News Intel Launches 14th-Gen Raptor Lake Refresh: Core i9-14900K, i7-14700K, and i5-14600K on October 17

[Admin]

Intel announced its 14th-generation Core ‘Raptor Lake Refresh’ series today, with three top-end overclockable models arriving at retail on October 17 to take on AMD’s Zen 4 Ryzen 7000 lineup.

Intel Launches 14th-Gen Raptor Lake Refresh: Core i9-14900K, i7-14700K, and i5-14600K on October 17 : Read more

 

[bit_user]

I'll be waiting to see the specs & prices on the non-K variants.

 

[evdjj3j]

They've got the crosshairs on last gen Ryzen? Wow, Intel don't set the bar too high for yourself.

 

[bit_user]

They've got the crosshairs on last gen Ryzen? Wow, Intel don't set the bar too high for yourself.

I think we don't know the precise timing on Arrow Lake's launch. It could happen close enough to Ryzen 8000 that they don't really need these CPUs to be competitive against it.

Remember, Intel originally planned to launch Meteor Lake on the desktop, this year. This Raptor Refresh is their plan B - seemingly a last-minute one, at that. That's why it's so underwhelming.

 

[Order 66]

Still, no official Intel ARK page detailing specs.

 

[TechyInAZ]

Pretty wild to have a new generation of chip's that still support's DDR4. That'll make a lot of older system owners happy.

 

[Avro Arrow]

So... they took the most power-hungry consumer-grade CPUs ever made and overclocked them even further. What could go wrong?

I'm starting to think that Intel just might be in bed with Asetek....

 

[Order 66]

So... they took the most power-hungry consumer-grade CPUs ever made and overclocked them even further. What could go wrong?

I'm starting to think that Intel just might be in bed with Asetek....

how so?

 

[TerryLaze]

So... they took the most power-hungry consumer-grade CPUs ever made and overclocked them even further. What could go wrong?

I'm starting to think that Intel just might be in bed with Asetek....

Nope, still 253W according to the article just like 13th gen and only 23W above the limit of the 7950x of 230W PPT.
You are talking about overclocking potential only here and it remains to be seen from reviews if the new ones are even better overclockers or not, but they are not higher (power) overclocked by intel.

 

[Order 66]

So... they took the most power-hungry consumer-grade CPUs ever made and overclocked them even further. What could go wrong?

I'm starting to think that Intel just might be in bed with Asetek....

The CPUs are actually not any more power-hungry than last gen like TerryLaze said, but of course, you wouldn't have seen his post.

 

[uwhusky1991]

Intel announced its 14th-generation Core ‘Raptor Lake Refresh’ series today, with three top-end overclockable models arriving at retail on October 17 to take on AMD’s Zen 4 Ryzen 7000 lineup.

Intel Launches 14th-Gen Raptor Lake Refresh: Core i9-14900K, i7-14700K, and i5-14600K on October 17 : Read more

Will be interested to see how 14900K/KF compares to 13900KS and whether it's pointless to pay a premium for an inferior part.

 

[bit_user]

Still, no official Intel ARK page detailing specs.

The article said they don't launch until tomorrow. I think the ark pages don't usually go live until Intel makes the official launch announcement.

 

[bit_user]

Nope, still 253W according to the article just like 13th gen

That's PL2. How does PL4 compare?

 

[ingtar33]

well Der8aur seems suitably unimpressed. Not many people out there I trust more on CPUs and overclocking. Dude knows what he's talking about. Shame the NDA prevents reviews till tomorrow.

 

[Giroro]

At some point during Microsoft's big Windows 11 push, Intel said their new processors need Windows 11 to run correctly. I think that was a mistake which continues to bite them.

Even though I know you can make Intel CPUs run just fine on Windows 10, my excitement for new processors is constantly being deflated by the threat that I might need to install Windows 11.

 

[Avro Arrow]

They've got the crosshairs on last gen Ryzen? Wow, Intel don't set the bar too high for yourself.

Well, to be fair, it is just a refresh of what they currently have. Their current architecture is already out-matched by Zen3 so expecting better from their current architecture would be overly-ambitious to the point of being delusional.

Still, no official Intel ARK page detailing specs.

It's probably still under embargo.

Pretty wild to have a new generation of chip's that still support's DDR4. That'll make a lot of older system owners happy.

I agree. I honestly believe that the adoption of DDR5 was a bit premature. Hell, I know people who are still rocking DDR3 and are doing just fine with it.

how so?

It was a joke, Asetek is a huge OEM of CPU liquid-cooled AIO solutions. Historically, a lot of manufacturers just bought some Asetek units in bulk and threw their names on them. I don't blame you for not getting it because it was a bit of an obscure reference and it's really my fault for not having linked the word "Asetek" for context. I've since fixed that oversight.

The CPUs are actually not any more power-hungry than last gen like TerryLaze said, but of course, you wouldn't have seen his post.

You're right, I didn't see it. Hell, I don't even know who he is, but I wasn't being completely serious. I don't think that Intel would be crazy enough to do that.

(Although I also never expected Intel to one day produce a CPU even more power-hungry than the AMD FX-9590, which became a meme in itself.)

 

[TerryLaze]

That's PL2. How does PL4 compare?

That's what I said...that's going to be the absolute limit for overclocking so we will have to wait for reviews to see if that changed.
For normal operation (within official limits of 253W ) PL4 is not changing the power draw at all.

 

[bit_user]

At some point during Microsoft's big Windows 11 push, Intel said their new processors need Windows 11 to run correctly.

Though it's probably not relevant to your needs, I would note that Linux has had support for the ThreadDirector for a few kernel revisions, now. I don't recall when the last big patch got merged, but it's safe to assume even Ubuntu 23.04 has support for it. Probably also 22.04 HWE, but worth checking for anyone who cares.

 

[bit_user]

I honestly believe that the adoption of DDR5 was a bit premature.

It makes a big difference for heavily-threaded workloads.

 

[Order 66]

It makes a big difference for heavily-threaded workloads.

how so? (I don't like to accept statements automatically, I want to know the why not just that it happens)

 

[Eximo]

how so? (I don't like to accept statements automatically, I want to know the why not just that it happens)

I believe it is the 2x32bit addressing rather than the 1x64 bit addressing in DDR4 and earlier.

Sort of like quad channel, plus the extra bandwidth always helps with workstation type tasks.

As I recall, a lot of games show almost zero performance penalty with a single DDR5 stick. That will probably change over time.

 

[thisisaname]

So... they took the most power-hungry consumer-grade CPUs ever made and overclocked them even further. What could go wrong?

I'm starting to think that Intel just might be in bed with Asetek....

At least with all that power being used it will be a nice warm bed

 

[HideOut]

Their gaming benchmarks in the first slide show 1080p performance. Whos going to spend $500+ on a cpu and matching build for 1080p gaming? Show 1440p and above FFS.

 

[bit_user]

how so? (I don't like to accept statements automatically, I want to know the why not just that it happens)

A benchmark is worth 10k words, IMO.

Upon reviewing the benchmarks I can find for Raptor Lake, the results seem decidedly mixed. One of the cases to benefit more is this Google Chrome - Jetstream v2 benchmark, which showed a 7.3% advantage for DDR5-7200/34 vs. DDR4-3600/18.

Core i9 13900K DDR5 7200 MHz (+memory scaling) review (Page 10)

Recently look at the performance differential between DDR5 6000 and 7200 MHz on Raptor-Lake, Intels Gen 13th series processors. Today we review a TeamGroup T-Force Delta 7200 CL34 (!) DDR5 kit to see...

www.guru3d.com

VRay NEXT showed a 4.4% benefit:

Core i9 13900K DDR5 7200 MHz (+memory scaling) review (Page 11)

Recently look at the performance differential between DDR5 6000 and 7200 MHz on Raptor-Lake, Intels Gen 13th series processors. Today we review a TeamGroup T-Force Delta 7200 CL34 (!) DDR5 kit to see...

www.guru3d.com

In terms of gaming Watch Dogs: Legion showed a 5.8% benefit, at 1080p.

Core i9 13900K DDR5 7200 MHz (+memory scaling) review (Page 12)

Recently look at the performance differential between DDR5 6000 and 7200 MHz on Raptor-Lake, Intels Gen 13th series processors. Today we review a TeamGroup T-Force Delta 7200 CL34 (!) DDR5 kit to see...

www.guru3d.com

The above case were the biggest differences from that review, in benchmarks that weren't totally synthetic. They included numerous other cases where the difference was negligible.

However, the biggest improvement I'm aware of is in SPEC2017 rate-N. I believe the way this works is that N separate instances of each single-threaded benchmark are run simultaneously. This is a torture test for memory bandwidth, because there's no data-sharing between any of the cores/threads. Sadly, Anandtech only ran this test for Alder Lake, and didn't repeat it for Raptor Lake. However, it showed a whopping 31.3% benefit for integer and a 37.4% benefit for floating point.

Source: https://www.anandtech.com/show/1704...hybrid-performance-brings-hybrid-complexity/8
​

SPEC2017 consists of 22 real-world applications. So, even though the way they run the rate-N test is a bit artificial, I don't consider it a totally synthetic benchmark.

So, in conclusion: I should amend my statement. It can make a big difference for heavily multi-threaded workloads, but it seems the difference is typically negligible vs. a high-performance DDR4 kit.

Still, if you're buying an i9 and want to squeeze the most performance from your system, it'd make sense to go with a fast DDR5 kit. It almost always helps, even if not by much. Furthermore, if you consider that the generational difference between Gen 13 and Gen 14 i9 processors is only about 2%, it puts some of the above gains in a different light.

 

[bit_user]

I believe it is the 2x32bit addressing rather than the 1x64 bit addressing in DDR4 and earlier.

Sort of like quad channel,

It's true that DDR5 subdivides a single 64-bit DIMM into two, independent 32-bit subchannels. This provides more parallelism in the hardware.

plus the extra bandwidth always helps with workstation type tasks.

Yes! Consider the sheer difference in bandwidth! The number following the DDR standard tells you how they compare. DDR5-7200 has exactly twice the theoretical bandwidth of DDR4-3600. Multithreaded workloads tend to be bandwidth-hungry, which is why the 96-core Genoa and 128-core Bergamo CPUs support 12-channel memory!! In the case of Genoa, that works out to 8x Zen 4 cores per channel, which is exactly the same as their top-end desktop CPU: the R9 7950X.

I think it's no coincidence that when AMD increased their top-spec server platform from 64 cores per CPU to 96, they also increased the max memory spec from 8-channel to 12-channel.

I even saw a recent interview with AMD's CTO (?), where the interviewer asked him if he foresaw > 16 cores in their desktop CPUs, and his answer was he didn't think it made sense in the near term, because a higher core count would be too bandwidth-starved.