-
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.
Raptor Lake Leaks + Intel 4 developments
- Thread starter g67575
- Start date
To be clear this isn't just an Intel thing this is seemingly industry wide right now with possibly the exception of RDNA3.
All they need to do to "catch up" is improve their interconnect tech - We have been talking about it in the EPYC thread, without them mustering up some special sauce that isn't EMIB, or the current vapor ware that is Foveros they will be forced into more monolithic designs. Once they have some special glue of their own that isn't super power hungry (EMIB I am looking at you) then I expect we will see a fall off in designs where balls to the wall power draw is the output.
All they need to do to "catch up" is improve their interconnect tech - We have been talking about it in the EPYC thread, without them mustering up some special sauce that isn't EMIB, or the current vapor ware that is Foveros they will be forced into more monolithic designs. Once they have some special glue of their own that isn't super power hungry (EMIB I am looking at you) then I expect we will see a fall off in designs where balls to the wall power draw is the output.
It's not great, basically forces those buying high end h/w to use £100 or more water coolers and higher watt power supplies.
I'd say this is going to be less of a problem with Zen 4, it looks like the power consumption maxes out at 230w on the 12 and 16 core designs.
The 8 core 7700X should max out at <150w.
The reason for their apparent efficiency, is the much higher base clocks, compared to Zen 3. The 7700X has a base clock of 4.5ghz. The 5800X's was just 3.8ghz, at these frequencies both CPUs consume about 105w.
I'd say this is going to be less of a problem with Zen 4, it looks like the power consumption maxes out at 230w on the 12 and 16 core designs.
The 8 core 7700X should max out at <150w.
The reason for their apparent efficiency, is the much higher base clocks, compared to Zen 3. The 7700X has a base clock of 4.5ghz. The 5800X's was just 3.8ghz, at these frequencies both CPUs consume about 105w.
Soldato
Most prebuilds don't use unlocked power limits and they certainly don't use intel's power limits actually. Most major manafacturers configure the CPUs on their own, so the stock power limit is irrelevant for the prebuilt pc's.
Also of course, you ignored the most important part of the question, which was how many of that 99% actually CARE about the efficiency of their CPU while simultaneously not knowing that they can adjust the power limits.
Soldato
Wrong. E cores have nothing to do with cooling constraints. E cores offer more performance for a given die space. Or to put it in economics terms, E cores offer more performance per dollar you spent to buy them (and for Intel to produce them).
It's obvious that they do. The cooling systems on laptops can only handle upto a certain amount of power consumption (~150w?). E-cores weren't designed with desktop PCs (particularly gamers) in mind.
Adding more E-cores running at lower frequencies allows higher multithreaded perf, at a lower cost in power than P-Cores run at high frequencies.
There's still a strong argument to just use more P-cores at lower frequencies though, instead of using E-cores. EDIT - there shouldn't be a limit on the number of P-Cores in the design, as Sapphire Rapids will use a lot more than 8 P-Cores.
Adding more E-cores running at lower frequencies allows higher multithreaded perf, at a lower cost in power than P-Cores run at high frequencies.
There's still a strong argument to just use more P-cores at lower frequencies though, instead of using E-cores. EDIT - there shouldn't be a limit on the number of P-Cores in the design, as Sapphire Rapids will use a lot more than 8 P-Cores.
Soldato
All 50 of our upgraded PCs this year did. Dell Precision 3660 + GPU additional as needed.
Caporegime
Must be a very niche use case then.
Soldato
Structural & Civil engineering company. All in that sort of industry use CPU's such as that. Every single place I have worked just utilise the the K variant. There a reason Dell has them off shelf. They are much more common than people realise tbh.
Soldato
You do realize that your point is self refuting right? 8 p cores would outperform 8 e cores at the 150w you mentioned, so it's obvious what you are saying does not make any sense. E cores are more efficient only at very very low power (2-3w per core) and even then it's only for specific workloads. Again, the reason they use them is not power or thermals.
The K chips tend to have higher base clocks, and presumably use less power at these frequencies than the locked variants:
en.wikipedia.org
Alder Lake - Wikipedia
Soldato
But the point is that your company, apparently , doesn't care that much about efficiency. Most of the dell prebuilts - even the workstation ones comes with the non k CPU variants, which makes sense
It makes sense if you actually think about it.
They can only have so many P-Cores, before hitting the cooling limit (~150w I'm guessing). If there's remaining cooling capacity, this can be used for E-cores.
Some times they use a lot of E-cores, just do reduce cost and cooling requirements on the lower end models.
Caporegime
I've worked in and still have regular communications with IT departments all over the UK and I've only seen one instance of an office using the top-end mainstream K CPU for multiple machines.
Soldato
I have worked at 7 different structural engineering companies as a BIM technician with this being the smallest company, Ridge being largest at 700+ staff at time of employment and yeah all the same setup. Back then of course was 6700k and such. It is clearly industry dependant and such. It used to be Xeon prior to that but there been less reason to use so as software utilised in this industry generally prefer faster single core such as CAD & Revit and so Intel still been dominant there. Architecture, Civil & Structural Engineering, Thermal Structure Modelling, Construction Details and such all will need similar spec and such use those CPUs.
Kinda missing the point that discussing the TDP and that should be stock out box config. Anything else is mute in discussion.
Lower base clocks for the entire 13th generation, at the same TDPs (vs 12th gen parts):
videocardz.com
These aren't going to be more power efficient parts than Alder Lake.
Intel 13th Gen Core "Raptor Lake-S" lineup leaks out, 4 to 24 cores and three different dies - VideoCardz.com
Intel reportedly has three dies for Raptor Lake-S ExtremePlayer has an update to the Intel 13th Gen Core specs, including the models that are not launching in the foreseeable future. According to the specs posted by the Chinese content creator ExtremePlayer, Intel is set to launch 14 different...
videocardz.com
These aren't going to be more power efficient parts than Alder Lake.
Your question suits your agenda. The point I made before you jumped in talking the same waffle you were talking in previous threads is that the base TDP on all these chips is climbing and the peak TDP and power usage is climbing and therefore cooling capacity and power requirements are also climbing. That in itself is not a great thing. Simply pushing a power envelope constantly to deliver more performance is not a sustainable approach in todays day and age. It really is that simple its not about what YOU can do with it, It doesn't matter if people CARE or not the approach isn't a sustainable approach. You also realise I work alongside a lot of these manufacturers of pre builds like HP, Dell etc etc and most, if not all, 100% do build to the intel spec absolutely to the letter.
Its also probably worth pointing out that in these environments people often do care... I dumped over 100 pre built intel machines at 65w and swapped them for 100 pre builts at 45w after only 6 months of ownership. Do people care... damn straight they do. If you had ever built out a DC or speced rack power requirements or frankly done anything at that sort of level you wouldn't have even asked the question.
(capitalising certain words because it appears you believe I cant read)
Soldato
No it absolutely doesn't. Why would not use all the power or thermals for P cores?
Soldato
Of course my question suits my agenda, but that's the only relevant question to be fair. If people don't care about efficiency, then it doesn't matter whether it goes up or not
Btw Intel's TDP has been constant for - now 3 years at 240w for the high end model, but efficiency has more than doubled. If you compare the up and coming 13900k at 240w to the 10900k at 240w, the difference is massive in performance and therefore efficiency. Sure there has never been a 350w "mode" (or whatever intel calls it) but still that doesn't change the fact that their new CPU at same wattage vastly outperforms the previous ones. Of course the same applies for AMD, newer CPUs are way more efficient than the 1st gen Zen's for example.
Taken directly from intel ARC:
Yep I don't see any sustained increase in TDP at all. Doesn't really matter what I say here but I would certainly like to see more power efficient designs all around. That's all I will say on the matter.