His other twitter post is within the same hour as that Intel AMA
Base PL2 is 107w
There's also a PL2 135w performance
So far it looks like the 11800H may have been a significant part of that. So there are definitely some 8-core parts.
Boost clocks are significantly higher, base clocks are lower. AVX will drag clocks down like always. wait for the reviews…
It's true.Yikes if true. . .
It's true.
The slides here are part of the press briefing for Chinese media outlets. Tbh I don't think they were supposed to be released out on the internet, but apparently someone didn't care.
As for the discussion about efficiency from earlier:
View attachment 44228
'nuff said.
EDIT: Ooooh, the OG source is a PM at Lenovo. That makes a tonne of sense now.
It very much gives a good general idea of what to expect for non-AVX-512 productivity tasks. Cezanne to have a very sizable lead in efficiency.That's just one bench. Not really enough to make a case.
It does show a weakness of Intel's chips. But, you are correct. That is a 7.5 year old benchmark that generally does poorly on all Intel chips. More data is needed for a full conclusion.That's just one bench. Not really enough to make a case.
They might not perform as well there as in some other benchmarks but their power draw has been totally average in cinebench flr a AVX2 load. Not looking great whichwver way you slice it.It does show a weakness of Intel's chips. But, you are correct. That is a 7.5 year old benchmark that generally does poorly on all Intel chips. More data is needed for a full conclusion.
They seem to have a considerable amount of dark silicon, where the GPU used to be. I wonder why couldn't they just add a couple of EUs instead:
Someone can check me on this but here's what I came up with.
CPUTDP Cores/Threads Base Max/All Boost Intel 11980HK 45 W 8/16 2.6 GHz 5.0/4.5 GHz Intel 11980HK 65 W 8/16 3.3 GHz 5.0/? GHz AMD 5980HS 35 W 8/16 3 GHz 4.8/? GHz AMD 5980HX 45+ W 8/16 3.3 GHz 4.8/? GHz Intel 11900H 35 W 8/16 2.1 GHz 4.9/? GHz Intel 11900H 45 W 8/16 2.5 GHz 4.9/4.4 GHz AMD 5900HS 35 W 8/16 3 GHz 4.6/? GHz AMD 5900HX 45 W 8/16 3.3 GHz 4.6/? GHz Intel 11400H 35 W 6/12 2.2 GHz 4.5/? GHz Intel 11400H 45 W 6/12 2.7 GHz 4.5/4.1 GHz AMD 5600HS 35 W 6/12 3 GHz 4.2/? GHz AMD 5600H 45 W 6/12 3.3 GHz 4.2/? GHz
Not really comparable since you are talking about AVX-512 versus AVX2 presumably. Also pretty sure AMD doesn't technically have any kind of multiplier limits.
If it's true Intel has already shipped a million of these parts then it seems like they should have skipped Rocket Lake and simply gone Tiger Lake to the desktop at 10SF along with the high performance mobile.
The saving grace for Intel is that 5nm is more like a 0.6 node jump so they won't be greatly behind. But they will be.
Times were surely more comfortable for Intel when they had the better architecture and the better process.
Based on the steepness of the curve between performance and frequency, there's a possibility 10nm SF is somewhat behind TSMC 7nm used in Zen 3.
They said Zen 3 uses an enhanced version of 7nm. So 10nm SF = 7nm original. It might take 10nm ESF to be equal/exceed 7nm in Zen 3. I think the ESF will end up slightly better than the latter 7nm, but for AMD 5nm will be right around the corner.
The saving grace for Intel is that 5nm is more like a 0.6 node jump so they won't be greatly behind. But they will be.
For what it's worth, AMD will not be using the base N5 node from TSMC. They will be using some enhanced version of it. If it's N5P, then it will bring an additional 5% perf at iso-power or -10% power at iso-perf.Based on the steepness of the curve between performance and frequency, there's a possibility 10nm SF is somewhat behind TSMC 7nm used in Zen 3.
They said Zen 3 uses an enhanced version of 7nm. So 10nm SF = 7nm original. It might take 10nm ESF to be equal/exceed 7nm in Zen 3. I think the ESF will end up slightly better than the latter 7nm, but for AMD 5nm will be right around the corner.
The saving grace for Intel is that 5nm is more like a 0.6 node jump so they won't be greatly behind. But they will be.
For what it's worth, AMD will not be using the base N5 node from TSMC. They will be using some enhanced version of it. If it's N5P, then it will bring an additional 5% perf at iso-power or -10% power at iso-perf.
For what it's worth, AMD will not be using the base N5 node from TSMC. They will be using some enhanced version of it. If it's N5P, then it will bring an additional 5% perf at iso-power or -10% power at iso-perf.
Because it won't be this year. It's Zen 3+ which will face Alderlake. Zen 4 is year after that. If they get their 7nm process ready it'll be close for once at least on the process side.
Yikes if true. . .
IMO a million is not that much, and that they were able to even do Tiger Lake H45 was probably unexpected.
Sucks that you can’t use the unlocked i9-11980HK in a desktop board. Just sad, really. Who needs it in a laptop that sounds like a jet plane? Intel is mad, really. No common sense at all.
Well at least this is still better than the earlier results. If nothing else we're not talking about needing >100W but now >80W.Find another one:
View attachment 44251
View attachment 44250
View attachment 44252
It seems TGL-H use a high-perf process instead of low-power process in mobile segment which is weird&insane, when 11800H's TDP is around 45w the perf/watt is underwhelming and vastly outperformed by 5800H, only when >80w it might be ahead but the tester's rig is too hot to hold the heat due to heatsink limitation......