Intel Officially Unveils 11th Gen Rocket Lake CPUs

[Craftyawesome]

9 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

These chips would be super interesting if one could stick them in existing motherboards.

Z490 and H470 work, but not the lower end chipsets. No memory OC on H470.

[DildorTheDecent]

29 minutes ago, TVwazhere said:

Am I missing something? is DDR4 overclocking just not possible on the i7's and is capped at 2933 or 3200? It appears they all have AVX-512 capabilities now so it's not that. Memory overclocking on intel isn't as important as it is for Ryzen (unless, that's also changing) but from the Author's provided source I just.... dont get it. 

The i9 has TVB (bar the 11900T) and the i7 does not.

 

Every CPU benefits from memory overclocking. It's not just Ryzen CPUs where there are clear benefits. The Intel platform is preferred for outright memory speed and memory latencies sub 40ns are not unheard of. There's a number of other overclocking related things Intel is outright better/preferred for.

 

Rocket Lake will take some of the 8 core records in the next couple of days and probably get single thread Geekbench. That should help the manufacturers sell a few Z590 boards.

[TVwazhere]

2 minutes ago, DildorTheDecent said:

The i9 has TVB (bar the 11900T) and the i7 does not.

TVB.... TVB.... *google*

Quote

Intel Thermal Velocity Boost vs Turbo Boost 

• Turbo Boost 2.0 is a single-core boost available if the CPU’s running under its power, current and temperature specifications.
• Turbo Boost Max 3.0 speed applies to two favored cores. It’s only achievable if the CPU is running below its power, current and temperature specifications.
• Single-Core Thermal Velocity Boost takes the faster of the two favored CPU cores to a speed higher than what’s achieved with Turbo Boost Max 3.0. For 10th Gen desktop CPUs, this is only doable if the CPU is running under 70 degrees Celsius (158 degrees Fahrenheit) and if the CPU is working beneath its power, current and temperature specifications. For 10th Gen mobile CPUs, the temperature threshold is 65 degrees Celsius (149 degrees Fahrenheit). 
• All-Core Thermal Velocity Boost refers to the speed achievable if every core is active and the CPU is operating under its respective temperature threshold (70 degrees Celsius for desktop chips, 65 degrees Celsius for mobile ones). 

Okay so it turbos itself based on thermal headroom, beyond normal "turbo boots" rates. Sounds like that's only useful for people doing custom watercooling, as even big tower coolers and AIO's dont keep most 8c/16t workloads under 70ºC. 

 

Couldn't it also be manually tuned by increasing core frequencies in the BIOS? 

[Drama Lama]

< insert generic 14nm joke >

[porina]

1 hour ago, JLO64 said:

Just out of curiosity, what are you doing that uses AVX-512?  I'm aware of the insane performance uplift it has (and I agree that you should upgrade, especially since you can use the same mobo) but I'm not aware of many applications that can utilize it other than some simulation software.

Prime number finding. Basically Prime95 is not a stress test, but is representative of a typical load. Much actual software used shares code with Prime95 when it comes to heavy lifting, and even those that don't use similar techniques. I wish people also used the benchmark feature included in Prime95, but it is not a single number output and that means people actually have to think when looking at the output.

 

With the above, it is not a certainty I will see any uplift. The y-cruncher results as proxy give me hope I will, but until I have a like for like comparison for Prime95 like workloads it isn't actually a certainty. I'm willing to test it out for the prime number finding community unless someone else gets their hand on one first. The massive uplift seen in Anandtech's 3DPM test result is NOT expected. That's specific to that code type and wont apply here. Basically 2x IPC is expected best case.

 

Currently I have a 7920X, and it destroys those workloads. Some AM4 CPUs, in specific cases, can get ahead, but otherwise they're not that different from non-AVX-512 Intel CPUs.

[Drama Lama]

9 minutes ago, TVwazhere said:

Intel Thermal Velocity Boost vs Turbo Boost 

• Turbo Boost 2.0 is a single-core boost available if the CPU’s running under its power, current and temperature specifications.
• Turbo Boost Max 3.0 speed applies to two favored cores. It’s only achievable if the CPU is running below its power, current and temperature specifications.
• Single-Core Thermal Velocity Boost takes the faster of the two favored CPU cores to a speed higher than what’s achieved with Turbo Boost Max 3.0. For 10th Gen desktop CPUs, this is only doable if the CPU is running under 70 degrees Celsius (158 degrees Fahrenheit) and if the CPU is working beneath its power, current and temperature specifications. For 10th Gen mobile CPUs, the temperature threshold is 65 degrees Celsius (149 degrees Fahrenheit). 
• All-Core Thermal Velocity Boost refers to the speed achievable if every core is active and the CPU is operating under its respective temperature threshold (70 degrees Celsius for desktop chips, 65 degrees Celsius for mobile ones). 

next generation they'll have:

Super duper ultra Omega xt power pro performance thermal meltdown boost

 

[Brooksie359]

1 hour ago, Hyrogenes said:

Im honestly gonna get a 11600k in a few months. seems like a great cpu but im a little worried about the new gen's oc potential. My 9600k is at 5.2ghz all cores. Would it even be that large of an upgrade to be worth a new mobo and chip?

Honestly if I were you I would try to pick up a 9900k as it probably cheaper than buying the 11600k plus a new motherboard. I know I can get one for about 375 bucks on Amazon while the 11600k cost about 300 bucks at the local microcenter near me so I would assume it is going to be at least that at other places as microcenter generally has the best prices on cpus. 

[DildorTheDecent]

21 minutes ago, TVwazhere said:

Couldn't it also be manually tuned by increasing core frequencies in the BIOS? 

I guess it could but then you'd be manually overclocking. So it all falls on you to figure out what your best cores are and tune them appropriately. Whereas TVB knows what's best from the factory and does its thing.

 

Not than anybody really bothers with that sort of tuning. Usually they just find a ratio and try and bring all cores up that frequency.

[mwagen]

Very interested in benchmarks of all the 'F' processors, especially the 11400F for less than $200. I bet it will easily win as the best budget gaming cpu, that or the 10105F even. The 11600KF looks compelling but I'd be tempted to shell out for the 11700F for the extra cores. Anything above that is overkill for gaming imo. Got a feeling that AMD is going to fall way behind unless all their prices come way down.

[Lord Szechenyi]

3 hours ago, Random_Person1234 said:

Core i3/Pentium Comet Lake Refresh specs and pricing:

  Hide contents

 

dude, that's not Rocket Lake, it even says in the picture

[Random_Person1234]

1 minute ago, Lord Szechenyi said:

dude, that's not Rocket Lake, it even says in the picture

Yeah, it's Comet Lake Refresh. For this gen, i5 and up will be Rocket Lake while Pentium/i3 will be a refresh of Comet Lake.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, TVwazhere said:

he fact they called it gear, and made the second one slower

It's not that illogical. First gear is a 1:1 ratio between memory clock and "infiniy fabric" (Idk what's intel's term for this) while gear 2 halves the ratio between those two. It's similar to a car where the second gear is usually half the gear transmission ratio of the first gear too.

[TVwazhere]

2 minutes ago, Medicate said:

It's not that illogical. First gear is a 1:1 ratio between memory clock and "infiniy fabric" (Idk what's intel's term for this) while gear 2 halves the ratio between those two. It's similar to a car where the second gear is usually half the gear transmission ratio of the first gear too.

Yes but in this case, gear 2 ends up being the slower rate, not the faster like it would in a car. Hence my butthurt for a product that I probably wont buy (at least, anytime soon)

[porina]

1 hour ago, TVwazhere said:

Yes but in this case, gear 2 ends up being the slower rate, not the faster like it would in a car. Hence my butthurt for a product that I probably wont buy (at least, anytime soon)

If you think about it in top speed sense (ram speed), Intel "gear" does make sense. So in a car, you're in 1st gear, you'll have some slow top speed before the revs hit the red line. You go to 2nd, and you have a much higher top speed. That's potentially what the gear system in Rocket Lake does, and we'll have to await memory overclocking tests to confirm that or otherwise. You might be able to overclock your ram to much higher speeds in gear 2, in a similar way you have the memory ratios since Zen 2. If you want to get much above 3600, you probably have to drop the ratio. Just like in a car, if you want better responsiveness, you want to stay in as low a gear as practical, but at some point you have to trade off for speed.

 

Also I feel it has to be repeated, that both Intel and AMD when they list an officially supported speed, they're probably thinking JEDEC timings anyway. The vast majority of the time, we can in practice run either much tighter timings and/or higher speeds, but it is not guaranteed. I still see regular posts appear saying words to the effect someone bought 3600 memory for their Ryzen system and it doesn't work. And I think that's essentially the position Intel have taken on the 3200 ram gear thing. They validate so the platform should work as expected under specified conditions. We enthusiasts just try something, if it works, it works. If it doesn't, it doesn't. We eat into that safety margin but often don't know how much we have left, and may cross the line.

[Fnige]

4 hours ago, Drama Lama said:

< insert generic 14nm joke >

< insert laughing reaction >

[Vishera]

When the 10900K is powerful than the 11900K...

It could have been a suitable replacement for the 10700K,but replacing the 10900K with the 11900K doesn't make any sense.

 

What's next?,Replacing the 8 core 11900K with a 6 core 12900K?

[heickelrrx]

11700K and 11600K at that price is really good price, if any we can also expect decent availability 

 

 

the locked model even better since it’s unlock for memory overclock assuming u got B560 board, literally the playfield is midrange market on this launch

 

 

since there is no Ryzen 5600, or 5700 I guess for now this is the value at right now? Paired with that 150$  Z490 board and u off to go

[JamesTheFolf]

7 hours ago, Random_Person1234 said:

Summary

Intel has officially unveiled the specs and prices of Intel's 11th Gen CPUs.

Core i9 specs and pricing (11900K reportedly offers about the same performance as 11700K).

  Hide contents

Core i7 specs and pricing (AnandTech review of 11700K):

  Hide contents

Core i5 specs and pricing:

  Hide contents

Core i3/Pentium Comet Lake Refresh specs and pricing:

  Hide contents

Note that these prices are in Intel 1000-unit pricing which Intel does for OEMs. The final retail prices are likely to be $10-$25 more, as seen by Newegg:

  Hide contents

The retail availability date of these CPUs will be March 30.

Edit: It appears that these CPUs are/were on preorder on Newegg and B&H. 11900K and 11700 are sold out. It also appears Newegg has raised prices on some CPUs, I have edited the photo above. The 11900K is now listed for $613 but sold out, the 11700 is in the same situation but $369.

 

Quotes

 

My thoughts

Seriously, Intel? You want us to pay $570 for a 8c/16t CPU in 2021 when the 12c/24t 5900X is priced at just $550. Sure, the 11900K may have more availability than the 5900X, but (assuming the report about its performance is correct) the 11900K will be roughly equal to the 11700K performance. The 11700K is around the 5800X performance according to the AnandTech review. And since both the 5800X and 5600X are readily available now at MSRP (at least in the US), Intel can't even win this generation on availability alone. If you want to go with Intel, I would recommend just waiting for Alder Lake later this year. What I'm most interested in is how AMD responds to the i5-11400 and 11500.

 

Sources

https://www.anandtech.com/show/16523/intel-core-11th-gen-rocket-lake-core-i9-core-i7-core-i5

Yeah as long as AMD can keep up with the demand, they are going to do much better than Intel. However we won't know for sure until we see some reliable reviews of the new chips.

[heickelrrx]

38 minutes ago, Vishera said:

When the 10900K is powerful than the 11900K...

It could have been a suitable replacement for the 10700K,but replacing the 10900K with the 11900K doesn't make any sense.

 

What's next?,Replacing the 8 core 11900K with a 6 core 12900K?

I tend to see this whole launch as they only launch i5 and i7, while i9 is basically i7 but you instant win the silicon lottery 

 

 

[D13H4RD]

I think the pricing for the 11600 and 11700 series are bang on right for the expected performance. I was initially worried about the pricing given all the leaks and thought that Intel couldn't swallow its pride for once and undercut the competition but it looks like at least for those parts, they have. 

 

What doesn't really make sense this time around is the Core i9 11900K. With past models, you had some significant benefit, like HT on the 9900K, or an additional core/thread count on the 10900K. With the 11900K, you're essentially getting a better binned CPU that can boost a tad higher when it is cooled really well. Can't imagine it'll be the favorite of many. 

[Craftyawesome]

1 hour ago, D13H4RD said:

I think the pricing for the 11600 and 11700 series are bang on right for the expected performance. I was initially worried about the pricing given all the leaks and thought that Intel couldn't swallow its pride for once and undercut the competition but it looks like at least for those parts, they have.

Sort of? Those are mostly the same price as 10th gen, and the -K i7s are more expensive. I feel like it only seems decent because the price increases in the R5 and R7 parts.

 

The 11400f seems like one of the best options, especially with unlocked memory OC. It depends on how well it performs against the 3600 and if you are willing to buy used.

[D13H4RD]

13 minutes ago, Craftyawesome said:

Sort of? Those are mostly the same price as 10th gen, and the -K i7s are more expensive. I feel like it only seems decent because the price increases in the R5 and R7 parts.

That's pretty much why.

[leadeater]

11 hours ago, TVwazhere said:

TVB.... TVB.... *google*

 

9 hours ago, TVwazhere said:

Yes but in this case, gear 2 ends up being the slower rate, not the faster like it would in a car. Hence my butthurt for a product that I probably wont buy (at least, anytime soon)

 

Huge missed opportunity here. Intel should have called them 5th Gear and Top Gear and instead of TVB called it JKM (Jeremy Clarkson Mode)

[Brooksie359]

13 hours ago, DildorTheDecent said:

I guess it could but then you'd be manually overclocking. So it all falls on you to figure out what your best cores are and tune them appropriately. Whereas TVB knows what's best from the factory and does its thing.

 

Not than anybody really bothers with that sort of tuning. Usually they just find a ratio and try and bring all cores up that frequency.

I mean even with normal boost methods its already pretty good and I doubt that you will see any significant performance differences between the two cpus in real world applications. Definitely not worth the price increase.

[Brooksie359]

8 hours ago, Vishera said:

When the 10900K is powerful than the 11900K...

It could have been a suitable replacement for the 10700K,but replacing the 10900K with the 11900K doesn't make any sense.

 

What's next?,Replacing the 8 core 11900K with a 6 core 12900K?

Unfortunately there is only so much room to have extra cores. Inorder to backport the 10nm design to 14nm they had to limit the core count to 8 cores. On the bright side its a new architecture with actual increase in single threaded performance which is nice for gamers. If they were on 10nm they likely could have done 10 cores with the same architecture or maybe even more than 10 cores.