Will Alder Lake be the end of the AMD period of success?

sblantipodi

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
3,759
I'm a big fan of AMD but history teaches that AMD can win only when Intel sleep on its success.

At the end, Intel is too big for AMD to compete with, and when Intel pushes the accelerator AMD is always behind.

This don't want to be a trolling thread but as a hardware junk since more than 25 years I need to recognize it.

Now Intel was way behind of AMD and I was so glad since I really don't like the way Intel is killing the innovation in this market,
but will AMD be strong enough to compete with Alder Lake?

We was expecting Zen4 at the end of this year and they postponed it to the end of 2022 arriving with PCIe4 instead of PCIe5 like the upcoming Alder Lake.
I know that PCIe4 will be enought for years to come but for people who don't change the PC so often, having the latest is a plus.

The most important things all in all is the performances, will Alder Lake be able to compete with Zen3 XT?

I need to buy a new PC for Christmas and I would really go with AMD but I Alder Lake is tempring with it's DDR5 and PCIe5 support, it seems a little bit more future proof.

What do you think about it?
 
Personally I want to see benchmarks and one should also remember that Zen3 is almost 1 year old as well so it makes more sense to compare Alder lake to the next AMD release. I will wait for independent benchmarks before I get my hopes up with regards to performance but I do hope Intel manages to best zen3 by at least 15%. Having competition is a good thing otherwise we would still be getting 5% IPC, 3-5% clock increase and same core count each year, which was underwhelming to say the least.

DDR5 is a double edge sword at the moment. It will likely be overpriced compared to performance for some time. PCI-e 5 is nice to have IMO at this point. I can't really tell much difference between very fast PCI-e 3 and a fairly good PCI-e 4 NVMe drive outside of benchmarks and GPUs barely have any benefit from PCI-e 4 as well. The main advantage of PCI-e 4 is due to the limited amount of lanes for the chipsets on consumer platforms as you get twice the bandwith with the same number of lanes and it will be similar for PCI-e 5. The real benefits of PCI-e 5 will mainly be special use cases for at least a few years.
 
I'm a big fan of AMD but history teaches that AMD can win only when Intel sleep on its success.

At the end, Intel is too big for AMD to compete with, and when Intel pushes the accelerator AMD is always behind.

This don't want to be a trolling thread but as a hardware junk since more than 25 years I need to recognize it.

Now Intel was way behind of AMD and I was so glad since I really don't like the way Intel is killing the innovation in this market,
but will AMD be strong enough to compete with Alder Lake?

We was expecting Zen4 at the end of this year and they postponed it to the end of 2022 arriving with PCIe4 instead of PCIe5 like the upcoming Alder Lake.
I know that PCIe4 will be enought for years to come but for people who don't change the PC so often, having the latest is a plus.

The most important things all in all is the performances, will Alder Lake be able to compete with Zen3 XT?

I need to buy a new PC for Christmas and I would really go with AMD but I Alder Lake is tempring with it's DDR5 and PCIe5 support, it seems a little bit more future proof.

What do you think about it?

I think I have heard this talk each and everytime Intel has launched their newest gens, for the past 3-4 generations. And somehow they managed to go BACKWARDS on their last gen launch.

Even if DDR5 and PCIE-5 support come out, the RAM at least will be very immature, and expensive. Also it is generally never a good idea to invest in the first round of RAM. Hist ory has shown that to be a major waste of money and sometimes even less performance than the high end of the last gen RAM.

So in short, not holding my breath either. Intel has screwed themselves too much in the last few years for me to get hyped. I will wait until I see numbers.
 
We'll see. Folks thought Northwood-C would be the end if AMD back when the Athlon Barton/Tbred cores were beating the daylights out of Wiliamette/Northwood A+B, and then after a short bit, the AMD64 systems dropped... And then the Dual-Core boxes. Just because Intel often surged ahead doesn't mean they will this time - and for that matter, the Athlon/Pentium battle lasted for most of a ~decade~ before AMD slipped with Phenom/Dozer.
 
We'll see. Folks thought Northwood-C would be the end if AMD back when the Athlon Barton/Tbred cores were beating the daylights out of Wiliamette/Northwood A+B, and then after a short bit, the AMD64 systems dropped... And then the Dual-Core boxes. Just because Intel often surged ahead doesn't mean they will this time - and for that matter, the Athlon/Pentium battle lasted for most of a ~decade~ before AMD slipped with Phenom/Dozer.
Lets remember who brought Dual core first, and 64 bit first. Intel stagnates and profits. AMD (probably because it had no choice in the matter) has really pushed the envelope when it is down. It has come back more than a few times from the grave. Intel has the revenue and is not as pressed to compete with consumer grade CPU's. AMD has tapped and expanded that market greatly lately.
 
I have a very old CPU and I need to upgrade, I need Windows 11 and I need an upgrade this year unfortunantly.
I'm really disappoined by AMD that postponed Zen4 to the end of 2022, I was waiting for Zen 4 since they had promised it for the end of 2021.

Now we have "only" Zen 3XT and sincerely is not enough.
I really can't understand how they think to sell a new CPU at the end of 2021 with memory in end of life.

I know that DDR5 will not be the best bang for the buck initially but sincerely I would like to have it.
 
The leaked benchmarks show it barely faster than 11900K. I wouldn't hold my breath.

And if we are talking about those:
https://hothardware.com/news/intel-core-i9-12900k-alder-lake-cpu-leaked-benchmark-z690

That a 11900k running 2133mhz ram....

To be fair that windows 10 and I am not sure how well the program-os is doing in taken full advantage of the hybrid cores, but still that Ram preview score look terrible (if it is not exponential metric), for a scenario with more than double the frequency, the lower GPU score and tracking score has well.
 
I'm a big fan of AMD but history teaches that AMD can win only when Intel sleep on its success.

At the end, Intel is too big for AMD to compete with, and when Intel pushes the accelerator AMD is always behind.

This don't want to be a trolling thread but as a hardware junk since more than 25 years I need to recognize it.

Now Intel was way behind of AMD and I was so glad since I really don't like the way Intel is killing the innovation in this market,
but will AMD be strong enough to compete with Alder Lake?

We was expecting Zen4 at the end of this year and they postponed it to the end of 2022 arriving with PCIe4 instead of PCIe5 like the upcoming Alder Lake.
I know that PCIe4 will be enought for years to come but for people who don't change the PC so often, having the latest is a plus.

The most important things all in all is the performances, will Alder Lake be able to compete with Zen3 XT?

I need to buy a new PC for Christmas and I would really go with AMD but I Alder Lake is tempring with it's DDR5 and PCIe5 support, it seems a little bit more future proof.

What do you think about it?


I think AMD will be good to go against anything intel puts out. One big change compared to the past is AMD is no longer saddled with tons of debt from back when they bought ATI. All the money they made now has paid that off and they are able to put a lot of money into R&D now. Plus they arent saddled with the cost of obsolete fabs they cant afford to run or upgrade. Also they are no longer looked down as the value or cheap option in the market so they have much better mindshare than they used to.

Intel may be able to come back with new products and beat AMD, but now AMD has both the money and the engineering to compete on a much more even footing. No longer will it be the 500 lb gorillia stomping on the ant. True competition will benefit the market, and we likely wont have another 10 year stagnation like we did when intel was the one running the market.
 
Its far to early to say. Intel press releases are no real indication of what's to come. AMD doesn't say much until they release the beast. So its time to hurry up and wait for some real world reviews.
Until then, save up for a new gpu 😂
 
If anything; wait for prices to drop on Zen 3 (maybe?) after Intel releases Alder Lake. They have already started dropping some and are almost always available (if you are lucky enough to have a MicroCenter near by). I jumped on X99 with a 5930k then a 5960x when it was the first platform for DDR4; and while that system lasted me 7 years almost; it was extremely expensive to adopt so early with DDR4. As others have said, PCIe 5.0 and DDR5 will probably need a good year to mature. Not to mention; I don't think PCIe 4.0 or DDR4 is liming anyone in the gaming realm right now. With Re-Bar enabled on PCIe 4.0 with my 5950X on my RTX 3090, I only scored slightly higher (graphically & FPS wise) than I did with the same video card on my X99 system at 1440p and 4K. Granted, my overall smoothness and 1% lows were much better. You are still VERY MUCH GPU limited at 1440p or higher unless you have some older setup and do not overclock.

If you need to upgrade (and knowing something is ALWAYS around the corner); Zen 3, even if it is a "dead end" platform will last you a long time; especially with a 5950x multi-threaded beast of a CPU (if you need it for more than gaming).
 
If anything; wait for prices to drop on Zen 3 (maybe?) after Intel releases Alder Lake. They have already started dropping some and are almost always available (if you are lucky enough to have a MicroCenter near by). I jumped on X99 with a 5930k then a 5960x when it was the first platform for DDR4; and while that system lasted me 7 years almost; it was extremely expensive to adopt so early with DDR4. As others have said, PCIe 5.0 and DDR5 will probably need a good year to mature. Not to mention; I don't think PCIe 4.0 or DDR4 is liming anyone in the gaming realm right now. With Re-Bar enabled on PCIe 4.0 with my 5950X on my RTX 3090, I only scored slightly higher (graphically & FPS wise) than I did with the same video card on my X99 system at 1440p and 4K. Granted, my overall smoothness and 1% lows were much better. You are still VERY MUCH GPU limited at 1440p or higher unless you have some older setup and do not overclock.

If you need to upgrade (and knowing something is ALWAYS around the corner); Zen 3, even if it is a "dead end" platform will last you a long time; especially with a 5950x multi-threaded beast of a CPU (if you need it for more than gaming).

As I already said, I don't buy platforms with EOL components like DDR4. I simply don't like it xD
 
As I already said, I don't buy platforms with EOL components like DDR4. I simply don't like it xD
I would not call DDR4 EOL yet; it's probably got quite a few years left, especially if the rumor of Zen 4 using DDR4 is true. Not to mention; mixed leaks show even Alder Lake may support DDR4 as well as DDR5. I guess I was lucky in the sense I had a Samsung B-Die kit from my X99 platform I could massively overclock on my Zen 3 setup (so saved money there). I can get the not wanting to "invest" (if you can call something that always loses value that) in older components; but there are some damn stellar DDR4 kits out there for not a horrible price either.

But I mean, I would not try to convince anyone otherwise if they want the absolute latest and greatest; my personal choice was to wait DDR5 and PCIe 5.0 out for a generation; but my X99 was showing its age in games, so Zen 3 it was as it was the best out when I built my new rig in spring.
 
I would not call DDR EOL yet; it's probably got quite a few years left, especially if the rumor of Zen 4 using DDR4 is true. Not to mention; mixed leaks show even Alder Lake may support DDR4 as well as DDR5. I guess I was lucky in the sense I had a Samsung B-Die kit from my X99 platform I could massively overclock on my Zen 3 setup (so saved money there). I can get the not wanting to "invest" (if you can call something that always loses value that) in older components; but there are some damn stellar DDR4 kits out there for not a horrible price either.

But I mean, I would not try to convince anyone otherwise if they want the absolute latest and greatest; my personal choice was to wait DDR5 and PCIe 5.0 out for a generation; but my X99 was showing its age in games, so Zen 3 it was as it was the best out when I built my new rig in spring.

I running an Haswell-E too using a 2080Ti right now, but the next upgrade needs a new CPU. (5930k here with a 4K 144Hz monitor)
 
DDR4 is EOL before DDR5 :)

Whats the alternative, buy overpriced slow ddr5 when it comes out and then buy faster ddr5 later on the same mobo? Sounds expensive and not worthwhile. By the time the fast ddr5 is shipping at a reasonable price it will be EOL by your metrics.
 
I running an Haswell-E too using a 2080Ti right now, but the next upgrade needs a new CPU. (5930k here with a 4K 144Hz monitor)
Yeah, you are still very much GPU limited in that situation at 4K, even with a 3090 I was very much GPU limited at 4K. However; after making the move from (roughly) a similar setup CPU/Mobo wise; I noticed a much smoother gaming experience with 0 stutter in any games (even at 4K). And that was with a 5960x overclocked to 4.65Ghz! You will not be disappointed in whatever you do, that is for sure.
 
Whats the alternative, buy overpriced slow ddr5 when it comes out and then buy faster ddr5 later on the same mobo? Sounds expensive and not worthwhile. By the time the fast ddr5 is shipping at a reasonable price it will be EOL by your metrics.

When I bought my X99 platform I bought 16GB of DDR4 that at the time was as new as DDR5 now.
Later I upgraded to 32GB and now to 64GB
 
When I bought my X99 platform I bought 16GB of DDR4 that at the time was as new as DDR5 now.
Later I upgraded to 32GB and now to 64GB

if I will ever be able to upgrade the GPU, here in Italy GPUs are completely vanished and when you find it they have idiot prices I don't want "endorse".
 
I have no idea why, but X99 mobos, especially some of the better ones are worth a lot right now.
They take high core-count Xeons I believe?
I would not call DDR4 EOL yet; it's probably got quite a few years left, especially if the rumor of Zen 4 using DDR4 is true. Not to mention; mixed leaks show even Alder Lake may support DDR4 as well as DDR5. I guess I was lucky in the sense I had a Samsung B-Die kit from my X99 platform I could massively overclock on my Zen 3 setup (so saved money there). I can get the not wanting to "invest" (if you can call something that always loses value that) in older components; but there are some damn stellar DDR4 kits out there for not a horrible price either.

But I mean, I would not try to convince anyone otherwise if they want the absolute latest and greatest; my personal choice was to wait DDR5 and PCIe 5.0 out for a generation; but my X99 was showing its age in games, so Zen 3 it was as it was the best out when I built my new rig in spring.
And don't forget, early DDR5 will be both slow and expensive - but more than that, it takes at least a year for them to improve yields/speeds/prices, AND for us to figure out what plays nice (if not longer).

eg: G.Skill + Zen works well, but Corsair is... problematic, in comparison. While on Intel, either works just fine. Lots of early Zen systems went out with Corsair ram, and getting XMP on that was more difficult than it should have been given the compatibility issues - while G.Skill made it a lot easier. Unless it was B-die, of course. But for DDR3, Corsair was the thing to buy. And DDR1? Mushkin! Remember that with the Northwood C chips? Now who buys Mushkin ram? Lord if I remember who owned the DDR2 timeframe. Geil?

Compatibility and performance is a mix of things. It takes a bit for that to work its way out. That's why I tend to wait a little bit now. I used to jump in - but I also used to edit autoexec and config.sys files by hand. Now I want it to run well - and while I tweak, tweaking to fix instability sucks. Tweaking to improve performance is fun.
 
get the amd cpus with vache some popcorn and enjoy the performance while watching the uphill battle the intel is trying to accomplish. my system is at its peak and still cant use the full potential as direct io storage isnt a thing yet so when it does my system will have even greater performance.

Intel releasing pcie gen 5 with ddr 5 is marketing and it'll be rough for awhile. dont be a beta tester for intel at your wallets expense and sanity with all bugs it will come with come to amd side we have cookies and milk even Grape Drank!
 
They take high core-count Xeons I believe?

And don't forget, early DDR5 will be both slow and expensive - but more than that, it takes at least a year for them to improve yields/speeds/prices, AND for us to figure out what plays nice (if not longer).

eg: G.Skill + Zen works well, but Corsair is... problematic, in comparison. While on Intel, either works just fine. Lots of early Zen systems went out with Corsair ram, and getting XMP on that was more difficult than it should have been given the compatibility issues - while G.Skill made it a lot easier. Unless it was B-die, of course. But for DDR3, Corsair was the thing to buy. And DDR1? Mushkin! Remember that with the Northwood C chips? Now who buys Mushkin ram? Lord if I remember who owned the DDR2 timeframe. Geil?

Compatibility and performance is a mix of things. It takes a bit for that to work its way out. That's why I tend to wait a little bit now. I used to jump in - but I also used to edit autoexec and config.sys files by hand. Now I want it to run well - and while I tweak, tweaking to fix instability sucks. Tweaking to improve performance is fun.
I believe in the DDR2 era, the goto RAM was OCZ. Remember them? I had (still have) 4 2GB sticks paired with my Q6600 at 3.6Ghz.

As for mature platforms, the time to buy and build a DDR4 system is now. Both intel and AMD have all but maxed out the configuration and there is sooooo much info on whats good or not these days. Id say for DDR4, AMD is king right now... nothing even comes close to pushing this setup. Hell, I can run a ton of VMs, game and connect to my work remotely all at the same time and not miss a beat... lol. Even when stress testing with Prime95 I was able to still play some music and surf the web with all 32 threads pegged at 100%. The IPC on these new chips is quite insane compared to years ago.

Best of all? My 5950x with a PBO Curve as OCed in my sig never tops 75C under extreme load (68C gaming). Runs way cooler with less power than Intel right now.

I'd be somewhat worried on the Alder Lake with that hybrid core setup, as you're also going to be beta testing for Microsoft at the same time to take advantage of that chip on Windows 11... lol
 
Amen. I do remember OCZ; didn’t buy from them for various reasons. History shows I had Kingston for my Sandy bridge box.
Agreed on the maturity now. My Threadripper box screams- 7-8 VMs, music, and a game. All at once.
I also had a z170 box (worked fine) and x370 (worked…. Less fine).
 
The early ddr2 kings were crucial ballistix with the famed micron d9gmh/gkx ics. Some could do 600+ when 400 was the standard. They oced like mad but prices were like gpus are today, stoopid. Then when 2gb modules came out ocz crushed it with their ocing ability, stability and community involvement. The set of 2x2gb 8500 reapers i had put most of my d9s to shame and even came with sweet heatpipes hehe. Q6700, EVGA 780i, OCZ 8500 reapers. Almost hit 600fsb (595, soclose)with that rig when everyone swore nvidia couldn't make a decent quadcore chipset. Good times.

Sorry for thread jacking.
Im starting to think Alderlake may actually bring it from some of the articles ive read but im sure AMD will bring it right back. Everyone is all worried about them holding off until 2022 for am4 and possibly not using ddr5. Lisa hasn't made a mistake yet, i doubt shes going to start anytime soon.
Now if she leaves, sure, then its time to shit the bed but i don't think that's happening. AMD is far from done.
 
Exactly look at her trajectory from Zen 1 + TR up Till now no were shes like well it was a good run see ya. DDR5+Pcie Gen 5 on new cpu i wouldnt want to be that guy building a new rig. im quite happy with how amd is doing and the new 3D Vache will just give more performance to a mature line of cpus already kicking intels face in. sit back watch the fireworks with alder lake to come,

i wonder if these will be forced with the intel standard as well 12VO psu's that would be too many new gen tech built into a products first launch.

1.DDR5 1st gen
2.PCie 5
3. intel 12vo
 
With AMD using the same socket for many generation of CPU's it is easier simply to plug in a new CPU if needed, than exchange the entire system.
 
I think one thing a lot of people forget; the RAM speed, unless you're running the slowest DDR4 out there (Sub ~3200Mhz these days), it has little effect on performance. On AMD, the sweet spot for performance is right around 3733Mhz ~ 3800Mhz. Anything above 3200Mhz performs good and anything above 3800Mhz (assuming you can keep a 1:1 FCLK) only adds performance in synthetic memory benchmarks, hardly 1 FPS in gaming from what I have seen. Keep in mind, most these memory tests are run at 1080p for games and FPS are already massive. RAM is only a factor of performance when it holds up the CPU. At 1440p and 4K? Almost negligible differences. I'm not saying buy the slowest RAM, but I think a lot of people focus on the raw speeds without considering their use case, or even factoring in what can be achieved with sub-timings. Not sure about the sweet spot for Intel as of late... but from what I recall, memory had even less impact on gaming with Intel above 3200Mhz ~3600Mhz because with AMD you are at least also increasing the FCLK.
 
I think one thing a lot of people forget; the RAM speed, unless you're running the slowest DDR4 out there (Sub ~3200Mhz these days), it has little effect on performance. On AMD, the sweet spot for performance is right around 3733Mhz ~ 3800Mhz. Anything above 3200Mhz performs good and anything above 3800Mhz (assuming you can keep a 1:1 FCLK) only adds performance in synthetic memory benchmarks, hardly 1 FPS in gaming from what I have seen. Keep in mind, most these memory tests are run at 1080p for games and FPS are already massive. RAM is only a factor of performance when it holds up the CPU. At 1440p and 4K? Almost negligible differences. I'm not saying buy the slowest RAM, but I think a lot of people focus on the raw speeds without considering their use case, or even factoring in what can be achieved with sub-timings. Not sure about the sweet spot for Intel as of late... but from what I recall, memory had even less impact on gaming with Intel above 3200Mhz ~3600Mhz because with AMD you are at least also increasing the FCLK.
That would apply if you are GPU limited. When I am CPU limited something as simple as changing tRFC to XMP value instead of motherboard value gave me as much as 1-2% FPS increase. When trying to get as high FPS as possible for MP games then fast ram is important, especially when the mouse input and rendered frames are synchronous. For casual gaming or most SP games it doesn't matter much.
 
That would apply if you are GPU limited. When I am CPU limited something as simple as changing tRFC to XMP value instead of motherboard value gave me as much as 1-2% FPS increase. When trying to get as high FPS as possible for MP games then fast ram is important, especially when the mouse input and rendered frames are synchronous. For casual gaming or most SP games it doesn't matter much.
Well yeah, if you are going for ultra competitive settings (usually the lowest) at 1080p for the highest frames possible, then you are likely CPU limited, which is why I mentioned that most RAM tests are done at 1080p as that is where you would see the most (if any) real differences.
 
I think one thing a lot of people forget; the RAM speed, unless you're running the slowest DDR4 out there (Sub ~3200Mhz these days), it has little effect on performance. On AMD, the sweet spot for performance is right around 3733Mhz ~ 3800Mhz. Anything above 3200Mhz performs good and anything above 3800Mhz (assuming you can keep a 1:1 FCLK) only adds performance in synthetic memory benchmarks, hardly 1 FPS in gaming from what I have seen. Keep in mind, most these memory tests are run at 1080p for games and FPS are already massive. RAM is only a factor of performance when it holds up the CPU. At 1440p and 4K? Almost negligible differences. I'm not saying buy the slowest RAM, but I think a lot of people focus on the raw speeds without considering their use case, or even factoring in what can be achieved with sub-timings. Not sure about the sweet spot for Intel as of late... but from what I recall, memory had even less impact on gaming with Intel above 3200Mhz ~3600Mhz because with AMD you are at least also increasing the FCLK.
And this is also architectural dependent. Skylake and its variants don't care THAT much about RAM speed. Zen? Oh yeah - it cares. Netburst cared. Will Alder Lake? ~shrug~ - we'll know when we know. It may. It may not. Zen4 may, it may not. We have to wait and SEE.
While part of me always likes tinkering with the newest tech, I also have systems that have to work well - I sometimes build a "tinker box" out of the brand new to see if its worth it. Other times, I wait. Generally, I wait a little, unless I HAVE to upgrade (my Bulldozer to x370 box was one of those).
 
The magic that is kicking Intel's *** is the 65watt 5600x because of it performance at that power level vs the Intel power Hogs .
 
The magic that is kicking Intel's *** is the 65watt 5600x because of it performance at that power level vs the Intel power Hogs .

It's not so much that the power consumption of the 5600X matters a lot. It's the power consumption of the Zen 3 mobile processors where AMD is really bringing the fight to Intel. The big money is in mobile. That's what this is all about. It's also why DDR5 is a big deal. It's not just about making something that's faster than DDR4, even though that will eventually come. It's about making higher density memory modules that consume less power.
 
Back
Top