Question Alder Lake - Official Thread

[Hulk]

With the release of Alder Lake less than a week away and the "Lakes" thread having turned into a nightmare to navigate I thought it might be a good time to start a discussion thread solely for Alder Lake.

 

[jpiniero]

And still using a 2080Ti for gaming tests. Absurd. I used to wait eagerly for The AT review for new cpus, but now I pretty much ignore it.

Probably can't afford a 3090, especially at it's current price.

 

[uzzi38]

Not really:

View attachment 52352

AnandTech deliverin’ the goods!

The E-Cores perform surprisingly well. I wonder if they can be overclocked? Seems like Intel needs to retire *cove.

12900K beat the 5950X on SPECINT2017 by 6.4% and 16.1% in SPECFP2017. Whilst clocking 5% higher (4.9GHz vs 5.2GHz). That's actually rather disappointing, not impressive. I was expecting a solid 10-15% lead, not a ~5% lead on IPC.

 

[ondma]

Probably can't afford a 3090, especially at it's current price.

Other sites seem to be able to afford current gen dgpus, even if only a 3080. Maybe Ian should start a go fund me page if AT is really that poor.

 

[nicalandia]

12900K beat the 5950X on SPECINT2017 by 6.4% and 16.1% in SPECFP2017. Whilst clocking 5% higher (4.9GHz vs 5.2GHz). That's actually rather disappointing, not impressive. I was expecting a solid 10-15% lead, not a ~5% lead on IPC.

These people Pointing out Anandtech SPEC2017 scores think that they are seeing a clock for clock test, but it's not.


Where can I read Benches where they have the 5950X at Max POB against a no power limit 12900K

 

[TheELF]

I think the Venn diagram of people buying flagship CPUs but fussing over pennies in electric costs are basically non-existent.

Now pure heat output as a concern for someone literally running full load 24/7, that is actually a type of person that exists.

It clearly says that both CPUs used 88W, at 88w the temps are going to be much lower as with 241w.
Both are using the same power both are pumping out the same amount of heat.

You have to factor in more expensive cooling, mb, and ps. And if you cannot sufficiently supply ample power and cooling to the 12900k, then hardware longevity at continuous 90C will be bugging me for the duration of it's use. If you have the money to afford the optimal power, cooling, platform upgrade, and slight increase in electric bill, ya 12900K is the cpu to get right now.

It clearly says that both CPUs used 88W, at 88w the temps are going to be much lower as with 241w.
Both are using the same power both are pumping out the same amount of heat.

To bridge this perf gap the 12900K has to be set at roughly 125W, that say it better.

Intel Core i9-12900K, i7-12700K & i5-12600K im Test: Leistung und Effizienz P- vs. E-Core

Intel Alder Lake im Test: Leistung und Effizienz P- vs. E-Core / Wie effizient ist die Hybrid-Architektur?

www.computerbase.de

It clearly says that both CPUs used 88W, at 88w the temps are going to be much lower as with 241w.
Both are using the same power both are pumping out the same amount of heat.

 

[Dayman1225]

I don't read smart phone reviews, but Ian still does a great job within the structure of AT's test procedures. The Win10/11 point is pretty muddled. W11 advantages Intel, at the expense of AMD and vise-versa. It seems as though AT doesn't have anyone to do full on dGPU reviews anymore. Ryan (and Ian, IIRC) does Architectural breakdown - so for benchmarking I go elsewhere. I do wish they'd get back to it, maybe the $$s just aren't there for them in this very competitive area.

Yeah don’t get me wrong they still produce some of the best break downs in terms of technical details regarding architectures - I still read for that but their reviews are nothing special. As for my earlier W10 point it looks like I’m wrong - reread and looks like they tested both.

 

[alcoholbob]

This is too little of a gain for users to take on all the big.little technical problems right now. It might be worth it when the little cores at actually faster than rocket lake/zen 3 cores and so you don't have to worry about scheduler problems.

 

[igor_kavinski]

Intel are producing more 11th gen CPUs right now than 12th gen (and they are cutting 11th gen prices).

My office has yet to get an 11th gen Dell PC. The IT guy keeps ordering 10th gen i5's as their stock is still not exhausted at our IT equipment supplier. Have to wait for ADL laptops before I get any chance to test 12th gen.

 

[inf64]

12900K beat the 5950X on SPECINT2017 by 6.4% and 16.1% in SPECFP2017. Whilst clocking 5% higher (4.9GHz vs 5.2GHz). That's actually rather disappointing, not impressive. I was expecting a solid 10-15% lead, not a ~5% lead on IPC.

It's really dissappointing to say the least. GC is a much wider core and yet the results are abysmal.

 

[nicalandia]

It's really dissappointing to say the least. GC is a much wider core and yet the results are abysmal.

Would this be a good core to implement a 3 or 4 way SMT? since its so wide? Intel has experience with 4 way SMT in Xeon Phi

 

[Hitman928]

Yeah People like you

So, people who say things you don't like, even if it is true. Got it. I won't perpetuate this thread diversion any more. Regards.

 

[nicalandia]

So, people who say things you don't like, even if it is true. Got it. I won't perpetuate this thread diversion any more. Regards.

Dude stop derailing this thread. I have reported you.

 

[VirtualLarry]

This is purely early adopter toy stuff IMHO for the time being.

Yes, it seems that way.

 

[Hitman928]

It clearly says that both CPUs used 88W, at 88w the temps are going to be much lower as with 241w.
Both are using the same power both are pumping out the same amount of heat.

It clearly says that both CPUs used 88W, at 88w the temps are going to be much lower as with 241w.
Both are using the same power both are pumping out the same amount of heat.


It clearly says that both CPUs used 88W, at 88w the temps are going to be much lower as with 241w.
Both are using the same power both are pumping out the same amount of heat.

I think there's a typo in their write-up. From the chart, it's clear that it's the 5900x that is 8% faster when both are at 88W. The 5950x is 16% faster than the 12900k when it is also at 88W. The problem really comes from Intel only having 8 performance cores, so trying to catch up to the 16 performance Zen 3 cores becomes a tall task and ADL has to start using larger and larger amounts of power to match the 16 cores once they are fed a bit more as well. I.e. the power curve becomes much steeper for the 12900k vs. the 5950x as higher performance levels are reached.

 

[blckgrffn]

Other sites seem to be able to afford current gen dgpus, even if only a 3080. Maybe Ian should start a go fund me page if AT is really that poor.

Honestly, for testing at max frames at 720p and 1080p low situations, this should be CPU bound and that's why we see any differences at all.

I'd rather they keep using the 2080ti for historical continuity with their *CPU* reviews. A 3080 isn't going to provide any different conclusions at these settings (IMO) but might muddy the historical value of the testing.

In the future they should provide a nvidia 4090 or whatever test showing similar results to the 2080ti in these low resolution tests. If that starts showing different results then yeah, let's get that fixed.

AND obviously I would prefer they did GPU reviews worthy of the historical pedigree of this site that focus on GPU performance and functionality.

 

[Accord99]

A single benchmark isn't really telling of IPC though. I also don't know which instructions CB15 supports. Does it use AVX(2) or just prior SSE sets?

And in CB R20, at 2.8 GHz, GC is about 16-17% faster then Zen 3. 22% faster than Cypress Cove and 44% faster than Skylake.

Intel Core i9-12900K och Core i5-12600K "Alder Lake" - Test - Test: Vid samma klockfrekvens

Stora och små kärnor kommer samman när Intel släpper lös processorfamiljen "Alder Lake" med löften om att återigen återta prestandatronen från AMD.

www.sweclockers.com

 

[Hitman928]

And in CB R20, at 2.8 GHz, GC is about 16-17% faster then Zen 3. 22% faster than Cypress Cove and 44% faster than Skylake.

View attachment 52357
View attachment 52358

Intel Core i9-12900K och Core i5-12600K "Alder Lake" - Test - Test: Vid samma klockfrekvens

Stora och små kärnor kommer samman när Intel släpper lös processorfamiljen "Alder Lake" med löften om att återigen återta prestandatronen från AMD.

www.sweclockers.com

Yes, ADL seems to be particularly strong on the FP side, particularly once you get to AVX+ instruction sets.

 

[StinkyPinky]

Could be some pretty nice deals on 5000 series ryzens coming up for black friday and xmas for those of us on AMD platforms. Alder Lake is just good enough to make AMD sweat and cut prices.

In saying that, I'm not 100% convinced on this big.little arch for desktop. It certainly hasn't helped the power output at all which suggests those P cores must be power hungry to say the least. It will be interesting to see which ratio of P and E cores they do for mobile. Apple went 8 and 2 for their Pro and Max cpu's but I suspect if Intel goes the same it will be pretty power hungry.

 

[tamz_msc]

And in CB R20, at 2.8 GHz, GC is about 16-17% faster then Zen 3. 22% faster than Cypress Cove and 44% faster than Skylake.

View attachment 52357
View attachment 52358

Intel Core i9-12900K och Core i5-12600K "Alder Lake" - Test - Test: Vid samma klockfrekvens

Stora och små kärnor kommer samman när Intel släpper lös processorfamiljen "Alder Lake" med löften om att återigen återta prestandatronen från AMD.

www.sweclockers.com

Yeah clock them even lower than 2.8 GHz and watch the relative difference in IPC increase.

Testing for IPC at fixed, low clocks is not the right thing to do.

 

[nicalandia]

And in CB R20, at 2.8 GHz, GC is about 16-17% faster then Zen 3. 22% faster than Cypress Cove and 44% faster than Skylake.

That is why using CB15 is the best as AVX instructions don't come to play.

 

[Accord99]

Yeah clock them even lower than 2.8 GHz and watch the relative difference in IPC increase.

Using lower clocks does not change the relative percentage difference in an almost perfectly CPU limited benchmark.

 

[tamz_msc]

Using lower clocks does not change the relative percentage difference in an almost perfectly CPU limited benchmark.

You're wrong. It changes the score/GHz. You can test it yourself.

 

[IEC]

Close, but no cigar.

BIG.little complications, early adopter tax on DDR5, and immaturity of the platform at launch remind me of some of the early adopter pains of the Ryzen 1000 series.

I suspect that the NEXT chip after Alder Lake will be the one to get... but it remains to be seen what AMD can do with DDR5 on board.

Exciting times for all when we have real competition again.

 

[tamz_msc]

As usual it is this Russian channel that does the OC testing properly. They tested the 12700K, which seems to have not many reviews.

Anyway, they test the 12700K with 5.2 GHz P core and 4 GHz E core with both 3700CL14 Gear 1 DDR4 and 5200CL32 DDR5 with tuned subtimings. The 5900X runs at 4.9/4.7 per ccx OC and 3800CL14 with tuned subtimings as well.

What's interesting about their test is that some games like the low latency that DDR4 offers while other games like the higher bandwidth of DDR5. There is no clear answer as to what memory you should choose. The 12700K wins but by a narrow margin over the 5900X. Funny thing is, Intel can't touch AMD in StarCraft II with DDR5. 64MB of L3 does wonders for the 5900X in that game.

 

[Hitman928]

As usual it is this Russian channel that does the OC testing properly. They tested the 12700K, which seems to have not many reviews.

Anyway, they test the 12700K with 5.2 GHz P core and 4 GHz E core with both 3700CL14 Gear 1 DDR4 and 5200CL32 DDR5 with tuned subtimings. The 5900X runs at 4.9/4.7 per ccx OC and 3800CL14 with tuned subtimings as well.

What's interesting about their test is that some games like the low latency that DDR4 offers while other games like the higher bandwidth of DDR5. There is no clear answer as to what memory you should choose. The 12700K wins but by a narrow margin over the 5900X. Funny thing is, Intel can't touch AMD in StarCraft II with DDR5. 64MB of L3 does wonders for the 5900X in that game.

TPU tested an overclocked 12700k but hit a hard wall at 5 GHz on the P cores. Their overclocked 12700k ended up only a couple of percent faster than just turning off the power limits and letting it do it's own boosting so they concluded it wasn't worth the effort.