Yeah, was not too long ago when done old tech site did this and it got called out by a ton of other reviewers as being damaging to the industry. LOL.
4min39s in the Reviewception, Ian mentions Anand and his 5 month early Sandybridge coverage.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Yeah, was not too long ago when done old tech site did this and it got called out by a ton of other reviewers as being damaging to the industry. LOL.
Made 5.7B last year. I suspect they’re just fine.That's fine I get it. If Intel shareholders are dumb enough to eat it and feel happy, they deserve to loose their money.
Stock price has gone nowhere (deservedly) in a year. Dividends aren't everything.Made 5.7B last year. I suspect they’re just fine.
Don’t disagree - but the company isn’t dying. Yet.Stock price has gone nowhere (deservedly) in a year. Dividends aren't everything.
Never said it was, just how disappointing release this. Literally going backwards.Don’t disagree - but the company isn’t dying. Yet.
Cache takes up a lot of die space and transistors, and Rocket Lake is already larger than Intel would like. There's a lot of smart people there at Intel making such tradeoffs as it is. AMD is 2 nodes ahead on TSMC's 7nm vs Intel's 14 so they can afford the extra cache (plus their design probably benefits from it more).
Minor gripe but AMD is one node ahead as the general consensus is that intel 10nm should be equal to 7nm (whenever 10nm is actually functional for mass production)
Apple and Intel already both have products coming this year for TSMC 5nm, TSMC's 5nm capacity is currently 1/4 their capacity at 7nm. TSMC is 3-5 years out from getting 5nm to the current capacity of their 7nm, I know AMD is all about 5nm in 2022, but that will be a shitshow.The other problem is that AMD is looking at 5nm for Zen4 which is coming sooner than later.
Well as long as Intel has OEM contracts to show... it really doesn't matter if its 20% faster or 50% slower. Money talks, performance is subjective. lolThat's fine I get it. If Intel shareholders are dumb enough to eat it and feel happy, they deserve to loose their money.
Was = to on paper... before they had to scale things back to make it work. Don't believe 10 year old Intel hype... that turned out to be hype. No Intel 10nm is not > or even = to 7nm.Minor gripe but AMD is one node ahead as the general consensus is that intel 10nm should be equal to 7nm (whenever 10nm is actually functional for mass production)
Note, the upgrade to "hot" (maybe the difference maker?)Since when does hot, stinking garbage pacify stockholders?
The reality is regardless of how good the CPU is in comparison to AMD's current offerings Dell alone will sell more of them than AMD makes processors this year.Well as long as Intel has OEM contracts to show... it really doesn't matter if its 20% faster or 50% slower. Money talks, performance is subjective. lol
I know its painful.... but the truth is Intel is still going to sell a ton of CPUs. AMD is still going to be #2.
If I held Intel stock I would be far more concerned about Apples ARM chips... and be questioning if Alder Lake is really going to be the chip that keeps x86 in the consumer device game. I would also be far more worried about Amazons server chips then if 11th gen is just a side grade 10th gen.
Perhaps. I mean during the last (long running) Intel stomp of AMD, it seems that Intel was actively working on dual and quad core CPUs (noting that AMD said "quad" long before anyone said and delivered long after Intel delivered one), and so they were ready to "pull the trigger" fairly quickly, though they delay did cost them like 17-20% of the server market or so (which Intel quickly regained).I've learned to NEVER bet against Pat Gelsinger in this industry- most who have end up losing in the end... but he can't turn it around immediately. Much like VMware, it will take him a couple of years to get the ship started in the right direction. Intel has very deep pockets, a lot of VERY good engineers, and lots of runway - they'll figure it out eventually. AMD should be proud of what they've done, but Gelsinger is one hell of an engineer and a leader.
Was = to on paper... before they had to scale things back to make it work. Don't believe 10 year old Intel hype... that turned out to be hype. No Intel 10nm is not > or even = to 7nm.
Yes Intel was planning to shrink gaps and up transistor counts... and it never freaking worked. Which is why they are where they are. The 10nm chips they have shipped have either been crippled... and more recently scaled down.
Anyway yes its fair to say Intel is at least 2 processes behind... as Zen 3 is on TMSC 7nm+. So even if you discount Intel 10nm completely there still 2 behind.
Well, I'm hoping it's not quite as bad as the review makes it out to be but even if it is, I'm fine with it - the 11900k is a nice bump from the 8700k that I'm giving to my kid.
They’ll be fine. This is just like Bulldozer and AMD. Intel just needs to bring Jim Keller onboard and have him finish re-architecting their new chips and they’ll be fine. Wait, they already had Keller and he left? Welp, they’re fucked.Never said it was, just how disappointing release this. Literally going backwards.
I actually built quite a few Bulldozer systems since they were a good value and had decent graphics. Great HTPC parts.This is just like Bulldozer and AMD.
My god, will somebody please make an el risitas video? Please?
That's what some people miss on the Bulldozer hate train. Sure it took a huge backseat to Intel, but at least they were extremely affordable.I actually built quite a few Bulldozer systems since they were a good value and had decent graphics. Great HTPC parts.
This isn't Bulldozer, it's Prescott.
Yeah, she has really focused AMD, which is great for them. I am eagerly awaiting their announcements on the 15'th I need a new server and workstation, so a shiny new EPYC and TR would be a nice have for May.I think something missing, so far, in this conversation is that Dr. Su is the CEO of AMD, unlike some predecessors. She has kept the "pedal to the metal" at AMD.
With Rocket Lake, Intel is finally competitive again in the $500 range. It doesn't beat Zen 3 (outside very specific niche scenarios), it doesn't match the higher end parts, it is less power efficient. But you can at least choose Intel again without sacrificing any major performance or features.The point is not forgotten on us that at least AMD is once again offering a high-performance video card that can compete with the competition in the $500 range. We do give kudos to AMD for finally providing something competitive to gamers at this price range.
Why not just choose a 10700K and get identical performance for a much, much lower price? The Bulldozer analogy is wrong, but not for the reason you stated.Rocket Lake has been compared to Bulldozer a lot, but I don't think this is the best analogy.
I think it is more akin to Vega64 launch, and Kyle's and Brent's conclusion from back then transfers surprisingly well to the 11700K:
With Rocket Lake, Intel is finally competitive again in the $500 range. It doesn't beat Zen 3 (outside very specific niche scenarios), it doesn't match the higher end parts, it is less power efficient. But you can at least choose Intel again without sacrificing any major performance or features.
11700k whips 10700k in multicore scenarios like rendering and encoding. It's an impressive improvement.Why not just choose a 10700K and get identical performance for a much, much lower price? The Bulldozer analogy is wrong, but not for the reason you stated.
If you're willing to spend that much to get the 11700k for encoding....why not get a 5800X instead?11700k whips 10700k in multicore scenarios like rendering and encoding. It's an impressive improvement.
And the XE graphics core should bring even better quality quicksync. *Although that's not confirmed, but let me dream. I have a mobo for rocket lake ok
While 10700k is still better at gaming, I wouldn't call it a whooping. However, with the sales right now, it's a good value for performance.
If you're willing to spend that much to get the 11700k for encoding....why not get a 5800X instead?
Unless of course you already have a mobo for the 11700k, then you're gonna be biased to towards the 11700k. Anyone outside of that is left wondering why, though.
TBH, I'm not even sure what quicksync is.Or better yet, buy an 11500 if you're into QuickSync. Supposed to have the same Xe as the higher end models unlike the 11400 and should be in the ~$230 range. I haven't seen any Xe benchmarks yet, so it's hard to say what QS is going to look like. If it's not significantly improved, I'll just hang onto my 10700 in my Intel box.
Vega64
TBH, I'm not even sure what quicksync is.
Okay, more video encoding. Yeah, I suppose that's a niche use case if it happens to be significantly better than both the 10th gen cpus and the lower end 11th gen. Though it's still a sad day when we're already relegating top end, new gen i7s to niche status hinging on "ifs".
If only it could have had improved performance across the board. Guess we'll have to wait until launch day to get the full details on that.
I'll reserve judgment until actual MSRP and more benches are released, but there's a long way to go to convince me an 11700K is worth more than the 10700K for gaming/midrange PC purposes....Then again, this is based on the leaked pricing I saw here.
I'm just saying the boost to multicore is pretty impressive and makes it a legit option for those targeting 8 or less cores. I don't expect someone with a relevant AMD mobo to jump over to Rocket Lake instead of Zen3. However, anyone on older platforms, I think Rocket Lake is actually a real choice.If you're willing to spend that much to get the 11700k for encoding....why not get a 5800X instead?
Unless of course you already have a mobo for the 11700k, then you're gonna be biased to towards the 11700k. Anyone outside of that is left wondering why, though.
Quicksync is great and has a lot of utility. I hope it is improved.Or better yet, buy an 11500 if you're into QuickSync. Supposed to have the same Xe as the higher end models unlike the 11400 and should be in the ~$230 range. I haven't seen any Xe benchmarks yet, so it's hard to say what QS is going to look like. If it's not significantly improved, I'll just hang onto my 10700 in my Intel box.
Quicksync is hardly niche. Many people use the encoders for streaming, encoding or transcoding video files. It also handles decoding, so you don't have to run that straight on your CPU. Intel's XE ads AV1 decode. Since Navi 2 and Ampere GPUs are really tough to get: XE is another avenue to get AV1 Decode.TBH, I'm not even sure what quicksync is.
Okay, more video encoding. Yeah, I suppose that's a niche use case if it happens to be significantly better than both the 10th gen cpus and the lower end 11th gen. Though it's still a sad day when we're already relegating top end, new gen i7s to niche status hinging on "ifs".
If only it could have had improved performance across the board. Guess we'll have to wait until launch day to get the full details on that.
I'm not saying quicksync is niche. I'm saying getting an 11700k just for that feature is. If it isn't improved that much over the current generation, or if the lower end lineup can match it.Quicksync is hardly niche
Also lets be clear. Admittedly it required refinement, Jim Keller help them develop the Zen core which has been their saving grace. Without Zen, AMD would be in serious trouble.I think something missing, so far, in this conversation is that Dr. Su is the CEO of AMD, unlike some predecessors. She has kept the "pedal to the metal" at AMD.