LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksRead more.Regains desktop gaming crown, according to internal benchmarks.
Read more.Regains desktop gaming crown, according to internal benchmarks.
I noticed it said "up to" DDR 4 3200 - so that likely means the lower models and possibly non-k ones are artificially crippled again when paired with cheaper motherboards. I assume they may at least be 2933 though instead of 2666, except for the 4 core parts, which may still be stuck with the slower RAM.
So its a whole 5% faster than Ryzen 5900X?
I guess that explains this https://hexus.net/tech/news/cpu/147249-intel-rocket-lake-flagship-cpu-overclocked-69ghz-ln2/
The CES 2021 video from Intel was an absolute garbage patch of "Real World", salacious comments about their competition and spinning a narrative around their products (making a problem so they can fix a problem).
"Business processors with leading in class security"
Which includes a canned attack against an AMD laptop, you what? They just brazingly made out AMD simply cannot protect you against any attack even though this was a single attack vector against a specific element of CPUs. I wonder how many they went through before selecting on one they specifically protect against. This "demo" was grossly disingenuous at best, I would love to see the actual configuration of both systems and the specific virus they deployed and method use.
This was as much a "Intel product" launch as it was an "anti-AMD marketing piece". It's one thing to market your product and use benchmarks against your competition but it's another to just salacious put out your competitor. Sadly, nothing they did there could be easily taken against them.
Take Nvidia, they don't need to put out the competition with salacious marketing because they have absolute confidence in their product. AMD needs to highlight their products increase of performance against their own previous gen and how they've gotten close/overcome the competition but are practical.
Intels marketing is "well our competitors are poodoo, you should stay with us".
Their gaming performance benchmark in Metro: Exodus is 156.54 vs 147.43 fps (Intel to AMD) which is a win of...6% with the 99th percentile min max being even closer (<1% and 4%) respectively.
If that's the best game they could find a win in, then I don't hold much hope at all for the rest of the lineup.
I also liked the Canno...Alder Lake show and tell which amounted to "hey look everyone, we do have something else coming, it's actually real and not just a pipe dream fantasy!"
Mini tired rant over.
Who the hell buys a high end desktop CPU for the onboard graphics. It's such a weird segment to care about.
And don't get me wrong I'm not narcissistic enough to think I've thought of something that Intel hasn't, I just find it really bloody weird
OOOPS! where are the energy efficiency numbers?
Anyone interested in transcoding video for a start. I'm hoping the xe graphics makes it into the pentium models too though as my media server doesn't need the general purpose grunt.Originally Posted by Tunnah
The moment these are released, AMD will drop their prices. It's great for (intelligent) consumers.
Having it exist is kind of nice. My recent work build ended up with a 3700X and all I wanted from graphics was to plug two displayport 1440p monitors in. The 8 core APU is too hard to get, and didn't have enough PCIe lanes for the cards I needed to plug in.
However, I still see Intel as an abhorrent convicted monopolist with products that are a mix of stupidly turned off features (I like ECC ram) and security holes. So unlikely to buy into these.
After going through the last year with Intel being forced to admit to one security vulnerability after another, they now want to boast about their security?
Very hypocritical of them!
During that time, I'm sure the really big customers (Amazon, Google, Azure, Facebook etc.) got very generous discounts to make up for having apply the crippling patches and potentially turn off HT, but ordinary customers were shafted more and more with each patch.
Last edited by kompukare; 12-01-2021 at 11:36 AM.
Intel must be getting heavy on the power requirements if they had to drop cores. I bet these run hot and can only boost for a decent amount with a decent cooling system and power supply. Should be good at bring down the 5000 series prices though!
If that's the top end desktop chip, I think they missed something, like 2 cores!
Topping out at 8 cores, a backwards step. So with the 19% IPC gain but with 2 less cores and 4 less threads the 10900K and 11900K are probably going to be about the same performance in multicore benchmarks.
That will look good on the charts. Better hope the 11900K is a good bit cheaper than the 10900K then.
Intel has since made their CES2021 video private, hmm I wonder why...
I assume these will be on 14++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
This is all very exciting however I will be waiting for 12th Generation.
The irony being that they were the worst affected by things like Spectre so picking 'protection' as a key aspect to focus on might not be the 'best choice' lol
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
