Man of Honour
Yikes.
And no thanks lol.
-
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 Ultra 9 285k 'Arrow Lake' Discussion/News ("15th gen") on LGA-1851
- Thread starter Dave2150
- Start date
Yikes.
And no thanks lol.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 30,815
Welcome to 8 hours ago.
Man of Honour
Well, s***. They aren't going to be able to fix that.Also: Intel says higher latency is expected
They aren't really any further on from the 12th generation, apart from supporting higher speed DDR5.
The decision I do not understand, is why Intel has not improved the memory controller. Apparently, there's not even an option for gear 1 (1:1 ratio) in the BIOS /UEFI anymore.
Is that correct?
EDIT - I forgot that gear 1 mode was only ever an option on DDR4 12th/13th/14th gen systems.
My dad wants to built a new Intel system, I'm wondering if he should wait for the cheaper locked CPUs. I also think they could do with a traditional 8 core CPU, lots of people don't care about E-cores, they are mostly a thing to improve efficiency on laptops. On the other hand, it looks like a i5 245K can only do around 5.0ghz on all cores...
I think the K edition CPUs would be more appealing with at least a £50 price cut, as the 245K performs similarly to the cheaper 14600K (and presumably the 14600 also) in games.
Intel has a big problem, they are not inviting people onto their new platform...
Apparently, Zen 6 CPUs may be coming out next year, if that happens, I wonder if Intel will have any answer at all.
Last edited:
It's decent in Linux especially for development (but not gaming):
Soldato
How many people pre-ordered Arrow-Lake?
I imagine Intel will improve the performance over time but it seems like a big mistake to pre-order it when there were no reviews and the new X3D processors are coming out soon.
Lesson here is never pre-order.
I imagine Intel will improve the performance over time but it seems like a big mistake to pre-order it when there were no reviews and the new X3D processors are coming out soon.
Lesson here is never pre-order.
Don
9800X3D if you are happy to wait
Soldato
Yes. Even a 5800X3D is pretty good (relative price to performance)
I imagine Intel will improve the performance of Arrow-Lake with BIOS updates and patches in Windows but it’s still not going to match X3D CPUS anytime soon,
Edit; words
Last edited:
Yep. 7800x3D is the best choice and you will probably get good deals on those soon.
Right now ARL doesn’t make any sense at this price.
I’ve not preordered ordered but as I said I’ll pick 1 or 2 up.
Soldato
What for? Too much money in your bank account?
Tinkering about with much like my Ryzen 9950X
Soldato
Does that make it a 14900T or 14950S or some low wattage rework variant of the 14900K?
Seems like a product that could have used a bit longer in the oven to refine it and then use the existing LGA1700 socket so that people are left hugely out of pocket (they did move to DDR5 only so that may not have been possible).
A few reviewers are comparing it to Zen 1 where it wasn’t competitive initially but after a few revisions in the form of Zen 2 and 3, it was great.
That’s probably what we have with ARL.
Me thinks Intel should have launched ARL with a competitor to X3D.
They could have then delayed the launch, refined the BIOS a little better in the extra time and caveated the performance a little bit more convincingly.
Ryzen 9000 launched and everyone basically ignored it, now with some patches and a drop in price occasionally and with X3D coming, it’s looking great.
Soldato
For a CPU that's meant a ground up design built on one of the most advanced nodes TSMC has available this is very disappointing.
Maybe Intel should pick up the phone and call Qualcomm I heard their in market for a new CPU architecture.
Maybe Intel should pick up the phone and call Qualcomm I heard their in market for a new CPU architecture.
Associate
Going by Guru3d review. In games at 1080p and 1440p, it's nowhere near the top, but in 4K it seems to lead more often than not. Why is it better at 4K when it's not better at 1080 or 1440p ?
Soldato
Reviewing a CPU at 1440P or 4K is when you start to push the load onto the GPU and not the CPU so it’s hard to tell.
It could be multiple factors including memory bandwidth, run to run variance, patched game status etc
I’m sure you know why CPU reviews are done at 720P?