Raptor Lake Leaks + Intel 4 developments

[g67575]

It's interesting that the thermal velocity boost clock (5.8ghz) for the 13900K will only be possible if the CPU runs at 70 degrees Celsius or lower. That extra 100mhz on 1 core is tough to get...

Full 'leak' slides here:

Intel Raptor Lake - Argumentation Aids from the blue Foil King for the Sale of their new CPUs | igor´sLAB

How does Intel actually want to sell the new Raptor Lake CPUs? Today’s sales foils, which I show you as a picture gallery, suggest that the blue foil king sees enough strong arguments to give the…

www.igorslab.de

Igor also says "In case anyone is wondering if that’s all for today: No! At 2 p.m. sharp, there will be a product launch with two test samples".

 

[g67575]

Wait for 13700f. profit.

 

[g67575]

Improved 'Next-gen' SK Hynix DDR5 16gb modules here:

Next generation DDR5 ICs Review: SK hynix 16 Gbit A-Die - 2x 16 GB with overclocking and gaming | Page 3 | igor´sLAB

Today I have a glimpse into the near future of RAM technology for you, and as is so often the case in the computer hardware industry, it comes from China, where SK Hynix’s new DDR5 memory ICs are…

www.igorslab.de

According to the author, they can handle 'Stable overclocking to 7466c34' in dual channel, at a comfortable 1.4v.

That should result in approx. 9.1 nanoseconds of latency with these settings.

 

[g67575]

Its probably a motherboard or bios limitation, the kits can probably hit 8k. 1.4v is rather low

I wonder how long it will be, for these 16gb ICs to go out to third parties and be sold as retail modules?

The nice thing about 1.4v is you can be reasonably sure the modules will work / and not explode

 

[g67575]

Probably sensible. I think they've made some progress with the locked CPUs though. It's just nice to finally see standardization of 5ghz all core from AMD and Intel even at the mid end.

There seems to be some excitement / interest in the additional E-cores, it's just not something I consider to be worthwhile.

 

[g67575]

It's notable that Intel states 'Improved P-core performance'. This seems to be referring to clock speed improvements, leading to improved performance (presumably due to refinements to the silicon itself).

However, there's no claim of improved IPC for the P-cores. It seems the core improvements are limited to increased L2 and L3 cache. There seems to be some cost saving going on, by limiting the cache amounts on the models below the 13600K.

 

[g67575]

I mean, were getting frequency and cache so IPC is asking a lot.

I made this point, because for ages quite a few people were saying there would be architectural - and therefore - IPC improvements (based on rumours). This was despite the fact that Intel's 'CPU Core Roadmap' didn't indicate any further developments beyond Golden Cove.

The way in which the performance improvement is worded, could be seen as misleading 'Improved P-Core performance'. The improved performance (from higher clock speeds) comes at the cost of higher power consumption, particularly for the 13700K (vs the 12700K). I suppose this is fine though, since the all core speeds are improved.

 

[g67575]

7950x will have good use cases but rest of the line up is quite useless.

This is rubbish, the 7700X @5.5ghz has a higher singlethreaded integer and floating point score in Geekbench 5, than the 12900KS (which can boost upto 5.5ghz on one core). The temperature shown in a separate CPUz benchmark was 71 degrees C, at 5.4ghz.

The 7700X is priced at $400, which is not that bad. Intel has been setting the prices that consumers pay for CPUs largely, because of their advantage with 12th gen CPUs, since November 2021. I think E-Cores have contributed to price increases also, due to the increase in MT performance.

In most cases, people should get this level of performance, even on mid level B650 boards.

It could be that the CPUz benchmark is reflecting more specific aspects of CPU performance, compared to Geekbench 5.

It is true though, that if you have a 12700K or 12900K CPU, Zen 4/AM5 probably won't seem very exciting to you (if judging purely on CPU performance).

In the example AMD gave (just 4 games), the flagship CPU was on average, 9% faster than the 12900K:

https://static.tweaktown.com/news/8/8/88190_09_amd-ryzen-7000-series-zen-4-cpus-are-official-september-27-launch_full.png

So, the results were either about the same, or a bit better than the 12900K.

The 12900KS tends to be only around 1% faster in games than the 12900K (both at stock), on average (according to Techpowerup).

 

[g67575]

AMD have always used Cinebench up till this release where they decided to swap to geekbench as cinebench results are not favourable.

Even the gaming results show a tie and a loss in 2 of the 4 games tested with most of the gains coming for a single game.

Your argument will kinda be destroyed if more gaming benchmarks show even a small advantage for the 7700X / 7900X vs the 12900K.

AMD was 1% behind in GTAV- oMg cLEaR wIn fOr iNtEl.

 

[g67575]

Well, Intel's locked CPUs aren't going to come out until next year, and the same for B760 mid tier boards. So, I think AMD will offer better value until then. Intel's mid range 13600/13700 locked CPUs should do well, but I think the top end CPUs will face tough competition vs the X3D Zen 4 CPUs. It's possible that AMD will underproduce these CPUs, due to production limitations.

Meteor Lake should offer the best single core performance, assuming an IPC increase + higher clocks, but only appealing as a new build. It will interesting to see if they release desktop CPUs in Q4 2023, I hope they do, but it's not confirmed yet.

 

[g67575]

I don't think they will be producing and selling old chipsets for less money, why would they do that? Also, lots of people want DDR5 now.

Additionally, the E-cores aren't free, they will end up increasing retail prices.

 

[g67575]

Lots of people building PCs are going to be buying DDR5 (just as many have already been doing), so for these people, the question is AMD platform, or Intel?

As prices fall further, the cost of DDR5 will become less and less of an issue to buyers, and people know DDR5 modules will work in PCs for many years to come. People also know that LGA1700 motherboards are a dead end, and that the 13th gen is the same architecture as the 12th, but clocked higher.

I suspect that many buyers are fed up with having to buy a new motherboard and rebuilding a PC, every generation or 2. Lots of people will probably choose a 6 core 7600X (plenty of performance for most users) on release of Zen4 and AM5, and just upgrade every couple of years, the total cost of this will be quite low, and no doubt there will be cheaper CPUs, like a '7600', or '7700' further down the road (as was the case for Zen 3). The other nice thing, is that you will be able to keep using the same AM4/AM5 cooler for future CPU upgrades.

So you can wish all you want that people stick with Intel, but ultimately, some real competition is good news for consumers, and helps to reduce prices. Hopefully, Intel will be forced into designing Meteor Lake's CPU socket to support upgrades for a longer period? Intel hasn't been offering CPU upgrades with a die shrink or new architecture, but more and more, this is what system builders/upgraders will want (e.g. meaningful drop in upgrades).

 

[g67575]

Yup, 4800 MT/s DDR5 8GB modules are cheap now, esp. in kits:

Crucial 16GB (2X8GB) DDR5 PC5-38400C40 4800MHZ Dual Channel Kit

Order Crucial 16GB (2X8GB) DDR5 PC5-38400C40 4800MHZ Dual Channel Kit now online and benefit from fast delivery.

www.overclockers.co.uk

Prices generally £80-£90.

It's appealing when compared to DDR4 3200 MT/s.

5600 MT/s 8GB module kits available for <£105.

Decent 6000 MT/s 8GB module kits available for <£120.

In my view, the 16GB capacity modules are still pricy, particularly @5600 MT/s, hopefully we will see price drops this year!

 

[g67575]

I think most can afford to spend £100-£120 on RAM, that's a pretty typical price for a new generation of DDR (think I paid about that for DDR3 and DDR4, probably a bit more for DDR3). It doesn't have to cost a lot to get 5600 or 6000 MT/s RAM.

People with 32GB of DDR4 already might be more reluctant to upgrade to DDR5, but it probably won't take that much longer for 16GB module prices to come down. Generally though, most of the PC market still has 16GB or 8GB in total according to Steam hardware survey, so the decision is more straightforward:

Steam Hardware & Software Survey

 

[g67575]

I'm expecting DDR5 to work just as well with Zen 4, as Golden Cove. It should actually work better, due to the memory controller working at full speed (upto DDR5 6000 MT/s).

 

[g67575]

The Infinity Fabric frequency doesn't affect the memory controller or RAM does it? Seems like it isn't important for performance.

Also, I think it runs at the same frequency (around 2000?), regardless of what DDR5 spec is installed

 

[g67575]

Yeah memory upgrades are so easy, doesn't matter much if you have to upgrade to 32gb eventually, as 16gb modules will be much cheaper by then.

I think the price of higher spec 16gb modules will come down, as demand for DDR5 increases. I haven't yet seen any games that make use of >16GB of RAM, so I'd guess the number of games that do is <1%. Most developers optimise for 8/16GB, as thats what most systems actually have.

For some, money isn't much of an issue, so 2x16GB DDR5 6000 MT/s (or above) at £200 (or more) isn't likely to be a concern at all.

 

[g67575]

"At its Tech Tour event in Israel, Intel confirmed that "Raptor Lake" brings a 15% single-threaded, and 41% multi-threaded performance gain over "Alder Lake." The single-threaded gain is from the higher IPC of the "Raptor Cove" P-core, coupled with its frequency set as high as 5.70 GHz"

Just leaving that there for g53578743388543

Hehe. Looks like they can push the silicon pretty far for the 13th gen, so there this is likely to be designated 'KS'. It's still the same core architecture though, as the 12th gen. I don't doubt that these CPUs will be very fast, but it's not for the likes of plebs such as I, the cost will be horrendous on launch. Consider that the MSRP of the 12900KS was $739 on launch.

Intel has put lots of time and investment into developing Meteor Lake and the 'Intel 4' process, that's what interests me. It looks like 6ghz all core will be the likely goal for Meteor Lake, hopefully without top end cooling. I'd also be interested to see if Intel actually decides to offer a decent upgrade path for their next CPU socket. Hopefully, Zen 5 can catch up in all core clock speed, in terms of marketing, both companies know the psychological affect on consumers of hitting 5/6ghz.

Regarding the 13th gen, this quote was interesting:
"RPL [correction] only exists because MTL wasn't going to be ready on time. RPL dev started 2 yr ago." - Isic Silas, Intel Corp VP of CCG.

Intel must be feeling fairly confident to make this kind of admission.

 

[g67575]

Intels 35w 13700T beats ryzen 5800x in both single and multithread.

The 13700T has the same 8 P cores and 8 E cores as the 13700k, the only difference is the huge reduction in TDP rating and therefore clock speeds. The 13700T has a measly base clock speed of 1.4ghz but can boost to beat the 5800x by 11%

This doesn't actually tell you very much. If you look at the result listing here:

HP - Geekbench

Benchmark results for a HP with an Intel Core i7-13700T processor.

browser.geekbench.com

You can see the max frequency is reported as 4.78Ghz, and there's no indication of any 35w limit being imposed (e.g. 12900T uses ~106w with turbo boost enabled).
But yeah, Golden Cove is fairly efficient when power limited to 125w or 190w. You can use it with an average cooler after all, if prepared to except the shame of lower clocks!

The WCCFTech article repeatedly makes reference to 35w power usage, they are being a bit special.

 

[g67575]

Joxeon, it's OK - you can keep DDR4 for as long as you like, but you gotta remember that a lot of people bought DDR4 for cheaps anyway...

Then you've got the early adopters with crappy DDR4 2133 MT/s kit.