Alder Lake-S leaks

[4K8KW10]

I am confused by all the hype for Alderlake. Yes they look like they will compete. Problem i have is lots of people saying silly things like RIP AMD and Intel is back. They are not back at all, as it stands they are competing with a product that is a year old and doing so buy burning more power and creating more heat even though they have the "efficient cores". What happens a coupe months after Alderlake launches and AMD beat Alderlake will it suddenly be RIP Intel and AMD are back. They still have nothing to compete with Epyc or threadripper either so Intel have a long long way to go yet

As I said - we desperately need competition now and Intel to wake the sleeping and milking us AMD up.
Offering an effectively 10-core/16-thread Core i5 at the same price point to compete with and handily beat the 6-core/12-thread Ryzen 5 5600X by ~25% in the single-threaded workloads and hold the single-threaded performance crown, is the first step towards a fairer market situation.

 

[cliffy]

As I said - we desperately need competition now and Intel to wake the sleeping and milking us AMD up.
Offering an effectively 10-core/16-thread Core i5 at the same price point to compete with and handily beat the 6-core/12-thread Ryzen 5 5600X by ~25% in the single-threaded workloads and hold the single-threaded performance crown, is the first step towards a fairer market situation.

I agree competition is needed but your reply doesn't really answer my points. Plus i do not really think AMD are milking it, i suspect a like for like system will still be cheaper on AMD based on the prices i have xeenfor the Z690 boards especially when factoring in the longevity of AM4

 

[4K8KW10]

I agree competition is needed but your reply doesn't really answer my points. Plus i do not really think AMD are milking it, i suspect a like for like system will still be cheaper on AMD based on the prices i have xeenfor the Z690 boards especially when factoring in the longevity of AM4

If Alder Lake is 25% faster per thread than Vermeer, I don't expect AMD suddenly to launch anything that can potentially beat the former.

 

[jigger]

As I said - we desperately need competition now and Intel to wake the sleeping and milking us AMD up.
Offering an effectively 10-core/16-thread Core i5 at the same price point to compete with and handily beat the 6-core/12-thread Ryzen 5 5600X by ~25% in the single-threaded workloads and hold the single-threaded performance crown, is the first step towards a fairer market situation.

It will take time for Intel to offer that.

 

[cliffy]

If Alder Lake is 25% faster per thread than Vermeer, I don't expect AMD suddenly to launch anything that can potentially beat the former.

The 3D stacked Cache along with a Mhz speed boost of refined process will close if not pass the gap and no doubt be more efficient in the process to. If you look at all the leaked benchmarks the intel chips are running at a higher frequency. Make the frequency equal an the possible Intel IPC advantage shrinks which is why i think the next and last AM4 chips to be released will at the bare minimum batch Alderlake

 

[jigger]

If Alder Lake is 25% faster per thread than Vermeer, I don't expect AMD suddenly to launch anything that can potentially beat the former.

The cadence of AMD has been impressive. Circa 15% every 18 months.

AMD are competing with themselves and seem not to be resting on their laurels at all.

 

[Joxeon]

The cadence of AMD has been impressive. Circa 15% every 18 months.

AMD are competing with themselves and seem to be resting on their laurels at all.

While a 15% performance boost is a good uplift except when the prices rise by up to 50% on some Sku's as it did with zen 3 it means your actually getting less performance per $ spent.

 

[cliffy]

While a 15% performance boost is a good uplift except when the prices rise by up to 50% on some Sku's as it did with zen 3 it means your actually getting less performance per $ spent.

Sorry but which chips were more 50% more expensive? I cannot find anything to support this

 

[cliffy]

While a 15% performance boost is a good uplift except when the prices rise by up to 50% on some Sku's as it did with zen 3 it means your actually getting less performance per $ spent.

5600X was 20% more expensive then 3600X
5800x was 11% more than the 3800X
5900X was 9.5% more than the 3900x
5950x was the same price as the 3950x

Cannot see 50% anywhere??

All provided huge performance gains over the previous generation, were far better priced than Intel alternatives and you did not need a new motherboard to run them

 

[Joxeon]

Sorry but which chips were more 50% more expensive? I cannot find anything to support this

The 6 core chips.

3600 $200
5600X $300

 

[cliffy]

The 6 core chips.

3600 $200
5600X $300

That is not like for like you cannot compare that. You actual complaint would be that they did not launch a 5600. What they did do was leave the previous generation for sale at discounted prices

 

[Joxeon]

That is not like for like you cannot compare that. You actual complaint would be that they did not launch a 5600. What they did do was leave the previous generation for sale at discounted prices

300$ is 33% more than 200$ not 50%

Don't let the chip naming fool you as the 5600X is indeed a replacement to the 3600 as it has the same TDP and same cooler, the fact that they added an X on the end was just clever marketing to fool people into thinking the price rise wasn't as high as it really was.

200+50%=300 unless I'm missing something.

 

[cliffy]

Don't let the chip naming fool you as the 5600X is indeed a replacement to the 3600 as it has the same TDP and same cooler, the fact that they added an X on the end was just clever marketing to fool people into thinking the price rise wasn't as high as it really was.

or you could say they lowered the TDP of the 5600x over the 3600x and still improved performance. You can spin it anyway you want

 

[Joxeon]

or you could say they lowered the TDP of the 5600x over the 3600x and still improved performance. You can spin it anyway you want

Whichever way you spin it the fact of the matter remains that a zen3 6core cost £100 more than a zen 2 6core.

Now if Intel bring out the 12600k and it beats a 5600X by an even larger margin than the 5600X did a 3600 and then raised the price by £100 would be arguing Intels corner on that one?.

 

[4K8KW10]

Hence I said that AMD allows itself to milk us

This year in the hardware components market is a real nightmare.
No graphics cards, or at insane pricing, and no competition in the processors space either.

 

[Journey]

Whichever way you spin it the fact of the matter remains that a zen3 6core cost £100 more than a zen 2 6core.

Now if Intel bring out the 12600k and it beats a 5600X by an even larger margin than the 5600X did a 3600 and then raised the price by £100 would be arguing Intels corner on that one?.

Depends on how many GWh's of electricity it requires to run per second.

 

[Joxeon]

Depends on how many GWh's of electricity it requires to run per second.

I don't think people care about the power usage so long as the performance gains are decent, people spending £1000+ on Gpus that use nearly 400w proves that.

 

[Journey]

I don't think people care about the power usage so long as the performance gains are decent, people spending £1000+ on Gpus that use nearly 400w proves that.

Well people are daft, avg unit (kWh) of electricity in the UK now is 21p, if you have a device that uses 100w more for 8 hours per day on average, then you've used nearly 300kWh extra in a year, or over £60. Adjust the figures accordingly for the usage hours, obviously.

 

[4K8KW10]

Except that you have to run your processor at maximum peak power usage in order to see that difference. In normal everyday usage even like gaming, the power draw remains much lower!

 

[jigger]

If individual people care about power or not, performance per watt is a key metric that the vast majority of the industry do care about. Nobody is going to design a CPU for a single market.