News Intel's Arrow Lake fix doesn't 'fix' overall gaming performance or match the company's bad marketing claims - Core Ultra 200S still trails AMD and...

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Something is very wrong here. Arrow Lake can't be that bad. A good journalist should try to dig out what caused the discrepancy between Intel Labs and reviewers instead of blaming Intel's marketing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: iLoveThe80s
There was a lot to not make out from this update. For one, I cannot easily see a hard comparison of what Intel reported and what Tom's is seeing. It is not relevant to bring all of the other CPUs into an article like this. Simply, just let the readers know if what Intel has reported is tangible or not in Tom's hands.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheSecondPower
Gururu said:
There was a lot to not make out from this update. For one, I cannot easily see a hard comparison of what Intel reported and what Tom's is seeing. It is not relevant to bring all of the other CPUs into an article like this. Simply, just let the readers know if what Intel has reported is tangible or not in Tom's hands.
Click to expand...
It is worth to check out Intel's disclosure too
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tmyDdqgSWdc&t=190s



I was waiting for Tom's report on this, just to find out this blame article. This is not Tom's usual standard.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Papusan
This new intel cpu is bad... they want force this nonsense e-cores. The old cpus is way stronger with hyper treading enable.
Even nvidia still using the old 14900k on their chart to show the power of graphics on "Work environments". Intel.need to stop this nonsense and back to true P core performance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: salgado18 and Hotrod2go
No amount of firmware, microcode or drivers are going to fix this, they need to redo their uArch to fix these issues. People rag on them but this is Intel's Bulldozer moment. That whole P/E core nonsense had them trying to build processors in a way that home users do not use them resulting in a sideways release. Hopefully they'll take this lesson to heart, go back to the drawing board and come out with something better in three to four years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: philipemaciel, Papusan, salgado18 and 7 others
It is delusional for Intel, or anybody else, to believe that there exists a software fix for architectural performance differences among CPU generations, especially if the difference is on the order of 10%.

There is no JIT (just-in-time compiler) in Intel CPUs (contrast this with the discontinued Transmeta CPUs) that would potentially allow for a 10% increase in performance via merely a software update.

Intel marketing people, including some of Intel's engineers, appear to be in a state of self-deception: they are claiming some numbers - but nobody outside of Intel is able to reproduce those numbers. If this continues it might end up in a class-action lawsuit against Intel.
 
  • Like
Reactions: thesyndrome, Papusan, salgado18 and 2 others
Thanks for your (brutal, in a good way) honesty, Paul.

Quite interesting findings for sure and I hope Intel just stops trying to gaslight people into buying ArrowLake with a false promise of "it'll work better later, we swear!". Let's hope Panther Lake actually fixes this kerfuffle. I don't want AMD to run "unchecked" either. No one benefits from it, except their shareholders.

EDIT: It's not Panther Lake, but Nova Lake, sorry 😀

Regards.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: philipemaciel, salgado18, Amdlova and 2 others
I agree with your conclusion and think they've taken the wrong approach. All of the software side fixes seemed to be related to Win 11 24H2 rather than being true fixes. So while I'm sure those issues are real and resolved it shouldn't make any difference for the professional reviewer community.

So while I don't think much was going to be fixed by the updates there's some notes here regarding this article:
  • You didn't list the BIOS/ME versions for the motherboards you tested which quite frankly makes these results worthless as a reference until that information is provided.
  • Y-Cruncher results are using AVX512 which heavily skews the combined productivity results and without noting this makes it a useless benchmark (unless the goal is to purposely skew the results in favor of AMD which I absolutely do not believe is the case).
  • Asus, ASRock and Gigabyte all had latency regressions with their first BIOS + ME update which led to overclockers rewriting to an older ME which resolved it. This may have since been resolved, but I haven't done any recent research as I opted to not update my BIOS yet and now there's another new BIOS from MSI that came out 2 days ago. MSI's first 0x114 PR4 didn't note updated ME, but they did with PR5.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: kcw and TheSecondPower
My results were much different but I also tweaked the interchip timing slightly. If you try doing that first I think you will get much better results. The other point is I don't know anyone with a PC that only uses it to play games if that's all you're using your machine for you're probably better off getting a console. For non-gaming purposes the Intel chip is much better than the AMD even without the internship timings being tweaked.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheSecondPower and iLoveThe80s
Intel lost both the MT and gaming crowns to AMD this gen and that’s even after their so called fix months after the initial launch. That’s two generations in a row AMD offers the best CPUs for each workload.
 
kcw said:
Something is very wrong here. Arrow Lake can't be that bad. A good journalist should try to dig out what caused the discrepancy between Intel Labs and reviewers instead of blaming Intel's marketing.
Click to expand...
What's to dig out there, buddy?

They plopped it into the test bench, installed all the necessary updates and that is what it has showed. And that's how it should be tested.

You think average users who buy these CPUs are going to be tinkering around various obscure settings trying to fix Intel's mess?

That's okay, just as we piled on AMD when they had their Bulldozer meme, so we do on Intel when they are in the same position getting destroyed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: philipemaciel, NinoPino, salgado18 and 2 others
Elusive Ruse said:
Intel lost both the MT and gaming crowns to AMD this gen and that’s even after their so called fix months after the initial launch. That’s two generations in a row AMD offers the best CPUs for each workload.
Click to expand...
This is not an accurate representation of how the current parts actually perform.

Gaming X3D is better than everything and regular Zen 5 is generally faster than ARL. Productivity wise ARL is generally faster than Zen 5 unless AVX512 is involved. If any meaningful portion of your workload includes AVX512 then Intel isn't an option in the first place because they simply don't have it on client parts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheSecondPower
thestryker said:
This is not an accurate representation of how the current parts actually perform.

Gaming X3D is better than everything and regular Zen 5 is generally faster than ARL. Productivity wise ARL is generally faster than Zen 5 unless AVX512 is involved. If any meaningful portion of your workload includes AVX512 then Intel isn't an option in the first place because they simply don't have it on client parts.
Click to expand...
I wonder if the gaming gap between ARL and X3D changes with sub $500 GPUs.
 
kcw said:
Something is very wrong here. Arrow Lake can't be that bad. A good journalist should try to dig out what caused the discrepancy between Intel Labs and reviewers instead of blaming Intel's marketing.
Click to expand...
But Intel cant solve the problem themselves, so what’s the point of further probing? Perhaps Intel should clarify what was the test bench and conditions used such that they obtained results that only they can get internally.
 
  • Like
Reactions: thekingofALLmonkz, philipemaciel, NinoPino and 1 other person
watzupken said:
But Intel cant solve the problem themselves, so what’s the point of further probing? Perhaps Intel should clarify what was the test bench and conditions used such that they obtained results that only they can get internally.
Click to expand...
Intel listed all of the test bed setup conditions on the slide deck for each of the claims. I'm not sure it was stated that Tom's testing examined identical original and updated testing with the same setups.
 
from the article
“These tactics and the test results make this whole 'fix' exercise feel more like misdirection and spin than an actual fix. Yes, Intel admits that it failed to make sure that some issues were addressed in a way that would apply evenly across all users, and it has now corrected those issues. However, it still hasn’t brought the chips up to the level of performance it originally promised, and even if it merely matched its previous-gen chips in gaming as it claimed, that's still not great. We expect generational improvements in performance, and anything less is rightly frowned upon. “

This is known as a tactic of demoralization. You’re being conditioned to lose faith in all once respected - or at least semi-admired - sources of integrity—good brands, government, government institutions, common decency, common respect for your intelligence, common respect for they not disrespecting yours.

All of this intentional destruction of the foundations of both faith and trust - these mind-boggling revelations are deliberately designed to erode those virtues with the same ferocious acid that erodes your faith and trust in the ENTIRE SYSTEM by witnessing everything ludicrously occurring - is specifically & expertly tailored to leave you in a place of complete capitulation so that you feel so lost and defeated you do not bother fighting back. Ie, it’s too broken to even bother fixing. Think I’ll have another beer.

Don’t fall for it. America is the last best chance and hope for freedom. You’re being played like a video game.

Don’t be an idiot. Flip the script for goodness' sake!
 
Atom Symbol said:
It is delusional for Intel, or anybody else, to believe that there exists a software fix for architectural performance differences among CPU generations, especially if the difference is on the order of 10%.

There is no JIT (just-in-time compiler) in Intel CPUs (contrast this with the discontinued Transmeta CPUs) that would potentially allow for a 10% increase in performance via merely a software update.

Intel marketing people, including some of Intel's engineers, appear to be in a state of self-deception: they are claiming some numbers - but nobody outside of Intel is able to reproduce those numbers. If this continues it might end up in a class-action lawsuit against Intel.
Click to expand...
I mean, except for the times it has actually happened, right? Like the windows threading improvement that made a 10% performance difference on ryzen?
 
HardwiredWireless said:
My results were much different but I also tweaked the interchip timing slightly. If you try doing that first I think you will get much better results. The other point is I don't know anyone with a PC that only uses it to play games if that's all you're using your machine for you're probably better off getting a console. For non-gaming purposes the Intel chip is much better than the AMD even without the internship timings being tweaked.
Click to expand...
For non gaming purposes pretty much anything will do. I think, to make your point clearer, you need to qualify WHICH non gaming tasks apply here, because running Office 365 and a browser (Probably 98% of non gaming use) nobody needs and i9 or whatever Intel is calling it this Gen.

Also consider that the gaming experience between PC gaming and Console gaming is equally disparate as many non gaming tasks. They exist as separate markets for a reason.

As for the processors in question. They are fine. Bleeding edge frame rates at 1080p low settings are only for comparisons where the CPU is exposed as the performance limiter. IE benchmarking. In real world scenarios they will achieve mostly identical performance to both their immediate predecessors, and AMD offerings.

Remain brand agnostic people, nobody needs that kind of stress in their life..
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lafong, TheSecondPower and Loadedaxe
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom