Rocket Lake might be faster in games. Might not have to cut prices either if AMD is too busy selling Milan.
-
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 325 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Rocket Lake might be faster in games. Might not have to cut prices either if AMD is too busy selling Milan.
Yeah it might be faster at a few games at 1080p low detail.
Hulk
Diamond Member
Intel has a lot of clout in the marketplace. They have been reliably supplying huge quantities of cpu's and other computer related parts to manufacturers for decades. For large vendors plus or minus 10% performance doesn't make a difference with computers being as fast as they are these days. Intel has been coasting (struggling with 10nm) for a few years now.
On the other hand people are noticing the architectural and process lead that AMD has gained on them. Right now it's the techies, but if Intel doesn't respond that will diffuse downward to the average user. It might take a year or two but if Intel doesn't catch up it will happen.
It's a race.
AMD must increase supplies of Zen 3 and produce mobile parts in quantities that matter to the big vendors before Intel can close the gap they have created with Zen. This is tough because no one wants to order 10,000 systems that can't be reliably delivered and put their ass on the line.
On the other hand Intel must take it's billions of dollars of cash and stop living in the past. Their current architecture is beaten and their process tech is far behind from an efficiency point of view.
It's a fantastic example of the free market and capitalism at work and the consumers are the ones who benefit.
Last edited:
You are a bit off here:
deprogbwlimit = 38, /* GB/s
AnandTech Forums: Technology, Hardware, Software, and Deals
Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
www.anandtech.com
You are not an expert, you should know that low details lowers CPU load as well. Your troll attempt should be better, max details without AA at a low resolution is the way to go if someone wants to maximize the CPU bottleneck for gaming.
It's relative, maybe there's a bottleneck somewhere. I'm going by it being 90% higher than Rocket Lake's 3200, and slightly higher than Tiger Lake's 5400.
Tigerlake-U LPDDR4x-4266= 34.1 GB/s
We won't see DDR5-6000 on ADL-S in the first batch. DDR5-4800 2DPC/DDR5-5200 1DPC looks legit for ADL-S.
Hah. At those setting, whatever difference is bottlenecked by the monitor in actual gameplay so it really is an utterly worthless benchmark. Nice try at a pedantic argument while deliberately ignoring the fact that RKL is DOA.
Last edited:
It does give them a reason to release it rather than just continuing to sell Skylake.
I gave it like 5 minutes of thought and he is still wrong. Depending on the game, bumping up texture details, geometry work and pixel shading complexity can easily bring the GPU back into the equation even at lower resolutions. He brings up "without AA" as if it constrains the resolution... MSAA just adds extra shading computations after the texture samples are returned, it does not increase the number of pixels being shaded. What he is thinking of is running without super-sample AA, which *nobody* uses anyways.
Also CPU loading drop for decreasing detail is much less severe than the GPU loading drop... so the claim that the *best* way to bottleneck the CPU by drastically *increasing* GPU loading to some magical level where it is just below the GPU bottleneck (as if that GPU bottleneck is a clear line) is bad methodology chasing after some trivial bump in CPU drawcall loading.
Anyways, in regards to your point, RKL is just hot trash designed to fool investors into thinking 14nm/skylake+++++ is still alive and kicking.
Last edited:
They can (and are) continue to sell tons of Skylake to Corporate desktop buyers who don't care beyond wanting the IGP. Server is a much more immediate problem for Intel.
Cool you agree then, desktop RKL is irrelevant and embarrassing. On the server front, Icelake server is about to be put down by Milan.
Of course, those same settings are used to show how much "better" Zen 3 is than Skylake.
You must have selective perception. I didn't see either "irrelevant" or "embarrassing" in his post.
LOL, nice quote marks. Zen 3 is definitively better than Skylake++++ at every metric I care about. From an engineering perspective, it is so far ahead as to put Intel in the technical backwater for at least a year.
Try reading between the lines. Doesn't take much since said irrelevance and embarrassment is so self-evident at this point.
The game perf is what makes Rocket Lake relevant. Otherwise they wouldn't bother and just sell Skylake. AMD doesn't technically have much to compete with at this point since they are too busy selling the APUs to mobile, and the IGP is necessary for OEMs to care outside of gaming desktops. And then there's Milan.
Hmmm, if gamers are willing to stand in line in the freezing cold outside MC to get an Ampere or Big Navi card, what makes you think they will just settle with Intel trash on the CPU?
Also, RKL game perf will be trivially better in most cases, worse in a few cases with a massive increase in power. Bank on it.
Yes exactly this applies also to Skylake-->Zen3 when it comes to gaming performance, but I guess his is too ignorant and won't understand this.
Heh, apparently because some reviewers posted benchmarks at potato resolutions, that means anyone who states Zen 3 is superior to Skylake++++++ must believe in the relevance of those potato resolution benchmarks!
Nice strawman guys.
Come on man. Millions of gamers will buy Intel for the same reason they buy Nvidia. AMD has disrupted the market, and kudos to them for finally doing it. AMD can't remake the market in a few years and they don't have the die capacity to speed up the change either. AMD's technical advantage aren't lost on us hardware enthusiats, but they are on many gamers.
There is a difference between people buying for better performance, versus people buying an inferior product out of ignorance.
If the argument is Intel can simply out-supply AMD (which is a legitimate argument), then RKL is utterly unnecessary. From a technical point of view, RKL is a step backwards... a step that I have not seen from any company in my entire 15+ years working in high-speed digital semiconductor design.
That remains to be seen, but OEMs do sell gaming desktops now.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
