Lets hope Nvidia take a note from this launch and stockpike a few million 4080 ahead of launch day
-
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.
Alder Lake-S leaks
- Thread starter Grim5
- Start date
Lets hope Nvidia take a note from this launch and stockpike a few million 4080 ahead of launch day
Soldato
Stock isn't plentiful, its mostly gone. OCUK haven't got any motherboards, and basically had a handful at best compared to the CPU's not what I'd call a smooth launch.
Soldato
Plenty of CPUs, just no ddr5 and mobos.
Its sales are below average that's why. Probably because the vast majority of enthusiasts are already on Ryzen platform so since the 3D Cache versions will beat ADL in gaming performance and it being a drop-in upgrade, there is little value proposition in getting ADL. The only ones who will buy this are those on older gen Intel CPUs like 8700k,9700k, 9900k, 4790k etc who need a platform upgrade anyway and AM4 being dead, ADL makes more sense. The absurd pricing on the motherboards also hasn't helped. The CPUs had to be priced competitively as a good-mid range Strix board costs almost as much as a 12700k. The Asus cash back will end soon and the TUF costs £280, which is just appalling for an entry level board
Soldato
I'm happy I got both done were I am on the list (if there is one)but I'm sure as always Gibbo will keep us in formed.
Soldato
I'm going for the cash back but does it not start on the 18th of this month. I tried it and said something about a code..?
Man of Honour
Depends. there are 6 temp sensors on the Z690 boards currently, the CPU temp is taken in various ways too, one by the mobo inside the socket, one off the CPU as package temp, one off the cpu as individual cores, another off the IA cores etc. If you run HWINFO64 you will get a full rundown of every sensor on the PC and just how much is reported.
If it appears to hit TJMax but not throttle then it can't actually be at TJMax. The CPU would 100% throttle if it is too hot, regardless of what software reports.
I'm not surprised though, given that there are other software with reporting problems - such as CPU Z that in some cases shows a 12900k running at 10ghz, which is impossible.
Just to expand on this, I run Cinebench R23, score ~27k. Keep running the test so the temps remain at 100c as reported in Hwinfo 7.14 - note a couple P cores reach 100c others do not. None of the E cores exceed 82c.
I keep re-running the test to keep the reported temp at 100c - score is the same and reported speeds on ALL P cores are approx 4.7GHz - is that really the extent of the thermal throttle as I'd expect it to go sub 4GHz and the Cinebench score to drop to reflect this.
In addition no crashing, lockup, errors, etc.
Something is amiss here.
I keep re-running the test to keep the reported temp at 100c - score is the same and reported speeds on ALL P cores are approx 4.7GHz - is that really the extent of the thermal throttle as I'd expect it to go sub 4GHz and the Cinebench score to drop to reflect this.
In addition no crashing, lockup, errors, etc.
Something is amiss here.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 24 May 2015
- Posts
- 500
Man of Honour
Cinebench never gets my CPU near 90 degrees as posted earlier, it's in the high 70s. Prime95 on the other hand running the Small FFT test gets me to around 91 degrees. I've yet to see anywhere close to 100 degrees however but I am on a different cooler and paste to others on the 12700KF.
Perhaps this only applies to 12900k as Anandtech only listed that cpu with regards to his comment and testing (?), you can also see other review sites on YT hitting 100c on Cinebench too with 12900k.
If the actual cooler was burning hot I'd prob think its getting toasty, its warm to the touch and doesn't feel 100c. On my previous 3960x TR system on loading that up you could feel the heat from the top of the case - now that did get hot.
Although I can't rule out my cooler could also be a load of cr@p.
If the actual cooler was burning hot I'd prob think its getting toasty, its warm to the touch and doesn't feel 100c. On my previous 3960x TR system on loading that up you could feel the heat from the top of the case - now that did get hot.
Although I can't rule out my cooler could also be a load of cr@p.
Software coding issues or BIOS reading issues?
You can't as the system can't post/boot into windows without the P cores enabled.
Last edited:
Soldato
He tested just e cores by disabling the 1 p core in games and apps.
I understand you can do it in Linux, disabale all the P cores, but guessing they are enabled in bios then in Linux turning them off..
Old article from this guy, he normally talks a lot of rubbish too so take it with a grain of salt until someone respected shows it like Wendell at level 1 tech.
https://www.hardwaretimes.com/intel...bling-of-low-power-or-high-performance-cores/
Its a very interesting test. Shows that the E cores by themselves are not good for gaming, maybe same gaming performance as ryzen 1000. But oh boy are they efficient, pulling less power at full load than most CPUs at idle.
However if I compare these results to the person who tried to tweak his 12900k for a 35w TDP using the optimal configuration of cores, it looks like fully disabling P cores is not the best way to go and you're giving away free performance as you can get better performance by still keeping a some P cores enabled but just underclocking and undervolting those P cores and still end up with the same 30 or 35w tdp and higher performance - also E cores seem to be less efficient at their boost clock, so keeping E cores at 2.4ghz is also better for efficiency and let P cores do most of the work.
However if I compare these results to the person who tried to tweak his 12900k for a 35w TDP using the optimal configuration of cores, it looks like fully disabling P cores is not the best way to go and you're giving away free performance as you can get better performance by still keeping a some P cores enabled but just underclocking and undervolting those P cores and still end up with the same 30 or 35w tdp and higher performance - also E cores seem to be less efficient at their boost clock, so keeping E cores at 2.4ghz is also better for efficiency and let P cores do most of the work.
Last edited: