• 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

g67575 said:
This someone on Reddit reckons it puts the IMC under more strain, running on 4, rather than 2 DIMMs:

"the memory controller has more strain keeping higher clocks with 4 sticks vs 2 sticks. You will either loosen timings to keep 4000mhz ram or lower ram frequency, which subsequently means lower FCLK."

Link;:
https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocking/comments/jsfo2o/5600x_47_2000mhz_fclk_4000mhz_but_only_with_2/

Need more info from AMD!
Click to expand...

This is all really basic well known information, and applied to the oldest chips that have the IMC's all the way back to the A64 days.
 
More Dimms/Double Density Dimms/Higher Speed/Tighter Timings all effect CPU/OC, add all four together and even harder on the CPU but it is down to how good your samples IMC is, I got lucky with my 4970k, running 32GB of 2400mhz with slightly tighter timings did not effect my overall OC, still same for settings for 5GHZ.

You can raise the System Agent/VCCSA Voltage to counter this but mine is still on Auto (half of VRam voltage so 0.8v), 1.15-125v is very safe on Haswell/Devil's Canyon.
 
Last edited:
g67575 said:
Someone on Reddit reckons it puts the IMC under more strain, running on 4, rather than 2 DIMMs:

"the memory controller has more strain keeping higher clocks with 4 sticks vs 2 sticks. You will either loosen timings to keep 4000mhz ram or lower ram frequency, which subsequently means lower FCLK."

Link;:
https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocking/comments/jsfo2o/5600x_47_2000mhz_fclk_4000mhz_but_only_with_2/

Need more info from AMD!
Click to expand...

All of this is well known and there's a Zen 3 thread full of info.
 
You can see why Intel are (so far) only testing DDR 5 @4800mhz with Alder Lake, they seem to be behind on memory controller speeds.
 
g67575 said:
You can see why Intel are (so far) only testing DDR 5 @4800mhz with Alder Lake, they seem to be behind on memory controller speeds.
Click to expand...

what? that's simply because that's the JEDEC DDR5 v1.0 official standard https://www.anandtech.com/show/15912/ddr5-specification-released-setting-the-stage-for-ddr56400-and-beyond#:~:text=However for DDR5 JEDEC is,the official peak of DDR4.

Almost all (probably ALL) DDR5 kits at launch of DDR5 consumer desktop platforms will be 4800mhz regardless of if its AMD or Intel. The only difference between the cheap (actually its expensive) and the (even more expensive) RAM kits will be timings, the entry level DDR5 4800mhz kits will have CL40 timings, more expensive kits may have tighter timings

DDR5 in its current form supports frequency between 4800mhz and 6400mhz officially, so eventually the speed of these RAM kits will be upgraded from 4800mhz to 6400mhz over time
 
Last edited:
g67575 said:
You think that Intel has an IMC that can handle over 4800mhz 1:1, when Rocket Lake is limited to 3200mhz 1:1?

The official JEDEC spec mentions faster 'A' speed modules at speeds over 4800mhz, so I don't think that's the reason for testing with 4800mhz RAM.
Click to expand...

I didn't say anything about IMC, no can comment on Alder Lake's IMC because there is zero information, you're just guessing.
I brought up the JEDEC standard because that's the minimum standard that CPU and Motherboards need to support.
 
Yeah, to be fair, Intel might be able to improve those IMC speeds a bit.

Tiger Lake's IMC will have 'LPDDR5-5400 "architecture capability" (Intel expects Tiger Lake products with LPDDR5 to be available around Q1 2021)'. Link here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiger_Lake#I/O

So, I think Alder Lake's IMC max speed will be similar.
 
Last edited:
Grim5 said:
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
Click to expand...

The power figures are awful, it has same core count as my 9900k but uses circa 50% more power.

They probably would have been better off just releasing a PCIE4 version of the 9900k or 10900k.
 
chrcoluk said:
They probably would have been better off just releasing a PCIE4 version of the 9900k or 10900k.
Click to expand...
Apparently there was a technical reason Intel couldn't get PCIe 4 on Comet Lake, but I can't find it now, nor would I fully believe it. A lot of the Z490 boards were marketed as PCIe 4 ready, so there must've been a plan somewhere. But then, some of the Z490 boards can't physically support PCIe 4, so who bloomin' knows!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom