Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

First professional review of Intel's Rocket Lake (11700K) is out.. and it's a disaster

This thread just reminded me that the average LTT user doesn't understand benchmarking or technology in general...

 

AVX512 vs AVX2 for power consumption numbers...

GPU bottlenecked benchmarks for CPU results... 

 

I know that most users here sees the world in black and white, and right now that world is "Intel bad. AMD good". But come on... At least be a bit objective here. 

 

 

Rocket Lake is not great. In a lot of ways its really bad. There is no need to exaggerate or misconstrue the findings of the article to make it look bad. 

 

Unless the rocket lake chips are significantly cheaper than AMD's 5000 series, or you really need AVX512, then there isn't really any point in getting this. Which is kind of what we expected to begin with. Rocket lake is a stopgap solution before alder lake. 

Personally I'd recommend not buying anything right now. Even if pricing and availability was decent, we are so close to a new generation of four example DDR that if you wait 2 years or so, you will get something much better for the same money. More so than your typical "wait 2 years and get something better". 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, illegalwater said:

despite consuming more than 2x the power.

In AVX-512, which is a feature the 5800x doesn't have. Power consumption is still high in AVX2 but not twice as high.

Don't ask to ask, just ask... please 🤨

sudo chmod -R 000 /*

What is scaling and how does it work? Asus PB287Q unboxing! Console alternatives :D Watch Netflix with Kodi on Arch Linux Sharing folders over the internet using SSH Beginner's Guide To LTT (by iamdarkyoshi)

Sauron'stm Product Scores:

Spoiler

Just a list of my personal scores for some products, in no particular order, with brief comments. I just got the idea to do them so they aren't many for now :)

Don't take these as complete reviews or final truths - they are just my personal impressions on products I may or may not have used, summed up in a couple of sentences and a rough score. All scores take into account the unit's price and time of release, heavily so, therefore don't expect absolute performance to be reflected here.

 

-Lenovo Thinkpad X220 - [8/10]

Spoiler

A durable and reliable machine that is relatively lightweight, has all the hardware it needs to never feel sluggish and has a great IPS matte screen. Downsides are mostly due to its age, most notably the screen resolution of 1366x768 and usb 2.0 ports.

 

-Apple Macbook (2015) - [Garbage -/10]

Spoiler

From my perspective, this product has no redeeming factors given its price and the competition. It is underpowered, overpriced, impractical due to its single port and is made redundant even by Apple's own iPad pro line.

 

-OnePlus X - [7/10]

Spoiler

A good phone for the price. It does everything I (and most people) need without being sluggish and has no particularly bad flaws. The lack of recent software updates and relatively barebones feature kit (most notably the lack of 5GHz wifi, biometric sensors and backlight for the capacitive buttons) prevent it from being exceptional.

 

-Microsoft Surface Book 2 - [Garbage - -/10]

Spoiler

Overpriced and rushed, offers nothing notable compared to the competition, doesn't come with an adequate charger despite the premium price. Worse than the Macbook for not even offering the small plus sides of having macOS. Buy a Razer Blade if you want high performance in a (relatively) light package.

 

-Intel Core i7 2600/k - [9/10]

Spoiler

Quite possibly Intel's best product launch ever. It had all the bleeding edge features of the time, it came with a very significant performance improvement over its predecessor and it had a soldered heatspreader, allowing for efficient cooling and great overclocking. Even the "locked" version could be overclocked through the multiplier within (quite reasonable) limits.

 

-Apple iPad Pro - [5/10]

Spoiler

A pretty good product, sunk by its price (plus the extra cost of the physical keyboard and the pencil). Buy it if you don't mind the Apple tax and are looking for a very light office machine with an excellent digitizer. Particularly good for rich students. Bad for cheap tinkerers like myself.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a consumer product

Vast majority of consumers only care about AVX 512 performance

So the 11700K is better than the 5800X

Awareness is key. Never enough, even in the face of futility. Speak the truth as if you may never get to say it again. This world is full of ugly. Change it they say. The only way is to reveal the ugly. To change the truth you must first acknowledge it. Never pretend it isn't there. Never bend the knee.

 

Please quote my post in your reply, so that I will be notified and can respond to it. Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

This thread just reminded me that the average LTT user doesn't understand benchmarking or technology in general...

 

AVX512 vs AVX2 for power consumption numbers...

GPU bottlenecked benchmarks for CPU results... 

 

I know that most users here sees the world in black and white, and right now that world is "Intel bad. AMD good". But come on... At least be a bit objective here. 

 

 

Rocket Lake is not great. In a lot of ways its really bad. There is no need to exaggerate or misconstrue the findings of the article to make it look bad. 

Aside from the power numbers (which I have fixed in the OP) what did I exaggerate or get wrong? Rocket Lake is legitimately performing worse than Skylake in some tests, and across the board it's worse than the 5800X aside from AVX512, which practically nobody in the market for these chips cares about.

 

You can nitpick all you want but the fact is that this is a disastrous launch, nothing about Rocket Lake is enticing to the average consumer, Zen 3 beats in raw performance and power efficiency, Comet Lake and Zen 2 have it beat on price. Who is this product for?

Dell S2721DGF - RTX 3070 XC3 - R5 3600

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LAwLz said:

Unless the rocket lake chips are significantly cheaper than AMD's 5000 series, or you really need AVX512, then there isn't really any point in getting this.

This is basically what everyone in the thread has been saying.

Friends don't let friends use Userbenchmark. Ban the term "bottleneck." Corps aren't your friends. If the PC does what you need it to do well enough, it's good enough. Don't build the "best" system, build the system that makes you happy. 

 

System specs:

Ryzen 5 5600X w/Arctic Freezer 34 eSports Duo | ASRock B550 PG Velocita | Radeon RX 6800 Reference

16GB Crucial Ballistix DDR4-3600mhz CL16 | 1TB Samsung 970 Evo Plus, 3TB Toshiba P300

Fractal Design Meshify 2 Compact | Seasonic Focus GX 750W

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, illegalwater said:

You can nitpick all you want but the fact is that this is a disastrous launch, nothing about Rocket Lake is enticing to the average consumer, Zen 3 beats in raw performance and power efficiency, Comet Lake and Zen 2 have it beat on price. Who is this product for?

I don't think anyone said anything to the contrary. Pretty much everyone in this thread has agreed that RKL-S is pretty underwhelming, even by stopgap standards to be fair.

 

I think what users like LAwLz are saying is that too many people are looking at the nearly-300W peak power consumption at AVX-512 workloads and going "NICE SPACE HEATER!!!", even though both the 10700K and 5800X can't do AVX-512, and it's been known that AVX-512 chugs down a lot of power. At AVX2, which all of the above mentioned processors support, the peak power consumption of a mere 220-225W isn't pretty but it's much more in-line with what's expected. AVX-512 is also a very niche workload, so the AVX2 result is closer to what many users should expect.

The Workhorse (AMD-powered custom desktop)

CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 3700X | GPU: MSI X Trio GeForce RTX 2070S | RAM: XPG Spectrix D60G 32GB DDR4-3200 | Storage: 512GB XPG SX8200P + 2TB 7200RPM Seagate Barracuda Compute | OS: Microsoft Windows 10 Pro

 

The Portable Station (Intel-powered Lenovo Yoga Slim 7i)

CPU: Intel Core i5 1135G7 | GPU: Intel Iris Xe 80CU | RAM: 16GB LPDDR4X-4267 | Storage: 512GB PCIe SSD | OS: Microsoft Windows 10 Home

 

The Communicator (Exynos-powered Samsung Galaxy Note8)

SoC: Exynos 8895 | GPU: ARM Mali G71 MP20 | RAM: 6GB LPDDR4 | Storage: 64GB internal + 128GB microSD | Display: 6.3" 1440p "Infinity Display" AMOLED | OS: Android Pie 9.0 w/ OneUI

Link to post
Share on other sites

With this kind of power consumption I'm not surprised Intel is not selling overclocking warranty's anymore, because there isn't much left to overclock anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Hymenopus_Coronatus said:

Looks like the architecture doesn't really do well at all when back ported to 14nm. Must be really annoying to be an Intel engineer who can only do so much with the 14nm process, I can just imagine how hamstrung they must feel. 

 

This is a disappointing result, really a shame

Yeah, it's really odd though, they can't get desktop 10nm sorted out, but they've already got 10nm celerons and pentiums launched for the mobile platforms. I have to ask, what is taking them so long?

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, AndreiArgeanu said:

Yeah, it's really odd though, they can't get desktop 10nm sorted out, but they've already got 10nm celerons and pentiums launched for the mobile platforms. I have to ask, what is taking them so long?

TGL-U (1135G7, 1165G7) and TGL-H35 (11370H for example) are also 10nm, but I wonder why they don't bring that to the desktop. Maybe this chip would've been better on their 10nm (SuperFin).

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Middcore said:

This is basically what everyone in the thread has been saying.

I think we have all reached the same conclusion, but for different reasons and to different degrees.

 

21 minutes ago, D13H4RD said:

I think what users like LAwLz are saying is that too many people are looking at the nearly-300W peak power consumption at AVX-512 workloads and going "NICE SPACE HEATER!!!", even though both the 10700K and 5800X can't do AVX-512, and it's been known that AVX-512 chugs down a lot of power. At AVX2, which all of the above mentioned processors support, the peak power consumption of a mere 220-225W isn't pretty but it's much more in-line with what's expected. AVX-512 is also a very niche workload, so the AVX2 result is closer to what many users should expect.

That's part of it. Another part are all the cherry picked benchmarks.

Scroll down on the first page and you will find someone posting a Far Cry 5 benchmark where "the 10800K competes with... the 5600x.."

and then don't mention that the benchmark is extremely GPU bottlenecked and the 5950X is also within margin of error from the 5600X.

 

5950X - 152 FPS

5600X - 146 FPS

10700K - 140 FPS

 

Narrative that person is trying to push: "The 10700K performs like a 5600X. This benchmark proves it."

The reality: "It's a bad benchmark for testing CPU performance since even the 5950X and the 5600X performs the same".

 

People also seem very focused on the negatives. It seems like the 11700K performs slightly better than the 10700K in most tests. Not a lot, but not insigificant either.

The narrative people are focusing on? "IT'S in some limited cases WORSE THAN SKYLAKE!"

 

Like come on...

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Benji said:

TGL-U (1135G7, 1165G7) and TGL-H35 (11370H for example) are also 10nm, but I wonder why they don't bring that to the desktop. Maybe this chip would've been better on their 10nm (SuperFin).

Scaling

The Workhorse (AMD-powered custom desktop)

CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 3700X | GPU: MSI X Trio GeForce RTX 2070S | RAM: XPG Spectrix D60G 32GB DDR4-3200 | Storage: 512GB XPG SX8200P + 2TB 7200RPM Seagate Barracuda Compute | OS: Microsoft Windows 10 Pro

 

The Portable Station (Intel-powered Lenovo Yoga Slim 7i)

CPU: Intel Core i5 1135G7 | GPU: Intel Iris Xe 80CU | RAM: 16GB LPDDR4X-4267 | Storage: 512GB PCIe SSD | OS: Microsoft Windows 10 Home

 

The Communicator (Exynos-powered Samsung Galaxy Note8)

SoC: Exynos 8895 | GPU: ARM Mali G71 MP20 | RAM: 6GB LPDDR4 | Storage: 64GB internal + 128GB microSD | Display: 6.3" 1440p "Infinity Display" AMOLED | OS: Android Pie 9.0 w/ OneUI

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

People also seem very focused on the negatives. It seems like the 11700K performs slightly better than the 10700K in most tests. Not a lot, but not insigificant either.

The narrative people are focusing on? "IT'S in some limited cases WORSE THAN SKYLAKE!"

 

It shouldn't be performing worse than the chip from 5.5 years ago in any cases, and the fact that it does is notable and remarkable. 

Friends don't let friends use Userbenchmark. Ban the term "bottleneck." Corps aren't your friends. If the PC does what you need it to do well enough, it's good enough. Don't build the "best" system, build the system that makes you happy. 

 

System specs:

Ryzen 5 5600X w/Arctic Freezer 34 eSports Duo | ASRock B550 PG Velocita | Radeon RX 6800 Reference

16GB Crucial Ballistix DDR4-3600mhz CL16 | 1TB Samsung 970 Evo Plus, 3TB Toshiba P300

Fractal Design Meshify 2 Compact | Seasonic Focus GX 750W

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Benji said:

TGL-U (1135G7, 1165G7) and TGL-H35 (11370H for example) are also 10nm, but I wonder why they don't bring that to the desktop. Maybe this chip would've been better on their 10nm (SuperFin).

The yields where horrible on 10nm. Producing wafers with 30% or higher failure rates isn't going to make a profit. 

 

So high frequency and high core count on desktop becomes super difficult. The IPC wasn't raised enough to get away with a lower frequency and still be "faster" than an AMD chip.

 

- If it ain't broken, don't fix it! - - Your post codes and beep codes in the drop down below -

Spoiler

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

People also seem very focused on the negatives. It seems like the 11700K performs slightly better than the 10700K in most tests. Not a lot, but not insigificant either.

The narrative people are focusing on? "IT'S in some limited cases WORSE THAN SKYLAKE!"

 

Like come on...

Yeah, I read through the entire review and my own takeaway from it was;

 

”Is it better than its predecessor? Not in everything but there has been some uplift. Is it enough for people to really care? In my humble opinion, no, not really. Not when Alder Lake is coming.”

 

Seems that a lot of people are really wanting this to crash and burn when it by itself isn’t terribly impressive to begin with...

The Workhorse (AMD-powered custom desktop)

CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 3700X | GPU: MSI X Trio GeForce RTX 2070S | RAM: XPG Spectrix D60G 32GB DDR4-3200 | Storage: 512GB XPG SX8200P + 2TB 7200RPM Seagate Barracuda Compute | OS: Microsoft Windows 10 Pro

 

The Portable Station (Intel-powered Lenovo Yoga Slim 7i)

CPU: Intel Core i5 1135G7 | GPU: Intel Iris Xe 80CU | RAM: 16GB LPDDR4X-4267 | Storage: 512GB PCIe SSD | OS: Microsoft Windows 10 Home

 

The Communicator (Exynos-powered Samsung Galaxy Note8)

SoC: Exynos 8895 | GPU: ARM Mali G71 MP20 | RAM: 6GB LPDDR4 | Storage: 64GB internal + 128GB microSD | Display: 6.3" 1440p "Infinity Display" AMOLED | OS: Android Pie 9.0 w/ OneUI

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

I think we have all reached the same conclusion, but for different reasons and to different degrees.

 

That's part of it. Another part are all the cherry picked benchmarks.

Scroll down on the first page and you will find someone posting a Far Cry 5 benchmark where "the 10800K competes with... the 5600x.."

and then don't mention that the benchmark is extremely GPU bottlenecked and the 5950X is also within margin of error from the 5600X.

 

5950X - 152 FPS

5600X - 146 FPS

10700K - 140 FPS

 

Narrative that person is trying to push: "The 10700K performs like a 5600X. This benchmark proves it."

The reality: "It's a bad benchmark for testing CPU performance since even the 5950X and the 5600X performs the same".

 

People also seem very focused on the negatives. It seems like the 11700K performs slightly better than the 10700K in most tests. Not a lot, but not insigificant either.

The narrative people are focusing on? "IT'S in some limited cases WORSE THAN SKYLAKE!"

 

Like come on...

Skylake is over five years old, so I'm sorry but there's no excuse for Rocket Lake performing worse anywhere, it should be better in every scenario. It's disappointing that this is the best Intel can offer after half a decade of stagnation on architecture.

Dell S2721DGF - RTX 3070 XC3 - R5 3600

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, illegalwater said:

Skylake is over five years old, so I'm sorry but there's no excuse for Rocket Lake performing worse anywhere, it should be better in every scenario. It's embarrassing that this is the best Intel can do after half a decade.

Eh, I don’t think this is the best Intel can do. Tiger Lake is architecturally much more impressive than this. It’s just limited on laptops.

 

Rocket Lake is a stopgap made out of some parts from already existing products (Ice Lake’s Sunny Cove core design backported to Intel’s 14nm and an Xe-based iGPU which made its initial debut in Tiger Lake albeit with much less execution units)

The Workhorse (AMD-powered custom desktop)

CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 3700X | GPU: MSI X Trio GeForce RTX 2070S | RAM: XPG Spectrix D60G 32GB DDR4-3200 | Storage: 512GB XPG SX8200P + 2TB 7200RPM Seagate Barracuda Compute | OS: Microsoft Windows 10 Pro

 

The Portable Station (Intel-powered Lenovo Yoga Slim 7i)

CPU: Intel Core i5 1135G7 | GPU: Intel Iris Xe 80CU | RAM: 16GB LPDDR4X-4267 | Storage: 512GB PCIe SSD | OS: Microsoft Windows 10 Home

 

The Communicator (Exynos-powered Samsung Galaxy Note8)

SoC: Exynos 8895 | GPU: ARM Mali G71 MP20 | RAM: 6GB LPDDR4 | Storage: 64GB internal + 128GB microSD | Display: 6.3" 1440p "Infinity Display" AMOLED | OS: Android Pie 9.0 w/ OneUI

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, D13H4RD said:

Eh, I don’t think this is the best Intel can do. Tiger Lake is architecturally much more impressive than this. It’s just limited on laptops.

Sorry I should have clarified, I was talking about desktops.

Dell S2721DGF - RTX 3070 XC3 - R5 3600

Link to post
Share on other sites

The performance is disappointing, it shouldn't be slower than skylake even while GPU limited. Rocket Lake makes no sense unless you're going to use AVX-512, or if you have to build a PC now and can't use a Ryzen CPU because of the GPU shortage.

I see people trying to excuse the power consumption or performance, its embarrassing for sure if Intel can't get ahead of AMD with a CPU that requires a new motherboard to take advantage of pci-e 4.0, and only compares to a significantly cheaper 5600X.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If there was any doubt as to why Apple switched to its own silicon, you now have a good explanation. Yeah, Alder Lake will be better, but Apple can't sit and wait for Intel to maybe, hopefully get better. Apple was already skipping processors that provided dubious performance gains.

 

(And no, AMD wasn't likely a realistic option — Apple would pour a whole lot of work into chaining itself to another company's fate.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

imma just say this, intel has hit a dark time well be lucky if we dont get a god damn trash lineup for the next 10 years like the A series, intel is gonna be hit hard and evreyone gonna be like RYZEN RYZEN WE NEED RYZEN 7800MHZ RAM BRRRRR

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Benji said:

TGL-U (1135G7, 1165G7) and TGL-H35 (11370H for example) are also 10nm, but I wonder why they don't bring that to the desktop. Maybe this chip would've been better on their 10nm (SuperFin).

My best guess is simply capacity. 10SF is a relatively recent announcement and they're probably scaling/upgrading for it. First chips on mobile, server and bigger mobile is going through now. Desktop is low priority.

 

5 hours ago, ShrimpBrime said:

So high frequency and high core count on desktop becomes super difficult. The IPC wasn't raised enough to get away with a lower frequency and still be "faster" than an AMD chip.

That might have been the case for older 10nm (Ice Lake era) but 10SF allegedly resolves those problems. You get the clock and IPC increases. I'm really curious how the 8 core Tiger Lake will do relative to nearest Zen 3 CPUs. I really wish it was like the old days when mobo makers did MODT models.

 

5 hours ago, Blademaster91 said:

Intel can't get ahead of AMD with a CPU that requires a new motherboard to take advantage of pci-e 4.0

This was never a get ahead CPU, it was a close the gap CPU, and in that perspective it does exactly what it was supposed to. Also, you don't necessarily need a new mobo. Many 400 chipset mobos were designed with PCIe 4.0 in mind so can be activated by dropping in a Rocket Lake CPU. As long as they don't copy AMD anyway, look at AMD's 400 chipset to 500 transition when they killed it off on the older chipset even though mobos could have supported it.

 

5 hours ago, Commodus said:

If there was any doubt as to why Apple switched to its own silicon, you now have a good explanation. Yeah, Alder Lake will be better, but Apple can't sit and wait for Intel to maybe, hopefully get better. Apple was already skipping processors that provided dubious performance gains.

I really doubt Apple would do any different if Intel had something as good as AMD right now. Apple want to be in control of as much as possible. Intel doing better or worse is unlikely to have influenced that unless Intel were so cheap they couldn't refuse, which obviously is not an Intel behaviour.

Desktop Gaming system: Asrock Z370 Pro4, i7-8086k, Noctua D15, Corsair Vengeance Pro RGB 3200 2x16GB, Gigabyte 2070, NZXT E850 PSU, Cooler Master MasterBox 5, Optane 900p 280GB, Crucial MX200 1TB, Sandisk 960GB, Acer Predator XB241YU 1440p144 G-sync
TV Gaming system: Asus B560M-A, i7-11700k, Arctic eSports 34 duo, Corsair Vengeance Pro RGB 3200 2x16GB, MSI 3070 Gaming Trio X, EVGA Supernova G2L 850W, Anidees Ai Crystal, Samsung 980 Pro 2TB, LG OLED55B9PLA 4k120 G-Sync Compatible
Streaming system: Asus X299 TUF mark 2, i9-7920X, Noctua D15, Corsair Vengeance LPX RGB 3000 8x8GB, Asus Strix 1080 Ti, Corsair HX1000i, GameMax Abyss, Samsung 970 Evo 500GB, Crucial BX500 1TB, BenQ XL2411 1080p144 + HP LP2475w 1200p60
Former Main system: Asus Maximus VIII Hero, i7-6700k, Noctua D14, G.Skill Ripjaws V 3200 2x8GB, GTX 980 Ti FE, Corsair HX750i, In Win 303 NVIDIA, Samsung SM951 512GB, WD Blue 1TB, Acer RT280k 4k60 FreeSync [link]
Gaming laptop: Lenovo Legion, 5800H, DDR4 3200C22 2x8GB, RTX 3070, 512 GB SSD, 165 Hz IPS panel


 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is brutal. :((

i like anime

Link to post
Share on other sites

waste of a good code name

please quote me or tag me @wall03 so i can see your response

motherboard buying guide      psu buying guide      pc building guide     privacy guide

ltt meme thread

folding at home stats

pc:

Spoiler

laptop: macbook air 13.3”

Spoiler

            RAM: 4GB 1333MHz

            CPU: Intel Core i5 2557M

            SSD: 128GB

            OS: Ubuntu 20.04

            Status: Retired PC

desktop: operation badger

Spoiler

            RAM: 16GB DDR4-3200 CL-16

            CPU: AMD Ryzen 5 3600 @ 3.6GHz

            SSD: 256GB

            GPU: Radeon RX 570 8GB OC

            OS: Windows 10

            Status: Main PC

            Cinebench R23 score: 9097 (multi) 1236 (single)

            Temps: CPU idle 45C, load 78C, top 85C. GPU idle 50C, load ~77C.

 

 

don't some things look better when they are lowercase?

-wall03

 

hello dark mode users

goodbye light mode users

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/5/2021 at 5:09 PM, illegalwater said:

121878.png

 

That peak power consumption tho. Holy shit Intel is being walloped by AMD.

Mechanical keyboard aficionado, professional fox

Mechanical Keyboard Club | Don't buy "gaming" keyboards, yo

Please quote me so I can see that you replied.

 

Be proud of who you are.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×