- Oct 9, 1999
- 4,951
- 3,383
- 136
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.
Yeah and over that boatload of mixed variety of workloads on Linux, 12900K is 10% faster than 5950x. While using on average maybe 20% more power, or 2W more if we consider that 5950X does not have IGP.
You're right. I hereby declare that 16 threads is the the ideal number for everyone, and any workload that utilises more than 16 threads should be discarded entirely.It's funny how some insist every CPU workload must be up to 32 threads because......... Maybe in the very near future, thanks to the core wars, that number will magically rise to however much the CPU with the most cores has on desktop. 64 threads, anyone?
Battery life is pretty bad
Understatement. Intel should be ashamed of itself for producing such a laptop cpu.
PL1/PL2 don't affect web surfing battery life, not on the H platform.You should be blaming MSI more for setting the PL1 and PL2 that high.
Until you drop down to like 15W or so, they don't affect web surfing nor video playback battery life on any platformPL1/PL2 don't affect web surfing battery life, not on the H platform.
The classic argument is this: Many people like hot coffee. Many people like iced coffee. Thus, the average person likes room temperature coffee.Averaging everything into a single number isn't any better either or is likely to be misleading. Imagine if we did that for something like eye color. The average human would be described as having an eye color that no one person likely has.
PL1/PL2 don't affect web surfing battery life, not on the H platform.
On Cinebench, the Alder Lake system scored 3.6 times higher than the Tiger Lake platform, while still achieving a transcode that was 1.37 times faster. It is very impressive.
My guess: Alder Lake has a higher branch misprediction latency penalty with it's 6-wide decoder. 7-zip decompression is highly likely to have a misprediction, and Alder Lake has a pretty big latency for having to go back and calculate the other path. 7-zip also doesn't use any special instructions that might help decompression speeds.7-zip decompression test is a weird anomaly. Why is 5900HX so great at that? And so bad at compression? Perplexing.
7-zip decompression test is a weird anomaly. Why is 5900HX so great at that? And so bad at compression? Perplexing.
Recent Ryzen chips always excelled at zip decompression.
Recent Ryzen chips always excelled at zip decompression.
Recent Ryzen chips always excelled at zip decompression.
AT has a review, and so does NBC on the MSI Raider. Battery life is pretty bad, perhaps unsurprisingly with 110 W PL1 12900HK and a 175 W 3080 Ti.
7-zip decompression test is a weird anomaly. Why is 5900HX so great at that? And so bad at compression? Perplexing.
And is anyone really going to use a high end gaming laptop for any extended time on battery? I dont really think Intel should be "ashamed" of building such a cpu. I one doesnt want such a power hungry cpu, they can certainly buy a different model. I guess in you mind choice is not a good thing?Understatement. Intel should be ashamed of itself for producing such a laptop cpu.
This same chip will also be used in thin and light laptops too, in case you forgot. This is sending out bad signals for what's to come for that segment, especially considering that ADL-P will be compared to TGL-U and TGL-H35, both of which already had the chipset on package.And is anyone really going to use a high end gaming laptop for any extended time on battery? I dont really think Intel should be "ashamed" of building such a cpu. I one doesnt want such a power hungry cpu, they can certainly buy a different model. I guess in you mind choice is not a good thing?
Sacrificing? It's the same CPU core and refined everything else. Of course power efficiency isn't being sacrificed lmao. The question has always been: how much does it improve, not does it improveIf 6900HX improves on performance without sacrificing power efficiency, Intel's "victories" here would be short-lived.
Not that one, no. I have a gaming laptop I use to play games plugged in, and use for other work when unplugged. It has good battery life.And is anyone really going to use a high end gaming laptop for any extended time on battery? I dont really think Intel should be "ashamed" of building such a cpu. I one doesnt want such a power hungry cpu, they can certainly buy a different model. I guess in you mind choice is not a good thing?
The 6900HX will IMPROVE power efficiency, not sacrifice it.If 6900HX improves on performance without sacrificing power efficiency, Intel's "victories" here would be short-lived.
It's a refined CPU core. Mostly the same, but changes have been made. It is on a new process, for starters.Sacrificing? It's the same CPU core and refined everything else. Of course power efficiency isn't being sacrificed lmao. The question has always been: how much does it improve, not does it improve