DLVR and other power management features are not a critical feature for desktop.
The "20% power saving or 7% clock increase" and thinking it would apply to a 200W+ 5GHz+ CPU is misunderstanding of the patent. I doubt it'll get anywhere near the claim in the datasheet at those figures.
The early roadmap leaks had DLVR for mobile, not desktop.
Hence, it's likely not worth it implementing it for desktop chips. DLVR unlike FiVR
increases motherboard costs, and we know motherboards are a low margin business.
I was doubting the potential performance gain of a Raptor Lake Refresh for desktop, however the addition of DLVR can provide a 20% gain in efficiency or 7% gain in performance.
Again this is a
misunderstanding of the patent. DLVR itself doesn't mean anything - it stands for Digital Linear Voltage Regulator. The patent says you could use FiVR for the same purpose.
The patent tells us the advantage is implementing the
second regulator in addition to the main one. The second regulator happens to be a digital linear regulator. Digital, because it can be software controlled, and Linear because it's not switched mode.
The advantage of the second regulator is in the
potential, instead of when the second linear regulator is active.
The most efficient mode of the "DLVR" is when the second regulator is inactive! Oh the irony! That's why I said "potential" is the advantage. It allows the main regulator to be more precise in predicting voltage ranges, which means you can lower the voltage.
The patent explicitly tells us if the second DLVR is more active, the less gain you'll have since linear regulators are inefficient - and this is simple knowledge, almost Electronics 101.