• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread

Page 277 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Intel's (and NVidia's) problem since 2017 is that they are fighting a much tougher and leaner enemy - it resembles a guerilla warfare to some extent. AMD has no more fabs to fund RND for, they have extremely talented overlapping engineering teams and they are racking in lot more $$$ than in the last 10 years - they can now redirect that money into uarchitecture design and talent hunting. They are also deep into consoles and probably locked next few gens with Sony and Microsoft (meaning it all gets optimized for Zen and RDNA derivatives). Intel and Nvidia (to lesser extent) have to execute flawlessly in the next 3-4 years to combat this new revival from AMD. Good luck to them!
 
inf64 said:
Intel's (and NVidia's) problem since 2017 is that they are fighting a much tougher and leaner enemy - it resembles a guerilla warfare to some extent. AMD has no more fabs to fund RND for, they have extremely talented overlapping engineering teams and they are racking in lot more $$$ than in the last 10 years - they can now redirect that money into uarchitecture design and talent hunting. They are also deep into consoles and probably locked next few gens with Sony and Microsoft (meaning it all gets optimized for Zen and RDNA derivatives). Intel and Nvidia (to lesser extent) have to execute flawlessly in the next 3-4 years to combat this new revival from AMD. Good luck to them!
Click to expand...

I'm not a gamer. Can you explain this to me? I know about AMD's Jaguar for the current active generation. Wouldn't that imply all console games that were also available on PC would have gotten that treatment? Or are you saying that because it is a direct copy of RDNA2 that it will be easier to optimize for AMD? I find it hard to believe.
 
I see everyone dubious on Rocket's boost speed, 5.5 GHz does sound extreme, but suppose the improvements they made into 10nm (Tiger lake's superFinfet) slipped up into 14nm whatever iteration it will be using?
They had to redesign most of the thing anyway by back-porting, I hear it's a whole "Cove" arch in itself, then it would make sense to have another 14nm change that allows even greater frequency.
 
DrMrLordX said:
Good job calling out AMD in an Intel thread. Never mind that even the 1800x wasn't "factory overclocked" any more than Kaveri, Godavari, or desktop Carrizo (x4 945). Those chips had very little upper headroom due to process and/or cache latency (that was an issue for Carrizo, apparently). If you want to point to a "factory overclocked" CPU from AMD, you really have to go back to the FX9590 and 9370.

In any case, I don't think we'll see clocks from Rocket Lake-S that are as high as Comet Lake-S.
Click to expand...
Not that anyone ever would hijack an Intel thread for pro AMD posts, but I never hear you call that out.
 
uzzi38 said:
I've been on Discord with Bepo for a long time. His predictions are far older than April this year.
Click to expand...

1. You have to prove it
2. The predictions from him are unrelated
3. We are not talking about predictions, everyone could predict something, we are talking about a real source
4. If he or others predicted it right well done, but that's it.
 
mikk said:
1. You have to prove it
2. The predictions from him are unrelated
3. We are not talking about predictions, everyone could predict something, we are talking about a real source
4. If he or others predicted it right well done, but that's it.
Click to expand...
I have to prove what? Look at MebiuW's profile on Weibo, you'll probably find an excel spreadsheet containing V/f curve points at some point. Look for one with a replies that say something akin to the following:

1600017080088.png

Then feel free to ask Bepo about that table yourself. Just ask him over Twitter. He'll tell you exactly what that table is. Do a little bit of research and you won't have to believe me but rather those directly involved.
 
DrMrLordX said:
Maybe. At that point it devolves into an argument of what chips are "factory overclocked". Regarding Rocket Lake-S, I expect power usage in line with the 10900K but with lower clocks (well, certainly not anything above 5 GHz). Does that make it a factory-overclocked chip?
Click to expand...

To me, a chip is factory overclocked if a TDP is set and the chip willingly blows through that TDP without changes by the user. Intel chips currently do that. AMD chips do not.

You guys are nuts if you think RKL will hit 5.5 Ghz. More likely is that frequencies will be the same as Comet Lake, but with a focus on IPC.
 
uzzi38 said:
I have to prove what? Look at MebiuW's profile on Weibo, you'll probably find an excel spreadsheet containing V/f curve points at some point. Look for one with a replies that say something akin to the following:

View attachment 29797

Then feel free to ask Bepo about that table yourself. Just ask him over Twitter. He'll tell you exactly what that table is. Do a little bit of research and you won't have to believe me but rather those directly involved.
Click to expand...

I call BS on that statement. Tiger Lake boosts up to 4.8 Ghz. If what he claims is true the laptops it is going in would melt.
 
eek2121 said:
I call BS on that statement. Tiger Lake boosts up to 4.8 Ghz. If what he claims is true the laptops it is going in would melt.
Click to expand...
This is MT CB15 iirc. Not single core.

And this is perfectly in line with the analysis done by the Lenovo product manager iirc.

EDIT (note that the 1165G7 caps out at 4.1GHz, whereas the 1185G7 will boost to 4.3GHz, which is where the real comparison lies. Regardless, it's within expectations.):

1600024315730.png
 
uzzi38 said:
I have to prove what? Look at MebiuW's profile on Weibo, you'll probably find an excel spreadsheet containing V/f curve points at some point. Look for one with a replies that say something akin to the following:

View attachment 29797
Click to expand...

According to that statement, it makes sense why earlier leaks had Tigerlake at 4.3GHz. They might have been planning at 4.3GHz, but either felt they needed more, or was necessitated because it was going to be delayed.

I think 4.3GHz with launch in June/July would have been much better. The extra 10% doesn't make a whole lot of difference and you still would have got 10nm SF V/F advantages.
 
eek2121 said:
To me, a chip is factory overclocked if a TDP is set and the chip willingly blows through that TDP without changes by the user. Intel chips currently do that. AMD chips do not.

You guys are nuts if you think RKL will hit 5.5 Ghz. More likely is that frequencies will be the same as Comet Lake, but with a focus on IPC.
Click to expand...
I'd agree with this. Intel would have had to lengthen the execution pipelines to get higher clocks, and then latency and stalls would have a bad impact on performance per clock. Then, why up the IPC to begin with?
 
Ajay said:
I'd agree with this. Intel would have had to lengthen the execution pipelines to get higher clocks, and then latency and stalls would have a bad impact on performance per clock. Then, why up the IPC to begin with?
Click to expand...

They are backporting, so it cannot be a dramatically different core.

If there are any imaginary frequency increases, it'll be because 14nm is 5 years old. And it'll use so much power to do it.

Increasing pipeline stages also come with core complexity increases which increase area and power used.
 
A/// said:
I'm not a gamer. Can you explain this to me? I know about AMD's Jaguar for the current active generation. Wouldn't that imply all console games that were also available on PC would have gotten that treatment? Or are you saying that because it is a direct copy of RDNA2 that it will be easier to optimize for AMD? I find it hard to believe.
Click to expand...

We are going off topic here but next gen consoles, Xbox X and PS5, are Zen(2) and RDNA2 based. All the games developed for those two next gen consoles will be Zen2/RDNA2 tuned. How that will reflect on PC is anyone's guess, but logical thing to assume is that AMD is going to have an advantage.
 
inf64 said:
We are going off topic here but next gen consoles, Xbox X and PS5, are Zen(2) and RDNA2 based. All the games developed for those two next gen consoles will be Zen2/RDNA2 tuned. How that will reflect on PC is anyone's guess, but logical thing to assume is that AMD is going to have an advantage.
Click to expand...

People said the same thing about the current gen consoles, didn't materialize. CPU wise it may not matter because of Intel's process problems.
 
ondma said:
Not that anyone ever would hijack an Intel thread for pro AMD posts, but I never hear you call that out.
Click to expand...

So you agree that you were taking the thread off-topic then? Glad we have an understanding.

eek2121 said:
To me, a chip is factory overclocked if a TDP is set and the chip willingly blows through that TDP without changes by the user. Intel chips currently do that. AMD chips do not.
Click to expand...

TDP is kind of nebulous though, so it's hard to use that to determine whether or not a chip is "factory overclocked". Power specs are all complicated nowadays. For example, AMD CPUs with a TDP of 105W actually use 142-145W pretty consistently. Does it mean they're "factory overclocked" though? Not necessarily. And I'm not absolutely sure you can say the 9900k or 10900k are "factory overclocked" because they will back off their high power consumption after a certain period of time (the tau period). Chips like the FX9590 were "factory overclocked" because they were specifically binned for high leakage, high clocks, and constantly ran at clockspeeds well outside of the rational points of their voltage/clockspeed curve. And the FX9590 was a high-clocked carbon-copy of the FX8350. Same die from the same wafers.

The name of the game nowadays is to try to figure out how to opportunistically push CPUs outside of their optimal clockspeed/voltage range when the cooling solution can handle it. Overclockers kept finding OC headroom on chips that were conservatively-clocked to stay within certain power/efficiency specs (look at the 2600x, for example). I don't think we'll ever see "factory overclock" anything anymore. It's more like, for top-bin chips anyway, neither AMD nor Intel want to sell you any headroom. And they're loathe to do so on lower-end parts.
 
dmens said:
Just going to remind everyone that "overclocking headroom" is in reality a gap of speed testing coverage. It is an engineering failure being marketed as a feature. That is why Intel chips often have a lot of headroom.
Click to expand...

Well, there's headroom and then there's headroom. OC classics like the Celeron 300a, various Core2Duo/C2Q chips, Westmere Xeons, the 2600x, etc. then yes I think those might fall into that category. The 10900k probably has some OC headroom, but it punishes you with insane thermals to the point that you require massive cooling solutions. I doubt the engineers failed when they realized that releasing a 300W+ 10c chip would be a bad idea.
 
IntelUser2000 said:
They are backporting, so it cannot be a dramatically different core.

If there are any imaginary frequency increases, it'll be because 14nm is 5 years old. And it'll use so much power to do it.

Increasing pipeline stages also come with core complexity increases which increase area and power used.
Click to expand...
I don't recall adding pipeline stages to be a major issue complexity wise (especially with modern tools and sims). But you have a point; Intel can just keep upping the current to maintain a halo CPU on RKL. They got a lot less backlash from the tech press than I thought they would (like, 'this uses too much power', but 'if you're a gamer, go with a 10900k'). The irony was pretty thick though.
 
videocardz.com

Intel confirms Tiger Lake-H processors with 8-cores - VideoCardz.com

Intel Tiger Lake H In an article posted on Medium, Intel’s Corporate Vice President of Client Computing Grup – Boyd Phelps, revealed that Intel is indeed working on 8-core processors based on Willow Cove core design. The processors known from various leaks as Tiger Lake-H are 35-45W high-end...
videocardz.com videocardz.com

6-8-core 35-45W Tiger Lake for next year, though the GPU is slower.

EDIT: maybe we will see some SFF PCs with these chips in them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top