's inter-core latency issues aren't just the result of the move to a bigger node. Tiger Lake H is doing better than the 14nm port, but it's still behind Comet Lake.
View attachment 44492
Did we completely rule out the possibility that it's not doing some weird power adjustments that affect latencies? How does it compare to Tigerlake-U? What about Cometlake-H?
The slower L3 caches will likely affect C2C latencies somewhat.