Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Intel Core I7-11700K Review: Blasting Off with Rocket Lake

anandtech.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 264 posts

Re: Intel Core I7-11700K Review: Blasting Off with Rocket Lake

#91

Post by jeffbee »

kllrnohj wrote: post #79
coding123 wrote: post #73

I think at this point we're just waiting for Windows and Linux to be fully supported on the M1 or for ARM to come out with a system on a chip that's documented enough for Windows and Linux to make a port.

Why would you wait for that when you can have a faster CPU in the form of the 5800X today? The M1 is a phenomenal laptop CPU, but it's still not faster than AMD's desktop offerings, either. At least not according to the specint results in the article.

The M1 is much faster on some single-threaded workloads than any other CPU. For example on browser benchmarks M1 is a whopping 60% faster than the 2nd place processor. Browser is an important workload for most people.

If you want to run MS Windows then obviously I can't recommend it.

Re: Intel Core I7-11700K Review: Blasting Off with Rocket Lake

#92

Post by krapht »

kllrnohj wrote: post #86
rbanffy wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interestingly enough, the AVX512 test was the easy win for Intel. Nobody uses it because it wasn't available and, when available, wasn't much faster overall. Now it is.

Who both buys consumer desktop CPUs (without ECC) and runs software that can use AVX512? Games won't use avx512 (not really simd math heavy work on the CPU, and also consoles don't have it). Web browsers won't use AVX512 (similar to games - not really SIMD-friendly raw math computation limited). Video & photo editing maybe will, but GPU acceleration is already more widely available & faster than avx512. What else doe…

Most scientific and engineering computing applications use double precision floats.

Re: Intel Core I7-11700K Review: Blasting Off with Rocket Lake

#93

Post by brigade »

Guthur wrote: post #28
samfisher83 wrote: post #18

You have to give whomever came up with 14nm process. Despite being super old it's still somewhat competitive. It's crazy Intel can't fix their process. They make more cash than amd, nvida etc. They make more cash than tsmc.

I would not be surprised if there was a lot of sunk cost fallacy on Intel's 10nm. They couldn't make it work effectively and it was so far behind that they bled out most of their process leadership. But rather than pivot and reset they've just kept hammering away at it. Of course the decision would not be trivial to make; the lead time for a new process node is significant.

I read somewhere that the crunch to get 14nm fixed burned a lot of goodwill among their top engineers, and when they saw delays looming for 10nm as well they looked for greener pastures rather than go through the 14nm crunch again. But yeah, Intel’s leadership should have been making better fallback plans for 10nm and beyond from the moment they knew Broadwell would have to be delayed, all the way back in 2013.

Re: Intel Core I7-11700K Review: Blasting Off with Rocket Lake

#94

Post by AuthorizedCust »

guardiangod wrote: post #5

i7-10700K to the i7-11700K Single thread floating point: +19.0% Multi-thread floating point: +19.5% Single thread integer: +13.0% Multi-thread integer: +7.3% Jesus. Just overclocking the RAM for the 10700k would give a similar performance increase. Along with 291W, this 10nm->14nm backport is not working out well for Intel. PS My work desktop died on Wednesday afternoon during the SpaceX SN10 flight. I rushed to my l…

Why didn’t you just go with AMD?

Re: Intel Core I7-11700K Review: Blasting Off with Rocket Lake

#95

Post by p1mrx »

pdog wrote: post #37

No ECC support means it's totally useless for workstation workloads.

With Ryzen, it's feasible to use ECC in a desktop/gaming PC too; you just need a motherboard that lists ECC support.

I'm running DDR4-3200 CL22 ECC overclocked to 3666 CL16 on an ASRock board with a 5800X.

Re: Intel Core I7-11700K Review: Blasting Off with Rocket Lake

#96

Post by 37ef_ced3 »

dogma1138 wrote: post #59
37ef_ced3 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AVX-512 software is appearing. For example, for neural net inference: https://NN-512.com AVX-512 is a pleasure from the programmer's perspective, much nicer than writing software for GPUs or for earlier SIMD instruction sets like AVX2/SSE Versus a GPU, the AVX-512 machine model is just much simpler, and there are no drivers or proprietary compilers Versus earlier SIMD instruction sets, AVX-512 provides all the instru…

Isn’t the issue with AVX-512 is that different CPUs support different instructions? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/AVX-512 It might eventually get normalized but atm it’s a bit of a mess.

If you limit yourself to the Foundation instruction set (AVX-512F) you get a lot of benefit and maximum compatibility. That's what https://NN-512.com does

Re: Intel Core I7-11700K Review: Blasting Off with Rocket Lake

#97

Post by encryptluks2 »

walrus01 wrote: post #87
encryptluks2 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Price is the biggest factor. You can get 10 cores with Intel for cheaper than 8 with AMD, plus with Intel you get integrated graphics as well which is really important right now considering the GPU shortage. Also, Intel allows virtual GPUs for virtualization in QEMU which AMD won't do.

If I wanted more than 8 cores, the 12-core ryzen 5900X is $549, can you really get an intel 10-core cpu for the same price, or within 50 bucks plus or minus, that performs better? I'm seeing the i9-10900K for $467, but in terms of dollars/performance per core I think it's still behind the ryzen which costs $82 more. https://www.techspot.com/review/2132-amd-ryzen-5900x/

The biggest issue you're going to run into, is that the 5900x may be $549 retail or whatever, but where are you going to buy one? I recently opted for a pre-built 4600G PC, and the 4700G is a great price point too... unfortunately AMD decided to really open these up to OEMs.

Re: Intel Core I7-11700K Review: Blasting Off with Rocket Lake

#98

Post by freeone3000 »

nxc18 wrote: post #83
coding123 wrote: post #73

I think at this point we're just waiting for Windows and Linux to be fully supported on the M1 or for ARM to come out with a system on a chip that's documented enough for Windows and Linux to make a port.

Windows on ARM is already working on M1 Mac through parallels. The big issue now is licensing and I assume some niceties in terms of official drivers/fine-tuning support. According to recent videos, Windows in a VM on M1 Mac today has same or better performance than Windows on ARM running natively on Surface Pro X. https://www.macrumors.com/2020/12/22/m1-mac-windows-parallel... https://twitter.com/imbushuo/status/133…

Licensing isn't an issue: a standard Windows 10 Pro license is processor-independent and includes a single-seat virtualization license. If Apple allowed it, you could even use the same license for virtualization and BootCamp like you can on amd64 macs.

Re: Intel Core I7-11700K Review: Blasting Off with Rocket Lake

#99

Post by millstone »

walrus01 wrote: post #87
encryptluks2 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Price is the biggest factor. You can get 10 cores with Intel for cheaper than 8 with AMD, plus with Intel you get integrated graphics as well which is really important right now considering the GPU shortage. Also, Intel allows virtual GPUs for virtualization in QEMU which AMD won't do.

If I wanted more than 8 cores, the 12-core ryzen 5900X is $549, can you really get an intel 10-core cpu for the same price, or within 50 bucks plus or minus, that performs better? I'm seeing the i9-10900K for $467, but in terms of dollars/performance per core I think it's still behind the ryzen which costs $82 more. https://www.techspot.com/review/2132-amd-ryzen-5900x/

Can you get the 5900X at all?

Re: Intel Core I7-11700K Review: Blasting Off with Rocket Lake

#100

Post by encryptluks2 »

millstone wrote: post #99
walrus01 wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I wanted more than 8 cores, the 12-core ryzen 5900X is $549, can you really get an intel 10-core cpu for the same price, or within 50 bucks plus or minus, that performs better? I'm seeing the i9-10900K for $467, but in terms of dollars/performance per core I think it's still behind the ryzen which costs $82 more. https://www.techspot.com/review/2132-amd-ryzen-5900x/

Can you get the 5900X at all?

Not to mention, where would you get an adequate GPU to go along with it unless you already have one.
Post reply on HN