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.
But I struggle to find another justification for their efforts to disable it other than really not wanting it to be used.
Like, you think they sacrifices a potential feature from the big core just to make the small cores look better?Marketing reasons to not undermine the Small Cores.
Probably E-core engineers complained that their precious little cores are getting disabled just so people can run AVX-512 applications. Are there any reports of pre-built gaming PCs having E-cores disabled in BIOS from the factory?Like, you think they sacrifices a potential feature from the big core just to make the small cores look better?
Like, you think they sacrifices a potential feature from the big core just to make the small cores look better?
That's the opposite of how it's generally worked.Probably E-core engineers complained that their precious little cores are getting disabled just so people can run AVX-512 applications. Are there any reports of pre-built gaming PCs having E-cores disabled in BIOS from the factory?
I have no proof of this, but I always assumed Alder Lake failed the lifetime testing with AVX-512 (that is, more chips failed prematurely than Intel was willing to accept). So, rather than delay the chips more, they just shipped with that portion turned off.But I struggle to find another justification for their efforts to disable it other than really not wanting it to be used.
Nah, I doubt that's it. Or SPR would have the same issue. I just really don't think they have a good path forward with AVX-512. I'd honestly be surprised if even Arrow Lake or Lunar Lake support it.I have no proof of this, but I always assumed Alder Lake failed the lifetime testing with AVX-512 (that is, more chips failed prematurely than Intel was willing to accept). So, rather than delay the chips more, they just shipped with that portion turned off.
You could be correct that there is no business case going forward for AVX-512. Which would be sad, because AVX-512 has some very powerful (albeit limited) uses for things like encryption, photo editing, compression/decompression, etc. But even if that happens to be true, that still is not a reason to turn it off for already developed and sold chips.Nah, I doubt that's it. Or SPR would have the same issue. I just really don't think they have a good path forward with AVX-512. I'd honestly be surprised if even Arrow Lake or Lunar Lake support it.
That's weird. The AVX-512 setting in the BIOS must be set to AUTO so whenever E-cores are disabled, it gets set to ON. Should be "fixed" by a friendly Intel mandated BIOS update soon.AVX-512 is enabled on my 12700F. During a few primegrid tasks, it was on for a few minutes/seconds,, jumping from 162 watts to 300 ! I could not believe the kill-a-watt, but our local guru found this is some log files of the jobs. (yes, I disabled the 4 e-cores)
Running linux, I doubt that will happen.That's weird. The AVX-512 setting in the BIOS must be set to AUTO so whenever E-cores are disabled, it gets set to ON. Should be "fixed" by a friendly Intel mandated BIOS update soon.
I would not do this upgrade. Its more like a side-grade. If anything, and you want more gaming speed, the 5800X3d for almost the same price as a 12700k will be much faster, and cost less (no platform upgrade). Yes, if you did not already have to AM4 platform, and a good CPU, it might have been the way to go. Not in your case.I'm considering upgrading from a Ryzen 5800x to an i7-12700k. I currently use Windows 11. Is it possible for a game to accidently use an e-core instead of a p-core even with the more advanced thread scheduler of Windows 11?
On average based on Techpowerup's results, 12700K is only 5 to 6% faster than the 5800X in games. 12900K about 8% faster. Maybe wait for Raptor Lake?I'm considering upgrading from a Ryzen 5800x to an i7-12700k.
Unless they have money to burn, probably comfortable waiting for at least Zen 4, and quite reasonably into '23 or even '24.On average based on Techpowerup's results, 12700K is only 5 to 6% faster than the 5800X in games. 12900K about 8% faster. Maybe wait for Raptor Lake?
No, absolutely not. In fact you have to disable e-cores for it to work on mine, and others have said the same. I think even Intel said it, before they decided to disable it in future chips/updates.Could AVX512 simply be using the e-cores?
Or simply go for a 5800X3D in a month, and save his entire platform.Unless they have money to burn, probably comfortable waiting for at least Zen 4, and quite reasonably into '23 or even '24.
Absolutely. They have not perfected it yet. There are all sorts of odd things going on with that scheduler.I'm considering upgrading from a Ryzen 5800x to an i7-12700k. I currently use Windows 11. Is it possible for a game to accidently use an e-core instead of a p-core even with the more advanced thread scheduler of Windows 11?
I would not do this upgrade. Its more like a side-grade. If anything, and you want more gaming speed, the 5800X3d for almost the same price as a 12700k will be much faster, and cost less (no platform upgrade). Yes, if you did not already have to AM4 platform, and a good CPU, it might have been the way to go. Not in your case.
WIth gaming? Really? Do you have proof of this? I know initially the E cores caused issues with DRM in games but that was patched pretty quickly. I haven't heard of games being run on E cores when the P cores were available.Absolutely. They have not perfected it yet. There are all sorts of odd things going on with that scheduler.