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

Intel's Lion Cove P-Core and Gaming Workloads

chipsandcheese.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 126 posts

Re: Intel's Lion Cove P-Core and Gaming Workloads

#4

Post by adrian_b »

samrus wrote: post #2

122 points and no comments? Is this being botted or something?

Such articles are very interesting for many people, because nowadays all CPU vendors are under-documenting their products.

Most people do not have enough time or knowledge (or money to buy CPU samples that may prove to be not useful) to run extensive sets of benchmarks to discover how the CPUs really work, so they appreciate when others do this and publish their results.

Besides learning useful details about the strengths and weaknesses of the latest Intel big core, which may help in the optimization of a program or in assessing the suitability of an Intel CPU for a certain application, there is not much to comment about it.

Re: Intel's Lion Cove P-Core and Gaming Workloads

#6

Post by Nursie »

whatever10 wrote: post #5
samrus wrote: post #2

122 points and no comments? Is this being botted or something?

I mean what is there to comment. Intel botched another product release. It is just a sad state of affairs.

How so?

Not that I disbelieve, I just wasn't especially picking that up from the article.

Re: Intel's Lion Cove P-Core and Gaming Workloads

#7

Post by onli »

To see what that means in practice, in my multi generational meta benchmark the 285K lands currently only on rank 12, behind the top Intel processors from the last two generations (i7-13700K and 14700K plus the respective i9) and several AMD processors. https://www.pc-kombo.com/us/benchmark/games/cpu. The 3D cache just helps a lot in games, but the loss against the own predecessor must hurt even more.

Re: Intel's Lion Cove P-Core and Gaming Workloads

#8

Post by mort96 »

> E-Cores are turned off in the BIOS, because setting affinity to P-Cores caused massive stuttering in Call of Duty.

I understand doing this for the purpose of specifically analyzing the P-core microarchitecture in isolation. However this does make the test less interesting for potential customers. I don't think many people would disable E-cores in BIOS if they bought this CPU, so for the purpose of deciding which CPU to buy, it would be more interesting to see results which factor in the potential software/scheduling issues which come from the E-core/P-core split.

This isn't a criticism, just an observation. Real-world gaming results for these CPUs would be worse than what these results show.

Re: Intel's Lion Cove P-Core and Gaming Workloads

#9

Post by la_oveja »

Nursie wrote: post #6
whatever10 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean what is there to comment. Intel botched another product release. It is just a sad state of affairs.

How so? Not that I disbelieve, I just wasn't especially picking that up from the article.

they still cannot reach power figures they had in the last, 3? generations. 13 and 14 series, which made these figures by literally burning themselves to the point of degradation.

intel has no competition to amd in the gaming segment right now. they control both the low energy efficiency market and the high performance one.

Post reply on HN