Intel Core Ultra 9 285k 'Arrow Lake' Discussion/News ("15th gen") on LGA-1851

[stooeh]

I think that the reviewers are telling us which is best rather than presenting the information and allowing us to decide. FPS at 1080P isn't the only metric I use to decide so I have to try to ignore what they are saying and consider all the options myself.

The information is right there for you to decide - do you really think it is useful having results of a supposed CPU comparison with all the CPUs getting the same FPS because everything is GPU limited? Most people who don't need to upgrade their CPU won't upgrade it just because HUB says it is 10% faster at 1080p. But this is an enthusiast forum and we are fans of blowing money on frivolous upgrades

I play at 2160p but I still want to see CPU bench results from reviewers where the GPU is not the limiter.

 

[Rroff]

The information is right there for you to decide - do you really think it is useful having results of a supposed CPU comparison with all the CPUs getting the same FPS because everything is GPU limited? Most people who don't need to upgrade their CPU won't upgrade it just because HUB says it is 10% faster at 1080p. But this is an enthusiast forum and we are fans of blowing money on frivolous upgrades

I play at 2160p but I still want to see CPU bench results from reviewers where the GPU is not the limiter.

As per other threads where people have posted on this it is more the lack of other information - people will happily do 45 tests at 1080p but rarely touch more on other settings and other factors - especially if you aren't using a 4090 at 1080p. An interesting one at least for me personally is that with a 4080 class GPU currently the CPU impact on FPS is far less significant but the impact on game load times between different CPUs can be stark and noticeable - and not always correlated with the 1080p CPU performance.

 

[cebri]

so 5% before the updates

Yes, their claim was same performance at 70? watts less in gaming.

If they hit that mark, they just need a 60-70$ cut. But considering they haven't made many chips for the DIY market I don't think they will do that.

 

[stooeh]

As per other threads where people have posted on this it is more the lack of other information - people will happily do 45 tests at 1080p but rarely touch more on other settings and other factors - especially if you aren't using a 4090 at 1080p. An interesting one at least for me personally is that with a 4080 class GPU currently the CPU impact on FPS is far less significant but the impact on game load times between different CPUs can be stark and noticeable - and not always correlated with the 1080p CPU performance.

I don't really find load times an issue in any games I have played in years outside maybe BG3 so would be interesting to note if more cores made a dent in that particular game. As for shader compilation it is probably twice as fast on 7950X3D vs 7800X3D which is certainly noticeable but usually a one time thing or only after a driver update. I can see the benefit there but I'm not sure it would be enough to be influence a purchasing decision. I would certainly prefer more FPS in game than quicker load times - in most cases. I think I would also prefer an Intel chip with 10 or 12 P-cores or AMD X3D with 10 or 12 cores on a single CCD versus having E-cores or a 2nd CCD.

 

[Rroff]

but usually a one time thing or only after a driver update.

Unfortunately some games like Hogwarts Legacy it isn't a one time thing I'm not sure if that is something the devs have been too lazy to fix or whether there are genuine reasons for it - unlike some people have suggested it isn't just a loading screen which they were too lazy to label properly and just says shader compiling as if you run the game on a system without enough memory to compile shaders it almost immediately loads the game but you get quite a bit of stutter when playing.

 

[stooeh]

I have Hogwarts installed and it takes about 47 seconds from clicking Play on steam to loading up the save game and in being in control of character including about 18 seconds of 'Preparing Shaders' - does not seem that bad?

 

[Rroff]

I have Hogwarts installed and it takes about 47 seconds from clicking Play on steam to loading up the save game and in being in control of character including about 18 seconds of 'Preparing Shaders' - does not seem that bad?

I don't know why but a lot of people get the full 1-2 minutes preparing shaders every single startup of the game and it has never been fixed, but it was only an example (it can vary quite a bit on different hardware with that game though).

 

[cebri]

CP2077 on ARL fixed?

 

[RavenXXX2]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1866577137148498151