Alder Lake CPU questions

[Concil]

Hey all, i just saw Linus' video on the new intel CPUs and it looks great, but i don't exactly understand the platform. I understand that big cores will be used for the big tasks, gaming and video editing and what not, while the little cores will be used for more mundane things such as web browsing or playing back content from netflix and what not. What i do not understand is if these little cores are doing nothing while the big cores are doing the gaming or video editing stuff, i know Linus said that these efficiency cores 'pack a punch' after looking at the Cinebench R32 benchmark, but does that mean they are active for all the other benchmarks? And if so, to what extent? And a platform question i have is if you are locked into going DDR5 with the new Alder Lake CPUs and motherboards? It would be cool to rock an unlocked i5 in this new platform while also being able to chose budget friendly components. Perhaps these are dumb questions and the answers are another video away, but ive been out of the market for new hardware for a while and this seems really compelling. 

 

[Helpful Tech Witch]

Well, the E cores are probably delegated things like backround tasks and the OS, while the P cores get more space to do the dirty work for games and benchmarks etc.

The E cores probabyl also will try to pick up some of the slack in the main task too

[Concil]

6 minutes ago, HelpfulTechWizard said:

Well, the E cores are probably delegated things like backround tasks and the OS, while the P cores get more space to do the dirty work for games and benchmarks etc.

The E cores probabyl also will try to pick up some of the slack in the main task too

Yeah, i would also assume that the P cores are just really good based on their own merit aswell, but it would be cool to see how the E cores are being used at any given moment. I reckon Linus should do that "BLOAT is killing your FPS" video again (even though bloat wasn't really killing your FPS) with these CPUs (i have no clue about the logistics of such a test since it wouldn't be far to compare across generations or even to cripple an alderlake CPU to it couldn't use it's E cores) 

[Helpful Tech Witch]

Just now, Concil said:

Yeah, i would also assume that the P cores are just really good based on their own merit aswell, but it would be cool to see how the E cores are being used at any given moment. I reckon Linus should do that "BLOAT is killing your FPS" video again (even though bloat wasn't really killing your FPS) with these CPUs (i have no clue about the logistics of such a test since it wouldn't be far to compare across generations or even to cripple an alderlake CPU to it couldn't use it's E cores) 

that video was usless, it did the worst possible system for that system. They shoulda done it on a fist gen ryzen midrange or a 6-7th gen intel midrange and a 1060 with 2x4gb ram, not suck a high end pc

[xg32]

19 minutes ago, Concil said:

.

 

there are ddr4 motheboards and ddr5 motherboards, so u can't just swap ram later. What we do know summarized is that gaming is ~10% faster, less if both zen 3 and 12th gen is on 250w and the 12600k is amazing value either way.

[Concil]

3 minutes ago, HelpfulTechWizard said:

that video was usless, it did the worst possible system for that system. They shoulda done it on a fist gen ryzen midrange or a 6-7th gen intel midrange and a 1060 with 2x4gb ram, not suck a high end pc

I totally agree, i finished watching that video and realized i had wasted my time, learned absolutely nothing XD 

2 minutes ago, xg32 said:

there are ddr4 motheboards and ddr5 motherboards, so u can't just swap ram later. What we do know summarized is that gaming is ~10% faster, less if both zen 3 and 12th gen is on 250w and the 12600k is amazing value either way.

Of course, i know they physically don't fit into the other slot, for the notch is different, but that for me is besides the point, i just wouldn't want to be forced into paying some early adopters fee, and yes these CPUs are killer in performance and value, just don't want it clouded by really expensive ram 

[YoungBlade]

This is something we're all (enthusiasts and engineers alike) going to be learning more about in the coming years. We're in uncharted territory in some respects. Yes, the mobile space has had this for several years, but Alder Lake is quite different. Sort of like how dual-core CPUs left some people wondering what the second core would be doing, and the comparison was dual-socket systems, which function very differently, even if there were similarities.

 

The OS has the final say in how processes are divided up among the cores, but I'd imagine applications will get a say, too, once this type of architecture becomes common enough to devote the time and effort to optimize for it.

 

Who knows for sure what will come from this in a decade? Maybe Windows will run 100% on E cores and P cores will shut off when not in use to save power. Maybe some single-threaded games will request to run on a single P core, and Windows will be able to isolate that core so HT doesn't kick in and put a second process on it, giving the game unfettered access to the resources it needs to run smoothly. Or maybe no one ever bothers to code low-level with it and Windows has to flounder around guessing what to do.

[Concil]

3 minutes ago, YoungBlade said:

This is something we're all (enthusiasts and engineers alike) going to be learning more about in the coming years. We're in uncharted territory in some respects. Yes, the mobile space has had this for several years, but Alder Lake is quite different. Sort of like how dual-core CPUs left some people wondering what the second core would be doing, and the comparison was dual-socket systems, which function very differently, even if there were similarities.

 

The OS has the final say in how processes are divided up among the cores, but I'd imagine applications will get a say, too, once this type of architecture becomes common enough to devote the time and effort to optimize for it.

 

Who knows for sure what will come from this in a decade? Maybe Windows will run 100% on E cores and P cores will shut off when not in use to save power. Maybe some single-threaded games will request to run on a single P core, and Windows will be able to isolate that core so HT doesn't kick in and put a second process on it, giving the game unfettered access to the resources it needs to run smoothly. Or maybe no one ever bothers to code low-level with it and Windows has to flounder around guessing what to do.

I absolutely agree, it's very cool that the market is headed in this direction, and i wonder how game optimization work on such a platform. A lot of unknowns of course, and one can only speculate so much. perhaps new benchmarking tools will come around to verifiably say what a program or the Operating system is doing with the cores and how it can be better done etc... 

[Mister Woof]

Biggest reason to hold out is lack of cooler options and DDR5 pricing/selection.

 

Once those stabilize, it will be much easier to make an informed decision.

[Tan3l6]

Currently it's similar to going from DDR3 1600Mhz to DDR4 2133Mhz

In a few months time (6+?) DDR5 prices and speeds probably might get reasonable.

[Concil]

2 minutes ago, Mister Woof said:

Biggest reason to hold out is lack of cooler options and DDR5 pricing/selection.

 

Once those stabilize, it will be much easier to make an informed decision.

i don't plan on going DDR5 and the cooler stuff seems like a non issue to me, it's like when people where going crazy over AMD chiplet design and people worried about the coolers. One Gamers nexus video on the topic and all worries about it will be put behind me 

[Concil]

1 minute ago, Tan3l6 said:

Currently it's similar to going from DDR3 1600Mhz to DDR4 2133Mhz

In a few months time (6+?)DDR5 prices and speeds probably might get reasonable.

it's always worth waiting i assume 

[Tan3l6]

1 minute ago, Concil said:

it's always worth waiting i assume 

That's correct always, concerning upgrades.

There are always things just going to be revealed I mean...

[xg32]

i'm eyeing something like cl36 7200 for next gen b4 i jump in

[YoungBlade]

1 minute ago, Mister Woof said:

Biggest reason to hold out is lack of cooler options and DDR5 pricing/selection.

 

Once those stabilize, it will be much easier to make an informed decision.

Yeah, when I saw that reviewers were struggling keeping the stock 12900K cool using current 280mm AIOs, I cringed. Some engineers are going to need to do some work on the blocks for those to give them better compatability. Until then, people who bought the 12900K may have a rough time.

 

I'm so glad that some motherboards have compatability with older coolers, though, because I can't wait to see the Dawid Does Tech Stuff video where he uses the crappy Dell cooler with the 12900K.

[xg32]

3 minutes ago, YoungBlade said:

Yeah, when I saw that reviewers were struggling keeping the stock 12900K cool using current 280mm AIOs, I cringed. Some engineers are going to need to do some work on the blocks for those to give them better compatability. Until then, people who bought the 12900K may have a rough time.

 

I'm so glad that some motherboards have compatability with older coolers, though, because I can't wait to see the Dawid Does Tech Stuff video where he uses the crappy Dell cooler with the 12900K.

GN got it down at 75C with the right mounting, but thats a 360, i'm still waiting for the 250w vs 250w results from HUB, im assuming they will be a tie 12900k vs 5950x

[Mister Woof]

8 minutes ago, Concil said:

i don't plan on going DDR5 and the cooler stuff seems like a non issue to me, it's like when people where going crazy over AMD chiplet design and people worried about the coolers. One Gamers nexus video on the topic and all worries about it will be put behind me 

It's just that there are only a handful that even work at present, severely limiting your options.

[Concil]

1 minute ago, Mister Woof said:

It's just that there are only a handful that even work at present, severely limiting your options.

Yeah, after reading the some of the other comments it does look like waiting is the better option at the moment 

 

[QuantumSingularity]

Is it just me or is there anyone else who also doesn't like that P & E stuff? Yes i know ARM and Apple have been doing it for years and our phones, tablets and laptops used it all that time and bla bla bla, but in a gaming desktop or workstation, i think it's wrong. TBH i don't think intel is doing this to innovate, but because it's the only way they found to keep that CPU from melting down and taking the rest of the system with it. I'm certain in the HQ there was a convo in the lines of "Yo guys, we can't make this stay under 300W and needing LC so we thought we should cut few of the cores short, give them a single thread, keep their voltage and clocks down, call them "efficiency cores" and let's market it like a "new energy efficient" solution like those in the mobile devices. Also let's call Bill and ask him to make it so task manager in the new Windows assigns lower priority tasks to these cores first". This really throws me back to the Phenom II era when AMD was "locking" cores to prevent the chips from burning, but people as usual found a way to exploit it and unlock the 4th core on their 3-core CPU. I really don't like it and hope AMD won't get sucked into that void. You can power limit full performance cores and assign priority scheduling to those with a bit of tinkering. There is no need to waste space on the die with retarded cores when power source isn't a problem. In the end though i'm glad that intel finally made something that rivals Ryzen's performance, because that last 5 years they've been basically laying knocked-out in the corner. And the pricing is undoubtedly the most un-Intel thing about it - under $300 for a K i5. AMD's combo punches really brought them back to earth. Now let's see how the supply-demand is gonna play out.

 

As for the platform change - we all know how the first gen of a new platform is. I don't plan to get the first AM5 chips either. Will skip straight to the 2nd gen DDR5 platform. As usual the difference between last gen previous platform vs first gen new platform is just not worth the premium you pay unless you are an enthusiast grade fanatic with thirst only for the latest with money being no option.

[xg32]

15 minutes ago, QuantumSingularity said:

.

it's a band-aid 300w release to compete with amd against cpus that are a year old, a refresh...on ddr4 will take the crown right back. that said, the 12600kf is 150w 300usd is insane for now (i think it beats the 5800x in everything)

 

From the comments ive read, people are actually quite disappointed with the 12900k overall.

[YoungBlade]

36 minutes ago, xg32 said:

(i think it beats the 5800x in everything)

It loses quite badly to the 5800X in compression/decompression workloads and it loses by a bit in some rendering applications like Corona and Blender. This makes sense as AMD's SMT implementation has always been very strong in those types of workloads. It does win in code compile, Cinebench, and some of the Puget Systems Adobe CC benchmarks, though. In addition, it loses to the 5800X in most games, but the margins aren't particularly amazing there. It certainly beats the 5600X, but those 4 E cores can struggle to compete with SMT equipped full cores when in Ryzen's traditional stomping grounds.

[Mister Woof]

31 minutes ago, YoungBlade said:

It loses quite badly to the 5800X in compression/decompression workloads and it loses by a bit in some rendering applications like Corona and Blender. This makes sense as AMD's SMT implementation has always been very strong in those types of workloads. It does win in code compile, Cinebench, and some of the Puget Systems Adobe CC benchmarks, though. In addition, it loses to the 5800X in most games, but the margins aren't particularly amazing there. It certainly beats the 5600X, but those 4 E cores can struggle to compete with SMT equipped full cores when in Ryzen's traditional stomping grounds.

What's going to be interesting (and I haven't seen it quite yet) is overclocking values. If the 12600KF can OC to some higher clocks, it should be able to close the gap or overtake the 5800x most of the time, which doesn't gain particularly anything from overclocking as it pertains to games (~3.5% in games). And as with gaming, OC's generally don't really affect power consumption all that much.

 

I recall the 5800x reviews, it seems to beat the 10900K in games the majority of the time, but once you apply a pretty average 5.1ghz OC, the 10900K gained 11.5% effectively eliminating any differences between the chips, and overtaking the 5800x at stock and putting it in basic parity with the 5800x even with PBO.

 

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-5800x-zen-3-review/4

 

 

[QuantumSingularity]

Gaming wise that 12600k looks really well against stock 5600X and 5800X. The problem is, almost no one uses those in stock config. Even my old 3600X is perma locked at 4.7GHz cause the NH-D15 is just soooooo good. Also i noticed most tests are done with 3200MHz memory and we know how significant RAM speed can be with Ryzen 5000.

[Mister Woof]

10 minutes ago, QuantumSingularity said:

Gaming wise that 12600k looks really well against stock 5600X and 5800X. The problem is, almost no one uses those in stock config. Even my old 3600X is perma locked at 4.7GHz cause the NH-D15 is just soooooo good. Also i noticed most tests are done with 3200MHz memory and we know how significant RAM speed can be with Ryzen 5000.

In most scenarios, AMD gains almost nothing in games from OC. Sometimes losing, especially if it's an all-core OC (lowers single core opportunistic boosting, which is helpful for games). Usually, if there's any gains, it's going to be with PBO. And as shown above, it's minimal.

 

The 10900k for example gained over 3x more from a modest OC than the 5800x with PBO. (10900K 11.5%, 5800x 3.5%)

 

The 10700k gained 14%, and the 10600K gained even more, close to 17% from OC.

 

Of course, that's skylake. Alderlake may be different. 

[QuantumSingularity]

I admit i haven't done any OC tests in the last year, simply because of the GPU shortage. No need to stress people's CPUs further when their 1060 i struggling to keep up with their stock 5600X.