News Raptor Lake Refresh Reportedly Costs 15 Percent More Than Raptor Lake

[bit_user]

I have put it off all summer and now decided to wait for the 149090k refresh. I don't care if it costs a hundred bucks more. ... Anyway, are you saying I should wait for the major generational leap of Arrow Lake? But that could be a year! But it does suck to build a 5- or 6-thousand-dollar PC at the end of the old generation and 9 to 11 months before a generational change occurs.

There's always something better, just around the corner. Arrow Lake looks to be over a year away, and then after that will just be Lunar Lake, and something else beyond that!

Nobody can make this decision for you, because only you know how aged your current machine feels, among other things. What I can say is the link I posted above tells me Arrow Lake is going to be a lot more evolutionary than revolutionary. Same core counts, similar power envelope, around 10% single-thread performance improvement.

LGA1700 is now a mature platform with basically all of its gremlins known and a wide array of offerings. Worst case, if you did decide you just had to have an Arrow Lake, it's not a $5k - $6k proposition to swap out your motherboard + CPU, but more like $1k. Maybe a bit more, if your cooler is incompatible. You might then get half or 1/3rd of your money back from Ebaying your old CPU + mobo.

That just my perspective. I'm not trying to convince you one way or the other, but rather to give you some aspects to consider, so that you're hopefully more at peace with whatever you decide.

 

[spongiemaster]

Intel's 14 nm node series has been proclaimed by as their most profitable node ever, so you know the costs can't have gotten too far out of control!

Come on man. 14nm was their leading edge node on the desktop from 2014's Broadwell through 2021's Rocket Lake. 7 years is more than 3 times the length of time any other node was Intel's best. Of course it was their most profitable.

 

[bit_user]

The last 4 core generation, Kaby Lake, was pretty substantially faster than Sandy Bridge when comparing stock performance.

These retrospective looks give a different result than if you looked at them right after launch. The main reason is that almost no AVX2 software existed, when Haswell launched. Many years later, a lot of AVX and AVX2 code has been written which makes Haswell and Skylake (which has a lot of AVX/AVX2 optimizations) look better than they did at the time.

I always remember the subtitle of this review:

The Core i7-4770K Review: Haswell Is Faster; Desktop Enthusiasts Yawn

Intel's Haswell architecture is finally available in the flagship Core i7-4770K processor. Designed to drop into an LGA 1150 interface, does this new quad-core CPU warrant a complete platform replacement, or is your older Sandy Bridge-E system better?

www.tomshardware.com

 

[spongiemaster]

That was pretty much the exact bottom of the PC market, IIRC. Their prices don't normally drop so fast, nor would I expect Intel's to.

While the terrible PC market played a roll, it didn't have anything to do with Zen3 ridiculously outselling Zen4 even at AMD Heaven, also known as Mindfactory. The motherboards was so insanely expensive that the only way AMD could increase sales was to lower the cost of the CPU's. At the lower end, you could build a competitive Intel system for half the cost of a 7600x system. The buy in cost of Zen 4 just wasn't cost competitive so you can't put the blame on the poor market for the terrible sales.

 

[spongiemaster]

I always remember the subtitle of this review:

​

The Core i7-4770K Review: Haswell Is Faster; Desktop Enthusiasts Yawn

Intel's Haswell architecture is finally available in the flagship Core i7-4770K processor. Designed to drop into an LGA 1150 interface, does this new quad-core CPU warrant a complete platform replacement, or is your older Sandy Bridge-E system better?

www.tomshardware.com

​

Again, for enthusiasts, the performance increase was minimal when comparing overclocked to overclocked. Also, from that review:

For those of you on Core i7-2700K or older, Core i7-4770K makes sense as part of a two- or three-year upgrade cycle.

 

[TCA_ChinChin]

The last 4 core generation, Kaby Lake, was pretty substantially faster than Sandy Bridge when comparing stock performance. Not really sure why you singled out Ivy Bridge. The jump in performance from Ivy Bridge to Haswell was much larger than from Sandy Bridge to Ivy Bridge.

I specifically put both Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge (Sandy/Ivy Bridge). The performance jump from Ivy to Haswell was larger than Sandy to Ivy, but thats a piss poor bar to beat. I still have my Haswell refresh 4790k which puts up basically the same FPS numbers now as friend that have 3770k processors. Even back then the performance difference was minimal and even the overclock difference wasn't as large as I expected due to sandy/ivy being quite good overclockers already.

 

[YSCCC]

There's always something better, just around the corner. Arrow Lake looks to be over a year away, and then after that will just be Lunar Lake, and something else beyond that!

Nobody can make this decision for you, because only you know how aged your current machine feels, among other things. What I can say is the link I posted above tells me Arrow Lake is going to be a lot more evolutionary than revolutionary. Same core counts, similar power envelope, around 10% single-thread performance improvement.

LGA1700 is now a mature platform with basically all of its gremlins known and a wide array of offerings. Worst case, if you did decide you just had to have an Arrow Lake, it's not a $5k - $6k proposition to swap out your motherboard + CPU, but more like $1k. Maybe a bit more, if your cooler is incompatible. You might then get half or 1/3rd of your money back from Ebaying your old CPU + mobo.

That just my perspective. I'm not trying to convince you one way or the other, but rather to give you some aspects to consider, so that you're hopefully more at peace with whatever you decide.

indeed, and more importantly, for me I have had a had time for over half a year when I dive into release purchase of the 12700kf, the bios, ram training and stability literally drive me nuts back then, luckily I don't rely on it for work and only gaming, if work is needed it can be disasterous when you literally drop money coz it mess up and hangs.

New architecture can also means potential problem, that's why the tick-tock system the tock is usually more satisfactory to be used. IMO the 14th gen either cater those who need a new PC as the old one breaks, or those like me who need a iGPU in the processer for some games/apps, but don't want to spend a whole more on the completely board+CPU combo (good boards are very expensive nowadays), just buy a 14th gen to replace the alder lake, pop it in and you're good to go, especially the Z690 is basically indifferet to Z790 in the performance metric, only fewer PCIE 5.0 NVME lanes and you won't hurt like old days pairing old chipset with new CPU making it 5% slower, ram overclocking isn't an issue either as although officially the Z690 ram OC was rated lower, in reality it don't differ much unless you go to extreme overclock.