When 69 is greater than 99 - upcoming Celeron beats 9900K and 10900K in single core benchmarks

[williamcll]

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/276182770441519105/930810597468155984/CeleronG6900-Bilibili-BV1Yb4y1H7Kv.mp4

Various benchmarks for the upcoming entry level Alder Lake Celeron have appeared online, showing single core performance that could best even the flagship models just a few years ago.

Quotes

Quote

As far as specifications are concerned, the Intel Celeron G6900 features two cores & two threads, based on the 10nm ESF Golden Cove core architecture. As you can tell, it's a very entry-level dual-core processor with a clock speed of up to 3.4 GHz. The CPU carries 4 MB of L3 cache and 2.5 MB L2 cache within a 46W TDP package. Being an entry-level design, the chip will cost just $42 US and could be used for entry-level eSports gaming titles and standard office workloads. The Intel Celeron G6900 was tested on the ASRock Z690M Phantom Gaming 4 motherboard. The clock speeds were rated at 4.40 GHz which means that the user might have enabled BFB or Base Frequency Boost technology to drive up the clock speeds by +1 GHz by raising the power limit. A total of 16 GB of DDR4 memory was also featured on the platform since this motherboard only comes in DDR4 flavors.

 

My thoughts

Feels like duo core processors are just a bit too lacking these days, the single core performance might be nice but once you start stacking up background processes it's going to hurt a lot. Might be great for embedded PCs though.

 

Sources

https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1Yb4y1H7Kv

https://wccftech.com/intels-most-entry-level-alder-lake-cpu-the-dual-core-celeron-g6900-has-single-core-performance-on-par-with-a-5-3-ghz-core-i9-10900k/

[RejZoR]

As Apple would paraphrase it: "Our best processor yet"

 

To which we all yawn in digust: "No shit Sherlock".

 

Remember just few years ago where it was natural that brand new mid or even low end stuff beats several years old stuff? Well, apparently these days it's a bragging right. Also for reference, 9900K is now 4 years old. Imagine comparing Pentium 4 from 2000 to first Pentium from 1996 and being shocked that Pentium 4 is hugely faster? That's apparently a thing now. Just like the other news how some laptop Alder Lake beats Threadripper from 5 years ago. Like, lol? It's expected to be that way and doesn't shock me even the slightest. It shocks me when all we get is lame 5 or 10% uplift in performance for a whole new full price...

[Vishera]

11 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

Remember just few years ago where it was natural that brand new mid or even low end stuff beats several years old stuff? Well, apparently these days it's a bragging right. Also for reference, 9900K is now 4 years old. Imagine comparing Pentium 4 from 2000 to first Pentium from 1996 and being shocked that Pentium 4 is hugely faster? That's apparently a thing now.

It's a thing because of the stagnation that had been in the market between 2011 to 2017.

You could have bought a 2600K in 2011,overclock it to 4.7~5GHz and call it a day.

A 7700K is just a sidegrade from the 2600K,the performance difference is not enough to justify the upgrade.

So we got used to it being that way,

Now we just have to realize that we are in a new era,the renascence of the CPU market.

[tkitch]

9 minutes ago, Vishera said:

It's a thing because of the stagnation that had been in the market between 2011 to 2017.

You could have bought a 2600K in 2011,overclock it to 4.7~5GHz and call it a day.

A 7700K is just a sidegrade from the 2600K,the performance difference is not enough to justify the upgrade.

So we got used to it being that way,

Now we just have to realize that we are in a new era,the renascence of the CPU market.

Thank you AMD for not letting intel sit on its ass any more!  

[SADS]

I feel all these comments right now.

I've been sitting on pretty much the same hardware for, what feels like or I would guess, 4years or so now... and with how things are at the moment, I'm still not in for upgrading anything.

I upgraded my monitors to 4k and I can still play the games I like just fine...

 

But I'm sure that there are others that want/"need" more or hate their money etc.

 

I used to upgrade because I actually wanted the new technology because it was a major improvement and was exciting... maybe I'm just getting old now though

[BDsankey]

1 hour ago, Vishera said:

It's a thing because of the stagnation that had been in the market between 2011 to 2017.

You could have bought a 2600K in 2011,overclock it to 4.7~5GHz and call it a day.

A 7700K is just a sidegrade from the 2600K,the performance difference is not enough to justify the upgrade.

So we got used to it being that way,

Now we just have to realize that we are in a new era,the renascence of the CPU market.

That's why I waited ages to upgrade from my 3770K to finally a 10600K. Now if GPU prices weren't so high I could try and upgrade my GTX 1080 FTW to a 3080/RX 6800XT for my desktop. I've been waiting for stock/reasonable pricing since the 3080 launch. 

[Lightwreather]

This single bit of info makes this far more hilarious than it should be

[Alder Lake]

  

2 hours ago, RejZoR said:

As Apple would paraphrase it: "Our best processor yet"

 

To which we all yawn in digust: "No shit Sherlock".

 

Remember just few years ago where it was natural that brand new mid or even low end stuff beats several years old stuff? Well, apparently these days it's a bragging right. Also for reference, 9900K is now 4 years old. Imagine comparing Pentium 4 from 2000 to first Pentium from 1996 and being shocked that Pentium 4 is hugely faster? That's apparently a thing now. Just like the other news how some laptop Alder Lake beats Threadripper from 5 years ago. Like, lol? It's expected to be that way and doesn't shock me even the slightest. It shocks me when all we get is lame 5 or 10% uplift in performance for a whole new full price...

kids, like your mother always says, there will always be critics

 

 

just let people be impressed if they want to, no need to look down on people who think it's cool that we have i3s which perform the same as i9s from last generation or two generations ago, if you find this boring and unimpressive, nobody's forcing you to read it ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Brooksie359]

5 hours ago, BDsankey said:

That's why I waited ages to upgrade from my 3770K to finally a 10600K. Now if GPU prices weren't so high I could try and upgrade my GTX 1080 FTW to a 3080/RX 6800XT for my desktop. I've been waiting for stock/reasonable pricing since the 3080 launch. 

Tbh you are gonna have to probably have to wait for the next gen of gpus before the supply issue is fixed and even then there will likely be hard to get any gpu when the next gen first comes out anyways. 

[BDsankey]

23 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

Tbh you are gonna have to probably have to wait for the next gen of gpus before the supply issue is fixed and even then there will likely be hard to get any gpu when the next gen first comes out anyways. 

For sure, it's insane how bad this has gotten. Really makes a guy wish he just bought a console haha (they have struggles too I know). 

[the gamer that is bad]

the dream minecraft server cpu

[jaslion]

6 hours ago, the gamer that is bad said:

the dream minecraft server cpu

Pretty much only this. Anything that is basically single core heavy and only single core heavy is what this cpu is going to be good at anything else it's going to be pretty poor trying to do.

[Fnige]

21 hours ago, J-from-Nucleon said:

This single bit of info makes this far more hilarious than it should be

btw, benched on arch

[RoseLuck462]

Pretty impressive

[Spindel]

Current generation stuff beats past generation stuff from the same company.

 

Who would have thought, what a remarkable world we live in... 

[crazycusti]

Hello! 

 

yeah this is my cpu

 

im happy about that little beast is on many tech portals! haha

 

ive tested the cpu with ddr4-2400 to ddr4-2933 with horrible timings. today i got some ddr4-3200 cl16 kits to run geekbench again.

 

in the future i plan to use a i5-12600k, but actual i must save money  that is why i use an overpowered z690 board. this complete project is an homeserver, and ryzen was not a deal, because plex cant transcoding on amd igpus. 

 

btw kernel 5.13 and kernel 5.16 made not an difference on this only p-core cpus, 5.16 got many tweaks and fixes for the new big.little alderlakes like 12600k upwards.

 

greets!

 

 

(sorry, my english is not the best)

[crazycusti]

(and yeah, btw i use arch)

 

edit: and my local minecraft server run very good, its a dream! before i had an Opteron X3421 (microserver gen10) and the complete faildozer-embedded quadcore cpu had on multicore the same score than one core on this celeron lol! the most parts in a minecraft server use a maximum of 2 threads..

[WolframaticAlpha]

2 hours ago, Spindel said:

Current generation stuff beats past generation stuff from the same company.

 

Who would have thought, what a remarkable world we live in... 

Current generation lowest end stuff beats out top of the line cpu from 2-3 years ago. When did that last happen?

 

 

[Spindel]

2 minutes ago, WolframaticAlpha said:

Current generation lowest end stuff beats out top of the line cpu from 2-3 years ago. When did that last happen?

 

 

Until around 2010-2013 this was the norm

[crazycusti]

32 minutes ago, WolframaticAlpha said:

Current generation lowest end stuff beats out top of the line cpu from 2-3 years ago. When did that last happen?

 

 

in my opinion, the change from netburst to conroe was similary good. 2005-2006? any lowend coresolo cpu beats up an very good (not the extreme or pentium d) pentium 4 presscot cpu.

[WolframaticAlpha]

1 minute ago, crazycusti said:

in my opinion, the change from netburst to conroe was similary good. 2005-2006? any lowend coresolo cpu beats up an very good (not the extreme or pentium d) pentium 4 presscot cpu.

And each of those times was talked about, right?

[KaitouX]

2 hours ago, WolframaticAlpha said:

Current generation lowest end stuff beats out top of the line cpu from 2-3 years ago. When did that last happen?

Ryzen 3 3100 beat the 2700X and all TR 2000 in single core.

 

If the lowest end was beating the top of the line in multicore it would have been impressive, beating in single core when basically every CPU of the new generation uses the exact same architecture, with the same improvements to IPC, is just expected.

[CarlBar]

A Celeron is a lot further down the Intel stack than an R3 is down AMD's. I think AMD still have an Athlon lineup thats equivalent to Intels Celerons, not 100% sure on that though?

[KaitouX]

9 minutes ago, CarlBar said:

A Celeron is a lot further down the Intel stack than an R3 is down AMD's. I think AMD still have an Athlon lineup thats equivalent to Intels Celerons, not 100% sure on that though?

I think Ryzen 3 is the second lowest you can go with AMD Zen, only Athlon is lower. But they never released a Athlon(dual-core) Zen 2 CPU as far as I know, but it would likely still have better single core than the 2700X, single core performance isn't affected by the lower TDP that much and modern boosting makes performance differences caused by the clock speed even smaller than they already are.

[schwellmo92]

4 hours ago, WolframaticAlpha said:

Current generation lowest end stuff beats out top of the line cpu from 2-3 years ago. When did that last happen?

 

 

In single core, lately it is common. It has happened the last two generations for both Intel and AMD.