Question Raptor Lake - Official Thread

Page 95 - 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
It's really not a good look to double down like this.
As far as we know, it's just a Wafer right? AMD built and actually finished the ThreadRipper Non-PRO CPUs to the point of actually working ES Samples were Breaking World Records on Water. But they decided to cancel it all together due to market trends...

What is the chance of these Monolithic CPUs following suit due to the same trend?
 

Exist50

Platinum Member
Aug 18, 2016
2,452
3,102
136
As far as we know, it's just a Wafer right? AMD built and actually finished the ThreadRipper Non-PRO CPUs to the point of actually working ES Samples were Breaking World Records on Water. But they decided to cancel it all together due to market trends...

What is the chance of these Monolithic CPUs following suit due to the same trend?
This is very clearly a server chip first and foremost. I think we'll probably see it come to the workstation market as well (it's the same socket and IO, after all, so why not?), but it has plenty of reason to exist regardless.
 

Timmah!

Golden Member
Jul 24, 2010
1,515
835
136
This is very clearly a server chip first and foremost. I think we'll probably see it come to the workstation market as well (it's the same socket and IO, after all, so why not?), but it has plenty of reason to exist regardless.

At least 50 reasons to exist :)

Regarding the former argument about whether the rumors of the monolithic chip are true or not, while @jpiniero might have claimed his doubts, i believe the one to oppose the "idea" the most was surely @nicalandia.
Not to cause any argument now or point fingers, it does not matter at all anyway, just correcting the record :p

your own words: https://forums.anandtech.com/thread...ure-lakes-rapids-thread.2509080/post-40756992
 
Last edited:

LightningZ71

Golden Member
Mar 10, 2017
1,798
2,156
136
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
Oh, I'm well aware that, at minimum, we're at least half a year away from such a product hitting OEMs. However, the fact of its existence alone is enough to put downward pressure on the market segment.
 

nicalandia

Diamond Member
Jan 10, 2019
3,331
5,282
136

I have admitted many pages ago of the High Chance of a Monolithic Sapphire Rapids because there have been a few entries on Sisoftware of what look like Monolithic SPR CPUs and now with this Die Shot it's pretty much confirmed.

I am kind of perplexed on the design choice since Huge Monolithic CPUs were believed to be a thing of the past.

Here a 300mm 10nm Wafer, 68 Complete dies each measuring 30.8 x 25.20
1664392362857.png
 
Last edited:

Timmah!

Golden Member
Jul 24, 2010
1,515
835
136
I have admitted many pages ago of the High Chance of a Monolithic Sapphire Rapids because there have been a few entries on Sisoftware of what look like Monolithic SPR CPUs and now with this Die Shot it's pretty much confirmed.

I am kind of perplexed on the design choice since Huge Monolithic CPUs were believed to be a thing of the past.

Here a 300mm 10nm Wafer, 68 Complete dies each measuring 30.8 x 25.20
View attachment 68379

Well, people arguing with you back then claimed it might be more financially viable for Intel to produce smaller monolithic chip for lower core counts than waste 1600mm of die space on them, same amount as on full 56/60C config. I guess that would be most likely explanation.
Anyway, seeing how huge the chip is, knowing Intel, this wont be cheap - well, not cheaper than TR5000 anyway. So i may happily stick to my 7950x plans, cause this will be no doubt outside my budget.
 

dullard

Elite Member
May 21, 2001
25,511
4,009
126
I am kind of perplexed on the design choice since Huge Monolithic CPUs were believed to be a thing of the past.
There are significant power and latency advantages to monolithic CPUs. The main drawback is lower yields and longer development cycles. As long as you can sell it for a high price, the power/latency gains outweigh the costs of lower yields. Long development cycles are (somewhat) more tolerated on the server side as they don't expect new chips frequently. Also, when your process is behind the competition, you need to pull every lever you have for performance.
 

nicalandia

Diamond Member
Jan 10, 2019
3,331
5,282
136
There are significant power and latency advantages to monolithic CPUs.

Up to certain amount of CPU cores yes... But that is no longer the case when you cross the 18 Core CPU barrier. You can bet that those monolithic CPUs will have Subnuma domains(to alleviate the latencies of such large Mesh), the power consumption on such large mesh is significant too.

As an example this 28C/56T Xeon CPU with Mesh interconnect and Subnuma clusters(now called Subnuma Domains)
1664403681795.png
 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
22,065
11,693
136
And if it gets them some extra performance?

At that point they'd be better off just going full-bore Raptor Cove on the new part. There's really not much to be gained from cutting back on the L2 for mobile Raptor Lake. Very soon we'll see the parts for real, and we'll know for sure if they actually made yet another core design just for Raptor Lake mobile.
 

dullard

Elite Member
May 21, 2001
25,511
4,009
126
Up to certain amount of CPU cores yes... But that is no longer the case when you cross the 18 Core CPU barrier. You can bet that those monolithic CPUs will have Subnuma domains(to alleviate the latencies of such large Mesh), the power consumption on such large mesh is significant too.

As an example this 28C/56T Xeon CPU with Mesh interconnect and Subnuma clusters(now called Subnuma Domains)
Break that 28C core CPU into separate chiplets and you still have the clusters PLUS longer distances for signals to travel. You are confusing the issue of monolithic/chiplets with the plusses/minuses of different mesh types.
 
  • Like
Reactions: yuri69

naad

Member
May 31, 2022
64
176
76
That single thread score looks like a joke, almost 30% off from desktop chips.
I know they're laptops but geekbench is bordering on microbenchmark territory, so boosting for seconds shouldn't be a problem
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kaluan

nicalandia

Diamond Member
Jan 10, 2019
3,331
5,282
136

tamz_msc

Diamond Member
Jan 5, 2017
3,865
3,729
136
Based on this:

AMD-Ryzen-7000-Performance-Summary.png

from here, the 13900K should have no trouble matching the 7950X in applications and beat it in gaming by 5% by my estimation.

This is because from this image:

2022-06-09%2013_17_33_575px.jpg


the Cinebench R23 performance uplift estimate of >35% turned out to be a very good proxy for overall performance uplift in applications (comparing the 7950X and 5950X). With Intel promising up to 41% MT performance for the 13900K over the 12900K, at similar power consumption levels (253 W vs 241 W), I expect application performance to be a wash between the 13900K and the 7950X.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: Geddagod and Kaluan

inf64

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2011
3,865
4,549
136
Although the 3dcenter effort is commendable and shows something similar to what techpowerup has in their performance summary, I like better the separate MT/ST indexes like this one :

1664616145953.png

7950X is around 52% faster in MT according to this index. Interestingly, Computer base has almost exactly the same difference (~50%) in their own MT benchmark suit:
1664616397987.png

So 1.5x vs 1.4-1.45x, the performance will be close but 7950X should still be faster vs 13900K stock vs stock in MT workloads (average).
ST and gaming is a bit trickier but I guess 13900K might be a percentage or so behind in ST and similarly a few percent ahead in gaming. Overall, it will be very close.
 

Abwx

Lifer
Apr 2, 2011
11,557
4,349
136
from here, the 13900K should have no trouble matching the 7950X in applications and beat it in gaming by 5% by my estimation.

This is because from this image:

2022-06-09%2013_17_33_575px.jpg


the Cinebench R23 performance uplift estimate of >35% turned out to be a very good proxy for overall performance uplift in applications (comparing the 7950X and 5950X). With Intel promising up to 41% MT performance for the 13900K over the 12900K, at similar power consumption levels (253 W vs 241 W), I expect application performance to be a wash between the 13900K and the 7950X.

The 7950X score 50% better than the 12900K overall , but somewhat with up to 41% for the 13900K it will be a tie .?.



Edit : To keep up with the 7950X they ll have to increase TDP well over 253W, expect higher peak power than this number...
 
Last edited:

nicalandia

Diamond Member
Jan 10, 2019
3,331
5,282
136
Intel promising up to 41% MT performance for the 13900K over the 12900K, at similar power consumption levels (253 W vs 241 W), I expect application performance to be a wash between the 13900K and the 7950X.
It's actually a bit less, for example Geekbench.

12900K vs 13900(65 Watts) are identical here:

But the 13900K vs 13900 the MT performance boost is only 32%
 
Last edited: