• 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

Grim5 said:
Current top of the range models from amd and intel sit at around 40-50w while you web browse, YouTube or even just idle. I assume big.little will bring that down to like 10-15w, but do you care?
Click to expand...
I do, I spend more time doing browsing word processing and YouTubing than gaming/photo editing/video editing. So ya I do.
 
Grim5 said:
Current top of the range models from amd and intel sit at around 40-50w while you web browse, YouTube or even just idle. I assume big.little will bring that down to like 10-15w, but do you care?
Click to expand...

If your processors using 50w while web browsing there's something seriously wrong with your setup. Moderm processors put unused cores to sleep and they use virtually no power.
 
marms said:
If your processors using 50w while web browsing there's something seriously wrong with your setup. Moderm processors put unused cores to sleep and they use virtually no power.
Click to expand...

im watching a youtube video right now and my 5950x is sitting at 55w
 
marms said:
If your processors using 50w while web browsing there's something seriously wrong with your setup. Moderm processors put unused cores to sleep and they use virtually no power.
Click to expand...
Countered somewhat by modern browsers being so well threaded. Every core has something to do and can't go to deep sleep.
Grim5 said:
Current top of the range models from amd and intel sit at around 40-50w while you web browse, YouTube or even just idle. I assume big.little will bring that down to like 10-15w, but do you care?
Click to expand...
40-50W idle is whole system, right?
My 5800X idles at 20-23W PPT. So including IO die and VRM inefficiencies. Cores themselves are at 1-2W all together.

So far all idle problems people had (mostly high 45-55C temps) could be traced to some background app, usually RGB.
 
alec said:
Countered somewhat by modern browsers being so well threaded. Every core has something to do and can't go to deep sleep.
40-50W idle is whole system, right?
My 5800X idles at 20-23W PPT. So including IO die and VRM inefficiencies. Cores themselves are at 1-2W all together.

So far all idle problems people had (mostly high 45-55C temps) could be traced to some background app, usually RGB.
Click to expand...


No not whole system lol

Gpu idles at 45w
Cpu idles at 50-60w
Water pump probably another 20w
Not sure how much ram and rgb uses and NVMe and fans

Temps are fine, CPU at 35c, GPU at 30c

I say idle, but as you mention there is background stuff running all the time (rgb, sound control panel, mouse control panel etc)
 
Last edited:
The possibilities go beyond power use though. Wouldn't it be great if at some point the little cores could allow for truly silent (passive) cooling while idling or for low workload activities, only going for active cooling when the big cores are being used? More power = more heat after all
 
my system with light work load ie browsing and word processing etc draws around 100w at the socket.

if that can go down to 50w i will be pretty happy and if that goes to 15w i will be delighted as I am using the damn thing everyday (mon to sun) and 8-10hrs at a go so that's a fair bit of energy saved.
 
Even lowering CPU power use to ARM levels won't give you such improvement. Motherboard, memory, gpu all have idle power consumption.
And PSU are not efficient at all in 10-100w range.
ATX12VO looked very promising for such idle power improvements.

Edit: well, using a laptop would make sense if you care about power so much.
It should use around 10w idle and 40-60w load... but then it is less powerful and not as flexible.
 
Ya I should really be using a laptop for my work and my PC for my video editing and gaming needs.

but I didn’t think the outlay justifies the energy saved. Plug another piece of hardware means more embodied energy etc.
 
I do not want a laptop and already have a phone so want big cores not 1/2 of each, possibly yes if it was X real cores + X HT cores and then Y small cores for browsing etc.
 
WiGgLr said:
The possibilities go beyond power use though. Wouldn't it be great if at some point the little cores could allow for truly silent (passive) cooling while idling or for low workload activities, only going for active cooling when the big cores are being used? More power = more heat after all
Click to expand...
TBH I do that with my system, just needs some power efficient normal cores.
 
^^^ Well, if we divide the reported fake 27.2 GHz by 8 if it's the number of cores that it recognises, then we get 3.4 GHz all core boost.
 
Ok lets do some maths here.

The 1186G7 in its 28 Watt configuration boost to 4.8Ghz, it scored 585.

The 5980HS also boost to 4.8Ghz, it scored 586. The same.

For good measure the 5950X which scores 643 and apparently boost to 4.9Ghz, which makes no sense, 10% higher performance for 2% higher clock speeds... but we will go with it, the 5950X is Desktop and probably boosting a little over 4.9Ghz (my 5800X is supposed to be 4.8Ghz but is a solid 4.85Ghz) and the 5980HS being a laptop chip is probably boosting a little lower, i score about 620 at 4.85Ghz.

I think what we can say is Rocket Lake is at least 95% the IPC of Zen 3, the main Alder Lake cores are the same as Rocket Lake.

https://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-ryzen-9-5900x-and-5950x-review,10.html

HQwCuAc.png
 
Last edited:
4K8KW10 said:
^^^ Well, if we divide the reported fake 27.2 GHz by 8 if it's the number of cores that it recognises, then we get 3.4 GHz all core boost.
Click to expand...

Alternative theory, it's reading the clock speed of the little cores = 3.4ghz on the little cores.
We know from earlier leaks months ago that they were getting over 4ghz on the big cores, so there is no way the score has increase and dropped 1ghz to 2ghz clocks

The most likely answer here is that the little cores run like 1 to 2ghz slower than the big cores and software like Geekbench gets very confused
 
Grim5 said:
We know from earlier leaks months ago that they were getting over 4ghz on the big cores, so there is no way the score has increase and dropped 1ghz to 2ghz clocks
Click to expand...

It's an engineering sample - your statement is wrong. The frequency can be in any range.
 
Grim5 said:
you don't gain performance by dropping clock speed, not rocket science
Click to expand...

What are you comparing the above result with?
And how are you sure that there is no new driver or some changes in the new configuration which could result in higher performance with lower clocks?
 
Leaks are leaks (and speculative), but this is starting to sound like genuine progression. Still a long way to go but I wonder if this will be the real deal or just a disappointment.
More importantly, with the way things are at the moment, I wonder where this will be positioned price-wise.
For those that have been in this game for a while like me, various PC components have had huge peaks and troughs in supply and demand (hence price), but with the perfect storm we have at the moment no-one knows what the new 'normal' will look like.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom