Did I say all large markets?
And even my first post, why would you assume I'm talking about other countries than the UK.
If I ask for the price of milk, would you give the US price?
-
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.
Intel Core i7-11700K Review: Blasting Off with Rocket Lake
- Thread starter Purgatory
- Start date
Did I say all large markets?
And even my first post, why would you assume I'm talking about other countries than the UK.
If I ask for the price of milk, would you give the US price?
Soldato
No, Rocket Lake isn't a beta test of a new arch, it's a one-off. Alder Lake coming end of the year is entirely new again.
Yep, Rocket Lake is a port to try and make existing Ice Lake architecture work on 14nm and it's being done solely as a one off stop gap.
The reason Intel is rapidly moving through change is because they are so behind schedule - just remember if we look at Intel's own road maps, Rocket Lake/Ice lake was supposed be launch for Desktop on 10NM back in 2016, it's 5 years over due - Intel's plan was then to iterate on it by launching a new version of Rocket lake each years on 10nm+ then 10nm++ then 10nm+++ etc until 2021/22 when it was due to launch a new architecture again, called Alder Lake.
We're now at 2021 going into 2022 and Alder Lake is just about ready to go, which only gave Intel 6-12 months to sell Rocket lake or write off the entire R&D for that architecture and throw it in the rubbish bin. Intel has moved quickly to try and recover some revenue to allocate towards the billions it spent trying to make Rocket lake/Ice Lake work and it's just as quickly moving on from this failure.
Regardless of how a consumer feels about this product's performance today, the fact is that Rocket Lake is now 5 years overdue and in the end failed to make 10nm work, as such it consumes 50% more power than it should and runs much hotter then it should
The reason Intel is rapidly moving through change is because they are so behind schedule - just remember if we look at Intel's own road maps, Rocket Lake/Ice lake was supposed be launch for Desktop on 10NM back in 2016, it's 5 years over due - Intel's plan was then to iterate on it by launching a new version of Rocket lake each years on 10nm+ then 10nm++ then 10nm+++ etc until 2021/22 when it was due to launch a new architecture again, called Alder Lake.
We're now at 2021 going into 2022 and Alder Lake is just about ready to go, which only gave Intel 6-12 months to sell Rocket lake or write off the entire R&D for that architecture and throw it in the rubbish bin. Intel has moved quickly to try and recover some revenue to allocate towards the billions it spent trying to make Rocket lake/Ice Lake work and it's just as quickly moving on from this failure.
Regardless of how a consumer feels about this product's performance today, the fact is that Rocket Lake is now 5 years overdue and in the end failed to make 10nm work, as such it consumes 50% more power than it should and runs much hotter then it should
Last edited:
I didn't literally mean it was a beta test, just was under the impression that it was more or less Alder Lake applied to their current process - but I stand corrected.
Soldato
Nah, Rocket Lake is a total cluster****, my dude. As humbug pointed out, this was an architecture designed for Intel's 10nm process and was supposed to come out a few years ago and serve as the new basis until Alder Lake in late 2022. But after so many delays, 10nm still isn't really up to scratch so this Rocket Lake design was scaled up and applied to the old 14nm node and Alder Lake rushed forward by about a year.
We know why Rocket Lake is just *****, but the real question is why Intel even bothered. It's not even a case of "gotta put something out so it looks like we're doing something", because Rocket Lake is a regression in every way and can only been seen as an utter embarrassment. Surely putting out an entire range of products that are quantifiably worse than their predecessors, actually confirming they'll be superseded in less than a year and explicitly cancelling overclocking warranties is much more damaging optics then just not releasing anything at all.
**Inappropriate comments removed, also fully star swearing please**
Last edited by a moderator:
Ah I see, thanks for clarification. I guess that they have partnerships that rely on their releases, like the motherboard vendors and such as you say. I'm still on Skylake but shopping for a Zen 3 build now (managed to get a GPU, PSU and some memory so far so I'm making progress!) - just catching up a little on what's going on in the Intel camp. Thanks again for the info
Last edited by a moderator:
Interesting news:
Stock performance should be pretty wild with these clocks, 5.3Ghz on two cores, with 5.1Ghz across all cores, stock! These auto boost clocks depend on cooling of course.
The 11900k's appear to be ultra binned parts, which makes the price make sense. Want toping gaming performance? Pay up
Stock performance should be pretty wild with these clocks, 5.3Ghz on two cores, with 5.1Ghz across all cores, stock! These auto boost clocks depend on cooling of course.
The 11900k's appear to be ultra binned parts, which makes the price make sense. Want toping gaming performance? Pay up
So what does it look like when you design your architecture for 10nm and then end up having to build it on 14nm anyway
You get HUGE CPU cores, Intel was lucky they even managed to fit 8 cores on this thing!
Size of the chip is just a "small" inconvenience
Upscaling the smaller design disrupts all the thought put into signaling timings between transistors and all the similar stuff. This is partly why no one really does a direct design shrink across full process node, as it doesn't give much of the benefit for the cost. All todays "shrinks" are either half node, or with some significant changes in design.Intel should have just held on another 6 months for Alder Lake, unless they secretly expect that to slip as well.
Interesting news:
Stock performance should be pretty wild with these clocks, 5.3Ghz on two cores, with 5.1Ghz across all cores, stock! These auto boost clocks depend on cooling of course.
The 11900k's appear to be ultra binned parts, which makes the price make sense. Want toping gaming performance? Pay up
You know what else should be wild? Watts. Intel should have concentrated on refining their boosting algorithms to AMD levels to drop power usage more, instead of pushing higher clock speeds with already insane power usage and heat output
Soldato
Can't wait to see those cores being kept at 70c to make use of the extra 100MHz, shows how little confidence they have of it running at anything reasonable heat wise that is. You'd literally have to be an absolute plonker to buy an 11900K over the 10850K or 10900K, unless you aren't gaming and are using the PCI-E 4.0 for something useful.
Interesting news:
Stock performance should be pretty wild with these clocks, 5.3Ghz on two cores, with 5.1Ghz across all cores, stock! These auto boost clocks depend on cooling of course.
The 11900k's appear to be ultra binned parts, which makes the price make sense. Want toping gaming performance? Pay up
5.3ghz and still loses to 4.8ghz Ryzen 5000 in games, shame bro
. No need to pay that much when you see the 11900k gets smoked by the 5600x and doesn't even need $1000 custom water cooling like the 11900k needs for 5.3ghz 
and then you realise you messed up cause intel just shut down it's overclocking warranty 
Watts will probably be less on the 11900k vs 10900k, as the former has two less cores. Of course I'm meaning non AVX-512 power draw, since that's not used in games or most applications. In the applications that do use it, it obviously draws really high power, but also crushes AMD performance wise, as they don't support it.
Last edited:
That theory clearly did not work with 11700k
Even without AVX512, 11700k consumed more power than 10700k. I don't see that to change with 10900k vs 11900k11700k uses ~80W more than 5800x
Caporegime
Interesting news:
Stock performance should be pretty wild with these clocks, 5.3Ghz on two cores, with 5.1Ghz across all cores, stock! These auto boost clocks depend on cooling of course.
The 11900k's appear to be ultra binned parts, which makes the price make sense. Want toping gaming performance? Pay up
Ryzen 5000 already does this, Its called PBO2, Intel copying AMD now?
Out of the box i'm running 4.85Ghz all core in games, with a couple of tweeks its 5Ghz +
That theory clearly did not work with 11700k
11700k uses ~80W more than 5800x
11700k used a bit more power than the 10700 yeah, though they both have 8 cores.
11900k has two less cores than 10900k, so is unlikely to use as much power (outside avx-512)
That said, for me personally, performance is more important that power.
I'd be surprised if Alder Lake launches this year. I'd also be surprised if it's any good, as it'll be Intel's first time doing the big small core idea, clocks are likely to be bad on the broken 10nm etc. DDR5 speed, when factoring in latency, will be worse than high end DDR4. We'll see, though I don't think it's worth waiting for.
Soldato
Tbh I hope Intel sort themselves out and then come 2023 when I may look at upgrading (based on DDR5, PCIE 5, 40% touted performance uplift alone in 2022 for AMD) I want to have options and not just forced AMD because Intel are still sucking. It was same issue when I got the 4790k, there wasn't another option out there to compete so choice was very limited with everything else.