Intel Core i9-11900K

[philehidiot]

But someone at Intel must have chosen to tune the part that way to try and keep winning some gaming benchmarks.

Oh well, perhaps this is one of those dog of a CPUs that Intel knocks out occasionally. It has been a while since the Pentium 4.

"Tune" makes it sound quite delicate.

The numbers look more like a hydrogen bomb going off.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

It is often said there are no bad chips these days, only bad prices.

Whilst I think there's definitely a place for the i5s, any chip that is drawing near 300W at the socket in this day and age is a bad chip.

I certainly wouldn't have an issue with anyone buying Intel for general purpose computing. But if you need anything more than mid-range performance, you'd be mad to consider Intel at all at the moment.

I have been all for AMD utterly slaying the Intel dragon but I am glad to see they have a roadmap out of this sorry mess. This isn't like the P4 dip where the issue is for a generation. I can see AMD dominance going on for a decade. That just opens the possibility of a role reversal and that's no good for anyone. A good few years of real AMD dominance and real competition in everything from laptops to datacentres will do the market good. But I want to see Intel catching up now.

The i5 11400F looks vastly more interesting than this overpriced but effective fan heater. I really don't get why manufacturers insist on getting reviews of their overpriced products out first.

The issue here,is AMD still has the long in the tooth Zen2 CPUs under £300 for the most part,and the only reason the Core i5 CPUs looked a bit mediocre in value was because Intel gated features behind the Z490. However,in gaming,Photoshop,etc Intel Core i5 CPUs were core for core faster when used with similar speed RAM to Zen2 CPUs. This is because of the latency issues of the dual CCX design,and better optimisations for Intel CPUs. Zen3 went to one CCD,and bumped up single core performance a decent amount.

Now they have allowed B560/H570 some more options to tweak RAM,etc and they have PCI-E 4.0 with the RKL CPUs,for a mainstream buyer,the mainstream AMD CPUs are not brilliant value anymore!

[nobodyspecial]

The only good thing I guess is gaming shows Intel is only ~30w over AMD's 5900x. Blender though...

Wait for sept and Alder+10nm enhanced superfin and a chip that is actually designed for 10nm (not a backport). At least you get a gpu in Intel, but that isn't much saving grace here for 11900k. IF your gpu dies (like mine) in your PC, you can run for a while on the IGP if needed (covers that RMA time at least...LOL).

This chip will sell millions, but only because AMD can't make enough chips to matter yet I guess (stuck at 20% share sadly). AMD needs to stop wasting wafers on LOW margin consoles and make SERVERS instead (make thousands instead of $10-15 a chip!). Force MSFT/SONY to go to someone else and NOT x86. Intel would just laugh if they came to them with mid teen margins (OR LESS, that's from AMD themselves!). They can go make an ARM chip or something. IE, Intel has been shorting their own low end stuff for 3yrs. See dell, hp, lenovo complaints about having PC's missing cpus that can't be sold. Why? Because Intel WISELY told poor people to go fly a kite, while making SERVER chips to keep that net income above 20B/year. AMD net income is less than a 10th of that STILL (no, 1 time tax breaks don't count!).

[3dcandy]

One wonders if, with hindsight, that Rocket Lake isn't the best name for a chip that runs so erm hot...

[DanceswithUnix]

One wonders if, with hindsight, that Rocket Lake isn't the best name for a chip that runs so erm hot...

Lava Lake?

[Tabbykatze]

The only good thing I guess is gaming shows Intel is only ~30w over AMD's 5900x. Blender though...

Wait for sept and Alder+10nm enhanced superfin and a chip that is actually designed for 10nm (not a backport). At least you get a gpu in Intel, but that isn't much saving grace here for 11900k. IF your gpu dies (like mine) in your PC, you can run for a while on the IGP if needed (covers that RMA time at least...LOL).

This chip will sell millions, but only because AMD can't make enough chips to matter yet I guess (stuck at 20% share sadly). AMD needs to stop wasting wafers on LOW margin consoles and make SERVERS instead (make thousands instead of $10-15 a chip!). Force MSFT/SONY to go to someone else and NOT x86. Intel would just laugh if they came to them with mid teen margins (OR LESS, that's from AMD themselves!). They can go make an ARM chip or something. IE, Intel has been shorting their own low end stuff for 3yrs. See dell, hp, lenovo complaints about having PC's missing cpus that can't be sold. Why? Because Intel WISELY told poor people to go fly a kite, while making SERVER chips to keep that net income above 20B/year. AMD net income is less than a 10th of that STILL (no, 1 time tax breaks don't count!).

Ah, Mr Nobody, it's been a while.

I guess you are unaware how many Zen 3 Server chips they've been selling to AWS and Azure, the Zen 3 server chips were actually being sold as far back as October (apparently) and have been pushing them heavily since.

AMD actually makes quite a substantial amount from Console sales and is working very well for their bottom lines.

But honestly, none of the last half of your comment is worth responding to.

[3dcandy]

Lava Lake?

Lava Lamp - pwetty and hot

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

TBF,Intel wil sell a lot of RKL CPUs,just like they sold a lot of CNL CPUs,etc. AMD is far more production limited because TSMC itself is capacity limited,and Intel has large fab capacity on 14NM - this is why even if Intel is behind in pure technology terms,they still have the majority of the PC desktop and laptop CPU market. To put in context,in terms of semiconductor sales Intel and Samsung tend to be significantly ahead of TSMC.



This was the same reason Intel could try their crap during the Athlon 64 era - AMD was also capacity limited,and Intel could make more CPUs. IIRC,Intel threatened OEMs with reduced supplies(or bribed them) so they would use Intel CPUs - its probably similar reasons to why so many laptops still use Intel CPUs. AMD really needs to consider second sourcing their CPUs and GPUs to other fabs such as Samsung too. That way they are not so dependent on TSMC and whatever capacity they have available.

[DanceswithUnix]

AMD really needs to consider second sourcing their CPUs and GPUs to other fabs such as Samsung too.

A new tape out under Samsung design rules could be tricky for existing products, after months of effort and spending millions on the port with masks and testing the chip would be a long way towards obsolete.

It does feel like they need to do something though. I notice you can't even get an Athlon 3000G right now. Something at that low end level even GlobalFoundaries could make, and people don't really care if low end chips going into Chromebooks etc are the latest thing.

[3dcandy]

TBF,Intel wil sell a lot of RKL CPUs,just like they sold a lot of CNL CPUs,etc. AMD is far more production limited because TSMC itself is capacity limited,and Intel has large fab capacity on 14NM - this is why even if Intel is behind in pure technology terms,they still have the majority of the PC desktop and laptop CPU market. To put in context,in terms of semiconductor sales Intel and Samsung tend to be significantly ahead of TSMC.



This was the same reason Intel could try their crap during the Athlon 64 era - AMD was also capacity limited,and Intel could make more CPUs. IIRC,Intel threatened OEMs with reduced supplies(or bribed them) so they would use Intel CPUs - its probably similar reasons to why so many laptops still use Intel CPUs. AMD really needs to consider second sourcing their CPUs and GPUs to other fabs such as Samsung too. That way they are not so dependent on TSMC and whatever capacity they have available.

I don't think you're right at the moment. Check out the prices around the world - no stock of the new Intel stuff and the scalpers are charging double. That tells me it's basically a paper launch right now
Lower down the stack and there is a lot more available but still not at retail or msrp

Hexus review is probably the most pro Intel one out there - everybody else is saying it's not good at all

[3dcandy]

A new tape out under Samsung design rules could be tricky for existing products, after months of effort and spending millions on the port with masks and testing the chip would be a long way towards obsolete.

It does feel like they need to do something though. I notice you can't even get an Athlon 3000G right now. Something at that low end level even GlobalFoundaries could make, and people don't really care if low end chips going into Chromebooks etc are the latest thing.

Nope global foundries can't make them - it's still a 7nm cpu

[DanceswithUnix]

Nope global foundries can't make them - it's still a 7nm cpu

3000G is 14nm

https://www.amd.com/en/products/apu/amd-athlon-3000g

Basically a cut down 2400G die.

[3dcandy]

3000G is 14nm

https://www.amd.com/en/products/apu/amd-athlon-3000g

Basically a cut down 2400G die.

So it is....
Needz more coffaffee

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

I don't think you're right at the moment. Check out the prices around the world - no stock of the new Intel stuff and the scalpers are charging double. That tells me it's basically a paper launch right now
Lower down the stack and there is a lot more available but still not at retail or msrp

I don't know where you are looking - there are plenty of CNL CPUs easily available at below RRP. Also,have you missed all those previews of the Core i7 11700K? Retail CPU sales have been available for weeks now.

Now compare that with people only receiving their Ryzen 9 5900X/5950X CPUs ordered last year,only in the last few weeks. There are threads on places such as OcUK with people downgrading the CPU as they got fedup not receiving it after months.

Also those foundry figures are from the last year - look at the sales of Intel and Samsung compared to TSMC. Most of those Intel sales will be its own products,especially CPUs and chipsets.

Retail CPUs sales are also a fraction of the entire market of CPU sales. Desktop sales are dwarfed by laptop sales nowadays.

Even at the height of the Athlon 64 and years of Intel having the subpar Pentium,and AMD having the Athlon and Athlon XP, AMD just about managed nearly half of desktop CPU sales and AMD had their own fabs.



However,laptops were still massively in favour of Intel.

Also if you look at most laptops and prebuilt systems,they use Intel CPUs. ATM,AMD is nowhere near the sales marketshare of Intel in CPUs:
https://www.crn.com/news/components-...pacity-expands

After ceding market share to AMD in PCs for several quarters, Intel regained some territory in the fourth quarter last year thanks to improving CPU capacity, even as its x86 rival continued to grow.

Intel’s market share growth was largely due to the chipmaker increasing manufacturing capacity for lower-end processors such as Celeron and Pentium, though growing sales of Core i5 and Core i7 processors also played a role on the desktop side, according to Dean McCarron of Mercury Research, a Prescott, Ariz.-based firm that produces a quarterly x86 CPU market share report based on shipments.

This allowed Intel’s share in laptops to grow 1.2 points to 81 percent against AMD while its desktop share grew 0.8 points to 80.7 percent, according to Mercury Research’s report for the fourth quarter of 2020. The result is that Intel grew market share for x86 CPUs overall by 0.7 points, bringing it to 78.3 percent. (The report does include sales from Via, a much smaller chipmaker, but its share in the market rounds to zero in all segments but desktop, McCarron said).

Due to AMD supply constraints,Intel regained marketshare and still its around 80% of the market. A lot of that is prebuilt systems.

If you look at channels such as Lowspecgamer,he points out entire markets in the world have poor access to AMD products,and its easier to get hold of Intel parts at closer to RRP. CPUs such as the Ryzen 5 1600AF were not available in many markets,but the Intel competitors were.

If you look at servers,AMD managed to just get past 10% of the total market in July 2020:
https://www.datacenterknowledge.com/...ntel-s-expense

AMD,with the Athlon 64 managed to get to 25% of the server market IIRC.

AMD is doing well,but ATM are still massively outsold by Intel in all markets,and they are currently supply constrained. I mean just look at the revenue Intel generates from consumer CPU sales alone compared to AMD? That shows despite loosing share they are selling more CPUs overall.

Hexus review is probably the most pro Intel one out there - everybody else is saying it's not good at all

I don't think they are. Both Gamersnexus and Techspot/Hardware Unboxed looked at the Core i5 11600K and considered it not too bad,especially in light of the Ryzen 5 5600X prices going wonky due to the supply constraints.

Even Techspot/Hardware Unboxed said the following:

If both CPUs were available at their MSRP, then the 5600X would be the obvious choice as it’s faster and more efficient, plus it's supported on a wider range of motherboards. But at today’s prices we’d get the 11600K. Actually no, what we’d do is forget both the 5600X and 11600K and just get the outgoing 10600K, or even better the 10600KF.

The Core i5-10600K is $224 and the 10600KF model (no graphics) posing an even more attractive proposition at $200. Those 35% savings could then go into something else, especially if your focus is gaming. If you’re in need of a CPU upgrade today and have a budget between $200 and $300, the Core i5-10600KF is a cracking good CPU for the money.

Techspot/Hardware Unboxed utterly savaged the Core i9 11900K and so did Gamersnexus,but the supply constraints AMD has,which are pushing up street pricing is starting to have a real effect on recommendations now. More than the high end its now very concerning that the entry level and maisntream markets seem to have Intel offering better value products,which are easier to get hold off at RRP.

A new tape out under Samsung design rules could be tricky for existing products, after months of effort and spending millions on the port with masks and testing the chip would be a long way towards obsolete.

It does feel like they need to do something though. I notice you can't even get an Athlon 3000G right now. Something at that low end level even GlobalFoundaries could make, and people don't really care if low end chips going into Chromebooks etc are the latest thing.

I think AMD didn't order extra wafers from GF as their WSA is coming to a close,and expected TSMC to be able to supply enough capacity. It appears TSMC can't dial up enough extra capacity for AMD,despite Huawei being booted off TSMC 7NM and 5NM.

The consoles are also eating up a lot of the extra capacity AMD booked from some posts I saw on here. Its sadly just a perfect storm.

It does seem Nvidia going with Samsung in some ways has meant they have had more capacity to sell GPUs. Its far easier to get an Nvidia GPU.

[3dcandy]

I won't quote.... see around the world at the top of that.
Stocks in US are poor, for example.
But stocks of AMD in US are much better and so are prices.

I know we're UK based but we also have a perfect storm of covid and brexit to thank for our issues.
Yes Intel sell vastly more than AMD but for certain products in the new Intel stack the availability is shocking. I've read that they reckon the top chip for example is suffering yield issues. The reviews are nearly all about the top end - thus me saying that. I'm on about Intel selling lots of the top end chips not the stack

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

I looked on Newegg,Amazon US and a few UK retailers. The only RKL SKU which might be a bit hit and miss appears to be the Core i9 11900 series,but the Core i7 and Core i5 series seem OK.Again we will have to only ascertain if availability is truely poor when CNL stocks and production are rundown in favour of RKL. There is that to consider - Intel needs to sell the current CNL stock unless they want to suffer excessive inventory.

You could be right but if they are having issues then it will known by June/July. You saw that with Zen3,when it was quite clear it was either yields or lack of TSMC capacity being available. Even the Ryzen 9 CPUs have been rare as hen's teeth too,although stock does seem to be getting better now. So it seems to be the battle of the CPUs which are hard to get.

However,WRT to the Core i9 CPUs,yields are not the issue here at least with this one model. It will be the Core i7 and Core i5 models availability being lower which is an indication.The Core i9 and Core i7 CPUs this generation are only differentiated by clockspeed. Yet look at their cost and power consumption. This tells me the Core i9 CPUs are essentially a RKL Extreme Edition,ie,binned leaky parts which can clock higher,and have all the boosting tech enabled on them. They are a marketing exercise and why they cost so much. This stunt has been done by Intel before - the P4 EE was the same and harder to get,and existed to just try and rain on the Athlon 64 parade. Nvidia did even back in the day with the 1GHZ GTX560TI GPUs which ended up never really making it to retail,and the few that did had stability problems IIRC.