• 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"

Does it need to be a merry go round though? Facts are facts. Run everything at the same power, the 2ccds are a little bit better (10%) in efficiency than the bigger intel parts, the single ccds are a lot worse in efficiency compared to their intel counterparts. Why are we still talking about and act like there is a gap is beyond me.

The germans at computer base de tested all cpus at multiple multithreaded workloads at multiple power levels. Wanna know who was - by far - the most efficient cpu? Yeap, the 13900k. Other interresting facts, the 13700k at 88w was faster than the 7700x / 7800x 3d at 142w!!! The 7700x / 7800x3d was losing massively even to the 13600k, it was consuming more power while being slower. The 7600x was also, by far, the worst cpu in efficiency in their charts.

So why what I'm reading in this forum is completely different to what the reviews are showing?

:rolleyes:


Here it is!

giphy.gif
 
Beep beep.

They should have renamed it to: the most efficient processor in the world when you tinker with the BIOS and optimize it a bit, but that applies to all products, so... According to his logic, Intel has a patent on optimizing processors in the BIOS, meaning only Intel products can do it, and it must be emphasized multiple times that efficiency is not an issue because everything can be adjusted and limited.
 
They should have renamed it to: the most efficient processor in the world when you tinker with the BIOS and optimize it a bit, but that applies to all products, so... According to his logic, Intel has a patent on optimizing processors in the BIOS, meaning only Intel products can do it, and it must be emphasized multiple times that efficiency is not an issue because everything can be adjusted and limited.
A power limit isn't optimizing. It's just a power limit. AMD Cpus come with a power limit, but you can change those as well. Intel K cpus do not, so if you want efficiency either don't buy the K parts but the T or non K or buy the K parts and power limit them. Either way, efficiency is equal between the high end CPUs and Intel wins in the lower end segment. Can we move on now?

EG1. Except gaming, in gaming the 3d chips are better.
 
Last edited:
I suspect Intel's main focus will be power consumption. It's not a good image with 12900k, 13900k being so highly inefficient compared to Zen4x3d. 14th gen for desktop is likely to make this worse.

A desktop chip consuming 350W+ is complete madness, when the competition sips power and delivers similar overall performance (better performance in games).
Pat Gelsinger: Accelerators, Accelerators, Accelerators.
 
Seems to me like you have to spend most of your time buried in the bios to get both Intel and AMD systems working `properly`, I just want to plug it in and get going !!! Ah the good old days :D
 
Seems to me like you have to spend most of your time buried in the bios to get both Intel and AMD systems working `properly`, I just want to plug it in and get going !!! Ah the good old days :D
They both still more than good enough and the best it's ever been with out the box performance. Working 'properly' in the old days would be things like the shunting mod and being forced to overclock and that because they left so much performance in the box.

It's because you are generally only getting the nth degree of performance for all the hard work now as the rest is already there.
 
They both still more than good enough and the best it's ever been with out the box performance. Working 'properly' in the old days would be things like the shunting mod and being forced to overclock and that because they left so much performance in the box.

It's because you are generally only getting the nth degree of performance for all the hard work now as the rest is already there.

I agree. These days the CPU's pretty much overclock themselves out of the box. Very little headroom to be gained in pure frequency.

If you're gaming at 4k, you get 99%of the performance with "load optimized defaults" from Intel 13th gen and Zen4.
 
And what do the users of 13900k and 13900ks gain from purchasing 14900k, apart from a 100W+ higher consumption and a lighter wallet? Someone mentioned platform vitality, which I consider to be when new models offer significant advancements, noticeably higher performance, etc., rather than just within a 5% margin while consuming much more power. With AMD, we had Zen 2 with a 15% IPC improvement over Zen 1, and then Zen 3 with a 19% higher IPC compared to Zen 2. Additionally, there's Zen 3-3d which offers significantly higher 0.1%/1% low fps in gaming. Transitioning from Zen 1 and Zen 2 to Zen 3-3d is substantial, and that's what I consider true platform vitality.
 
well well well look who joined Intel

 
well well well look who joined Intel

That says to me Intel are exhausting other options.
 
That says to me Intel are exhausting other options.
Not really, in every industry people will move from one company to the next looking for that little bit of extra coin. I work in insurance and consultancy industry and I see senior people leave one day only to appear at one of out competitors 6 months later as their CEO or new CFO, it's just a merry go round of talent.

Ask Mr Hallock why he joined Intel and you'll get a BS answer such as 'their goals aligned with mine' but we all know you left because of the financial opportunities they've been offered. There's no shame in it we all do it but outside of our families and close friends it's not we would ever normally admit to.
 
Not really, in every industry people will move from one company to the next looking for that little bit of extra coin. I work in insurance and consultancy industry and I see senior people leave one day only to appear at one of out competitors 6 months later as their CEO or new CFO, it's just a merry go round of talent.

Ask Mr Hallock why he joined Intel and you'll get a BS answer such as 'their goals aligned with mine' but we all know you left because of the financial opportunities they've been offered. There's no shame in it we all do it but outside of our families and close friends it's not we would ever normally admit to.
Truth is neither of us really know so your guess is as good as mine ;)
 
And what do the users of 13900k and 13900ks gain from purchasing 14900k, apart from a 100W+ higher consumption and a lighter wallet? Someone mentioned platform vitality, which I consider to be when new models offer significant advancements, noticeably higher performance, etc., rather than just within a 5% margin while consuming much more power. With AMD, we had Zen 2 with a 15% IPC improvement over Zen 1, and then Zen 3 with a 19% higher IPC compared to Zen 2. Additionally, there's Zen 3-3d which offers significantly higher 0.1%/1% low fps in gaming. Transitioning from Zen 1 and Zen 2 to Zen 3-3d is substantial, and that's what I consider true platform vitality.

If rumours are true and 14900k is just 200Mhz higher clock, with higher power draw, then very little, besides epeen/bragging rights.

If they've improved the process, implemented DLVR, reduced power draw, then that a different story, but we don't know for sure at this point.
 
Maybe the 14700k, that includes additional E cores, might see the best improvements from the current gen.
It would be nice to think that it might reduce prices of the current gen and maybe even influence something similar by AMD.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom