Rocket Lake Review: A waste of sand...

Gerard · 25 Mar 2021 at 14:54

Destination said:
damn that is awful against a lower core ryzen
Really awful

Is dave knocking about trying to spin this as a positive or has he gone to ground?

humbug · 25 Mar 2021 at 14:59

Gerard said:
Is dave knocking about trying to spin this as a positive or has he gone to ground?

His last post was on Sunday.

He can't work with what Intel have given him

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 25 Mar 2021 at 15:24

Curlyriff said:
What has the 11600k got to do with the 11700k?

If the 11700k for most part is loosing, why would you be wanting less cores from Intel and then talk about price. Its not even small margins in a number of places.

The 10700k is still generally better for price/performance. It is cheapest in stock in UK from what can see at moment at £290. No point saying a few weeks ago it was £250 although I've not personally seen that and can't find any data to support but either way that's like saying the 5600x has been £280 which it has but it irrelevant at moment.

The 5600x is £300 to £330 at most stores at moment though. The 11700k is £390. It is still not good in terms of the specific chip being discussed.

A Ryzen 5 5600X and Ryzen 7 5800X are close together in most games. You buy 8 cores for extra longevity. That means for the most part a Core i5 11600K or Core i5 10600K is close to their 8 core counterparts for gaming when clocked to similar speeds.

The Core i5 10600K has gone as low as £180. The Core i5 11600K ATM is £240~£250. Then the Core i5 11400F is £140~£150. These are all competing against Zen2 parts,which are going to be comparatively worse - people have forgotten Zen2 dominates the sub £300 price-point.

The B560 motherboards can run RAM at XMP,and AFAIK you can even going past it with some motherboards. Rocketlake also brings PCI-E 4.0 to the Intel platform.

So at this point a £125 Core i5 10400F,a £140~£150 Core i5 11400F,or £170~£200 Core I5 10600K with a B560 motherboard is going to be quicker than a Ryzen 5 3600/3600X/3600XT. The same goes down the range - the Core i3 10100/i3 10100F are between £80~£100 and are quicker than the Ryzen 3 3100.

It doesn't really matter if AMD wins,because the Ryzen 5 5600X is essentially over £300 now,which means a Ryzen 7 5800X bundle can be had for not much more.

Unless AMD has something closer to £200 which is a Zen3 part,all you are having is slower Zen2 parts. As a Zen2 owner myself those Intel parts are going to be better buys for a mainstream and entry level gamer.

Objectively I cannot recommend a Ryzen 5 3600 now at its current price. My Ryzen 7 3700X was positioned against the Core i5 10600K in streetprice,and I know for sure it cannot beat it in a number of games.

pandem0nium · 25 Mar 2021 at 15:31

Z590 Has the same connectivity as B550, with the four extra gen 4 lanes for a M.2 but the chipset lanes still being gen 3.
B560 now with ram overclocking enabled brings it up to ...A520.

You're paying more for less, motherboards wise, and that needs to be taken into account when comparing value.

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 25 Mar 2021 at 15:36

humbug said:
I would like to see a £250 5600 None X.

I have seen 10700KF for £280, I'm not sure but that might not last, i think i have read somewhere, can't remember where, Intel have stopped Comment Lake production, so this is leftover inventory.

The 11700K is too expensive, coupled also with expensive Z590 Motherboards, at £420 the 5800X is better value, you're getting a better CPU and a half decent motherboard is cheaper.

AMD right now have no reason to do anything at all and with their wafer shortages are in no way inclined to do anything, if or once Comet Lake stock dries up AMD are competing with themselves.

The problem is that under £280~£300 you only have Zen2. For example the Core i5 11400F is £140~£150 for example. So that with a B560 motherboard,and even a better £30 CPU cooler,is going to be probably run MCE and RAM at 3200~3600MHZ fine.

So at this point,the Ryzen 5 3600 is looking a bit long in the tooth.

£250 isn't good enough for a Ryzen 5 5600 non-X,as the Ryzen 7 5600X is technically a £280 part. It needs to be closer to £200,even if it means making some more cuts to the SKU(less L3 cache?).

pandem0nium said:
Z590 Has the same connectivity as B550, with the four extra gen 4 lanes for a M.2 but the chipset lanes still being gen 3.
B560 now with ram overclocking enabled brings it up to ...A520.

You're paying more for less, motherboards wise, and that needs to be taken into account when comparing value.

The A520 is essentially a rebadged B450,so only has PCI-E 3.0 for the main slot. B560 has a PCI-E 4.0 main slot,and PCI-E 3.0 for the M2 slot.

B450 can run PCI-E 4.0 for both the PCI-E slot and M2 slot fine,but AMD artificially blocked it.

The problem is also the AMD product stack. Under £280~£300 you only have Zen2,and it is generally worse off compared to CFL/RL in gaming workloads.

pandem0nium · 25 Mar 2021 at 15:40

CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
The A520 is essentially a rebadged B450,so only has PCI-E 3.0 for the main slot. B560 has a PCI-E 4.0 main slot,and PCI-E 3.0 for the M2 slot.

Yeah, you're right. Lets say a lesser B550 without overclocking then. a halfway house between A520 and B550.

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 25 Mar 2021 at 15:42

pandem0nium said:
Yeah, you're right. Lets say a lesser B550 without overclocking then. a halfway house between A520 and B550.

The thing is the B450 can do PCI-E 4.0 fine - the OEM B550A can run PCI-E 4.0 fine and uses a rebadged B450 chipset. So A520 can probably support PCI-E 4.0,AMD is choosing not to enable it.

pandem0nium · 25 Mar 2021 at 15:48

CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
The thing is the B450 can PCI-E 4.0 fine - the OEM B550A can run PCI-E 4.0 fine and uses a rebadged B450 chipset. So A520 can probably support PCI-E 4.0,AMD is choosing not to enable it.

Yeah, it was a shame that gen 4 wasn't enabled officially on older boards, when we know it did work on some early Zen2 BIOSs. And I don't doubt that that gen 3 on A520 is just pure product segmentation. At least A520 got gen 3 chipset lanes.

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 25 Mar 2021 at 15:51

pandem0nium said:
Yeah, it was a shame that gen 4 wasn't enabled officially on older boards, when we know it did work on some early Zen2 BIOSs. And I don't doubt that that gen 3 on A520 is just pure product segmentation. At least A520 got gen 3 chipset lanes.

Its kind of annoying as I had one of the best B450 mini-ITX motherboards,and AMD made sure later AGESAs were blocked from having PCI-E 4.0 - I almost got a B550/X570 motherboard,but realised I might as well wait for Zen3+ or Zen4.

pandem0nium · 25 Mar 2021 at 16:06

CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
Its kind of annoying as I had one of the best B450 mini-ITX motherboards,and AMD made sure later AGESAs were blocked from having PCI-E 4.0 - I almost got a B550/X570 motherboard,but realised I might as well wait for Zen3+ or Zen4.

Yeah, that is a shame, and I can see why you'd wait.

Don't want to derail too much.

Just to compare:

Z590 Strix F wifi: £319.99

https://www.overclockers.co.uk/asus...-lga-1200-ddr4-atx-motherboard-mb-6fy-as.html

B550 is £189.95

https://www.overclockers.co.uk/asus...i-amd-am4-b550-atx-motherboard-mb-6fc-as.html

That's a big price difference for roughly equivalent boards.

humbug · 25 Mar 2021 at 16:14

CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
The problem is that under £280~£300 you only have Zen2. For example the Core i5 11400F is £140~£150 for example. So that with a B560 motherboard,and even a better £30 CPU cooler,is going to be probably run MCE and RAM at 3200~3600MHZ fine.

So at this point,the Ryzen 5 3600 is looking a bit long in the tooth.

£250 isn't good enough for a Ryzen 5 5600 non-X,as the Ryzen 7 5600X is technically a £280 part. It needs to be closer to £200,even if it means making some more cuts to the SKU(less L3 cache?).

The A520 is essentially a rebadged B450,so only has PCI-E 3.0 for the main slot. B560 has a PCI-E 4.0 main slot,and PCI-E 3.0 for the M2 slot.

B450 can run PCI-E 4.0 for both the PCI-E slot and M2 slot fine,but AMD artificially blocked it.

The problem is also the AMD product stack. Under £280~£300 you only have Zen2,and it is generally worse off compared to CFL/RL in gaming workloads.

The 3600 should be a £150 CPU, the 3700X a £200 and a £250 5600 none X.

Nothing wrong with these Zen 2 CPU's, still very capable mid range CPU's but Zen 3 is clearly much better and i don't mind the price reflecting that but there does need to be a £250 entry option.

The Comet Lake CPU's, at least 10700KF and under, are the ones to go for right now in the mid range, the performance is good and they are priced well, but i think its temporary, Intel are not willing to let go of what "Premium Brand" image they think they still have, its why Rocket Lake prices are quite high, its as if they are pretending Zen 3 isn't really a thing or hoping people don't notice it.

shamus21 · 25 Mar 2021 at 16:31

pandem0nium said:
Z590 Has the same connectivity as B550, with the four extra gen 4 lanes for a M.2 but the chipset lanes still being gen 3.
B560 now with ram overclocking enabled brings it up to ...A520.

You're paying more for less, motherboards wise, and that needs to be taken into account when comparing value.

The chip set is still Gen 3 but intel has doubled the bandwidth

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 25 Mar 2021 at 16:42

pandem0nium said:
Yeah, that is a shame, and I can see why you'd wait.

Don't want to derail too much.

Just to compare:

Z590 Strix F wifi: £319.99

https://www.overclockers.co.uk/asus...-lga-1200-ddr4-atx-motherboard-mb-6fy-as.html

B550 is £189.95

https://www.overclockers.co.uk/asus...i-amd-am4-b550-atx-motherboard-mb-6fc-as.html

That's a big price difference for roughly equivalent boards.

I don't disagree,that once you reach the £300 CPU level,Intel is harder to recommend,especially when cooling costs also have to be taken into consideration for these higher end parts,as is the requirement for motherboards with sufficient power delivery. I am just concerned AMD has seemingly forgotten about the entry level and mainstream areas. Even the Ryzen 5600X is probably at the upper level of what you would call a mainstream CPU.

humbug said:
The 3600 should be a £150 CPU, the 3700X a £200 and a £250 5600 none X.

Nothing wrong with these Zen 2 CPU's, still very capable mid range CPU's but Zen 3 is clearly much better and i don't mind the price reflecting that but there does need to be a £250 entry option.

The Comet Lake CPU's, at least 10700KF and under, are the ones to go for right now in the mid range, the performance is good and they are priced well, but i think its temporary, Intel are not willing to let go of what "Premium Brand" image they think they still have, its why Rocket Lake prices are quite high, its as if they are pretending Zen 3 isn't really a thing or hoping people don't notice it.

Zen2 is capable,as I have one of them myself!

It's just the Zen2 pricing doesn't seem to reflect the new pricing with Intel. What I don't understand is why AMD is still making Zen2,when the core chiplet for Zen3 is only 10% larger(IIRC). A Ryzen 5 5600 non-X at £200ish with 16MB of L3 cache(instead of 32MB) would be doable IMHO,and would easily be a big upgrade over a Ryzen 5 3600/3600X,and still give enough in the bank for the Ryzen 5 5600X to differentiate itself.

Also,there is the £140~£150 Core i5 11400F:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zNgOs4fmXo

It looks a 5% to 10% improvement over the £125 Core i5 10400F. A B560 will enable fast RAM,and a £20~£30 CPU cooler would be fine if you want to run MCE or something similar.

humbug · 25 Mar 2021 at 16:54

CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
I don't disagree,that once you reach the £300 CPU level,Intel is harder to recommend,especially when cooling costs also have to be taken into consideration for these higher end parts,as is the requirement for motherboards with sufficient power delivery. I am just concerned AMD has seemingly forgotten about the entry level and mainstream areas. Even the Ryzen 5600X is probably at the upper level of what you would call a mainstream CPU.

Zen2 is capable,as I have one of them myself! It's just the Zen2 pricing doesn't seem to reflect the new pricing with Intel. What I don't understand is why AMD is still making Zen2,when the core chiplet for Zen3 is only 10% larger(IIRC). A Ryzen 5 5600 non-X at £200ish with 16MB of L3 cache(instead of 32MB) would be doable IMHO,and would easily be a big upgrade over a Ryzen 5 3600/3600X,and still give enough in the bank for the Ryzen 5 5600X to differentiate itself.

Also,there is the £140~£150 Core i5 11400F:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zNgOs4fmXo

It looks a 5% to 10% improvement over the £125 Core i5 10400F. A B560 will enable fast RAM,and a £20~£30 CPU cooler would be fine if you want to run MCE or something similar.

11400F vs 10400F both 6 core 12 thread.

I can think of 2 reasons why there is this difference between them that apparently doesn't exist between the 10700K and 11700K.

They are lower clocked lower core count CPU's vs the 10700K / 11700K, with it Nvidia's ridiculous 20% higher than AMD driver overhead allows that much more of the CPU to drive the GPU and not the ###### Driver, they are using an AMD GPU.

With them also being lower end CPU's the point at which the CPU becomes the bottleneck is also that much sooner, so the faster CPU will reflect its performance delta more.

RE: my rant in the other thread, (Ryzen 5 3600... Upgrade?) this is the other side of it, they all say Rocket Lake is no faster than Comet Lake, isn't it tho?????? or is it just that your testing methodology doesn't allow Rocket Lake to stretch the legs it has over Comet Lake?

This isn't fair on Intel!

I get your point and i agree, Intel do have some good offerings in the mid range, even with Rocket Lake.

dazzlaa · 25 Mar 2021 at 16:59

I’m expecting a 11400f to be delivered on the 30th March for a new ITX build I’m doing for my Wife/kids. From what I’m reading, that thing is going to be absolutely killer for £150. Quite excited to see how it performs.

silvagti · 25 Mar 2021 at 17:05

dazzlaa said:
I’m expecting a 11400f to be delivered on the 30th March for a new ITX build I’m doing for my Wife/kids.

Yeah, on positive note, for a change in this thread, that looks on paper like it should offer decent performance for the money :cool:

pandem0nium · 25 Mar 2021 at 17:27

shamus21 said:
The chip set is still Gen 3 but intel has doubled the bandwidth

Yeah, you're right, there is that.

Rocket lake has 4 gen4 lanes for the DMI now, so equivalent to x8 gen 3.

AMD has the same lanes on Zen 2 and 3 non-APUs. But that's limited to x4 gen 3 with B550.

So that's going to be a bit better for running multiple storage drives off the chipset for Intel.

With Intel though, you can't run nvme drives in raid across CPU lanes and the chipset.

dazzlaa · 25 Mar 2021 at 17:28

silvagti said:
Yeah, on positive note, for a change in this thread, that looks on paper like it should offer decent performance for the money

I never read through the entire thread but I got the impression it had descended my dads bigger then your dad a long time ago

humbug · 25 Mar 2021 at 17:33

dazzlaa said:
I never read through the entire thread but I got the impression it had descended my dads bigger then your dad a long time ago

Actually the thread was perfectly fine, right up until this troll grenade.

This is the point where it goes wrong, if you get your way.

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 25 Mar 2021 at 17:43

humbug said:
11400F vs 10400F both 6 core 12 thread.

I can think of 2 reasons why there is this difference between them that apparently doesn't exist between the 10700K and 11700K.

They are lower clocked lower core count CPU's vs the 10700K / 11700K, with it Nvidia's ridiculous 20% higher than AMD driver overhead allows that much more of the CPU to drive the GPU and not the ###### Driver, they are using an AMD GPU.

With them also being lower end CPU's the point at which the CPU becomes the bottleneck is also that much sooner, so the faster CPU will reflect its performance delta more.

RE: my rant in the other thread, (Ryzen 5 3600... Upgrade?) this is the other side of it, they all say Rocket Lake is no faster than Comet Lake, isn't it tho?????? or is it just that your testing methodology doesn't allow Rocket Lake to stretch the legs it has over Comet Lake?

This isn't fair on Intel!

I get your point and i agree, Intel do have some good offerings in the mid range, even with Rocket Lake.

Well I have not tested any of them as I don't have a Core i5 11400F myself,it was just the comparison I saw between the two. But I would imagine,one of the big problems Gamersnexus showed was CFL consistently ran at a higher clockspeed than RKL which had problems. With the lower end parts I suspect,their rated clockspeeds are not that high for Intel 14NM+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ so can hit their rated clockspeeds a bit easier. The top end parts are probably rated past the ideal V/F curves for the node Intel are using,so end up throttling once they boost past a certain clockspeed.

My main gripe is that by now we should at least have a refreshed the Zen2 parts now in some way. Even replace the Ryzen 5 3600 with the Ryzen 5 3600XT,etc. After all the Ryzen 5 3600 is only 4 months to its 2nd birthday!