News Intel Bartlett Lake-S: up to 12P-Core or up to 8P-Core +16E-core

[Wolverine2349]

You are quickly becoming similar to a former member who kept saying AMD should have made a "3600 x 2". If it was all that obvious I'm sure Intel would be working on it. Nobody is going to put money into developing a "gaming CPU". It's all server first for Intel and AMD. Intel decided to target Apple with LNL. Well see how that works out.

There is no need for a gaming CPU. Developers will target for what is available. I don't understand your fetish for a 12-16 core homogeneous CPU. As @dullard posted about it would have to sacrifice frequency.

I don't know what else to say. No one else seems to understand why you want what you do. Should Bartlett Lake come out in a 12+0 form, I would love to see it compared to a 9900X. Too bad we have a year to wait.

Devs target what is available. Not always. Devs are getting lazy. Even some new games like Elden Ring and such struggle with hybrid big.little.

Besides if the e cores are really becoming that good and are smaller it would be a good business move from Intel to make a dedicated Skymont only die lower power and more cores with Raptor Cove IPC. Low power alternative for SFF. And laptop only cores can be used there at low clocks while desktop version has the higher clocks.

Intel already doing it with the prior e cores of MTL Sierra Forrest for Xeon.

Oh please 9900X vs 12 p core on a ring bus. The 12 p core bartlett would slaughter it just as it would slaughters
the 9700x and 9950x. The 13th and 14th Gen already do big time.

 

[dullard]

Even some new games like Elden Ring and such struggle with hybrid big.little.

Have you tried what others recommended? Win 10 is your biggest problem (Windows 10 doesn't work well with E cores), followed by leaving HT turned on (Elden Ring hates hyperthreading). I think your hatred towards big.little is misplaced. Especially when you are doing your best to run big.little in the worst possible combination (Win 10, HT on, gaming, on 2.5+ year old games).

 

[Wolverine2349]

Have you tried what others recommended? Win 10 is your biggest problem (Windows 10 doesn't work well with E cores), followed by leaving HT turned on (Elden Ring hates hyperthreading).

I have not used Elden RIng just read reports that it along wiht some game with the name Wong in it also have troubles and those are newr games. SO this idea devs devlope for what is available is simply not true or otherwise Big.Little should have 0 issues with any new game except Star Citizen which is beta messy code.

But some games do.

And WIN10 is where I like it.

Hate WIN11 and its forced telemetry spyware and forced integrated co-pilot Unless is there anyway they can be turned off as good as in WIN10. It seems the spy crapware is more embedded in WIN11

 

[dullard]

I have not used Elden RIng just read reports that it along wiht some game with the name Wong in it also have troubles and those are newr games. SO this idea devs devlope for what is available is simply not true or otherwise Big.Little should have 0 issues with any new game except Star Citizen which is beta messy code.

I will have to say that I do not understand why you care so much about games you do not play (enough that you post about it on multiple forums). But, I will accept that as your passion.

As for developers on games like this, you have to look closely at the timelines. Alder Lake was released Nov 2021 (Desktop) through Aug 2022 (mobile). Wide availability wasn't until Feb/Mar 2022. Elden Ring was released Feb 2022. So, it is very likely that the developers had no idea exactly how the Big.little would behave. Certainly the testers didn't have any modern Big.little x86 CPUs to test it. It isn't a good example for your developers argument.

 

[Wolverine2349]

I will have to say that I do not understand why you care so much about games you do not play (enough that you post about it on multiple forums). But, I will accept that as your passion.

As for developers on games like this, you have to look closely at the timelines. Alder Lake was released Nov 2021 (Desktop) through Aug 2022 (mobile). Wide availability wasn't until Feb/Mar 2022. Elden Ring was released Feb 2022. So, it is very likely that the developers had no idea exactly how the Big.little would behave. Certainly the testers didn't have any modern Big.little x86 CPUs to test it. It isn't a good example for your developers argument.

I may intend to play it but I have not yet. I want a set and forget it solution that lasts a while through video card upgrades that the core mobo RAM and CPU are future proof.

Golden Cove or Zen 4 or Raptor Cove or higher IPC with more than 8 cores on a single node IMH would provide that for a few years or more at least. Especially given IPC stagnation as it seems a wall has been hit by both Intel and AMD for a while given the Zen 5 data point.

I am kind of caught between a rock and a hard place given what I want and it does not exist or it may exist in the future but maybe not anytime soon if ever.

So I am or was willing to compromise and give big.little a chance as I did last MArch with Raptor Lake. Problem is that plan was scrapped once I started to experience stability problems then liek wild fire it goes all over the news degradation issues and such so returned it and went with 7800X3D.

But would like more than 8 cores for headroom. Yeah 8 cores seems to be enough for now, but CPU usage can get high in TLOU Part 1 in some parts, though I think its ok for now.

A. So basically I can stay with 7800X3D and only 8 cores and simplest. Best gaming CPU overall for now though thread heavy games may start to change that real quickly.

B. Or could get a dual CCD 7950X3D or 9950X3D disable HT and use process Lasso to ensure game threads stay on 3d cache CCD.

C. Or wait a couple months and get Arrow Lake and give Big.Little try e-cores much better and closer in IPC and no HT (intended to turn HT off anyways on RPL and leave e-cores on) and now it should be stable as it is not Raptor Lake with stability issues.

SO kind of stuck between those 3 choices. Really choice A or C is most likely where I am at. Decision not easy.

I have an itch for more than 8 cores, but not that much more. Really want them on same die and good latency between them without a massive latency jump through Infinity fabric. Intel only provides that not AMD.

If there was such CPU it would be a no brainer. Maybe its coming with Bartlett Lake though maybe not. But even if it is can it be trusted with the RPL stability and degradation issues. And even if it can be its gonna spill so much heat inside the case compared to Arrow Lake let alone Zen X3D 8 cores.

SO decision is not easy as what I would like is probably never coming and even if it is not in a way that would be good as who knows about stability with Bartlett Lake given RPL issues and the amount of insane heat it will dump into case combined with an RTX 4090 and eventual 5090 and beyond.

Not crazy about WIN11, but maybe I scan strip the spyware crap out of it? Or maybe WIN10 will work? But it seems no choice WIN11 is gonna be required sooner or later and already is on Zen 5 even though Zen 5 is like a side grade from Zen 4 in all non AVX512 workloads.

 

[Wolverine2349]

At base, the whole 12 P-core chip gets 125 W, so each P-core has ~10 W. At turbo ~253 W, each P-core gets ~21 W. That is a drop from a Raptor Lake chip with the E-cores turned off (~15 W at base, and ~31 W at turbo). So, the 12-core chip will have to run at lower frequencies.

I'd say look at the Raptor Lake lineup and subtract ~400 MHz due to the lower power allowed per core. Maybe subtract less (only ~300 MHz) if Intel optimized it for these lower power levels.

Of course it would have to run at a lower frequency with e-cores turned off. Its 8 P cores vs 12. Of course 12 of same core type more heat and power and harder to cool.

But how will 12 P cores frequency run compared to 8 P cores + 16 e-cores with e-cores turned on running all core workloads?

 

[dullard]

Of course it would have to run at a lower frequency with e-cores turned off. Its 8 P cores vs 12. Of course 12 of same core type more heat and power and harder to cool.

But how will 12 P cores frequency run compared to 8 P cores + 16 e-cores with e-cores turned on running all core workloads?

My math for the frequency drop was with E cores on. Look at the Raptor Lake and subtract 300 MHz to 400 MHz. You could turn E-cores off, overclock it, then subtract more but that just seems way too circuitous.

 

[dullard]

A. So basically I can stay with 7800X3D and only 8 cores and simplest. Best gaming CPU overall for now though thread heavy games may start to change that real quickly.

I'd stay with option A. You have a great CPU--especially for gaming. There is no such thing as future proofing with technology. The closest you can get to future proofing is to turn down details as your system starts aging (and upgrade the GPU). In 5 years when it is feeling obsolete, then upgrade. Trying to buy a CPU soon and hope it works well with games that might be released and maybe needs the features is a recipe for disappointment.

 

[Wolverine2349]

My math for the frequency drop was with E cores on. Look at the Raptor Lake and subtract 300 MHz to 400 MHz. You could turn E-cores off, overclock it, then subtract more but that just seems way too circuitous.

SO wait are you saying the frequency drop for the P cores will be more with a 12 P core part than the 8 P core + 16 e-core part with e-cores on in all core workloads?

 

[jpiniero]

They could always increase the TDP.

 

[igor_kavinski]

@Wolverine2349 , clone your SSD to a spare one and then install the latest update pack of Win11 here: https://windowsxlite.com/24H2Updates/

Don't worry, those update file links are direct from Microsoft. You may see improvements in fps with the latest AMD specific optimizations in Win11 24H2.

If you don't like it. Just swap your original SSD back in and you are back to normal.

 

[igor_kavinski]

The process agnostic development is very encouraging. It gives me hope that Intel could easily, with relatively little effort, backport Lion Cove to Intel 7++, 4 or 3 and give LGA1700 systems a new lease on life.

Come on, everyone. Tonight and every night from now on, think about Bartlett Lake having Lion Cove cores right before falling asleep.

Let us change reality together!

 

[moinmoin]

View attachment 106096

The process agnostic development is very encouraging. It gives me hope that Intel could easily, with relatively little effort, backport Lion Cove to Intel 7++, 4 or 3 and give LGA1700 systems a new lease on life.

Come on, everyone. Tonight and every night from now on, think about Bartlett Lake having Lion Cove cores right before falling asleep.

Let us change reality together!

You actually want another Rocket Lake?

 

[igor_kavinski]

You actually want another Rocket Lake?

If it extends LGA1700 life, let's risk it!

 

[Wolverine2349]

View attachment 106096

The process agnostic development is very encouraging. It gives me hope that Intel could easily, with relatively little effort, backport Lion Cove to Intel 7++, 4 or 3 and give LGA1700 systems a new lease on life.

Come on, everyone. Tonight and every night from now on, think about Bartlett Lake having Lion Cove cores right before falling asleep.

Let us change reality together!

Only if they give more than 8 p cores on it for Lion Cove backport.

If it's 8 + 16 hybrid Arrow Lake backport not at all interested.

 

[igor_kavinski]

Only if they give more than 8 p cores on it for Lion Cove backport.

Yes, let's hope 12 Lion Cove cores with AVX-512!

 

[Wolverine2349]

Yes, let's hope 12 Lion Cove cores with AVX-512!

Yes and at least on backport of LGA 1700.

But even better if they do it on new LGA 1851 as well with the Intel 20A or TSMC 3 or whatever its called. Please Intel come on. You have a buyer right here. I will pay $1000 or even $1500 for it.

 

[igor_kavinski]

I will pay $1000 or even $1500 for it.

Don't give Intel ideas!

At most it should be $100 more than the top Ryzen.

 

[Wolverine2349]

Don't give Intel ideas!

At most it should be $100 more than the top Ryzen.

I do not want them charging that much. But if its the only way for one to be available than so be it.

Right now there is no good homogenous CPU options with decent clocks and modern platform and modern IPC with more than 8 cores on one die.

Better to have one tha ta costs $1000 to $1500 than none at all.

And no Xeon Workstation is not at all the answer. There is very limited benchmarking data on Sapphire Rapids. But form what limited data available, it requires ECC RAM which is a no no for gaming and XMP, and worse yet has severely gimped IPC and latency and its IPC is like poor man's Zen 3 from the limited data I found on it. So not not an option besides it just costing a lot.

Your right such a 12 P core Lion Cove CPU should not cost more than $100 more than top Ryzen. But better to have a more than 8 P core (10-12 cores) modern IPC good latency option on one die for an absurd $1000 to $1500 price than no option for such a chip at all.

AMD is of no hope as they are stuck with 8 core big core CCDs per rumors and avialable data at least through Zen 6. Their hire core count CCDs are multi CCXs and even if not they are their weaker poor cache gimped latency C cores.

 

[iameatingjam]

@DavidC1

the problem is they're using the same tech for the past 10 years aka 10m,+++++++++ and cramming more stuff into the same footprint aka LGA1700 and then charging for more E cores w/ no real increase in performance and more crashes. ADL though doesn't / didn't have any issues like these subsequent releases.

If you're ok with dropping $500+ on a CPU/board and rolling the dice on old tech feel free. I wouldn't bother with anything Intel though until ARL comes out which will be a complete redesign from the ground up instead of repackaging the SOS.

Personally I ditched Intel and went AMD as a lateral when I had issues with the setup and adding U.x drive to the system and having 2 fail spectacularly within less than a week of adding them. Switching over though wasn't a huge thing as I tend to rebuild / upgrade often anyway just to stay up to date with tech and sell off / recoup the costs before things get too old. Now, looking back at some of the gremlins with that setup it seems to all come back to the MOBO I was using vs the CPU itself. I had a card that wouldn't work 100% and figured maybe it was the platform but, I pulled the card out of the drawer and put it in the AMD setup and worked just fine like new. Some other little things as well improved by switching things up. In between the two I did switch MOBOs to accommodate 5*M2 before finding the U.x drives to be more budget friendly for higher capacity/unit. All in all though for the base AMD setup it was only $800 for a 12/24 CPU / 32GB / 850W PSU / misc parts (case/fans/etc.) It's been rock solid for the past 11 months.

But ecores do improve performance, just not for gaming. Thats what makes intel able to be good at gaming and productivity at the same time. They could have done 12P cores instead of 8+16 but then MT performance would be lower and therefore hurt productivity performance. I'm not defending intels instability issues - but I think you got it wrong when it comes to ecores.

 

[ondma]

But ecores do improve performance, just not for gaming. Thats what makes intel able to be good at gaming and productivity at the same time. They could have done 12P cores instead of 8+16 but then MT performance would be lower and therefore hurt productivity performance. I'm not defending intels instability issues - but I think you got it wrong when it comes to ecores.

Yea, but what if the cpu load for gaming becomes greater than 8 P cores can handle, especially now that the P cores only have 8 threads?

 

[Thunder 57]

Yea, but what if the cpu load for gaming becomes greater than 8 P cores can handle, especially now that the P cores only have 8 threads?

That seems unlikely considering console limitations. Unfortunately few games are PC first anymore. Last I could think of is probably Doom and Doom Eternal. Maybe Battlefield? I don't know.

 

[igor_kavinski]

Watch 7995WX run Forza Horizon 5 at less than 5% total CPU utilization and beat 7950X3D: http://www.portvapes.co.uk/?id=Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps&exid=threads/gaming-on-a-threadripper-7995wx.2621823/

 

[Wolverine2349]

That seems unlikely considering console limitations. Unfortunately few games are PC first anymore. Last I could think of is probably Doom and Doom Eternal. Maybe Battlefield? I don't know.

Consoles are actually 8 core and 16 threads not just 8 cores and 8 threads.

 

[Wolverine2349]

But ecores do improve performance, just not for gaming. Thats what makes intel able to be good at gaming and productivity at the same time. They could have done 12P cores instead of 8+16 but then MT performance would be lower and therefore hurt productivity performance. I'm not defending intels instability issues - but I think you got it wrong when it comes to ecores.

They should have option for both, not just 8 + 16.

Big.Little does not work great across all apps and some scheduling quirks.

A more than 8 P core option would be so nice to have as long as they are on one ring or die.

Hopefully Bartlett Lake is it it.