• 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.

Rocket lake leaks

pc-guy said:
Is that good price or is that expensive? £500 for a board, you are in the realm of god like aorus master etc. I guess that is an aorus master board.
Click to expand...

To me that's crazy money, especially as SLI/Crossfire are no longer a thing, so paying for a board with that sort of increased PCIe access isn't necessary any more. I guess you can fit a stream capture card and 4 m2 drives in there, if that's important.
 
LePhuronn said:
I'd argue yes it should. Intel will not price it competitively, because it's Intel. They're going to milk the 1% 1080p lead over the 5900X in a handful over games and charge accordingly; AMD pitched the 5900X as their top gaming CPU, so that will be Intel's comparison point. Completely ignoring the fact it will have a 4 core deficit and use twice the power. Because there's no way Intel could do a proper comparison against the 5800X because they'd get stomped into the ground once again. We've already seen Intel's marketing slides to exactly this, and leaked prices show it to be more expensive than the 5900X.

Overpriced CPU on a platform that will be stupid money because of the insane VRM count the boards must have, not choose to have. A platform that is also be inferior to the year-old X570 as well. Unless Intel are literally charging 5600X money for their top 11900K, the entire 11th gen should be dismissed out of hand on principle: yet another joke CPU rushed out by a company whos hubris and illegal practices are finally biting them on the ass, but yet still fleece their customers because they know the fanboys are idiots who'd just lap it up regardless.
Click to expand...

I hesitate to reply to this but find myself doing so anyway, must reflect poorly on me.
Your words prove that my assessment was correct. Your use of language demonstrate that you're emotionally attached to all of this, which means that you can't debate or discuss anything rationally, because you have inherent bias. Shame.
 
lol, utter tosh mate. Tosh to the extreme. If you think that stating fact demonstrates an emotional investment then I think you need to refine your comprehension skills before you can make any accusations of bias or inability to debate. And furthermore, if any statement of fact that casts X company in a negative light is interpreted as emotionally-fuelled bias, I'd suggest the real bias lies with those who made such accusations.

Kindly point out anything I posted to be factually untrue. Illustrate to me any points of bias. The only emotional influences that present themselves in my posting is when trolls and fanbois start accusing me of the very thing they are guilty of, and I will retort every single time, because - believe it or not - nothing riles me up like those incapable of discussing matters because of their own inherent bias and emotional attachment to inconsequential nonsense.

So since you believe I am incapable of debate, the floor is yours. Discuss the points I raised, counter them if you believe I am incorrect.
 
Roadrunner_668 said:
guys they are cpus come on ha ha
no need to get passionate about it !
benchmarks, prices, and objectiveness are the only things that matter :)
Click to expand...
Precisely, which is exactly what I posted. But like I said, when somebody starts patronisingly accusing you of bias because they don't like, or understand, facts then that's when the emotions come into play.
 
LePhuronn said:
lol, utter tosh mate. Tosh to the extreme. If you think that stating fact demonstrates an emotional investment then I think you need to refine your comprehension skills before you can make any accusations of bias or inability to debate. And furthermore, if any statement of fact that casts X company in a negative light is interpreted as emotionally-fuelled bias, I'd suggest the real bias lies with those who made such accusations.

Kindly point out anything I posted to be factually untrue. Illustrate to me any points of bias. The only emotional influences that present themselves in my posting is when trolls and fanbois start accusing me of the very thing they are guilty of, and I will retort every single time, because - believe it or not - nothing riles me up like those incapable of discussing matters because of their own inherent bias and emotional attachment to inconsequential nonsense.

So since you believe I am incapable of debate, the floor is yours. Discuss the points I raised, counter them if you believe I am incorrect.
Click to expand...

Mate, you used the words "Milk, Stomped, Overpriced, Insane, Joke, Illegal and Fleeced".
But somehow you've endeavoured to suggest that I'm biased?

I mean I know you're not exactly writing a peer reviewed academic research paper, but seriously? It seems like you've spent too long in an echo chamber.

*edit* Oh I missd out the word stupid. You used that too.
*edit2* you used fanboys and idiots as well....

Just to reiterate, my point is that your emotive language clearly demonstrates inherent bias. Hence I don't think it's realistically possible to debate anything with you.
 
Last edited:
Sharing of erroneous data may imply bias although it can also imply ignorance.
Sharing of data in an overly emotional way doesn't tell us if the sharer is biased or not.

My take on is that there are a lot of emotionally stunted men on tech forums who repeatedly spew out their low level bile whilst talking about things which aren't a big deal at all in the grand scheme of things.
Even if their facts are mainly correct it's still rather tedious.
It's like hearing a shouty guy in the street, it gets annoying quickly.
It's one step removed from the playground often and best ignored unless they soil the forum. Then just report them to a teacher, I mean moderator.
 
rustyk21 said:
...my point is that your emotive language clearly demonstrates inherent bias...
Click to expand...
It really doesn't. But nice of you to focus on my posting style rather than the content. You claim I have bias, but yet you don't offer any constructive counterpoint. Why is that?
rustyk21 said:
Hence I don't think it's realistically possible to debate anything with you.
Click to expand...
You haven't even tried. Or more accurately, when I offered a counterpoint to your statement of "you can't dismiss Intel out of hand", you started making assumptions and seeing bias where there is none. Why was that?

So, are you actually going to say anything, or just ignore the actual discussion here and feed that high horse of yours?
 
What gets me, @smilingcrow , is that there always seems to be somebody new show up and start all the pettiness over again. I freely admit I'm always very quick to snap back the second somebody starts whinging off topic or is just an outright troll, which never helps, but it seems the moderators here either have totally the wrong priorities or just ignore everything until the personal insults start flying. 90% of the childish bickering would come to an end if the moderators actually moderated, and moderated the actual root of the issue.
 
Well perhaps I can help get back on topic with a technical question for the knowledgeable folks here.

I'm planning a new build and like others am waiting for GPU availability. In the meantime I can see that CPU & motherboard choice may also change, with the launch of Rocket Lake being an example, and indeed relevant to my question. From my research I have ascertained the following:

#1 - GPU (gen 4) <- pcie 3 x16 -> 10900K <- DMI 3 x4 -> Z490 (gen 4) <- pcie 4 x4 -> M2 NVMe (gen 4)
#2 - GPU (gen 4) <- pcie 4 x16 -> 11900K <- DMI 3 x4 -> Z490 (gen 4) <- pcie 4 x4 -> M2 NVMe (gen 4)
#3 - GPU (gen 4) <- pcie 4 x16 -> 11900K (with Z590) <- pcie 4 x4 -> M2 NVMe (gen 4)

Am I correct? If so what about the following?

A) GPU pcie 4 x16 will have negligible benefit over pcie 3 x16 for gaming?
B) Since the M2 NVMe is for OS, is the max 4GB/s of options #1 & #2 something to worry about enough to choose #3 instead?
 
therealdippy said:
Well perhaps I can help get back on topic with a technical question for the knowledgeable folks here.

I'm planning a new build and like others am waiting for GPU availability. In the meantime I can see that CPU & motherboard choice may also change, with the launch of Rocket Lake being an example, and indeed relevant to my question. From my research I have ascertained the following:

#1 - GPU (gen 4) <- pcie 3 x16 -> 10900K <- DMI 3 x4 -> Z490 (gen 4) <- pcie 4 x4 -> M2 NVMe (gen 4)
#2 - GPU (gen 4) <- pcie 4 x16 -> 11900K <- DMI 3 x4 -> Z490 (gen 4) <- pcie 4 x4 -> M2 NVMe (gen 4)
#3 - GPU (gen 4) <- pcie 4 x16 -> 11900K (with Z590) <- pcie 4 x4 -> M2 NVMe (gen 4)

Am I correct? If so what about the following?

A) GPU pcie 4 x16 will have negligible benefit over pcie 3 x16 for gaming?
B) Since the M2 NVMe is for OS, is the max 4GB/s of options #1 & #2 something to worry about enough to choose #3 instead?
Click to expand...

Rocket Lake has 20 usable PCIe4 lanes, so one PCIe4 GPU + one PCIe4 NVMe drive.

A) GPU pcie 4 x16 will have negligible benefit over pcie 3 x16 for gaming?
Click to expand...

Right now that is correct, tho i don't think we know yet how PCIe3 vs PCIe4 will effect Resizeable Bar performance.

B) Since the M2 NVMe is for OS, is the max 4GB/s of options #1 & #2 something to worry about enough to choose #3 instead?
Click to expand...

A PCIe4 NVMe drive will only help you in performance if you're moving files around or as a Video editor scrubbing through a lot of footage, for gaming and day to day use there isn't even any difference between a PCIe3 NVMe and a Sata SSD.
 
@therealdippy
If you're only running 1 NVMe SSD and 1 GPU then you won't have any problems with bandwidth limitations since you'll have 20 PCIe lanes coming off an Intel CPU. If you want PCIe Gen 4 on that Intel CPU then yes Rocket Lake is your boy and play it safe with a Z590 motherboard; it's looking like a lot of "PCIe 4 ready" claims from Z490 motherboards won't actually be true.

I'll be honest though, and this single factor may sway your purchasing decision, NVMe drives are for the convenience of not having to bother with cables. For OS use, you will not see any difference between a Gen 3 and Gen 4 drive, and frankly hard pressed to see the difference between a Gen 3 drive and a SATA 3. NVMe comes into its own when shifting a lot of data around and sustained operations, the quick burst nature of an OS doesn't really benefit.
 
A lot performance leaks for this CPU series, its really not looking good, despite Intel's claimed IPC gains it seems unlike Zen 3 which whose IPC jump over Zen 2 is at least what they claimed right across every workload; Intel's seems far more selective.

https://www.hardwaretimes.com/intel...-the-similarly-priced-ryzen-5-3600-in-gb5-mt/

Intel’s Core i5-11400 Fails to Beat the Similarly Priced Ryzen 5 3600 in GB5 MT
Click to expand...

The 10400K replacement still can't beat AMD's old 3600, and its up-against the Ryzen 5600X? which humiliates it....

https://www.hardwaretimes.com/intel...-the-similarly-priced-ryzen-5-3600-in-gb5-mt/
 
Is this actually a performance regression then, despite the IPC uplift? 10400F vs 5600X was big talk, but if Rocket Lake can't even keep up with Comet Lake...
 
The IPC betterment can not offset the core count deficiencies - two cores and four threads less, Intel's processors also lack scalability with their threads - Ryzen scales better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom