Intel 285K reviews going live...

[EightyDuce]

For your viewing pleasure and deliberation....Not great, Intel has their work cut out for them. Hopefully they keep improving as competition is to all of our benefit.

GN

 

HUB

 

Edited October 24, 2024 by EightyDuce

[LucShep]

Welp  goodbye Intel, it was good to have you.  LOL

At least AMD is the saving champion brand that cares about people... *IMPERIAL MARCH SONG STARTS FOR AMD INFLATED PRICES*


PS: gosh, I love my little i7 12700K "...my preecccious..."

Edited October 24, 2024 by LucShep

[EightyDuce]

Level1Tech

 

Derbauer

 

[corbu1]

Wow! That‘s really interesting. I was using Intel CPU‘s for more than a decade now. But it seems next time I have to think about it!

[LucShep]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 24, 2024 by LucShep

[AngleOff66]

Ultra 7 265k review.  Includes MSFS.

 

[diego999]

That's why you don't buy the hype or believe those "leaks" released by Intel or AMD themselves.

Watching the new Intel flagship lose in some games against the 5800X3D is beyond pathetic.

 

[kksnowbear]

To be honest, the only thing that surprises me about all this...

...is that anyone is surprised about it.

[Aapje]

The worst part is that they seem to be befuddled by the issues. How can it be that reviewer after reviewer runs into issues, that Intel themselves didn't find? Don't they test their own product like a reviewer would? It's so embarrassing for such a big company.

[Hiob]

12 minutes ago, Aapje said:

The worst part is that they seem to be befuddled by the issues. How can it be that reviewer after reviewer runs into issues, that Intel themselves didn't find? Don't they test their own product like a reviewer would? It's so embarrassing for such a big company.

That's exactly that kind or repeating pattern that made me distrust them. Even if they were en par with the performance, I would currently stay with Ryzen. But they aren't even close. That makes it even easier.

Take special notice of the Gamers Nexus video. Even the energy efficiency, the biggest selling point, isn't what they claim.

No thanks. Intel is dead to me for the time being.

[Lurker]

the i513600k is the last great chip that Intel made. Best bang for buck chip I have ever owned. Next cycle it's going to be AMD for me, unless somehow Intel bounces back. And I do hope they bounce back, because AMD is going to hike those prices up by a huge margin. 

[LucShep]

7 hours ago, kksnowbear said:

To be honest, the only thing that surprises me about all this...

...is that anyone is surprised about it.

It is surprising.

The reviews of Arrow Lake are overall as everybody expected - very good multicore performance with excelent (low) power consumption and temps at full load, much better than previous Raptor Lake there.
Exactly like the leaks and rumours said - give or take a direct competitor to Ryzen 9950X and better than i9 14900K, even without Hyper-Threading, which is a real step up IMO.

The missing piece of the puzzle was only the gaming performance - where the surprise gets in.

It was late in the party that we learned about Intel moving the memory controller to a separate SOC tile, which is what is believed to be the culprit for such a lower performance in so many games. 

I generally agree with the reviewers, that this is a "ZEN 1" moment for Intel.
If you remember, that too was a departure and the beggining of something new for AMD. And those (too) were good chips, but with a mediocre gaming performance (took them at least two more generations after it).

Resuming:  Arrow Lake is a good processor, but not one for gamers. Not at this point anyway.

My curiosity is with overclocking - there could be a lot of performance hidden (or none at all) and, so far, we're none the wiser.
The techtubers were so concerned with rushing out the reviews (for the clicks, moneyz moneyz) that, strangely so, they didn't even explore that aspect.
That's historically a crucial piece on any "K" CPU review, and noone has done it yet.

PS: waiting on FrameChasers review of it, should be entertaining! 

Edited October 25, 2024 by LucShep

[kksnowbear]

1 hour ago, LucShep said:

It is surprising

Nah...not really.  Not to me anyhow.

And I bet not to a ton of knowledgeable people, either.

[Hiob]

1 hour ago, LucShep said:

My curiosity is with overclocking - there could be a lot of performance hidden (or none at all) and, so far, we're none the wiser.
The techtubers were so concerned with rushing out the reviews (for the clicks, moneyz moneyz) that, strangely so, they didn't even explore that aspect.
 

 

I think that is because Overclocking has lost its appeal for the most part. It is more an self-serving exercise to raise in the ranks of 3Dmark than actually improving gaming performance. Ever since AMD started to have the bios do 90% of the overclocking by rel. inteligent real-time auto-adjustement. The game was over for the most part.
I am (was) a passionate overclocker/optimizer myself. But it's just not worth the effort anymore. Not to say, that there is nothing to gain anymore, but for real world applications the actual gains are meh.
Add on top the accelerated silicone degradation - especially for Intel..... I understand that the enthusiasm for overclocking has cooled down a lot. 

[LucShep]

42 minutes ago, Hiob said:

I think that is because Overclocking has lost its appeal for the most part. It is more an self-serving exercise to raise in the ranks of 3Dmark than actually improving gaming performance. Ever since AMD started to have the bios do 90% of the overclocking by rel. inteligent real-time auto-adjustement. The game was over for the most part.
I am (was) a passionate overclocker/optimizer myself. But it's just not worth the effort anymore. Not to say, that there is nothing to gain anymore, but for real world applications the actual gains are meh.
Add on top the accelerated silicone degradation - especially for Intel..... I understand that the enthusiasm for overclocking has cooled down a lot. 

I agree for the most part. It has become (even more of a) niche.

But looking at the plethora of new tweak settings (a lot more complex to overclock these), the general consensus is that there is performance hidden within those BIOS settings.

It's not going to be an X3D beater, but it looks like Intel was so scared of reliability and critics on power/temps that they choked Arrow Lake with enforced default settings (many of which motherboard manufacturers can not go over this time around).

For example, one among other threads on the web:
 https://www.overclock.net/threads/storming-the-power-gates-with-asus-z890-apex-and-intel-285k-are-you-ready-to-overclock-like-never-before.1812707/

Edited October 25, 2024 by LucShep

[EightyDuce]

31 minutes ago, Hiob said:

I think that is because Overclocking has lost its appeal for the most part. It is more an self-serving exercise to raise in the ranks of 3Dmark than actually improving gaming performance. Ever since AMD started to have the bios do 90% of the overclocking by rel. inteligent real-time auto-adjustement. The game was over for the most part.
I am (was) a passionate overclocker/optimizer myself. But it's just not worth the effort anymore. Not to say, that there is nothing to gain anymore, but for real world applications the actual gains are meh.
Add on top the accelerated silicone degradation - especially for Intel..... I understand that the enthusiasm for overclocking has cooled down a lot. 

In my opinion, overclocking to take product and squeeze untapped performance out of it for a meaningful gain in every day use are long over. I can fondly remember taking my Athlon 1700 from 1.4 Ghz to 1.8Ghz on water, using a low production water-block, Chevy chevelle heater core for a radiator, and an Eheim aquarium pump. Or soldering potentiometers to graphics card power delivery to give the power hungry chip what it wanted.

These days, manyfacturers' boost algorithms squeeze 90%+ out of the silicon. To squeeze any more out of it requires exotic cooling, an expensive MB with extended controls and a lot of time. Then the end result is hardly meaningful outside of benching.

As much as I want to see Intel do better, hoping for overclocking potential to save their new chips is unrealistic at best 

Just my humble opinion.

[LucShep]

15 minutes ago, EightyDuce said:

As much as I want to see Intel do better, hoping for overclocking potential to save their new chips is unrealistic at best 

It won't but, other than P-Cores+E-Cores clocks, I find that the Ring tweak settings can be interesting, now that it is separate from the P-Core voltage.
Pushing the Ring will surely help a bit with the high latency issues, due to the memory controller in a separate SOC tile.

"Arrow Lake has about a 5% IPC improvement on the P-cores and about 25-30% on the E-cores. This ends up in very nice CPU-Z and Cinebench benchmark results, however the new tile system with TSMC has a massive latency penalty on memory. More massive, in fact, than even Rocket Lake, which is enough to cause performance regressions even worse than what we saw with Rocket Lake vs Comet Lake. Hyper-Threading enabled would have prevented any of this, but the amount of heat HT would have caused on this platform would have prevented even the already pedestrian clock speeds from being stable. You can expect about a 20ns latency penalty with the same RAM on Arrow Lake as compared to Raptor Lake."

Edited October 25, 2024 by LucShep

[kksnowbear]

1 hour ago, Hiob said:

I think that is because Overclocking has lost its appeal for the most part. It is more an self-serving exercise to raise in the ranks of 3Dmark than actually improving gaming performance. Ever since AMD started to have the bios do 90% of the overclocking by rel. inteligent real-time auto-adjustement. The game was over for the most part.
I am (was) a passionate overclocker/optimizer myself. But it's just not worth the effort anymore. Not to say, that there is nothing to gain anymore, but for real world applications the actual gains are meh.
Add on top the accelerated silicone degradation - especially for Intel..... I understand that the enthusiasm for overclocking has cooled down a lot. 

This.  100%.  I still offer to do overclocking as a service, but because of the time involved in doing it properly, I can't do it for free.  But I also have to be honest and acknowledge it's hardly worth it any more (perhaps with a very few notable exceptions...and less of those, as time goes on).

Edited October 25, 2024 by kksnowbear

[LucShep]

Digital Foundry

 

[Nightdare]

"And the crowd goes .....yawn"

 

"...but my Ferrari does better mpg than your old one"

-said no one EVER

Edited October 25, 2024 by Nightdare

[kksnowbear]

7 minutes ago, Nightdare said:

"And the crowd goes .....yawn"

 

"...but my Ferrari does better mpg than your old one"

-said no one EVER

 

 

[EightyDuce]

It's a bit of a process, but early Overclocking is interesting if one has the means and desire...

 

E Cores

P Cores (less promising than E)

 

Edited October 25, 2024 by EightyDuce

[LucShep]

 

Nice, so SkatterBencher got the OC videos out already (always great videos from him every new Intel Gen).
He and Buildzoid are, IMO, two of the guys that show it how it is, worth following.

Arrow Lake really is a departure from previous chips, some things going the opposite way of Alder Lake and Raptor Lake.
It's not just from the tile aspect (with separate memory controller) or lack of hyperthreading, but this DLVR thing and how the E-Cores got such a proeminent role now.

The OC'ing margins on the E-Cores are insane, 500Mhz or more possible now. And the reverse on the P-Cores, quite limited and not much margin.

I think I've seen enough and, TBF, it's not the direction I was hoping for  some things are actually not making much sense.

I now wonder if Arrow Lake was meant to be just a "stop gap"? 
I find weird how the planned Razer Lake, which was to be Arrow Lake refresh, was reportedly cancelled one month before the release of Arrow Lake (see here).
If the following release, which is Luna Lake, is not in LGA1851 socket, then that is confirmed.
 

Edited October 26, 2024 by LucShep

[EightyDuce]

3 minutes ago, LucShep said:

 

Nice, so SkatterBencher got the OC videos out already (always great videos from him every new Intel Gen).
He and buildzoid are, IMO, two of the guys that show it how it is, worth following.

Arrow Lake really is a departure from previous chips, some things going the opposite way of Alder Lake and Raptor Lake.
It's not just from the tile aspect (with separate memory controller) or lack of hyperthreading, but how the E-Cores got such a proeminent role now.

The OC'ing margins on the E-Cores are insane, 500Mhz or more possible now. And the reverse on the P-Cores, quite limited and not much margin.

I think I've seen enough and, TBF, it's not the direction I was hoping for  some things are actually not making much sense.

I now wonder if Arrow Lake was meant to be just a "stop gap"? 
I find weird how the planned Razer Lake, which is/was Arrow Lake refresh, was reportedly cancelled one month before the release of Arrow Lake (see here).
If the following release, which is Luna Lake, is not in LGA1851 socket, then that is confirmed.
 

It's definitely interesting how it goes from here. This generation is a pretty significant deviation from their previous design, time will tell; just not sure how long their shareholders are willing to wait.

[LucShep]

33 minutes ago, EightyDuce said:

It's definitely interesting how it goes from here. This generation is a pretty significant deviation from their previous design, time will tell; just not sure how long their shareholders are willing to wait.

Exactly.
Not good for the shareholders, for sure.
The gap in sales numbers increased since the 13th/14th gen degradation fiasco, and it'll now grow even more (prepare to pay more for AMD now).

Meanwhile, it's a shame that AMD didn't improve that much with Zen5 as well, the goal posts would have provoked a bigger step-up, and we'd all benefit from it.
But then, as it is with Arrow Lake, they don't even need to (and wont?) improve now.
So, basically, we're heading back to where we were a decade ago, but the roles have now been reversed.

The way I see it, this is a "Bulldozer" moment for Intel. But then if AMD survived that dark period, so can Intel.
Just how much and how long will it take for Intel to get (if they can) the necessary improvements is the next chapter of the story, and what makes this interesting.

Edited October 26, 2024 by LucShep