• 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 Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread

Page 490 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Racan

Senior member
Sep 22, 2012
269
178
116
Tiger Lake i9 11900KB tested inside the Beast Canyon NUC. Hardware Canucks also compared it to a desktop i9-11900K cooled by a Noctua NH-U12S:

 

mikk

Diamond Member
May 15, 2012
3,212
1,031
136
In short, it is classic paper lounch.

95 percent of users do not need the most expensive motherboards, and especially not the most expensive CPU models.


It's certainly not a paper launch if we can buy K models only this year, a lot of people will be happy with that. Also this was already known from some leaked roadmaps or Moore's Law Is Dead that we will only get K-models this years. The rest will follow in Q1 2022, this is nothing new.
 

lobz

Golden Member
Feb 10, 2017
1,767
2,284
136
It's certainly not a paper launch if we can buy K models only this year, a lot of people will be happy with that. Also this was already known from some leaked roadmaps or Moore's Law Is Dead that we will only get K-models this years. The rest will follow in Q1 2022, this is nothing new.
Exactly. By that logic, Zen 3 would also have been a paper launch. Launching with the K series is completely fine.

The real question will be the availability. X299 was a paper launch even after almost a year. Hopefully ADL will be _actually_ available for Christmas. I can't wait for all the Christmas tales of ADL taking down Zen3 :D :D Not having anything 'new' for the holiday season is a big-big, or rather a HUGE miss from AMD, regardless of what they can (or can't) bring in the near future. Any sort of announcement or communication trick won't cut it.

Edit: I wanna ask this again - where the heck is @Zucker2k or @eek2121 again, when I'm criticizing AMD? :tearsofjoy:
 

repoman27

Member
Dec 17, 2018
97
139
76
I added the new Xeon W-3300 parts to a list of Ice Lake server SKUs I had in order to get a better idea of where they slot into the stack. Figured I'd post it here in case anyone else finds it useful.

SegmentSKUCoresBase (GHz)Single Core Turbo (GHz)All Core Turbo (GHz)Cache (MB)TDP (Watts)Support for Intel Optane Persistent Memory 200 SeriesIntel SGX Enclave Capacity (Per Processor)Recommended Customer Pricing (USD)Stepping
Xeon Platinum8380402.33.43.060270Yes512 GB$8,099D2
Xeon Platinum8368Q382.63.73.357270Yes512 GB$6,743D2
Xeon Platinum8368382.43.43.257270Yes512 GB$6,302D2
Xeon Platinum8362322.83.63.548265Yes64 GB$5,448D2
Xeon Platinum8360Y362.43.53.154250Yes64 GB$4,702D2
Xeon W3375382.54.03.357270No$4,499D2
Xeon Platinum8352S322.23.42.848205Yes512 GB$4,046D2
Xeon Platinum8358322.63.43.348250Yes64 GB$3,950D2
Xeon Platinum8358P322.63.43.248240Yes8 GB$3,950D2
Xeon Platinum8352M322.33.52.848185Yes64 GB$3,864D2
Xeon W3365322.74.03.548270No$3,499D2
Xeon Platinum8352Y322.23.42.848205Yes64 GB$3,450D2
Xeon Platinum8352V362.13.52.554195Yes8 GB$3,450D2
Xeon Gold6348282.63.53.442235Yes64 GB$3,072D2
Xeon Platinum8351N362.43.53.154225Yes64 GB$3,027D2
Xeon Gold6338N322.23.52.748185Yes64 GB$2,795D2
Xeon Gold6338T242.13.42.736165Yes64 GB$2,742M1
Xeon Gold6338322.03.22.648205Yes64 GB$2,612D2
Xeon Gold6314U322.33.42.948205Yes64 GB$2,600D2
Xeon Gold6342242.83.53.336230Yes64 GB$2,529M1
Xeon W3345243.04.03.736250No$2,499D2
Xeon Gold6354183.03.63.639205Yes64 GB$2,445D2
Xeon Gold6346163.13.63.636205Yes64 GB$2,300D2
Xeon Gold633483.63.73.618165Yes64 GB$2,214M1
Xeon Gold6330N282.23.42.642165Yes64 GB$2,029D2
Xeon Gold6336Y242.43.63.036185Yes64 GB$1,977M1
Xeon Gold6330282.03.12.642205Yes64 GB$1,894D2
Xeon Gold5320T202.33.52.930150Yes64 GB$1,727M1
Xeon Gold5318S242.13.42.636165Yes512 GB$1,667M1
Xeon Gold5320262.23.42.839185Yes64 GB$1,555M1
Xeon Gold6312U242.43.63.136185Yes64 GB$1,450M1
Xeon Gold5318N242.13.42.736150Yes64 GB$1,375M1
Xeon Gold6326162.93.53.324185Yes64 GB$1,300M1
Xeon W3335163.44.03.724250No$1,299M1
Xeon Gold5318Y242.13.42.636165Yes64 GB$1,273M1
Xeon Silver4316202.33.42.830150No8 GB$1,002M1
Xeon Gold5317123.03.63.418150Yes64 GB$950M1
Xeon W3323123.53.93.721220No$949M1
Xeon Gold5315Y83.23.63.512140Yes64GB$895M1
Xeon Silver4314162.43.42.924135Yes8 GB$694M1
Xeon Silver4310T102.33.42.915105No8 GB$555M1
Xeon Silver4310122.13.32.718120No8 GB$501M1
Xeon Silver4309Y82.83.63.412105No8 GB$501M1

D2 stepping is 40C XCC, M1 stepping is 28C HCC.
 
Last edited:

JoeRambo

Golden Member
Jun 13, 2013
1,203
1,102
136
That's not even bad tho? Less SKUs means more chips in SKUs that matter to enthusiasts. What's the point to release whole lineup when mfg is limited and top of the line chips are unavailable?
I would not have minded if AMD had 5950x available earlier at the cost of lower tier CPUs that are of no interest to me personally?
 

Asterox

Senior member
May 15, 2012
598
922
136
That's not even bad tho? Less SKUs means more chips in SKUs that matter to enthusiasts. What's the point to release whole lineup when mfg is limited and top of the line chips are unavailable?
I would not have minded if AMD had 5950x available earlier at the cost of lower tier CPUs that are of no interest to me personally?
Enthusiasts, blah they are in very negligible quantities or numbers.

You cant live without Intel K CPU-s, and especially for gaming with inaccessible graphics cards+crazy prices.:innocent:

 
  • Like
Reactions: Tlh97 and Mopetar

jpiniero

Diamond Member
Oct 1, 2010
9,929
2,275
136
I am expecting the rest of the S lineup (and P and the Rocket Lake Refresh assuming it's true) to launch at CES.
 

TheF34RChannel

Senior member
May 18, 2017
786
304
136
I am on the fence here about the following: personally I have no usage for the hybrid CPU's (Alder/Meteor/whatever) but there'll come a time when my current setup won't suffice.

Hence I'm considering getting an i9-10900K 10C part and a Z590 Apex of Strix board with a fast RAM kit (not interested in DDR5 for a long while) and use that until there'll be proper enthusiast CPU's for desktop again (if ever...).

Either that of wait and see how these hybrid ones will fare in a few generations time.
 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
17,662
6,654
136
I am on the fence here about the following: personally I have no usage for the hybrid CPU's (Alder/Meteor/whatever) but there'll come a time when my current setup won't suffice.

Hence I'm considering getting an i9-10900K 10C part and a Z590 Apex of Strix board with a fast RAM kit (not interested in DDR5 for a long while) and use that until there'll be proper enthusiast CPU's for desktop again (if ever...).

Either that of wait and see how these hybrid ones will fare in a few generations time.
I mean there's nothing really wrong with a 10900K if it does what you want. But there are plenty of "proper enthusiast CPUs for the desktop" on the market right now. And if you like a 10900k you'll probably be okay with an Alder Lake when you just disable the Gracemont cluster. Which, I imagine, will be possible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: spursindonesia

TheF34RChannel

Senior member
May 18, 2017
786
304
136
I mean there's nothing really wrong with a 10900K if it does what you want. But there are plenty of "proper enthusiast CPUs for the desktop" on the market right now. And if you like a 10900k you'll probably be okay with an Alder Lake when you just disable the Gracemont cluster. Which, I imagine, will be possible.
Oh that's absolutely possible, however I'm rather liking the 10C at high frequency idea and Alder Lake is 8C tops. I should have added that in the original post, my apologies.
 

Gideon

Golden Member
Nov 27, 2007
1,429
2,875
136
It amazes me just how little some people value the 40%+ IPC advantage Golden Cove will have over Skylake.
10900k will be slower in ST and MT than 12900k with Gracemont disabled.
Yeah, going for 10900K especially when upgrading from 8700K is an odd move instead of getting Alder Lake. It will absolutely be faster even when disabling all the small cores (which I'm pretty sure can be done in BIOS)
 

blckgrffn

Diamond Member
May 1, 2003
8,103
1,358
126
www.teamjuchems.com
Yeah, I get the idea of scratching the itch but I'd just do what some others here did after seeing 10th gen and wretched 11th gen - get a 9900K to drop into your current board and flip the 8700k. Should be doable for $100 or less and you get a new shiny thing for a bit while you wait.

Now, I personally think the 8700K is a fine CPU. Roughly equivalent to a $200+ 10600K even today and you could have had it for what feels like forever at this point.

That's solidly in my "you can probably wait to see Ryzen 3D and ADL results" zone which I'd say is ~3600 Ryzen or better, and at 6C/12T and lots and lots mhz it fits the bill.

Plus, some people here are likely to drop sick 5950x's and 5900x's! That's the only reason I have 5800x now :D Oh yeah, and my son has a 8700K due to this as well :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tlh97

TheF34RChannel

Senior member
May 18, 2017
786
304
136
It amazes me just how little some people value the 40%+ IPC advantage Golden Cove will have over Skylake.
With so little known right now, where does the mentioned 40% actually come from architecturally? It feels like a hopeful estimation pulled from the air that is being thrown around on the internet. It's an honest question, not making fun of anyone.

10900k will be slower in ST and MT than 12900k with Gracemont disabled.
Possibly to likely. It's the mere 8C that doesn't appeal to me. It feels like going from 6 to 8 isn't fruitful. However I realise I should be looking beyond that mere number and at the the whole thing.

Yeah, going for 10900K especially when upgrading from 8700K is an odd move instead of getting Alder Lake. It will absolutely be faster even when disabling all the small cores (which I'm pretty sure can be done in BIOS)
Thank you for the reply, that goes towards everyone by the way.

Yeah, I get the idea of scratching the itch but I'd just do what some others here did after seeing 10th gen and wretched 11th gen - get a 9900K to drop into your current board and flip the 8700k. Should be doable for $100 or less and you get a new shiny thing for a bit while you wait.

Now, I personally think the 8700K is a fine CPU. Roughly equivalent to a $200+ 10600K even today and you could have had it for what feels like forever at this point.

That's solidly in my "you can probably wait to see Ryzen 3D and ADL results" zone which I'd say is ~3600 Ryzen or better, and at 6C/12T and lots and lots mhz it fits the bill.

Plus, some people here are likely to drop sick 5950x's and 5900x's! That's the only reason I have 5800x now :D Oh yeah, and my son has a 8700K due to this as well :)
Ha ha fair enough and the 8700K is a fine chip indeed! My rush came from a 10900K Maybe becoming unavailable when Alder Lake launches. Luckily I did have the common sense to ask the more clever than me people on this forum. Your replies help greatly.
 

IntelUser2000

Elite Member
Oct 14, 2003
7,586
2,437
136
With so little known right now, where does the mentioned 40% actually come from architecturally? It feels like a hopeful estimation pulled from the air that is being thrown around on the internet. It's an honest question, not making fun of anyone.
It might sound high, but competition-wise, 40% is actually low. Rocketlake is 18% over Skylake, so to achieve 40% you need about the same gain. With variants of Zen 3 coming with amazing technologies like the V-cache Intel should be scared if that's all they achieve.

Another thing is that there's the Intel slide which say it'll be up to 20% faster in single thread. Before all the weird super high Cinebench leak, we thought it was a reasonable expectation. I personally expected/wanted 25% gains per clock with slightly lower clocks. If you believe the Cinebench leak, Golden Cove might achieve 30-35% gain over Sunny Cove!

No one outside of associates close to Intel and the Intel architects know what the gains are. Consider that Skylake is also a 5-year old architecture.

MT performance also has to be considered with Gracemont. Using them for just background tasks will be of minimal benefit. No, with Skylake+ performance and full support for AVX2 they'll be a powerful adder to MT performance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tlh97 and Gideon

SAAA

Senior member
May 14, 2014
517
113
116
It might sound high, but competition-wise, 40% is actually low. Rocketlake is 18% over Skylake, so to achieve 40% you need about the same gain. With variants of Zen 3 coming with amazing technologies like the V-cache Intel should be scared if that's all they achieve.

Another thing is that there's the Intel slide which say it'll be up to 20% faster in single thread. Before all the weird super high Cinebench leak, we thought it was a reasonable expectation. I personally expected/wanted 25% gains per clock with slightly lower clocks. If you believe the Cinebench leak, Golden Cove might achieve 30-35% gain over Sunny Cove!

No one outside of associates close to Intel and the Intel architects know what the gains are. Consider that Skylake is also a 5-year old architecture.

MT performance also has to be considered with Gracemont. Using them for just background tasks will be of minimal benefit. No, with Skylake+ performance and full support for AVX2 they'll be a powerful adder to MT performance.
On one side 40% would be more than what they achieved in 5 years until Skylake, on the other hand if the Gracemont leaks are true, with Atom pushing higher than Skylake IPC on common code, then a 4 times bigger core managing maybe 40% more would look very bad.

Of course even just 30% faster single-thread and 30% higher top clocks results in far better absolute performance, but at the cost of 4 times the area and power?

From a mathematical stand point that factor should give a 100% faster core (square root of area), assume it's not really doable with a finite amount time/money/brainpower and about 25-35% is left on the table (some will be recovered with hyper-threading of course). Now it's "only" a 50-60% better core, the leak with 1.325*1.18 =1.56% faster than Skylake would fall nicely in that range.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tlh97

Rigg

Senior member
May 6, 2020
215
350
96
Alder Lake looks promising but i think delaying the release of PCIE 4.0/DDR4 motherboard chipsets untill 2022 is a blunder. I doubt early DDR5 is going to be either good, plentiful, or apropriatly priced vs good DDR4 when these initial SKU's release. In addition, PCIE5 is likely to significanlty increase the cost of the motherboards while most likely being pointless during the time period the platform will be relevent. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to see the crap entry level stuff on z690 costing $250ish with more capable boards being well over $300. If TDP is also being pushed (requiring more expensive cooling) the platform cost is going to be way too high. Maybe this matters less when people are willing to pay out the butt for GPU's but I don't like the trend. Hopefully they at least keep the prices competitive on the CPU's even if they have a bit of an edge.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tlh97 and Joe NYC

dr1337

Member
May 25, 2020
153
246
76
Alder Lake looks promising but i think delaying the release of PCIE 4.0/DDR4 motherboard chipsets untill 2022 is a blunder.
If this is true the only good reason I could imagine is that the ddr4 platform won't be specced as good as the ddr5 ones. It really does seem like doing ddr5 first is a huge missed opportunity to make a lot of money. Releasing the ddr4 boards first while also having the same socket upgrade path to ddr5 with just a mobo swap a few months down the line to me sounds like the default strategy intel would have used; a staggered release would generate many extra/repeat sales.
 

jpiniero

Diamond Member
Oct 1, 2010
9,929
2,275
136
Alder Lake looks promising but i think delaying the release of PCIE 4.0/DDR4 motherboard chipsets untill 2022 is a blunder. I doubt early DDR5 is going to be either good, plentiful, or apropriatly priced vs good DDR4 when these initial SKU's release. In addition, PCIE5 is likely to significanlty increase the cost of the motherboards while most likely being pointless during the time period the platform will be relevent. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to see the crap entry level stuff on z690 costing $250ish with more capable boards being well over $300. If TDP is also being pushed (requiring more expensive cooling) the platform cost is going to be way too high. Maybe this matters less when people are willing to pay out the butt for GPU's but I don't like the trend. Hopefully they at least keep the prices competitive on the CPU's even if they have a bit of an edge.
I haven't seen anything that suggests that z690 mandates DDR5 and PCIe5. Most boards probably will though.
 

Hulk

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
3,071
510
126
Okay let's play with the numbers. Let's assume Golden Cove is +40% over Skylake and Gracemont is as good as Skylake IPC-wise but with a 20% deficit due to being clocked lower.

8x1.4 + 8x0.8=17.6 Skylake cores

If this all turns out to be true and IF the Windows Scheduler does its job optimally and IF the memory subsystem is robust enough to move the data as required then this is looking to be a very capable CPU for both ST and MT apps.

Yeah I know, lots of "ifs."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tlh97

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS