Intel Core i9-11900KF 3.5GHz (Rocket Lake) Socket LGA1200 Processor - Retail

humbug · 21 Mar 2021 at 11:58

Steve Hel said:
He sounds like he’s trying to get a rise. If that’s the case then ignoring him would be more effective. If he’s genuine, then let him buy what he wants. It’s his money and his mistake.

There are a very small number of people here who post like this, whatever the reason for it what can be easily debunked really should be.

They are not doing it to make people debunk them, that isn't the troll they have in mind, if that is the reason for the way they post.

Steve Hel · 21 Mar 2021 at 12:02

I see your points. And if that is the reason you are doing this, then fair enough. I haven’t been on here long enough to question long term members reasons .

I just see the majority of Intel threads turn into an AMD attack on Intel.

If you are genuinely doing this to help others not fall for lies then I can’t argue with that.

humbug · 21 Mar 2021 at 12:23

Steve Hel said:
I see your points. And if that is the reason you are doing this, then fair enough. I haven’t been on here long enough to question long term members reasons .

I just see the majority of Intel threads turn into an AMD attack on Intel.

If you are genuinely doing this to help others not fall for lies then I can’t argue with that.

You're right, quite a lot of them do. AMD vs Nvidia vs Intel is an argument as old as these companies, its like that with CPU's and its the same with GPU's.

With the nature of AMD's comback, in how aggressive they have been it seems they have shown Intel up to be cynical and conniving, for a decade telling us we don't need more than 4 cores and charging £850 for 8, in the last 4 years AMD has driven a pretty explosive markup in what we get for our money while Intel marketing headed by a man called Ryan Shrout, who this community know to be a complete bawbag have been running round putting out fires in a rather comical but equally cynical way, and it really just rubs people up the wrong way, especially when they see posts that could have been made by Intel's marketing team.

kitfit1 · 21 Mar 2021 at 12:43

humbug said:
especially when they see posts that could have been made by Intel's marketing team.

I don't there is any "could have" about it @humbug. Any of us that have been here for some time know full well that Intel "plants" peeps on all tech forums for exactly this purpose, they always have done. In fact it's totally predictable when those peeps will start a posting spree and they always do

cliffy · 21 Mar 2021 at 13:26

humbug said:
It isn't. not by a long way. https://www.anandtech.com/show/16535/intel-core-i7-11700k-review-blasting-off-with-rocket-lake

@humbug Shhh, you'll be upsetting some people by posting real world info. Only slides direct from Intel can be used in these threads

Steve Hel · 21 Mar 2021 at 13:31

humbug said:
You're right, quite a lot of them do. AMD vs Nvidia vs Intel is an argument as old as these companies, its like that with CPU's and its the same with GPU's.

With the nature of AMD's comback, in how aggressive they have been it seems they have shown Intel up to be cynical and conniving, for a decade telling us we don't need more than 4 cores and charging £850 for 8, in the last 4 years AMD has driven a pretty explosive markup in what we get for our money while Intel marketing headed by a man called Ryan Shrout, who this community know to be a complete bawbag have been running round putting out fires in a rather comical but equally cynical way, and it really just rubs people up the wrong way, especially when they see posts that could have been made by Intel's marketing team.

I will be looking at all my options including AMD next upgrade. What’s put me off AMD in the past is high temps and memory compatibility. I have noticed a lot less issues cropping up apart from a usb issue recently that’s apparently fixed.

Do you honestly think these people work for Intel? I mean it wouldn’t take much research to see that the 11th gen is a bit of a waste of time for anyone. Especially when in around 6 months much bigger things are on the horizon.

I don’t see anyone else commenting on these threads. Fair enough if there were people falling for it, but I haven’t seen any evidence to suggest that.

The only thing I can see is pcie 4.0, but AMD already have that and from what I’ve seen it doesn’t make much difference if any.

humbug · 21 Mar 2021 at 14:02

Steve Hel said:
I will be looking at all my options including AMD next upgrade. What’s put me off AMD in the past is high temps and memory compatibility. I have noticed a lot less issues cropping up apart from a usb issue recently that’s apparently fixed.

Do you honestly think these people work for Intel? I mean it wouldn’t take much research to see that the 11th gen is a bit of a waste of time for anyone. Especially when in around 6 months much bigger things are on the horizon.

I don’t see anyone else commenting on these threads. Fair enough if there were people falling for it, but I haven’t seen any evidence to suggest that.

The only thing I can see is pcie 4.0, but AMD already have that and from what I’ve seen it doesn’t make much difference if any.

Do you honestly think these people work for Intel?

I didn't say that and its not how i approach my debates with people

I also don't care what people buy, i even understand how people can be put off by AMD's apparent teething issues, which they have had but they are also usually on top of resolving those issues.

Here's the thing about that, you can stick with what is essentially the same architecture design for a long time and you'll never get any 'surprises' cropping up once that architecture is in millions of system's, or you can be aggressive in pushing things forward inventing new ways and new stuff all the time and have to deal with a lot of complex problems along the way.

Frankly i'm amazed AMD don't have a lot more issues, they are doing very well.

Steve Hel · 21 Mar 2021 at 14:28

humbug said:
I didn't say that and its not how i approach my debates with people

I also don't care what people buy, i even understand how people can be put off by AMD's apparent teething issues, which they have had but they are also usually on top of resolving those issues.

Here's the thing about that, you can stick with what is essentially the same architecture design for a long time and you'll never get any 'surprises' cropping up once that architecture is in millions of system's, or you can be aggressive in pushing things forward inventing new ways and new stuff all the time and have to deal with a lot of complex problems along the way.

Frankly i'm amazed AMD don't have a lot more issues, they are doing very well.

You didn’t say that, but you implied it in a round a bout way.

Again, the only people taking these couple of people seriously seems to be the same people that claim “they don’t care what people buy”, yet every thread about Intel goes the same way.

If Intel are paying people to come on here and change what people already know about the current situation, then I don’t think they are getting very far. All it takes for someone to wind you lot up and watch you go is to title a thread something silly, claiming Intel beats this or that, and watch you dance.

You are giving them what they want.

DeathStorm · 21 Mar 2021 at 14:45

Steve Hel said:
You are giving them what they want.

Should we just ignore comments which are clearly wrong to outright lies then?

I care less about who's working for who than the quality of their argument and anyone who's gushing about Intel's 11th gen will seem suspicious given how disappointing the results have been from independent testing. Things are getting blown out of proportion though.

Steve Hel · 21 Mar 2021 at 15:38

DeathStorm said:
Should we just ignore comments which are clearly wrong to outright lies then?

I care less about who's working for who than the quality of their argument and anyone who's gushing about Intel's 11th gen will seem suspicious given how disappointing the results have been from independent testing. Things are getting blown out of proportion though.

I understand your point, but with the select few it clearly doesn’t stop them. It’s a case of banging your head off a brick wall.

What’s next? AMD stinks, and Intel doesn’t? You can show them facts, but it doesn’t change the fact that they still continue to try and get a rise. And they do by the look of things.

turbot1984 · 21 Mar 2021 at 16:01

1980's resolutions in 2021 makes sense? I guess it proves an academic point.

Hedge · 21 Mar 2021 at 16:39

720p lol

richto · 21 Mar 2021 at 17:06

That's the 11700K. And at irrelevant resolutions where you are probably maxing out the Intel CPU across all cores. If you look at FPS with sensible values of 1080P and above then allow for 11900K its going to be fastest:

https://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph16535/121977.png

]https://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph16535/121985.png

**No Hotlinking**

Minstadave · 21 Mar 2021 at 17:30

Yeah you've cherry picked those benches by quite some way. Post all the 1080P results and you'll see it paints a very different story. Not sure how you managed to miss that.

I'm deeply shocked that you've, completely at random ofcourse, managed to pick the only 2 1080p results the 11700K wins in out of the 10 games in that review. The 9900KS beats the 11700K at 1080P more often than not.

You've also hotlinked the graphs.

Minstadave · 21 Mar 2021 at 17:53

For balance:

richto · 21 Mar 2021 at 17:56

Minstadave said:
Yeah you've cherry picked those benches by quite some way. Post all the 1080P results and you'll see it paints a very different story. Not sure how you managed to miss that.

I'm deeply shocked that you've, completely at random ofcourse, managed to pick the only 2 1080p results the 11700K wins in out of the 10 games in that review. The 9900KS beats the 11700K at 1080P more often than not.

You've also hotlinked the graphs.

I picked the two FPS I knew at 1080P. Cherry picking is posting 720p and 360p results, lol.

I guess Borderlands and GTA5 are FPS too, but again those are going to be a 11900K win when you allow for the few percent faster over the 11700K:

I don't care about non FPS benchmarks for my use case.

https://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph16535/121961.png

https://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph16535/121993.png

**No Hotlinking**

Minstadave · 21 Mar 2021 at 18:02

richto said:
I picked the two FPS I knew at 1080P. Cherry picking is posting 720p and 360p results, lol.

Keep moving those goalposts, and hotlinking.

richto said:
I don't care about non FPS benchmarks for my use case.

That's interesting because Gears Tactics is not an FPS but you guess Borderlands is an FPS? Come on Dave, this is low brow even for you.

humbug · 21 Mar 2021 at 18:10

Testing at low resolution is offloading the work to the CPU rather than the GPU, if you want to test how fast the CPU actually is in games, not the GPU that's what you would do, in fact that what was always done, we didn't complain about that when Intel was faster, now that AMD are its suddenly a problem? Right.

richto · 21 Mar 2021 at 18:15

humbug said:
Testing at low resolution is offloading the work to the CPU rather than the GPU, if you want to test how fast the CPU actually is in games, not the GPU that's what you would do, in fact that what was always done, we didn't complain about that when Intel was faster, now that AMD are its suddenly a problem? Right.

No it's testing the total compute power of the CPU. If I cared about that I would get a 5950X. I care about performance at resolutions I might actually use.

Journey · 21 Mar 2021 at 18:17

And back to all the gear and no idea again.