• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

14th Gen "Raptor Lake Refresh"

KompuKare said:
Slap a K CPU into a W680 along with some ECC and call it a server: nobody ever got fired for buying Big Blue, right?

(The phone's autocorrect wanted to change big to buggy for some reason!)
Click to expand...

If your application requires high single thread performance it is a valid approach.
 
Rroff said:
If your application requires high single thread performance it is a valid approach.
Click to expand...
Unless they need the E cores and/or overclocking, wouldn't they lowest Xeon be better?
ark.intel.com

Intel product specifications

Intel® product specifications, features and compatibility quick reference guide and code name decoder. Compare products including processors, desktop boards, server products and networking products.
ark.intel.com ark.intel.com
Xeon 2488 is very similar to 14900K but has a lower TDP. Well and less cache but that might be due to no E cores.
 
Dave2150 said:
14th gen (specifically 14900k, 14900KS) are a complete joke for gaming anyway. Not sure why any gaming datacentre's were buying these when Zen4X3D is available.

Even if the CPU's were stable, AMD is just so much more power efficient. With datacentre power being so important, I'd have thought it would be a huge incentive to swap to Zen4X3D. Imagine the power saving when considering thousands of these CPU's... Mind boggling.

I think Arrow Lake and future Intel CPU's will be clocked much more conservatively.
Click to expand...

A lot of them are only superficially aware of these differences and have a very firmly routed "you can't go wrong with Intel" mentality, so while yes on the surface they know Intel CPU's are more difficult to cool, more expensive to run, they might even know the gaming performance isn't quite as good.... but at the end of the day i wouldn't use AMD because: You - Can't - Go - Wrong - With - Intel.

Well........ aren't you the clever one for thinking you're playing it safe.
 
Last edited:
Only Intel calamity after Intel calamity for an extended period is going to change that mindset, not least because people who think of themselves as expert hate being wrong, it makes them feel like fools when what they want to feel is expert, so they still kid themselves its worse on the other side, some how.

Only when their reputation is questioned for their play it safe with Intel mentality will they turn their thinking up side down and pretend that not going Intel is the clever, the smart expert's thinking because now you've been stupid and people are beginning to see it, you've been found out, you don't actually know anything at all.
 
Last edited:
humbug said:
Only Intel calamity after Intel calamity for an extended period is going to change that mindset, not least because people who think of themselves as expert hate being wrong, it makes them feel like fools when what they want to feel is expert, so they still kid themselves its worse on the other side, some how.

Only when their reputation is questioned for their play it safe with Intel mentality is questioned will they turn their thinking up side down and pretend that not going Intel is the clever, the smart expert's thinking because now you've been stupid and people are beginning to see it, you've been found out, you don't actually know anything at all.
Click to expand...
Sounds like a politician ;)
 
RBImGuy said:
Faults like this can kill a companys reputation forever as none want a dead cpu inside like intel
Click to expand...
Yes as any potential system issue could be a CPU issue now the longer this goes on and it could snowball to the point where people will switch to a competitor to fix the issue.
 
Last edited:
Intel's near silence: either total hybris and out of touch-ness, or internal they know pretty much what percentage of their recent CPUs are affected - and it's such a huge proportion that to do right would make previous problems like the Sandy Bridge chipset recall's $1 billion look like pocket change.

Meanwhile, Intel's reputation suffers.

And yes, karma and Schadenfreude is a dish best served cold. No corporate is our friend or is clean, but Intel have played quite dirty over the decades.
 
Last edited:
Not just for this reason alone, but I have tended to be influenced to remain with an Intel based CPU platform because it has, for me, just worked and done so reasonably well, if not great.
Going forward, if that thought of stability becomes more questionable than it has of late I am considering an AMD based platform that for me is quite a leap. Not necessarily because an AMD platform has typically been "bad" but familiarity and comfort has typically meant an Intel based PC just works and does so consistently and is always stable.
So far, no reason for this to change, the total stability has been there with my 14700k and a Z690 board. As it was with the 12700k and the 9900k before it.
Brand confidence, maybe more reflective of the 13900 / 14900k CPU's, is starting to be more questionable, by myself.
Time, along with Intel's response and action will be interesting to note. As will the up and coming CPU's, from both Intel and, maybe more interesting, AMD.
I can feel the colour red being of greater significance....
 
Last edited:
Thing is even before the instability, the peak power would have made me avoid Intel. Even when they won by a small margin, the power consumption was just crazy.

At least previous high power Intel platforms were HEDT and not mainstream - with the expectations that HEDT and low end workstation stuff is just better engineered.
 
Last edited:
Vimes said:
Not just for this reason alone, but I have tended to be influenced to remain with an Intel based CPU platform because it has, for me, just worked and done so reasonably well, if not great. Going forward, if that thought of stability becomes more questionable than it has of late I am considering an AMD based platform that for me is quite a leap. Not necessarily because an AMD platform has typically been "bad" but familiarity and comfort has typically meant an Intel based PC just works and does so consistently and is always stable.
So far, no reason for this to change, the total stability has been there with my 14700k and a Z690 board. As it was with the 12700k and the 9900k before it.
Brand confidence, maybe more reflective of the 13900 / 14900k CPU's, is starting to be more questionable, by myself.
Time, along with Intel's response and action will be interesting to note. AS will the up and coming CPU's, from both Intel and, maybe more interesting, AMD.
Click to expand...
I remember those days -

 
KompuKare said:
Thing is even before the instability, the peak power would have made me avoid Intel. Even when they won by a small margin, the power consumption was just crazy.

At least previous high power Intel platforms were HEDT and not mainstream - with the expectations that HEDT and low end workstation stuff is just better engineered.
Click to expand...

Intel even broke HEDT, X99, X299 all had their issues too and why most people bailed out of them and went AMD. All comes down to intel pushing the platforms too hard to compete and poor quality control and motherboard makers also taking the micky with high voltages, settings in the BIOS as defaults and degrading the cpus, chipsets and motherboards to failure .. ASUS is a classic for this and in my experience ASUS boards have been the worst for this sort of time bomb.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom