Question Raptor Lake - Official Thread

Page 98 - 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
4,527
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

Hitman928

Diamond Member
Apr 15, 2012
6,187
10,696
136
I have done a lot of part swapping and decided I would rather have the better IPC than more cores as gaming barely touches 6 cores let alone 8. Though I overthought things a lot and thought well maybe more strong cores is more future proof. Then I realized the reality is more than 8 cores on AMD CPUs are not on same CCD which means a latency penalty. Not an issue for productivity apps at all, but for game threads not good.

SO anyways to answer your question, I am a manual static old school overclocked and like static frequency and that is just how I am. So I statically set CCD1 to 4.7GHz and CCD2 to 4.6GHz at 1.275VCORE Then I did stability testing wit OCCT, Prime95 and such and they passed. Had PBO and all boost functions disabled and used Windows 10 Ultimate Power Plan.

I had ran test prior to changing my mind and swapping rigs to get score.

Then when I swapped to Alder Lake 12700K and settled on 5GHz stable overclock, I decided I am curious about IPC and I knew my 5900X CCD1 was 4.7GHz, so I set temporarily 12700K to 4.7GHz to see how IPC was and my above results are what I found. 16-17% IPC better than Zen 3 at least per CPU-Z and CInebench R23.

If all you care about is gaming, why not wait for Zen4 with 3d cache? It should be the clear gaming king and have a large lead in gaming IPC and performance per watt. The cheaper am5 boards should be out then too.
 

Exist50

Platinum Member
Aug 18, 2016
2,452
3,102
136
Raptorlake in blender database


Looks like it's not only the E-core spam works well (at least in rendering) against mid range competitor like 7700X, but the most problematic thing is it also standing well against its team mate like 12700k, which is 8P+4E....... looks like E-core spam is also hurting themselves....
View attachment 68893
I don't think Intel's terribly upset about their 13th gen upstaging 12th gen. If anything, it's great we're getting so much progress from a refresh.
 

Wolverine2349

Senior member
Oct 9, 2022
428
132
86
If all you care about is gaming, why not wait for Zen4 with 3d cache? It should be the clear gaming king and have a large lead in gaming IPC and performance per watt. The cheaper am5 boards should be out then too.


Is that really going to work well though given that regular Zen 4 runs at 95C especially to give it high enough clocks to handily or better beat 6GHz Raptor Cove??? Just imagine adding cache on top of it and how are they going to keep thermals ok at good clocks??

Do you think Zen 4 with 3D cache will handily beat a manually well tuned Raptor Lake 13900K for gaming or trade blows or be very close??
 

Markfw

Moderator Emeritus, Elite Member
May 16, 2002
26,171
15,326
136
Is that really going to work well though given that regular Zen 4 runs at 95C especially to give it high enough clocks to handily or better beat 6GHz Raptor Cove??? Just imagine adding cache on top of it and how are they going to keep thermals ok at good clocks??

Do you think Zen 4 with 3D cache will handily beat a manually well tuned Raptor Lake 13900K for gaming or trade blows or be very close??
You can set Zen4 to run at whatever temp you want in bios. As far as how high the Zen 4 with cache runs, why not post in the Zen 4 thread and talk about it ? And wait until it comes out before saying how bad its going to be ?
 
Jul 27, 2020
20,040
13,740
146
Do you think Zen 4 with 3D cache will handily beat a manually well tuned Raptor Lake 13900K for gaming or trade blows or be very close??
It will depend on the game. Some games love frequency+bandwidth. Those will absolutely fly with a 6 GHz Raptor Lake. But plenty others love huge cache. It will sure be an interesting battle to see unless AMD totally decimates Intel with a 7800X3D at 5.5 GHz boost clocks.
 

Hitman928

Diamond Member
Apr 15, 2012
6,187
10,696
136
Is that really going to work well though given that regular Zen 4 runs at 95C especially to give it high enough clocks to handily or better beat 6GHz Raptor Cove??? Just imagine adding cache on top of it and how are they going to keep thermals ok at good clocks??

Do you think Zen 4 with 3D cache will handily beat a manually well tuned Raptor Lake 13900K for gaming or trade blows or be very close??

The way AMD stacks the dies, it does cache over cache only, so the hotspots in the actual computational part of the CPU aren't covered by active devices. Instead, they put only silicon over those parts that has as good or better thermal conductivity than the silicon in the non-3d versions. With that said, there are always inefficiencies when you have a materials interface introduced so thermals will probably be a little worse on the 3d version, but only a little. This is exactly what we saw with the 5800x vs. the 5800x3d. Then despite the slightly worse thermals and clock speed, the x3d version was able to greatly outperform the non-3d version in games (~25% faster). The 7700x already matches if not slightly outperforms a 12900K in gaming, so yes, I think a Zen4-3d CPU is the best bet to be the gaming king upon release.
 

Wolverine2349

Senior member
Oct 9, 2022
428
132
86
You can set Zen4 to run at whatever temp you want in bios. As far as how high the Zen 4 with cache runs, why not post in the Zen 4 thread and talk about it ? And wait until it comes out before saying how bad its going to be ?


I have no comment on it being bad. Just concerned seeing the 95C on the current Zen 4 parts that just came out even with good cooling when they run at stock speeds. I hope they can make it great and can clock it high and it topples everything.
 

Hulk

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
4,527
2,519
136
So are you saying Zen 4, Golden Cove and Raptor Cove all have really close IPC??

And how accurate of a test is CPU-Z single thread score for measuring IPC at same clock speed.

I tried it myself at fixed 4.7GHZ locked frequency on a Ryzen 5900X and Core i7 12700K fixed at 4.7GHz a few months back

CPU single thread score

Core i7 12700K 4.7GHz: 767

Ryzen 9 5900X CCD1 at 4.7GHz: 642

642/767 is 0.837

So per CPU-Z single threaded score of Ryzen 5900X at 4.7GHz is between 83 and 84 percent as fast as Core i7 12700K

So therefore Golden Cove P cores of Alder Lake are 16-17% better IPC than Zen 3??

I do not have a Zen 4 CPU to test but have read and IPC uplift says overall 13% though some say only 8-10 over Zen 3%.

SO Golden Cove IPC still a little ahead of even Zen 4 by like 3-8%??

Or is CPU-Z benchmark not a good barometer.

I also got a very similar result when I tried with Cinebench R23 single core test calculating Golden Cove IPC 16-17% above Zen 3.

12700K 4.7GHz Cinebench R23 single core score: 1855

Ryzen 5900X 4.7GHz CInebench R23 single core score: 1548

How accurate are both for IPC test.
Benchmarks are a curious thing. We tend to live and die by them here on this forum.
I tend to use benchmarks as follows.
First, CPUz, Cinebench, etc.. I find useful to get a general impression of where a CPU stands next to the competition. If the results are close, say within 10 or 15% I don't really draw any conclusions about which chip is better.
Next, the validated benches coming from applications that I actually use on a day-to-day basis. When CPU's are close in benchmarks I need to know how they actually perform on computational tasks that are important to me.

BTW, thanks for posting the results of your ISO tests. Very informative.
 

Carfax83

Diamond Member
Nov 1, 2010
6,841
1,536
136
The 7700x already matches if not slightly outperforms a 12900K in gaming, so yes, I think a Zen4-3d CPU is the best bet to be the gaming king upon release.

The 7700x has a clock speed advantage against the 12900K that is going to be erased against Raptor Lake, plus the latter will have enhanced cache and memory performance. I have no doubts that Raptor Lake is going to beat Zen 4 in gaming, but I do agree that Zen 4 3D is a different beast.

I'm not sure that Zen 4 3D will benefit from the increased cache the way that Zen 3 did though, as Zen 4 doesn't seem to be bandwidth starved unlike Zen 3. Not saying it won't beat Raptor Lake, but I doubt we will see the huge gains that Zen 3 3D had.
 
  • Like
Reactions: controlflow

IntelUser2000

Elite Member
Oct 14, 2003
8,686
3,786
136
Raptorlake fixes the uncore clocking much lower when E cores are disabled. They went from a 4.1GHz uncore to 5GHz. They said itself is responsible for a gain of 5% in gaming.

Also from leakers about inter-core latency, Raptorlake has a much better latency distribution among the cores. Basically only the boundary line between P and E are affected, whereas previously the P's suffered too.

Both are going to improve the scenarios where the hybrid implementation doesn't fare so hot. I can't wait to see how much better it becomes in the following years!

There is almost no IPC uplift with Raptor Cove's P cores, at least not in the leaks we had thus far. It's just clock and process improvements, plus faster E cores.

Ironically despite the expectation, the E cores have a bigger gain because of the uncore improvements benefitting them more. For example they said the prefetching improvements along with the increased L2 cache size allow the E cores to have 2-3% perf/clock improvement and in some cases up to 16%!

This also shows the promise of the hybrid because E cores should improve at a faster rate than P cores do. Maybe in 2-3 generations most of the doubts about hybrid will disappear because the E cores will be that much closer to the P cores. We need to have a long term perspective, because Alderlake is their first try.

Next major IPC jump for Intel will be Arrow Lake. Lion Cove will indeed be the king of the jungle even more likely is if Intel 3 is potent.

20A not 3.
 
Last edited:

Wolverine2349

Senior member
Oct 9, 2022
428
132
86
If that's the case Intel will dominate laptop and desktop sales wise, rep wise and AMD will have to go hybrid.

I hate the hybrid arch. It belongs in mobile space not power desktops. Nevermind all the scheduling and compatibility crap as we have been in SMP world for 30 years in X86 space.

More than 8 P cores on the same CCD/ring would be great.

Though it would be nice if Intel had an 8 P core only option with no e-cores that is well binned and can overclock so high. Cause even highly threaded games do not really benefit at all from more than 8 good cores and seems unlikely to change anytime soon as I have heard coding for more and more threads is beyond impossible for things like games.
 

nicalandia

Diamond Member
Jan 10, 2019
3,331
5,282
136
This also shows the promise of the hybrid because E cores should improve at a faster rate than P cores do. Maybe in 2-3 generations most of the doubts about hybrid will disappear because the E cores will be that much closer to the P cores.
I just don't see that happening, the e cores due to their design will Always be constrained by their design(which is to max out performance/Area) they have limited FP performance, their L2 Cache is far away from the L3 and Core 1(on the cluster) has to do a round trip to comunicate with Core 2.

The e core design for MTL and ARL have the same foundation as the gracemont cores, they will tweak the design as physically possible to extract every bit of IPC, but I will be surprice if by Arrow Lake they have reach sunny cove performance

1665504002646.png
 
Last edited:

deasd

Senior member
Dec 31, 2013
567
922
136
Isn't that already in works. Zen 5 is rumored to be a hybrid cpu with zen 4c cores as well.

'Zen5 hybrid' is just a BS rumor from MLID in 2021:


but im not going to talk about Zen5 here....
 
  • Like
Reactions: Exist50

ondma

Diamond Member
Mar 18, 2018
3,005
1,528
136
Just read a test of the 4090 on Techspot. Seems like it puts an much larger cpu stress on gaming than current cards. They tested with a 5800x 3D and a lot of games were cpu limited even at 1440. Will be interesting to see if finally more cores will lead to better gaming performance, e.g. 7700x vs 7950x.

Edit: I thought this was Zen 4 thread (duh). My real question is if Raptor Lake with only 8 P cores is going to be sufficient to feed the newer GPUs like the 4090, whereas AMD has up to 16 "real" cores. Not sure if the E cores can somehow be set to take over some of the increased cpu load allowed by the generational GPU leap.
 
Last edited:

Wolverine2349

Senior member
Oct 9, 2022
428
132
86
Just read a test of the 4090 on Techspot. Seems like it puts an much larger cpu stress on gaming than current cards. They tested with a 5800x 3D and a lot of games were cpu limited even at 1440. Will be interesting to see if finally more cores will lead to better gaming performance, e.g. 7700x vs 7950x.


Don't games have to be coded to take advantage of more cores though?? I mean games while they are more threaded than in past aren't they still limited to how many threads they can scale to and fewer faster cores are better than more and more cores??

And yeah more than 8 cores for gaming?? Though with the 7900X and 7950X, will there be a big penalty because of the fact there are 2 CCDs threads have to communicate with and crossing them incurs a big latency hit which is bad for games and could drop 1% lows a lot at those times?? And on Intel's case if a thread gets caught ion an e-core ouch as well as the e-cores are bad for game threads. On AMD's side the other cores are still strong but the cross latency penalty. We need more than 8 P cores on a single ring/CCD if games are really going to benefit from more than 8 cores 16 threads. If only Intel would make a 10 P core Raptor Lake or Alder Lake
 

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
8,114
6,770
136
Do you think Zen 4 with 3D cache will handily beat a manually well tuned Raptor Lake 13900K for gaming or trade blows or be very close??

Yes. We saw how well the 5800X3D did in comparison, and that was with lower clocks than the regular Zen 3 CPUs. Given how soon after the launch of Zen 4 we're getting the 3D version it's pretty safe to assume that AMD has things well in hand.

I expect RL to be more competitive in terms of productivity with respect to AMD this time around, but even Intel's own figures suggest they'll lose to v-cache Zen 4 more often than not.
 

Wolverine2349

Senior member
Oct 9, 2022
428
132
86
Yes. We saw how well the 5800X3D did in comparison, and that was with lower clocks than the regular Zen 3 CPUs. Given how soon after the launch of Zen 4 we're getting the 3D version it's pretty safe to assume that AMD has things well in hand.

I expect RL to be more competitive in terms of productivity with respect to AMD this time around, but even Intel's own figures suggest they'll lose to v-cache Zen 4 more often than not.


Do you think it will be a bloodbath for Zen 4 3D vs Raptor Lake in gaming or a close win for AMD more often than not assuming paired with GeForce RTX 4090 at 1440p.
 

inf64

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2011
3,865
4,549
136
Do you think it will be a bloodbath for Zen 4 3D vs Raptor Lake in gaming or a close win for AMD more often than not assuming paired with GeForce RTX 4090 at 1440p.
I'm afraid nobody can answer that question right now. We still have no CPU scaling reviews for RTX 4090, that will give us some clues at least.