Question Raptor Lake - Official Thread

Page 93 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Hulk

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
4,525
2,519
136
Since we already have the first Raptor Lake leak I'm thinking it should have it's own thread.
What do we know so far?
From Anandtech's Intel Process Roadmap articles from July:

Built on Intel 7 with upgraded FinFET
10-15% PPW (performance-per-watt)
Last non-tiled consumer CPU as Meteor Lake will be tiled

I'm guessing this will be a minor update to ADL with just a few microarchitecture changes to the cores. The larger change will be the new process refinement allowing 8+16 at the top of the stack.

Will it work with current z690 motherboards? If yes then that could be a major selling point for people to move to ADL rather than wait.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vstar

nicalandia

Diamond Member
Jan 10, 2019
3,331
5,282
136
Maybe both.
No, thats just a Bad Reading on Geekbench5. Its reading the e core cache config

Not the first time Geekbench5 would missread Raptor Lake

Look at this entry
Intel_Core_i9_13900k_geekbench.png

And compare it to this one
FdbVg8uVQAASQDR.png

Pay attention to L1 and L2, identical, but L2 reads 2 MiB because the Gracemont cores on ADL have 2MiB of shared L2
 
Last edited:

nicalandia

Diamond Member
Jan 10, 2019
3,331
5,282
136
It's not a misread, CPU ID confirms it's Raptor Lake.

GenuineIntel Family 6 Model 183 Stepping 1
Its Raptor Lake no question about it. Its the Core uArch we are talking about here. The 13500, the 13900HK and the 13700H are using Golden Cove cores which have 1.25 MiB of L2 Cache. The missread its the fault of Geekbench its reading the e core cluster cache config
 

IntelUser2000

Elite Member
Oct 14, 2003
8,686
3,786
136
@BorisTheBlade82 I saw that. Like WTF?!

Not only that it's a monolithic 34 core! This must be the rumored monolithic Sapphire Rapids. Why call it Raptorlake though? It has almost nothing in common with it.

At a possible >700mm2 die it'll disprove any doubt about Intel 7 process.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: lightmanek

Exist50

Platinum Member
Aug 18, 2016
2,452
3,102
136
@BorisTheBlade82 I saw that. Like WTF?!

Not only that it's a monolithic 34 core! This must be the rumored monolithic Sapphire Rapids. Why call it Raptorlake though? It has almost nothing in common with it.

At a possible >700mm2 die it'll disapprove any doubt about Intel 7 process.
Probably isn't actually Raptor Cove, unless it's a bizarre early look a refresh, but rather the much-awaited Sapphire Rapids monolithic die. And with a full 8 memory channels too.
Here's another thought. Consider a monolithic 34c MCC die. It would be huge, yes, but doable, and reasonably bin-able to <=32c high volume SKUs, without fussing with SNC or the like.

;)

Probably worth posting that in the lakes/rapids thread as well. Makes more sense than clustered with the actual Raptor Lake stuff.
 

Tup3x

Golden Member
Dec 31, 2016
1,086
1,085
136
Raptor Lake pricing is very competitive. No future but if one needs to build a system now and doesn't plan to upgrade anytime soon, the total cost is not bad at all.

If possible it would be good idea to skip first gen AM5 CPUs and also wait for next gen Intel CPUs. Intel changes sockets like socks so I'm not that worried about their platform. Hopefully things are smoother with AM5 then with AM4. It took loooong time for them to fix USB issues (my external HDD still seems to have some issues).
 
  • Love
Reactions: Hotrod2go

Kocicak

Golden Member
Jan 17, 2019
1,090
1,141
136
If Intel did some improvements just by updating a microcode, they could and should update the microcode for existing Alder Lake CPUs as well.
 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
22,065
11,693
136
I'm curious about that bit. Is it rebranded Alder Lake, or Raptor Lake without the increase in L2? Not that it makes much of a difference either way, but still.

Others beat me to it but that would mean another set of masks for yet another variation of Raptor Lake. Raptalder Lake? Whatever you would call it. It would be a waste of resources. It really does look like Intel just rereleased Alder Lake on mobile.

Intel has stated there will be desktop Meteor Lake bins, whats uncertain is whether there will be high end Meteor Lake desktop parts. For Intel’s sake that would be good, though I’m not optimistic given the talk of clock speed regressions and that the largest leaked part is 6P+8E.

Intel can surprise us with an 8+16 or 8+32 or 12+16 Meteor Lake package any day now. Until they do that we should temper our expectations of what Meteor Lake-S holds in store for the enthusiast market.
 

Asterox

Golden Member
May 15, 2012
1,039
1,823
136
Well, it's very obvious why they did it. :mask: But why did they do that, when they had to specify the configuration details anyway.Data is not invisible, so complete absurdity or an attempt to show the i9 13900K in a better light.

i9 12900K, ddr5 4800mhz

i9 13900K, ddr5 5600mhz


 
  • Like
Reactions: lightmanek

jpiniero

Lifer
Oct 1, 2010
15,223
5,768
136
Probably isn't actually Raptor Cove, unless it's a bizarre early look a refresh, but rather the much-awaited Sapphire Rapids monolithic die. And with a full 8 memory channels too.

A 34 core SPR would be way too big so it has to be Raptor Cove. It's still quite the big boi.

I checked Dell and Lenovo and they are both still not selling Icelake-W so you figure that is dead. But something like this 34 core Raptor Cove might have appeal to OEMs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lightmanek

Carfax83

Diamond Member
Nov 1, 2010
6,841
1,536
136
Well, it's very obvious why they did it. :mask: But why did they do that, when they had to specify the configuration details anyway.Data is not invisible, so complete absurdity or an attempt to show the i9 13900K in a better light.

i9 12900K, ddr5 4800mhz

i9 13900K, ddr5 5600mhz

I touched on this in the other Intel thread and I don't see a problem with it. Alder Lake is validated to run officially at DDR5 4800 speeds. Yes we all know it can typically use much higher memory frequencies, but it's not validated. There's presumably been a few people that have bought DDR5 6400 kits along with their 12900K CPUs and have had to run them at slower speeds and more relaxed timings because the memory controller is incapable of hitting that speed without being unstable.

Raptor Lake's memory controller is validated to run at at least 2800mhz so that it can fully take advantage of DDR5 5600. Intel could have cherry picked a 13900K with a beast memory controller that could comfortably run at DDR5 7000+ speeds if they wanted to, and skewed the benchmarks even more but they didn't because that memory speed is unvalidated and not guaranteed by the manufacturer to work with Raptor Lake.
 

nicalandia

Diamond Member
Jan 10, 2019
3,331
5,282
136
I touched on this in the other Intel thread and I don't see a problem with it. Alder Lake is validated to run officially at DDR5 4800 speeds. Yes we all know it can typically use much higher memory frequencies, but it's not validated. There's presumably been a few people that have bought DDR5 6400 kits along with their 12900K CPUs and have had to run them at slower speeds and more relaxed timings because the memory controller is incapable of hitting that speed without being unstable.

Raptor Lake's memory controller is validated to run at at least 2800mhz so that it can fully take advantage of DDR5 5600. Intel could have cherry picked a 13900K with a beast memory controller that could comfortably run at DDR5 7000+ speeds if they wanted to, and skewed the benchmarks even more but they didn't because that memory speed is unvalidated and not guaranteed by the manufacturer to work with Raptor Lake.
The 7600X at DDR6000 also kicks the 12900k at DDR4800 In a simlar fashion as the 13900K.

Truth is there is not going to be much difference between both CPUs at DDR6400
 

inf64

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2011
3,865
4,549
136
I touched on this in the other Intel thread and I don't see a problem with it. Alder Lake is validated to run officially at DDR5 4800 speeds. Yes we all know it can typically use much higher memory frequencies, but it's not validated. There's presumably been a few people that have bought DDR5 6400 kits along with their 12900K CPUs and have had to run them at slower speeds and more relaxed timings because the memory controller is incapable of hitting that speed without being unstable.

Raptor Lake's memory controller is validated to run at at least 2800mhz so that it can fully take advantage of DDR5 5600. Intel could have cherry picked a 13900K with a beast memory controller that could comfortably run at DDR5 7000+ speeds if they wanted to, and skewed the benchmarks even more but they didn't because that memory speed is unvalidated and not guaranteed by the manufacturer to work with Raptor Lake.

Although it's true that official spec is 4800 for AL, they could have ran the tests with 5600 memory just to show apples to apples comparison. AL does gain noticeable fps when going to 5600+ so the real review numbers are really not going to be comparable to what intel showed. Most AL parts can run at least DDR5 5600 without any problems.

Also, suspect is the fact they used DDR4 3200 on AMD platform but that's besides the point. As nicalandia noted, there should not be much of a difference between all chips mentioned (Z3D, AL, RC and Z4), not until we get Nvidia 4090 to remove the GPU wall.
 

Carfax83

Diamond Member
Nov 1, 2010
6,841
1,536
136
Although it's true that official spec is 4800 for AL, they could have ran the tests with 5600 memory just to show apples to apples comparison. AL does gain noticeable fps when going to 5600+ so the real review numbers are really not going to be comparable to what intel showed. Most AL parts can run at least DDR5 5600 without any problems.

I think the reason why they do this is to prevent lawsuits due to misrepresentation and false advertisement. Intel always does their product launches with the officially supported memory frequency. AMD also did the same thing until Zen 4. I was honestly shocked that AMD paired their Zen 4 review samples with DDR5 6000 memory kits, because as far as I know, DDR5 6000 isn't validated to run on Zen 4.
 

inf64

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2011
3,865
4,549
136
I think the reason why they do this is to prevent lawsuits due to misrepresentation and false advertisement. Intel always does their product launches with the officially supported memory frequency. AMD also did the same thing until Zen 4. I was honestly shocked that AMD paired their Zen 4 review samples with DDR5 6000 memory kits, because as far as I know, DDR5 6000 isn't validated to run on Zen 4.
It's for legal reasons I guess (in intel's case), but so far we have even reports that Zen 4 can run 4 dimms with DDR 6000 without any problems (even on 7600X which is the lowest quality silicon).
My point is that the difference in games with current GPUs will be much smaller than what intel showcased, but lets wait and see.
 

LightningZ71

Golden Member
Mar 10, 2017
1,798
2,156
136
Assuming that Intel can bin 32-34 core models of the RPLS34 die, they should comfortably sit between the 5975wx and 5995wx threadrippers in most tasks. I don't see it getting past the 64 core -95 in most any MT task that properly scales beyond 32 threads, but it should do quite well in anything in the 8-32 thread set.

I'm just happy that Intel hasn't fully abandoned that market as it at least keeps AMD's prices reasonable.
 

Exist50

Platinum Member
Aug 18, 2016
2,452
3,102
136
Others beat me to it but that would mean another set of masks for yet another variation of Raptor Lake. Raptalder Lake? Whatever you would call it. It would be a waste of resources.
And if it gets them some extra performance? Raptor Lake will need to hold them over for a year+. Even marginal gains may be worth the effort. Also, if DLVR actually shows up, that'll require new silicon too.
A 34 core SPR would be way too big so it has to be Raptor Cove. It's still quite the big boi.
Dude, come on. It's right there in the picture. They certainly wouldn't have created such a chip just for the workstation market.
Do you have an Idea how long it will take for the actual product to come to market? Having a Wafer on display is not the same as being production ready
Whatever they decide to call it, it's really Sapphire Rapids. So should hopefully be shipping in some form by year's end.
 

jpiniero

Lifer
Oct 1, 2010
15,223
5,768
136
Dude, come on. It's right there in the picture. They certainly wouldn't have created such a chip just for the workstation market.

I didn't say doing a 34 core Raptor Lake would be worth the engineering effort. Raptor Cove is probally like half the size of the Sapphire core so you can see why they did it.