Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread

Page 619 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Exist50

Platinum Member
Aug 18, 2016
2,445
3,043
136
The specific mentions of Atom indicates to me that it's an older much more power/die efficient core like Silvermont. It's efficient enough to use in phone modems and it's completely x86 compatible as we know.
Nah, I think it's 2x Crestmont. ISA compatibility is enough of a headache without introducing a CPU that doesn't even support AVX. Just not viable.
 

IntelUser2000

Elite Member
Oct 14, 2003
8,686
3,785
136
Nah, I think it's 2x Crestmont. ISA compatibility is enough of a headache without introducing a CPU that doesn't even support AVX. Just not viable.

You seem to have good sources but I am gonna guess in this case it may be more of a speculation than not.

Goldmont class cores are more than powerful enough for chipset duties and Crestmont is overkill. For example the Silvermont used in integration clocked well below 1GHz. Silvermont and it's derivatives are also proven in that they were able to make x86 devices with ARM-like low power, while they abandoned that in successors.

If you are using a core almost entirely for the purpose of taming power management, AVX won't be needed. The issue with battery life on Intel platforms is that while it can go to super low idle(2W, display on), it takes an amazing effort to make it happen. So what happens in regular Intel platforms is that the true idle power is closer to 4W+. The talk about KEI and efficient x86 core sounds like it's needed to achieve the much better battery life on par with ARM notebooks.
 

Exist50

Platinum Member
Aug 18, 2016
2,445
3,043
136
You seem to have good sources but I am gonna guess in this case it may be more of a speculation than not.

Goldmont class cores are more than powerful enough for chipset duties and Crestmont is overkill. For example the Silvermont used in integration clocked well below 1GHz. Silvermont and it's derivatives are also proven in that they were able to make x86 devices with ARM-like low power, while they abandoned that in successors.

If you are using a core almost entirely for the purpose of taming power management, AVX won't be needed. The issue with battery life on Intel platforms is that while it can go to super low idle(2W, display on), it takes an amazing effort to make it happen. So what happens in regular Intel platforms is that the true idle power is closer to 4W+. The talk about KEI and efficient x86 core sounds like it's needed to achieve the much better battery life on par with ARM notebooks.
I'm not 100% confident that it's exactly 2x Crestmont, since my information pre-dates Crestmont in general, but I'm confident it's no less than 2x Gracemont.

And you seem to be looking at it like a microcontroller, but I think it's meant as a general purpose application processor. Like, you could watch a youtube video without ever waking the compute tile. But that means it has to be software compatible with the other cores. Might be a real pain for Arrow Lake in particular. So to answer A///'s question above, I don't expect AVX-512 to be making a comeback anytime soon.
 

IntelUser2000

Elite Member
Oct 14, 2003
8,686
3,785
136
And you seem to be looking at it like a microcontroller, but I think it's meant as a general purpose application processor. Like, you could watch a youtube video without ever waking the compute tile. But that means it has to be software compatible with the other cores. Might be a real pain for Arrow Lake in particular.

That almost sounds like a 3rd hybrid cluster for light application duties. Sounds like a minefield to me. The reason I thought a simpler CPU would work is because on a typical system you aren't just running a browser with a video. It also isn't because you have too many tabs open. It's that there's a rogue thread or driver that refuses to cooperate.

And it's so common because that's how complex the Windows ecosystem is.
-Obscure Chinese SSD vs a well known SSD from a good manufacturer
-Needing a driver version that's not available on the manufacturer support site but may be available using driver retrieval software(which often is shady).
-The driver/firmware of the hardware is simply buggy. And since it's something like a webcam or a fingerprint device, you can't do anything about it.

So ideally if a dedicated core can do all that without needing a special driver then you can keep the main core in the lowest C state when necessary. And you don't need it powerful enough to run even a browser.

Also specifically regarding Intel I believe their off-die PCH is hampering them. As an IDM they are also concerned with maximizing their fabs so moving the main chips to a full SoC would mean loss of utilization. In their eyes they needed EMIB/Foveros before dealing with this despite them likely realizing they need a form of on-die chipset.
 

nicalandia

Diamond Member
Jan 10, 2019
3,330
5,281
136
According to this Leak Raptor Lake will bring Higher Boost than 12900KS, Perhaps 13900K wil have 5.8 Ghz boost and 13900KS 6 Ghz? I could see those numbers to fight with 5+ Ghz Zen4

1650117190768.png


 
Last edited:

Exist50

Platinum Member
Aug 18, 2016
2,445
3,043
136
Let's hope not. That would be silly.
Well for better or worse, that's my understanding of what it is. I don't think it's a bad idea in theory... but I worry about the ISA implications.

According to this Leak Raptor Lake will bring Higher Boost than 12900KS, Perhaps 13900K wil have 5.8 Ghz boost and 13900KS 6 Ghz? I could see those numbers to fight with 5+ Ghz Zen4
I have significant doubts that they can hit those speeds on Intel 7. Zen 4 will have a much better chance.
 

deasd

Senior member
Dec 31, 2013
512
724
136
RaptorLake-P 14 cores leaked By Userbenchmark


index.png

2.png


Now UserBenchmark is known for its bias against AMD's CPUs so we are not going to compare the performance of the leaked Raptor Lake part against any Ryzen CPUs but instead use Intel's own Alder Lake CPUs for comparison. The benchmark database includes results for Core i9-12900HK which has the same 14 core and 20 thread CPU config and runs at a higher base clock of 2.9 GHz and boost clock of 4.3 GHz.

It's the first time I hear Userbenchmark is bias against AMD though, any bad track records?
 
Last edited:

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
7,797
5,899
136
It's the first time I hear Userbenchmark is bias against AMD though, any bad track records?

Go read some of their CPU summaries. The recent 5800X3D is pretty good. There are even some of their Intel CPU summaries where they spend more time whining about AMD biased reviewers than talking about the Intel CPU in question. Even the r/intel subreddit has banned them from being posted there.
 

deasd

Senior member
Dec 31, 2013
512
724
136
Go read some of their CPU summaries. The recent 5800X3D is pretty good. There are even some of their Intel CPU summaries where they spend more time whining about AMD biased reviewers than talking about the Intel CPU in question. Even the r/intel subreddit has banned them from being posted there.
oh yea I just read their comment about 5800X3D. facepalm

Have you been living under a rock for the past 6 Years? Userbenchmark has been banned as a reputable source by most outlets

I'm outsider but I also never take Userbenchmark as reliable site(much worse than geekbench), but it's fresh to me that a big site like WCCFtech call other site BIAS which makes me laugh and curious if it would cause any drama lol.

(off topic....)
 

Exist50

Platinum Member
Aug 18, 2016
2,445
3,043
136
RaptorLake-P 14 cores leaked By Userbenchmark


View attachment 60162

View attachment 60163




It's the first time I hear Userbenchmark is bias against AMD though, any bad track records?
They change their suite and scoring system constantly to target whatever Intel happens to be doing the best in. Examples include decreasing or even eliminating the weighting of multicore results, and adding a whole category for just memory latency.
 

moinmoin

Diamond Member
Jun 1, 2017
4,933
7,618
136
It's the first time I hear Userbenchmark is bias against AMD though, any bad track records?
They are the laughing stock among benchmark sites.

Some threads for your entertainment (all between 2019-2020, after which we as a forum apparently finally stopped caring about the site):
 

A///

Diamond Member
Feb 24, 2017
4,352
3,154
136
5.8 Ghz to 6 Ghz sounds like something My Life Is Diseased came up with.

I have significant doubts that they can hit those speeds on Intel 7. Zen 4 will have a much better chance.
Intel may matter in frequency sensitive software where more than a core or two aren't used during operations. I can only think of a few software where that would put Intel at an advantage.
 

Exist50

Platinum Member
Aug 18, 2016
2,445
3,043
136
5.8 Ghz to 6 Ghz sounds like something My Life Is Diseased came up with.


Intel may matter in frequency sensitive software where more than a core or two aren't used during operations. I can only think of a few software where that would put Intel at an advantage.
I meant that I expect Zen 4 to have a better chance of hitting ~6GHz.
 

A///

Diamond Member
Feb 24, 2017
4,352
3,154
136
I meant that I expect Zen 4 to have a better chance of hitting ~6GHz.
Oh yeah, we may see that in AM5's lifetime for sure. I'm still hung up on what Dr. Su said earlier this year during the AMD CES presentation where she said the game they were running had the chip at 5 Ghz. I haven't seen more info on that since then so I don't know she meant. I guess we'll find out more next month.

And of course then it's that long wait until launch day where every dang day feels like eternity.
 

Thala

Golden Member
Nov 12, 2014
1,355
653
136
Intel may matter in frequency sensitive software where more than a core or two aren't used during operations. I can only think of a few software where that would put Intel at an advantage.

Oh i can think of quite a few software packages, where this makes a difference - they are called single core benchmarks :p
 

eek2121

Platinum Member
Aug 2, 2005
2,904
3,905
136
Is Intel still planing on bringing AVX512 to their mainstream line?
If not, rumor is Zen 4 will have it.
According to this Leak Raptor Lake will bring Higher Boost than 12900KS, Perhaps 13900K wil have 5.8 Ghz boost and 13900KS 6 Ghz? I could see those numbers to fight with 5+ Ghz Zen4

View attachment 60136



With a chiller maybe.