Damn, Intel!

[Emily Young]

Intel’s long-awaited Alder Lake is finally here – But can 12th-gen Core really slow AMD’s momentum, or is it just another power-hungry processor in a long line of desperation CPUs?

 

 

[Tan3l6]

Will there be DDR4 vs DDR5 on same CPU comparison?

12600K with DDR4 versus DDR5 for example.

 

Edit - ah, did not watch the video till end - yes there will be!

[GodOfROG]

14 minutes ago, Tan3l6 said:

Will there be DDR4 vs DDR5 on same CPU comparison?

12600K with DDR4 versus DDR5 for example.

 

Edit - ah, did not watch the video till end - yes there will be!

So intel lies?

[Tan3l6]

11 minutes ago, GodOfROG said:

So intel lies?

No. 

 Where?

 

Though watching other videos - DDR5 at low speeds is not too much faster than DDR4 on high frequency and lower latency. In some cases even slower.

[GodOfROG]

1 minute ago, Tan3l6 said:

No. 

 Where?

These arent CPUs they are Space heaters 

[Tan3l6]

2 minutes ago, GodOfROG said:

These arent CPUs they are Space heaters 

You mean 12900K specifically I think. 

You'd freeze with 12600K being the only heat source. At least here.

[Blademaster91]

No DDR4 testing? I think it would be interesting to see if there is any performance difference using DDR4, and where is the 12700K? The i9 12900K seems to be too expensive and too hot running when pushed in productivity testing. Also would be good to see a comparison using Windows 10 vs. Windows 11.

[GodOfROG]

11 minutes ago, Tan3l6 said:

You mean 12900K specifically I think. 

You'd freeze with 12600K being the only heat source. At least here.

using a 2950x + some gpus to heat my house

[GodOfROG]

11 minutes ago, Blademaster91 said:

No DDR4 testing? I think it would be interesting to see if there is any performance difference using DDR4, and where is the 12700K? The i9 12900K seems to be too expensive and too hot running when pushed in productivity testing. Also would be good to see a comparison using Windows 10 vs. Windows 11.

IMO Mature DDR4 is going to be better than immature DDR5 - it will be more of a test once the DDR5 process is a few years in to it- for what its worth I'd ONLY be buying ddr5 at this point since its going to age like wine.

[StephanTW]

kinda expected some max streaming fps there aswell but I guess thats not a really desired number for too many people, though I would argue with current GPU prices it is.

[BigDamn]

The 12900k is impressive to an extent, but for content creation I still believe the 5950x is the clear winner. Though the chip is $100 more, the cost saved on AMD's platform and not requiring a top tier cooler even things out with a slight performance edge to Ryzen. I wish we could've seen a comparison between Windows 10 and Windows 11 for AMD to verify that the performance hit really is fixed.

 

But man the 12600k is impressive. This is THE gaming chip to beat for the foreseeable future. Can't wait to see what AMD's response is when Zen4 releases.

[Alder Lake]

exciting that there's finally benchmarks

 

what's less exciting is that it's restricted on school laptops

 

 

 

though I can already see the intel haters popping up here, acting like the 12900k is the only CPU they're releasing, and that it's bad for the cost, which is incredibly ignorant

[GodOfROG]

2 minutes ago, yesyes said:

exciting that there's finally benchmarks

 

what's less exciting is that it's restricted on school laptops

 

 

 

though I can already see the intel haters popping up here, acting like the 12900k is the only CPU they're releasing, and that it's bad for the cost, which is incredibly ignorant

Really sad we arent seeing any HEDT at this time.

[Ermil]

Ryzen has worse performance than Intel right now, but considering the price difference (of DDR4 vs. DDR5, motherboards and cooling), if I would need a new computer, I'd still go AMD.

Also, I don't understand the need for E-cores. They are pretty cool, but I don't see a use for them other than laptops. Something that would've been much better, from Microsoft's part, was a manual (or a better automatic) core assignment system/scheduler for apps. Right now, even on W11, Windows just puts everything on core 0 with apps that are multi threaded using the other cores, and you end up with background tasks as well as the important process (app/game) using CPU 0. You can see this with CSGO where disabling CPU 0 from task manager increases your fps instantly.

[Alder Lake]

Just now, GodOfROG said:

Really sad we arent seeing any HEDT at this time.

not quite sure what you mean by that, do you mean how nobody has used it since it's been out for only a few hours?

[Kilrah]

10 minutes ago, yesyes said:

not quite sure what you mean by that, do you mean how nobody has used it since it's been out for only a few hours?

HEDT are the higher end "workstation" CPU platforms with more PCIe lanes, memory channels etc like intel X series or AMD threadripper.

[Alder Lake]

Just now, Ermil said:

Ryzen has worse performance than Intel right now, but considering the price difference (of DDR4 vs. DDR5, motherboards and cooling), if I would need a new computer, I'd still go AMD.

Also, I don't understand the need for E-cores. They are pretty cool, but I don't see a use for them other than laptops. Something that would've been much better, from Microsoft's part, was a manual (or a better automatic) core assignment system/scheduler for apps. Right now, even on W11, Windows just puts everything on core 0 with apps that are multi threaded using the other cores, and you end up with background tasks as well as the important process (app/game) using CPU 0. You can see this with CSGO where disabling CPU 0 from task manager increases your fps instantly.

E-cores mostly serve to increase efficiency by not PULVERISING background tasks at 5.3Ghz, and instead having really efficient cores to do it

it lowers temps, allowing for higher clocks, while also consuming less power

 

and it's also good for marketing, since it's something relatively new

[Alder Lake]

33 minutes ago, Kilrah said:

HEDT are the higher end "workstation" CPU platforms with more PCIe lanes, memory channels etc like intel X series or AMD threadripper.

I was under the impression that HEDT just referred to high end desktop PCs

[kumicota]

When pointing out that the 7nm from Intel is the same as their 10nm I think it would be interesting to call out AMD on that too, as they were the ones that begin with that new metric just for marketing

Edited November 4, 2021 by kumicota
typos and grammar errors

[Alder Lake]

6 minutes ago, kumicota said:

When pointing out that the 7nm from Intel is the same as their 10nm I think it would be interesting to call out AMD on that too, as they were the ones that begin with that new metric just for marketing

that's why they renamed intel 10nm to intel 7

 

also you have it backwards, Intel 10nm is the same as amd 7nm

[Blademaster91]

54 minutes ago, GodOfROG said:

IMO Mature DDR4 is going to be better than immature DDR5 - it will be more of a test once the DDR5 process is a few years in to it- for what its worth I'd ONLY be buying ddr5 at this point since its going to age like wine.

Yeah I think DDR4 is still good for now, and much cheaper, I would rather wait for faster DDR5 speed ratings.

30 minutes ago, yesyes said:

though I can already see the intel haters popping up here, acting like the 12900k is the only CPU they're releasing, and that it's bad for the cost, which is incredibly ignorant

If this was aimed at me, I didn't say 12900K was bad for the cost, just expensive and power hungry, if you can justify the cost of a new platform and high end cooling, the 12900K is significantly better than the 11th gen i9.

[Alder Lake]

2 minutes ago, Blademaster91 said:

Yeah I think DDR4 is still good for now, and much cheaper, I would rather wait for faster DDR5 speed ratings.

 

 

If this was aimed at me, I didn't say 12900K was bad for the cost, just expensive and power hungry, if you can justify the cost of a new platform and high end cooling, the 12900K is significantly better than the 11th gen i9.

5950x was close to $800

you could also lower the wattage by like 30% while not losing 30% performance, and even if you still go that way, the i7 exists, which is far less power-hungry

[kumicota]

1 minute ago, yesyes said:

that's why they renamed intel 10nm to intel 7

Yeah but I see a lot of people and reviewers that when points this out doesn't show that AMD was the ones that began with that new metric, so I do see a lot of people(even on LTT video comments) criticizing intel for that, when it's a thing that AMD is the one to blame

[Alder Lake]

Just now, kumicota said:

Yeah but I see a lot of people and reviewers that when points this out doesn't show that AMD was the ones that began with that new metric, so I do see a lot of people(even on LTT video comments) criticizing intel for that, when it's a thing that AMD is the one to blame

people see what they want to see, and hear what they want to hear

[themrsbusta]

I disagree Linus conclusion: To me, the 5600X still the king because is a 65w CPU

i5 is 10 bucks more expensive but a 125w/150w CPU needs an more expensive motherboard, more powerful PSU and much more cooling, you probably can't use in Micro ITX without a huge watercooler.

At the end of the day you would paid more on the entire kit than using the Ryzen. To have a little bit more performance, on the spreadsheets...