[SOLVED] Alder Lake, will it fix high consumption?

[Sduis]

Hi, I don't know if there can be a discussion. But do you think that Intel's 10nm processors could come up with some revolution at Intel and fix the high power consumption of Intel processors, hopefully I7-12700 will be cooled again with normal air and not water cooling.

 

[Newtonius]

It's up in the air at this point, right now I think Intel is going to be focused trying to play catchup with AMD so thermals might not be high on the priority list. They did cut die on core count on the 11th gen for possibly temp reasons, though they claim it's because they were focusing on 'giving more performance per core'. Though in LTT's recent video they did use an 11900k on air cooling and it's temps were well managed, still lost to AMD but at least temps and voltage were better than 10th gen.

 

[Zerk2012]

It's up in the air at this point, right now I think Intel is going to be focused trying to play catchup with AMD so thermals might not be high on the priority list. They did cut die on core count on the 11th gen for possibly temp reasons, though they claim it's because they were focusing on 'giving more performance per core'. Though in LTT's recent video they did use an 11900k on air cooling and it's temps were well managed, still lost to AMD but at least temps and voltage were better than 10th gen.

Their not behind so their nothing to catchup for your average consumer.

The work PC's that need as many cores as they can get their behind on some but it's not as big of a market.

People see the 250 watt power draw and try to read to much into it, that is just for a short burst.
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/intel-core-i9-10900k/18.html

 

[Newtonius]

Their not behind so their nothing to catchup for your average consumer.

The work PC's that need as many cores as they can get their behind on some but it's not as big of a market.

Sure, Intel CPUs are by any means NOT slow compared to AMD, but with AMD taking the lead in both gaming and workstation after a decade of Intel dominance it's considered catch-up for Intel, at least from my perspective. Especially if they want to re-secure that image of themselves being top-dog amongst the public eye. While a basic working consumers wouldn't really care about AMD's higher core count when all they want to do is browse the web and open a few excel documents, that doesn't mean Intel is fine with this, their ads and promos are usually aimed to discredit AMD and claim they are the faster and better option. However, with reviewer benchmarks already coming out for 11th gen it's clear that performance is still in favor of AMD based builds and will continue to be this way until Intel innovates its design as AMD did with its chiplets design. Which Intel might in the near future as the new GAAFET design might repalce the standard FinFet.

https://eepower.com/market-insights/could-gaafets-replace-finfets/#

 

[Zerk2012]

Their not behind so their nothing to catchup for your average consumer.

The work PC's that need as many cores as they can get their behind on some but it's not as big of a market.

Sure, Intel CPUs are by any means NOT slow compared to AMD, but with AMD taking the lead in both gaming and workstation after a decade of Intel dominance it's considered catch-up for Intel, at least from my perspective. Especially if they want to re-secure that image of themselves being top-dog amongst the public eye. While a basic working consumers wouldn't really care about AMD's higher core count when all they want to do is browse the web and open a few excel documents, that doesn't mean Intel is fine with this, their ads and promos are usually aimed to discredit AMD and claim they are the faster and better option. However, with reviewer benchmarks already coming out for 11th gen it's clear that performance is still in favor of AMD based builds and will continue to be this way until Intel innovates its design as AMD did with its chiplets design. Which Intel might in the near future as the new GAAFET design might repalce the standard FinFet.

https://eepower.com/market-insights/could-gaafets-replace-finfets/#

That site has really nothing to say.
Bottom line you can buy a 10700K and game just fine and you can actually buy one right now. (310 bucks)

Even work programs their a lot of them that don't use a bunch of cores and depend more on single core of a few cores along with GPU acceleration.

For the new ones their really close
https://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/compare_cpu-intel_core_i7_11700k-1862-vs-amd_ryzen_7_5800x-1747

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K8N_NFzu7kg

https://pcpartpicker.com/products/compare/qtvqqs,VW3gXL/

50 bucks less for the 11700K

 

[geofelt]

10nm rates to be more power efficient.
the smaller density will in part be used to get more components on a chip.
Partly for better performance, partly for economics.
Intel high power consumption today comes from overclockers or others looking for maximum multicore performance.
For most of us, it is time to abandon overclocking as a means to get something for nothing.
Processors of today are binned and sold at their maximum performance level.
Current processors do a good job of turbo management.
How well you can do is determined by how good your cooling setup is.

No doubt, you will get more for your money with intel 12th gen.
Otherwise, why introduce a new product at all?

 

[Newtonius]

That site has really nothing to say.
Bottom line you can buy a 10700K and game just fine and you can actually buy one right now. (310 bucks)

Even work programs their a lot of them that don't use a bunch of cores and depend more on single core of a few cores along with GPU acceleration.

For the new ones their really close
https://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/compare_cpu-intel_core_i7_11700k-1862-vs-amd_ryzen_7_5800x-1747

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K8N_NFzu7kg

https://pcpartpicker.com/products/compare/qtvqqs,VW3gXL/

50 bucks less for the 11700K

The site I linked was talking about Intel's future innovation.... Not sure how you think it has 'nothing to say'. Here's another article if you want 'substance'.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/antony...9-5900x-which-should-you-buy/?sh=68e665776926

Though I'm talking about OP's question regarding if Intel plans to lower their temps and power draw (hence the relevance in my link, GAAFET to replace FinFET). Doesn't matter if you can buy Intel CPUs for cheaper and that they are available compared to AMD (which by the way is a bad sign since it shows no one wants Intel unless they have no choice now) the real matter is which brand is innovating their design to meet customer satisfaction. And AMD is winning that.

 

[geofelt]

It is folly to buy based on specs of the components.
Interesting, yes, but buy based on the performance of the product as it applies to YOUR particular workload.

 

[sonofjesse]

Just wait and see. Guessing one way or the other won't have any bearing on what actually happens, or what actually builds people are doing today IMHO.

 

[Dsplover]

Heat is a big problem for 1U/2U builds.
AMD will steal market with their 5000 Desktop APU’s.

How many more sectors can Int€£ afford to concede?

EPYC just smoked new Xeons.

Lucky for Int€£ I can’t get the right Server board/CPU combo.
I always use ASRock server boards with consumer chips. Fast/stable.

But ASRock has some great AMD versions out that would love to mate with 5000 desktop APU’s.

Meanwhile Int€£ chases AMD around with little luck until they knock down prices. Too many votes, too much heat, and releasing the Rocket Lakes w/o GFX drivers was pure incompetence.

I feel badly for them, but they fell asleep at the wheel. There’s a price for such complacency.