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.
I was mostly laughing at your mention of the U chips. Had you limited your comment to just P chips, then I wouldn't have responded.Official spec says P is 20-64 W. An OEM could just use H instead and cut the PL1 and PL2 to their needs I guess if they also wanted the 8 lanes.
First slide uses SPECrate n-copy, second slide uses Blender, different workloads differnt scaling hence the "upto".
Intels reasoning for not having a curve for 5800u and M1 was in the Tomshardware articlehence the 5800U curve being at about constant value, well , that s quite a desperate "benchmark"...
Intel shows Alder Lake and Tiger Lake performance across a wide range of power envelopes but says it couldn't alter the power range of competing chips. As such, it only provides one measurement for the AMD and Apple models. Additionally, Intel did not have any Ryzen 6000 models for comparison as they aren't available yet.
thats a load of crap......Intels reasoning for not having a curve for 5800u and M1 was in the Tomshardware article
ADL ~15% better than Tiger at 15W. About 30% better at 28W.
Intel's graphs are wonderfully cryptic though, so it probably has some strange nonlinear scaling!
At 15W TGL is at 0.75 and ADL is at 0.9, so that's 20%.
There's nothing for the U at 28W, so at 25W it's 0.95 vs ~1.23 which is slightly under 30%.
The P is 70% faster at 28W.
Compared to 5800U, it simply doesn't have enough cores for the U, as 2+8 is roughly ~6.
Looks like the P can reach 2x, but only if the power is ramped higher to 35W. Sigh marketing.
The gains are a bit disappointing. Somebody was talking about the System Agent in -H reaching 6W so I checked Ultrabook's reviews out how Tigerlake-H fares.
Something is messed up with Alderlake's System Agent. You can see the Tigerlake-H's SA can easily use only 1W even when under load.
But for Alderlake, it's staying at 4-6W most of the time. 5W at 30W and 4W at 18W. That's terrible.
If this largely carried onto the U and P, it would explain the lower than expected gains.
I stand corrected. After making the graph overlay I was too exhausted to correct the percent values.
That's ok, it happens.
Look at the System Agent power for Alderlake-H. It's 3-4x the one in Tigerlake-H.
So there's something big going on there. That kind of power increase in the SA would seriously rob the power going into the CPU at say, 15W. 5W at 30W. That means if we had a 1.5W SA like in Tigerlake, the chip power would have been 26W. That's substantial!
2W at 5.6W chip power WTF! 3.6W at 16W! For Tigerlake-H, it generally stays at 1-2W even with 45W package power. And lot of systems it can go to 0.7-1.2W
I can see Raptorlake being a decent jump just by Intel engineers fixing the issue to get the power numbers for the SA back in line with the Tigerlake generation.
Could the SA issue have anything to do with the P's and E's being on the same voltage?
I'm not so sure about that: on desktop I don't have a System Agent reading in HWInfo, but the "CPU Package Power" and "IA Cores Power" difference is much lower something around ~2.5W versus ~8.5W on 12700H in the Notebookcheck review.Seems like an Alderlake problem not -H problem.
I'm not so sure about that: on desktop I don't have a System Agent reading in HWInfo, but the "CPU Package Power" and "IA Cores Power" difference is much lower something around ~2.5W versus ~8.5W on 12700H in the Notebookcheck review.
This may also explain the difference in performance in my previous tests.
遠坂小町 on Twitter: "@VideoCardz https://t.co/mJoOEgYvCV" / Twitter
Funny how Intel is being the copycat, using AMD's HX naming scheme to indicate Ultra performance level. How things have changed.
I know that but the 800 pound gorilla needing to copypaste is when it shows desperation.H and U naming scheme came from Intel years ago, AMD copy pasted all of Intels naming in the past.
You realize he doesn't mean the brand and the company itself with its 100000+ employees, right?This will explain it all:
You made a good joke! If you need another:You realize he doesn't mean the brand and the company itself with its 100000+ employees, right?
I could go on and on spamming this thread with dozens of times he called Intel or its chips jokes, crap, etc. But, I prefer just to quote himself when he says he hates Intel in multiple threads.I just hate Intel, and it will be many years before I can forgive their greed in the past.
That quote from me was in 2002. Talk about digging up the past.You made a good joke! If you need another:
I could go on and on spamming this thread with dozens of times he called Intel or its chips jokes, crap, etc. But, I prefer just to quote himself when he says he hates Intel in multiple threads.
I wouldn't dig up the past if you were honest with yourself. You posted 2 decades of this:That quote from me was in 2002. Talk about digging up the past.
and then keep claiming to be neutral. A search of your posts calling people "intel fanboys" runs multiple pages. You keep going into almost every thread about an Intel chip and say to buy AMD instead. You keep claiming that you'll wait for reviews for your purposes, then say Intel chips are a joke without reviews on any program you use, etc. And your second quote was from 2004, when AMD was ahead.AMD is ahead right now, read and weep Intel fanboys.
I am honest. When Intel is ahead, I support them, when AMD is ahead, I support them. You just quote from 20 years ago, and only pick posts that you don't like, none of the recent ones. 20 Years ago, AMD was ahead. Until alder lake they were ahead recently. Now its a mixed bag. But you want to ignore all that. I was a conroe fan for years, dumped AMD like a hot rock. Then Ryzen happened.I wouldn't dig up the past if you were honest with yourself. You posted 2 decades of this:
and then keep claiming to be neutral. A search of your posts calling people "intel fanboys" runs multiple pages. You keep going into almost every thread about an Intel chip and say to buy AMD instead. You keep claiming that you'll wait for reviews for your purposes, then say Intel chips are a joke without reviews on any program you use, etc.
It is fine to be biased. AMD makes great chips. But your dishonesty about your feelings just really is annoying here.
First, that is one benchmark. Second, you are ignoring power consumption. But even I acknowledge they have the better gaming cpu, just not the 12900k.I personally find it amusing when people are not impressed by Alder Lake. I especially don't understand it when I see this from the TPU i9-12900K review:
View attachment 57961
That's 16 ADL threads smacking down 32 Zen 3 threads in MySQL. How is that NOT impressive? Of course the 5950X will win in highly parallel workloads. It has almost double the threads! And it costs more too. And you pay for better multicore performance with 2nd class single core performance. Sure, ADL won't suit you if you run highly parallel workloads at 100% CPU utilization most of the time but if your workloads are mixed, ADL likely makes more sense for you to buy.