Makes you wonder, considering Alder Lake is supposed to be a 2021 product as well, why they investing energy and releasing Rocket Lake at all.
I am afraid this is a totally irrelevant product in particular in the light of the Ryzen 5000 series.
January would have been less ugly.
Makes you wonder, considering Alder Lake is supposed to be a 2021 product as well, why they investing energy and releasing Rocket Lake at all.
I am afraid this is a totally irrelevant product in particular in the light of the Ryzen 5000 series.
Looks like Ocean Cove is dead and replaced with "Redwood Cove", whether this is large increase like Sunny/Golden Cove, or a smaller incremental upgrade akin to Willow (If I had to guess I'd say it's more like Willow. Intel seems to be on a cadence of Large Increase -> Small Increase -> Large Increase -> etc...)
It only has 80 EUs which is the reason for the relatively 3dmark scores. The other Acer goes down to sub 20W.
Tigerlake seemingly clocks fine to 4.8 in a ULV product and isn't that just Sunny Cove built on the 10SF node?
Redwood Cove being like Willow Cove gains is going to be laughably bad. Unless Golden Cove is a titanic jump and its 35-40% faster than Willow Cove to make up for the fact they have a year of minimal gains versus AMD that is doing 15-20% every year.
I do think the cache hierarchy change in WC could be preparing for future uarch expansions. Similar to Nehalem's 3-level cache hierarchy.
The 17W Swift is also faster.
ASUS Intelligent Performance Technology (AIPT)
Aerodynamic IceBlade for accelerated cooling
Each model in the new VivoBook series provides exceptional heat dissipation via an upgraded 8 mm heat pipe and a new IceBlade fan that efficiently accelerates heat transfer. The 87-blade IceBlade fan and impeller are made of a liquid-crystal polymer that allows them to be lighter and thinner than ordinary fans. Each IceBlade fan blade has a 3D-curved aerodynamic design, allowing the fan to achieve better flow rate and lower noise. In addition, the IceBlade fans also use a fluid-dynamics bearing, which can achieve better vibration reduction and lower noise when compared to ordinary fans.
@mikk The gaming performance is not good on both. The MSI device compared to a 4800U would be maybe 5-10% faster. You can see it underperforms the 4700U in few games. I want to see 30-40% gain over the 4800U.
They really need DDR5 with Xe LP which we will see on ADL-P.
I hope we see way more than just Xe with LPDDR5. Like an update for additional performance. Xe is barely competitive with Vega graphics. 30-40% best case win over your competitor that uses an older architecture does not bode well at all. Van Gogh is a real threat. Oh and the state of their drivers at this point. Tsk tsk.
At least its doing way better than their CPU line haha.
Both Arrandale/Clarkdale's Gen 5.75 and Haswell's Gen 7.5 were significant updates to their predecessors. Gen 5.75 added improved occlusion techniques thus along with on-package GMCH ended up being 2.5x better than the one in GMA X4000.
Intel is still the undisputed leader in volume & SW toolchain. This won't change any time soon. So the targeted "average CPU" will still be an Intel.Intel should fear the future as much as possible ...
For the last decade, the vast majority of the developers specifically optimized their code for Intel microarchitectures. If developers start designing their software around their competitor's microarchitecture then the performance gap could potentially become wider or be maintained ...
Even with the developers on Intel's side, they still couldn't keep their performance leadership in any capacity ...
Intel is still the undisputed leader in volume & SW toolchain. This won't change any time soon. So the targeted "average CPU" will still be an Intel.
The peak performance is really good from Xe LP but it needs a lot more bandwidth for some reason and also a 25W+ Tigerlake version. Not sure if the memory compression is subpar or if it's partially a driver thing. There is a new MSI Prestige 14 user test on youtube, it reaches a graphics score of 5904 in Firestrike and 1673 in timespy. With enough bandwidth and 28W it can be really fast.
Well, no. 10nm, given the marketing name '10SF' (super fin) is still broken. There's a decent probability that ADL will regress in performance. Maybe Intel will be able to produce enough to heavily bin for a top performer, but then Zen4 will be here.I am thinking that Rocket Lake is using the Sunny Lake architecture instead of Willow Cove due to limitation in die space at 14nm. That's also probably why we are only seeing a maximum of 8-core parts.
It's a shame that Intel can't produce their fastest architecture (Willow Cove) at 10nm for the desktop for Rocket Lake. It would be a good competitor for Zen 3.
There is also the matter of capacity.They have advantage in some areas, and people will still go for them, but most of the market is eventually going to go to AMD if they never get competitive again.
It just takes time that's all. Over many years they've established trust from consumers because they had a better product. There's a delay due to the buffer created, but it also takes time to create the said buffer.
Well, no. 10nm, given the marketing name '10SF' (super fin) is still broken. There's a decent probability that ADL will regress in performance. Maybe Intel will be able to produce enough to heavily bin for a top performer, but then Zen4 will be here.
Aren't they currently shipping/selling 10SF Tiger Lake parts?
If they were really interested in extra volume on desktop, they could have released "T" series processors based on Tiger Lake 4C die. They would have made fine i3, low power processors for corporate environments. There's no need though. That market segment is handled well enough by the Comet Lake i3 parts in low power modes.
Well, no. 10nm, given the marketing name '10SF' (super fin) is still broken. There's a decent probability that ADL will regress in performance. Maybe Intel will be able to produce enough to heavily bin for a top performer, but then Zen4 will be here.
But they just managed 19%? So where did you come up with this theory?AMD have likely picked all the low hanging fruit that Jim Keller left them for Ryzen. I highly doubt they'll manage more than a 5-10% IPC increase again, before going to a new architecture. Hopefully I'm wrong though, their pace of innovation to this point (using Jim Keller's designs) have been refreshing.
AMD have likely picked all the low hanging fruit that Jim Keller left them for Ryzen. I highly doubt they'll manage more than a 5-10% IPC increase again, before going to a new architecture. Hopefully I'm wrong though, their pace of innovation to this point (using Jim Keller's designs) have been refreshing.
But they just managed 19%? So where did you come up with this theory?
Anandtech said:Typically when designing a CPU core, the easiest thing to do is to take the previous design and upgrade certain parts of it – or what engineers call tackling ‘the low hanging fruit’ which enables the most speed-up for the least effort. Because CPU core designs are built to a deadline, there are always ideas that never make it into the final design, but those become the easiest targets for the next generation. This is what we saw with Zen 1/Zen+ moving on to Zen 2. So naturally, the easiest thing for AMD to do would be the same again, but with Zen 3.
However, AMD did not do this. In our interviews with AMD’s senior staff, we have known that AMD has two independent CPU core design teams that aim to leapfrog each other as they build newer, high performance cores. Zen 1 and Zen 2 were products from the first core design team, and now Zen 3 is the product from the second design team. Naturally we then expect Zen 4 to be the next generation of Zen 3, with ‘the low hanging fruit’ taken care of.
It would have worked vs Raven and Picasso. But that would have caused AMD to use Renoir far more agressively on desktop.