Caporegime
They are struggling to do that now, with all their billions, and when they really need to.
-
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
They are struggling to do that now, with all their billions, and when they really need to.
Which is kinda what AMD have done surely
They've had a 16-core in the 'enthusiast' level for a good while now, and it's still 'overkill'. Is there really an argument for going to 20+ cores 'now' given how few things use all 16 cores, and those that do have the option of Threadripper/EPYC.Is that a conscious choice by Intel because it's the best option or because they can't realistically do more than 8 (or maybe 10) performance cores and *need* to add the small cores just to try to compete?
They were over ambitious and tripped up but had Intel got 10nm out 6 years ago then Zen 3 would probably look like bulldozer right now.
Caporegime
The other one still need dragging up, kicking and screaming "no i don't want to"Which is kinda what AMD have done surely
Is that a conscious choice by Intel because it's the best option or because they can't realistically do more than 8 (or maybe 10) performance cores and *need* to add the small cores just to try to compete?
And they will, they can't let AMD run away from them too much.
If they achieved 10Ghz in 2004 the same might also be true.
What if AMD had not made the Bulldozer mistake?
What ifi'sums are a ridiculous circular argument, lets stick to what is.
Soldato
But Intel didn't............................and maybe ADL could be their "Bulldozer" moment ?...........................let's wait and see.
Soldato
If this cpu is not good at gaming I'm sticking with what I have the good 9700k @ 5.1 will do me for a while yet ..
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 May 2009
- Posts
- 21,257
Preorders this month with review embargo after launch 4th Nov, was that correct?
Soldato
its strange dont you think that we havent seen any proper gaming benchmarks ? if alder lake was as good as intel say why leak no gaming benchies. does it stink at gaming .
Caporegime
AMD are already a solid 20% ahead in gaming vs Rocket Lake, if ADL makes no improvement on that and AMD gain another 15% in 3 months that will bring them up to +35%
That's getting near Bulldozer vs Ivy Bridge and given ADL looks like it will also use twice the power of Zen 3..... yeah.
Something like that yes... preorders first and review embargo a week after that, at which point you will get the CPU.
Don't preorder, Like Rocket Lake if Intel aren't willing to let you know how the CPU performs before they let you have it something is wrong.
Soldato
Caporegime
Theres this.....
That's interesting, is this the first actual game benchmark?
In Forza 4 there are two CPU results and as i don't read mandarin i don't know what they are but in the first one the 5950X is substantially quicker than the 12900K, 454 for the 12900K and 533 for the 5950X.
That's a difference of 17% to the 5950X.
5950X on win 10 with the 12900K on win 11, Is this why Ryzen is gimped on win 11? eh?
I think any problems will be caused by the small cores, not the big ones. So, maybe this won't make the 12900K as impressive in some tasks as Intel would like people to think. It could also be related to the CPU's task scheduler, and Windows 11, maybe they are still trying to optimize the performance of the 4/8 smaller cores, before allowing any leaks.
I think the 12400K will do very well though, but this won't be hugely profitable for Intel at the current rumoured pricing. Judging by rumoured the price of the 12600K, the 12400K will likely cost around £200-£220.
The 12700K should do well to, if people disable /disregard the 4 small cores.
Maybe there will be some leaks a week before launch.
I think the 12400K will do very well though, but this won't be hugely profitable for Intel at the current rumoured pricing. Judging by rumoured the price of the 12600K, the 12400K will likely cost around £200-£220.
The 12700K should do well to, if people disable /disregard the 4 small cores.
Maybe there will be some leaks a week before launch.
Last edited:
Wasn't a big part of Rocket Lakes issues down to the awful inter-core latency? As in worse than Zen2...
If they haven't fixed that then it's going to affect gaming performance heavily even if it can look impressive in synthetic benchmarks (like we've seen).
The whole 'NDA lifting on release day' thing is just a huge red flag no matter what.
If they haven't fixed that then it's going to affect gaming performance heavily even if it can look impressive in synthetic benchmarks (like we've seen).
The whole 'NDA lifting on release day' thing is just a huge red flag no matter what.
Rocket Lake was a new microarchitecture intended for 10nm but backported to 14nm.
Alder Lake is another new microarchitecture that was designed for Intel's 10nm node. Other 10nm CPU series on laptops like Ice Lake and Tiger Lake haven't had issues with core to core latency, no reason why the 12th gen would.
Alder Lake is another new microarchitecture that was designed for Intel's 10nm node. Other 10nm CPU series on laptops like Ice Lake and Tiger Lake haven't had issues with core to core latency, no reason why the 12th gen would.
If you disable the small cores what is the point when you can buy Ryzen.
Both sets of Intel’s cores have strengths and weaknesses. Intel is trying to offset one set of problems with another to gain the strengths.
Yup, AMD will still have the advantage over 8 cores, most likely. That's fine though, as most PCs or laptops don't have more than 8 cores, nor do they need them in most cases. This could change in a year or 2 possibly.
The small cores will provide a small boost, if they even work as intended. If you need more than 8 cores, Zen 3 is the best bet, especially with 3D cache on the way.
The small cores will provide a small boost, if they even work as intended. If you need more than 8 cores, Zen 3 is the best bet, especially with 3D cache on the way.
Caporegime
The 10400F is for something up to a 3060TI but for the 12400F it depends on the overall cost, i think it will go to £200, motherboard another £200 and DDR5 another £200.
That's £600, even with the 5600X being overpriced right now you can still get it with a half decent platform for about £450.
I think you all need to look at this, to understand Alder Lake and what Intel is doing better:
https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/cpus/
Over 97% of CPUs this year (at least for gamers) have 8 or less cores.
Current gen consoles have 8 CPU cores.
The magic number is 8, it is written.
1.07% have 12 core CPUs.
It could be that 8 small cores will have roughly equivalent performance to 4 large cores, for example. IF things go well, that is. That may explain the 'logic' of smaller cores. That, and they are scalable. And marketing reasons, e.g. 'more core make CPU go brum'
https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/cpus/
Over 97% of CPUs this year (at least for gamers) have 8 or less cores.
Current gen consoles have 8 CPU cores.
The magic number is 8, it is written.
1.07% have 12 core CPUs.
It could be that 8 small cores will have roughly equivalent performance to 4 large cores, for example. IF things go well, that is. That may explain the 'logic' of smaller cores. That, and they are scalable. And marketing reasons, e.g. 'more core make CPU go brum'
Last edited:
Caporegime
This sort of stagnation is not a good thing.
Having said that 8 cores are growing 5X faster than 4 cores, 12 and 16 core CPU's are also growing but not as fast.