@@GewelRealvery true I don't mind them going to a more simple number scheme it was starting to get to be way to much after 10th/11th gen but they for sure should have kept the i9/i7/i5 branding like the i9 Ultra 285k would have been fine
Their competition is now Snapdragon and their ARM CPUs for notebooks. That's why they are focusing so much on power usage, otherwise they'll lose market share on laptops and that opens up the market for ARM CPUs for Desktops.
My advice: No matter the pain... avoid the moonsugar. Just saying. I met a Lusty Argonian Maid once, and it turned out to be a Goblin Chief in a mage robe. That stuff ain't good for you. Stick to drowning out you arrow pain with skooma.
What's dumb is that Intel 3 process is actually good! If Intel had planned for it, they could have avoided using TSMC for Arrow Lake and saved money. Saved even more money if they didn't go this dumb 'many tile' route and just stuck with a monolithic chip. A monolithic Arrow Lake on Intel 3 likely would perform better than this while being cheaper to design and manufacture. Intel just keeps tripping over their own feet.
Sure is. That means you can keep what you have and spend your money elsewhere. Rather than constantly buying new stuff for really no reason other than to say that you did.
Note for Baylen, I liked the circle talking head overlay on the slides! This was a nice touch and my first time noticing it (not sure if this is something you’ve done for a while). Cheers!
I'm happy about the vastly improved power efficiency, but Intel 10nm to TSMC 3nm is a HUGE HUGE improvement, so I would have expected to see performance improvements too.
@@flxdrv5020 They are very different. Even a TSMC 5nm equivalent node would have been a big improvement on Intel 7 that Raptor Lake used. But it seems like a lot of the lack of performance improvement is coming from packaging architecture of Arrow Lake. If it were monolithic, it probably *would* be a good bit faster.
A new node doesn't just increase performance. It increases clockspeed at the same wattage or decreases power consumption for the same clockspeed. Hence the 2x perf/watt
The reason we see no inprovement singlethreaded is the tile design. Monolithic design is King but to expensive in future as chips get bigger and bigger. Intel had to do this.
@@kevinerbs2778 cmon dude, did you say that for decades when intel was giving us tiny "positive side?" Intel used to get railed for 10% gains for decades.
@@trauma50disaster1 HUB got unrealistic idea that ever generation should be giving consumers 20% up lifts. you guys have no clue how rare a 20% increase in IPC actually is. I'm used to 10 to 12% being on the high end of IPC increases. 3D V-cache has spoiled gamers. Zen 4 3D is 20% faster than Zen 4, all while Zen 4 3D has 10% lower clocks too, that's pretty unusual. You can't expect that every generation.
Great reporting Tim. Your coverage is much more comprehensive. The disjoint between 285's power and performance between slides was already suspicious to me. Thanks for the insight. Intel 285 seems to have AVX512 now so content creation is good. I am interested in that. However, without upgrade path for LGA1851, I think I will go for 9950X3D. Unless that CPU is 5% too.
The E core improvement sounds like the most appealing part of Arrow Lake. Hoping they put out a sub-10W chip that is a serious improvement over current offerings.
@@ZackSNetwork All the 4.0 lanes are muxed into the 4 CXL lanes that connect the CPU to the chipset. So yes, you can use them, but you can't use all of them at full speed at the same time. If you need lots of lanes that "talk" at the same time you still need a workstation class CPU.
IF you can buy any as stocks are nonexistent and its 550€ already. Looks like amd is doing it again. Cutting the supply so you would buy the 9800X3D instead for 600€.
No huge headline declaring it a huge disappointment or a complete disaster like Zen 5? I guess one thing Intel did right this time is not focus on performance uplift expectations in press materials.
It is only a disaster for gamers tho. Seems the architecture development are more focus on efficiency and server world. U see both AMD and intel new server chips are very impressive in performance.
Is not just insane, it's pointless. Having only 1 gen per platform means there's no need for a socket. It is much better soldering a CPUs straight to the motherboard, the higher cost/quality motherboard gets a better CPU.
@@PaintrainX >99% of customers don't upgrade their CPU Yeah because they usually have no path to upgrade. Plenty of AM4 users upgraded... some TWICE. AM5 is gonna see the same thing. It's Intel that screws the consumer every time going back decades.
I hope we get 9950X3D with cache on both dies, these days pushing clock speeds is not worth the hit to performance per watt in some applications. If Zen 5 X3D can clock into low 5Ghz (even 5.2Ghz) territory that'd be great.
Not sure how you ended up with 105MB. Are you including L1 (IC/DC)? Not including L1's, 9950X3D with double X3D would have a whopping 208MB (L2+L3), or 144MB with just one X3D CCD.
@@catsspat total L3 cache on 7800x3d it's 90 or 96mb if im not wrong on the 9800x3d will be 105 mb i think total L3 cache, plus high clock speed and unlocked for overclock.....i don't remember L2 cache on 7800x3d but i think 8mb ps.I read it online on hardware sites it can be true or not but AMD already admitted new change for 3d cpu
9900x3d and 9950x3d will get remake of 3d cash means Those will support PBO overclock tune and be lite better than 9800x3d in gaming but all those 3 support 8000Mhz ddr5 expo depending on x870 motherboard
At this point, I have to give Intel credit for what seems to be a reasonably honest assessment of the new architecture's performance. Independent testing will either confirm that, or refute it. Still, the information people really need is buried in the fine print.
" honest assessment " But they have 1 very intresting remark in their sc/mt 285k vs 9950x and 14900k benchmark slides - "among desktop processors targeting ~125w;" 😁. So they used default tdp for both their cpus - 285k and 14900k, but NOT for 9950x which is 170w by default 😅. It is a perf/watt test... BUT in the worst possible way.
It is not honest, it slight of hand marketing. You only get the perf advertise on 250w mode. The higher efficiency you only get in a lower TDP mode. You don't get both at the same time. They also don't mention the what the configuration was uae for 9950x.
Never heard your theme song anywhere until yesterday at work. The front desk girl runs a music playlist that comes through our entire floor. She was playing some chilled out music when Bensound - Dreams started up, so i asked if she was a hammer on box fan...she had no idea what i was on about.
Intel is pulling out all the stops to make “Zen 5%” a compliment to AMD. Compared to Raptor Lake we’re going to see (1) 5% clockspeed regression, (2) higher latency, potentially significantly impacting certain latency sensitive workloads like gaming, and (3) using a much more expensive packaging solution which will almost certainly lead to higher prices. We have to wait until we get independent test results later this month, but from what they’ve revealed today this looks like a complete dud of a product.
It wont lead to higher prices. Intel will simply eat the margin hit. They are thankfully one company not margins-obsessed and go for volume. They understand the importance of retaining market share.
@@senilestix AMD marketing slides were deceptive. (Or they jumped the gun and used Win11 24H2 Beta). At least Intel is not as blatant. But we will know at the end of the month if Steve is standing up again and thumbnail show FLOP in big bold letters!
I’m fine with CPU speed not advancing and superseding the 14900k. CPU being stable, power efficient, good core performance for productivity and gaming use should be their roadmap. Just look at the processing power increment from 2nd gen to 10th gen. CPU last a ridiculously long time. While GPU doesn’t. Hope they shift their focus on battlemage
That's the way. If they don't put a limit into power usage, more and more laptops are gonna start using snapdragon ARM CPUs, making them lose market share. This seems like a sensible direction for both companies to take.
People thinking no performance progress after two years with two generations of architectural updates and a massive process leap is ok is insane to me. It's ridiculous how low consumer standards are nowadays. We are never going to get these two years of lack of progress back.
I'd say for gaming the U7 265 KF looks like the sweet spot. Same number of p-cores as the U9 and only a minor relative drop in clocks. Which, on the face of it, might not really matter since it seems there's potentially quite a lot of headroom for overclocking anyway. If that results in 14900K levels of gaming performance from a significantly cheaper processor then that's a positive. I'm looking to upgrade next year from a 10th gen Intel and I'm going to be really interested in relative performance vs price. And far lower power consumption would be a big bonus given the direction of travel for GPUs these days.
For what it's worth, those slides look a lot more honest than they have been in a decade, certainly better than what AMD did for Zen5. Also, them going for the efficiency was the right choice to make, because however fast their CPUs were, the reviews were always "Hot mess, that can't compete with AMD". Now at least it's better at efficiency even if it loses to the X3D chips, this is similar to what Zen1 and Zen2 did, great multicore performance, decent single core performance. But yeah the prices should've been lower as well to compete, but I don't know how low can they go with them manufacturing at TSMC.
If AL is at best 10% faster than RL then it should get similar review to Zen 5. Underwhelming at best, but relatively bad. Especially at those prices. I hope Steve will be consistent with his opinion.
Not the same. 1) AMD lied about the uplift, and 2) AMD barely improved performance at the same power consumption. ARL getting same performance at half the power is a 2x perf/watt improvement.
@@TheTaurus104 It's not like Steve have curbed his tongue when it comes to Intel's stability problems and refusal to state exactly what is the correct power settings for their CPUs. In fact, I remember him harping on about the latter point already 5 years ago.
@@jayvee8502 that's missing the point of the OP I'm responding to. He's claiming people complained about Zen 5 because of only a 5% improvement, when it was mainly the lying *and* that it was 5% perf/watt and the efficiency claims weren't real. If ARL matches the claims of 2x perf/watt, then why would the anger be as much? That's a bigger improvement.
@@jonathansaraco zen 4 is the maxuimized tuned of the orginal zen architecture this is nore more ipc to gain out of and has it latency at its maxium achivable.
Long term platform support - given what a non-event the 9000 series is I have discounted the value of platform longevity. If you buy at the top end and AMD iterates with a negligible difference, platform longevity means very little. The 7000 series to the 9000 series has been more or less a marketing update and a price reset, not a performance increase.
Intel doesn't have anything better to show. Last year, I though they would need to improve efficiency at least x2 to be competitive. It seems they achieved at least that, however, without any gaming perf increase at all, it's uninteresting to people who are already on modern processors.
Look at new generation Xeon and Epyc it is another story tho. In low power laptop CPU and server class one their showing are impressive Just not desktop class CPU Tho nowadays it isn't like Desktop CPU is the focus for both
Thanks Tim! I think Intel will be good to go if they have brought similar performance with lower power usage as the Raptor Lake CPU's. Also, I think if/when they get rentable units off the ground, this strategy of removing HT will work out good. Zen 5 and Arrow Lake are probably going to be....meh, but Arrow Lake seems to have something to build upon IMO.
AMD was giving us 25%-30% performance increase every generation for the past 4 or so generations + 3D vcache. One generation with lower performance increase is fine
5070 seems to be same as last gen with a little better RT, 4% in raster 20% with RT? it seems not only CPUs are stagnating, so only top GPU is faster it seems if leaks end up true, then it will be hillarious gen with too high expectations yet again
The pricing for the 285K just doesn't make sense relative to the 265K... Comparing the other tiers pricing, for the specs, it's at least two tiers higher pricing than it should be.
Intel and their pricing has been stubborn for basically forever. Its more that the seven has gotten some nice improvements Its probably just a trap for people who just buy the highest one or dont care how much they spend
Bro you act like this is the first time you see how halo products are priced That's the same gap between the 14900K and the 14600K, also same gap between the 4080 and the 4090. Nothing new here
The 9950x is more expensive than the 285k while being slower for productivity and pretty much on par in gaming, yet you don't say that its pricing makes no sense.
The efficiency is very impressive and important, today's chips suck way too much power and reach way too high temps. People are so quick to judge, but I find this to be a great generation. If they get anywhere close to half of the power draw in testing, this is a giant win in my opinion
i wonder how these things will overclock... i know that hasn't been a focus recently, but with intel looking to keep power consumption down it may create some headroom. personally, I don't care too much about power consumption as long as i can keep it cool and quiet.
Is this the new fad now? Launching news CPUs with worse gaming performance? But still... gaming is just ONE thing you can do with desktop CPUs, seems like both companies are putting work and effort into improving other uses.
I am not quite sure if "circle-Tim" has made an appearance again 🤔but I like this choice when data/specs have to be shown on the screen 👍 Good job as always you guys! 😃
Zen 5 suddenly looks like a good generational uplift, huh? 😂😂😂 I guess those who already own Raptor Lake/Zen4 won't be upgrading, so with lower demand, i might get to snatch Zen4/5 CPU for a nice price. 7700 for 150$ would be sweet, or maybe 9700 comes out and gets discounted in a year's time. Zen3 will last me until then
@@kevinerbs2778 Yes, 5% lower clocks. Higher latency and only moderate IPC gains result in lower performance than previous gen. Intel needs to cut prices in half to be competitive with this.
@@nipa5961 then someone would have match & lock clock speeds with arrow lake & rapor lake to see the ipc differnces. The review tjat did that with both zen 4 and zen 5 at locked 4.0ghz shows a totally different picture. The turbo on all these cpus can change to the point where both cpus look excatly the sames. Even through they hit slightly different mhz speeds.
only positive thing I can see is for creators... Battlemage gpus will probably be crap to play games with but the XE cores paired with the uhd will probably be a good competitor against the high end RX gpus and 7700x or higher!!
TLDR: Gamers should buy an AMD X3D cpu, if you are doing predominately productivity work it may be worth considering if you are comfortable overpaying for a new platform that is DOA with no future upgrade path and gaining ~5% over a 14900K or a 9900X.
@@damienasmr922Me, who will just drop a Zen 6 CPU in my B650E board..like I dropped a 5800X3D in my older AM4 board. I think it's safe to say a whole lot of people will do the same.
I know it's strange for people to understand, but you do NOT need an X3D chip for gaming. I dont know where this nonsense is coming from. Standard models are perfectly fine for gaming.
@@glynkatkinyou know that zen 6 is not confirmed to be on am5 right? They said 2026, which could be zen6, or some refresh product like the 5800XT. Just don't set your hope too high
I'd pick this for longevity. 48 PCIE lanes means it can go from home desktop with GPU + fast NIC to server role where it can sit for years with a quad SSD card and very fast non-onboard nic. This a a far more balanced architecture and I'll bet it will scoop the bottom part of the NAS market. An extra few dollars for the CPU is nothing when you're looking at adding years to its useful life. Let's hope their chips don't burn out...
Steve, hi, I hope you will still compare the 5800X3D to Arrow Lake. Many of us looking to upgrade if the performance uptick is decent. Thanks for all you and Tim do.
People want a reason to upgrade even if they already have the bleeding edge or close to it. I feel that enthusiasm for gaming hardware too, but honestly if it's a few more years before there's a compelling reason to upgrade again I'm fine with that. My savings account will be happy.
I actually like their approach. CPU really doesn’t need to be more powerful than 14900k for multimedia or gaming use for a long run. It needs to be cheaper and less power consuming.
After endless generations of CPU's & GPU's bloating their power and size, therefore running into many issues... It is actually nice to have a CPU generation reset dedicated to slimming down/big efficiency gains/& vast future growth from that level. I think it'll pay off in 1-2 gens after, but it's a great start. Would be nice if GPU's spent one gen showing how insane they can go in size reduction/power reduction/a few hundred dollars in price reduction while giving at least a modest 10% in strength, type of reset. When you see what Apple has been doing since their M1 processors with crazy cool temps, tiny sizes, and finally beginning to bring some games... That would be the dream lol. I love my spec'd out new tower, but I'd love an Apple size lol. Hopefully these upcoming chips will start heading there, PC's shouldn't have to be this big, running warm, and using so much power if we push innovation moreso! Thanks for reading!
der8auer stated that's only if using single CUDIMM per channel. Single UDIMM per channel will be 5600MT/s and two UDIMMs per channel will be 4800MT/s, but he's not 100% sure yet.
well. the new intel cpus may perform at the level of the 14 gen or a bit below but at least they should not be plagued with instability and degradation issues, so its still an improvement i'd say. it would get such performance in a reliable way, and not by pushing the architecture beyond its capability as was done with intel 13 and 14 gen, so good for them. i would expect these new cpus to be far better at single threaded applications, btw. not to mention that if these cpus are as power efficient as is being said, they may not require as powerful coolers as 13 and 14 gen. who knows, maybe even the 285k can be reasonably cooled by good tower coolers, instead of requiring liquid cooling.... so people can save money on the coolers.
19:50 A 6 core 7600 for $200 compared to a 14 core 245k for just $294 makes the 7600 look like a terrible value because you are getting less than half the CPU's cores for more than 2/3rds the cost of the 245k. 21:40 You guys keep playing on the whole "Platform Longevity" but let's be real, only the bottom 1% of PC gamers actually care about that.
The fact that Intel created a new architecture based on efficiency shows they also think that previous one was eating allot of energy, the new architecture being able to keep up on performance is very impressive, to compare to new AMD is not fare because they refined their new one for few years, to compare would be first generation of Ryzen and Intel is way ahead there.
I am by no means an intel fanboy, ive been so mad at them in recent years, but this is actually a good thing. The current lower performance means that they cede ground to AMD, which will force Intel to do better with the generation after, this is also the first processor where they've done away with hyper threading, making it interesting, because realistically this is the first iteration and first iterations dont always go as planned, provided they learn from what is lacking with this new skew of processors, then they can definitely make the generation after Arrow Lake more impressive, give it time. Sometimes, its not about improving on the previous product, when realistically the new set of products are structured completely differently (quite litterally)
I'm mildly positive. If these new CPUs are reliable like Intel used to be, they're pretty good. AMD 9000 series is very overpriced, especially in Europe.
Happy to see the lower power consumption. There hasnt needed to be a big cpu uplift for gaming for a while now. As long as GPUs are crazy prices, I dont see the point in CPUs pushing power limits
Because it uses a lot less power. Intel has been pushing more and more power through their CPUs for the past 7 years now. i9s that use 400W. It's crazy and everyone complained and compared them to AMDs old Bulldozer CPUs with how hot and power heavy they are. Now they finally take 1 generation to give you still the same really good performance, but massively lower the power usage presumably from now on in every coming generation as well. And people complain? People wouldn't be happy unless you give them a 15% performance jump and cut power usage in half in one generation.
Agreed. While we would all like it to be magic, it really isnt magic sadly. I do wish they would at least lower the prices though since that is something they can directly influence, too bad shareholder syndrome or whatever other explanation
To be fair, it's not that bad It's just conservative upfront presentation, they probably don't want to be the same as Zen5 (too good claim) But again, if it's not much different from 14th Gen 13th Gen seems to be a pretty good deal because both CPU and MB will get discounted even more. Power efficiency is nice, but if you don't run CineBench all the time, Raptor Lake is not that bad.
Don't buy X3D unless your gpu is atleast 4080 super and you are using a 240hz+ monitor. Otherwise gains from this overkill CPU are very small compared to much cheaper 7500f.
@@itachiaurion3198 I mean, I play lots of strategy games, they're really not that necessary. End-turn times you can see a benefit, but it's negligible in terms of actual experience and not worth several hundred (or more) to worry about.
Just as a heads up: Hearing some audio issues on the last 2 videos. 1. Some crispy crackling (often during transitions to B-role) 2. A kind of high pitch reverb. Sounds like a slight feedback from the microphone or some other acoustic body starting to reverb when Tim talks louder. Just me?
@Hardwareunboxed On a sidenote I think it would be useful to do a chart for the same game of the $ per fps since older cards like 970 gtx or 660 gtx. To show the price creep for the segments of Nvidia. I remember when a 6600 GT or 9600 GT were 150 euros. A 970 gtx was 350 euros. A 1950 XTX was 400 euros. Now ngreedia wanna sell a 5060 called 5070 for 800 euros... We need to see how the fps per dollar evolved. Especially since the 970 and 1080 ti.
They are still pushing clocks quite a bit beyond its sweetspot. I bet if you compare performance at 5Ghz, Arrow Lake will beat Raptor Lake by a fair bit bigger margin.
@@moist_ointment No it didn't. Efficiency doubled if you limit the 285k to 125W. But nobody runs a k SKU like that. That's what the non-k parts are for. If I run my 7950X3D undervolted and at 50W it still retains 85% gaming performance and 70% all-core performance. Yes, we know you improve efficiency by limiting power. But it makes for pretty graphs... except the same bloody graph showed that if you run the 14900k at 125W too then the efficiency gain was only about 30%.
@@andersjjensen no, not if you limit it. The 50% reduction in power consumption was in gaming when PL1 was also set to 250W. Gaming doesn't fully load all cores and didn't draw the full PL1 value on either CPU
Good performance at lower power seems like a great design choice for 99 percent of the market. Works for OEM, datacenter and most gamers. On the positive side, Intel isn't even pretending the new CPUs are significantly faster at gaming than last gen. Unlike AMD, they owned up to their design goals. On the negative side, just like Zen 5. the low and mid range CPUs seem really pricy. The 65 watt 12th, 13th and 14th gen CPUs were fine for most people and you can still get great 12th gen parts cheap.
Lol, that slide comparing the 285K, the 14900K, and the 9950: they tested the 285K with 6400Mz memory, but the 14900 and 9950 were tested with 5600Mz. So not exactly like for like, eh Intel?
not that big of a diference, and they're just using base config for ram that are supported. which means the 285k probably support faster ram across the board compared to 14th gen intle or Zen 5 anyways
@@flxdrv5020 We're not talking about the 285K having a 10% advantage across the board where the memory difference is basically meaningless. These 2~5% gains are within the range of disappearing in some cases if you tested the other chips with the exact same memory settings. Sure, the base config might be different, but the RAM difference at these narrow margins makes a difference.
The memory clock makes little difference for gaming performance unless the game uses some kind of asset streaming. What matters more is the latency. Arrowlake has a latency penalty compared to raptorlake due to not being monolithic. I do wonder what arrowlake will top out at. Raptorlake topped out at about 130gb/s of bandwidth and ~50-55ns latency.
They tested with 6400 CUDimm that is not available for Customers yet. With normal DDR5 Ram the Core Ultra 200 only Supported 5600 MTs same as Ryzen 9000.
@almond_exe they were wrong and backed. Tile design of Intel is mutch better than AMD's chiplet. Chiplet has huge latency problems. Even at Intel we see now what the cost of tile chip's is. Imagine if they just made a 14900k in 3nm. It would crush any desktop chip of today, just because of the mutch lower latency.
likely a behind the scenes deal with motherboard manufacturers to keep sales consistent, there isn't a similarly large selection of motherboards on AMD side and this is likely due to that shady deal.
I’m pretty miffed that they’re still skimping out on the iGPU for the HX CPUs. Previously they were just desktop CPUs soldered into a laptop, and so had to make due with the bare minimum iGPU that the desktops get for cost optimization. But now that the iGPU is totally separate, there’s no reason they couldn’t give the HX laptop CPUs the actual laptop centric iGPU for better battery life. At the least though, I should given them _some_ credit that near as I can tell they have doubled the size of the iGPU, assuming I got the conversion rate between Execution Units and Xe cores correct, which I have zero confidence in.
Creo que es muy necesario conocer el precio de las placas base... Los procesadores para mi son prometedores solo con mencionar el menor consumo y que no tengan riesgo de quemarse. Hay que cambiar placas base , la arquitectura será interesante solo si el combo es accesible, para los que están con DDR5 es importante pero hay gente que esta usando Gen 12, 13 y 14 con DDR4 ...es una decisión mucho más difícil. I think it is very necessary to know the price of motherboards... For me, processors are promising just by mentioning the lower consumption and the fact that they do not have the risk of burning. Motherboards need to be changed, the architecture will be interesting only if the combo is accessible, for those who are using DDR5 it is important but there are people who are using Gen 12, 13 and 14 with DDR4... it is a much more difficult decision.
Why are people having such a problem understanding that this is the way cpus need to go? Constantly increasing power draws to increase performance is unsustainable. The 14th gen debacle proves that. If it weren't for new gen cooling coming in time, The temps on those were laughable. Right now Intel and AMD need to focus on efficiency improvements. And they have made a step in that direction. Is it really that surprising that intel lowering its cpu melting power draws means lower performance? AMD doesnt sound so bad now does it? They managed to lower power draws without sacrificing performance over the last gen (for the most part).
I honestly wanted a reason to upgrade from my 5800X3D and X470 motherboard, I can't justify only upgrading because I'm limited to PCIe Gen 3 speeds. Guess we'll wait another couple years LOL
@KoItai1 Who the heck is a bot on a tech channel? Dude those are joke song lyrics dude. Junction temp is a thing go Google it. Hot Garbage comes from the song Hot Burning, it was joking about Intel, not you! Yikes calm down buddy.
I normally switch back and forth. My current is a 7950X3D and before was a 12900K. Now it looks like i will stay with team red and wait for the 9950X3D. Edit: Nevermind: I'm building a new PC and started buying parts already. I'll get the 285 ultra with the 1851 motherboard when they become available. I'll just recycle my old RTX 4090. Then when the 5090 comes out I'll get that on day one when it launches.
This will be some very unpopular opinion, but I think basically zero upgradibility at all maybe ok for for Intel platform. In fact, it may be their key to regain leadership in the market. Just commit and put your RAM on your chip and solder everything on the motherboard just like Lunar Lake, and use every efficiency headroom to clock both your chip but especially your memory to the level that just can't be archieved on socket modules. 3D Vcache may not help with their gaming but 8000 mts DDR5 probably will. Then let the user use those extra high speed memory as cache if they've installed additional RAM on sockets. You already practically have zero upgradibility on Intel platform with 2-3 years upgrade path, the performance gain will never be worth it. Might as well just solder them together for better efficiency, compatibility verification, and quality control. Might as well still offer a seperate socket path for productivity users but I don't think gamers will mind if they get their performance and their efficiency at the cost of solder everything parts.
@pedro.alcatra If they deliver the performances at a competitive enough price point, I don't think people will mind too much. Gamers especially. It can be a gaming specific solution, like AMD X3D, but also sell higher end parts in traditional socket package
I've got 7900XTX running on 5800X3D (PBO max clocked ) with 1440p mon. And in most games ( not all ) I get the same fps if set to ultra vs medium graph. settings so 7800X3D is recommended. I'd say go for it, you won't regret.
The issue was with AMD marketing slides. They may be using Win11 24H2 Beta + Admin mode for the slides and when HUB tested and found big discrepancies, things blew up. Now that I'm running Win11 24H2, I can confirm that performance boost is real. AMD should have come clean in their slides.
If the intel slides are actually truthful then it won't be that big of a deal. Just like "upgrade to this if you are running 10th gen or earlier, avoid if you have something newer". There are some sus claims but reviews will show us what's up
pretty sure that most of those efficiency gains is due to the better production node of TSMC and not because of Intel's improved tile design I think it will take another generation or two before they could fully grasp their version of Chiplets and be able to produce designs that could rival AMD's version.
This has nothing to do with their tile architecture being less advanced than AMD's. Quite the opposite, it's more advanced and uses less power. Intel simply made bad choices in their architectural details that will hurt gaming.
@@maynardburger Oh Hey Pat told you to stop shadow posting online and just use your real name already bad decisions where and whose decisions were those were they yours its nice to see you going online and defending your company instead of running it like your paid to do.
The person who invented that new naming scheme has probably previously worked for a monitor manufacturer.
I like it
It should've stayed i5/i7/i9 tho
Hello Gewel and yes I like it too
💀
😂🤣
@@GewelRealvery true I don't mind them going to a more simple number scheme it was starting to get to be way to much after 10th/11th gen but they for sure should have kept the i9/i7/i5 branding like the i9 Ultra 285k would have been fine
Yay. We have the Intel -2.85% and Zen +5%. What a time to be alive
ArrowLake -10% in gaming. Zen2% in gaming. Both trash in their own way. 😂😂
wtf is up with that...
@@TheBlackIdentety и все понимают, играй они в 2к 21 на 9 или 4к… их процессор не спасет))) но молчат в тряпку
@@tattoojay88 купи себе норм монитор и видяху, а о проце забудь.
Well. Only one of those is a positive number, so...
"Gamers win when competition is fierce"
Gamers would be losing for another while
Especially with Nvidia 😂😂😂
And nvidia wins again and most likely again increase market share!
😂
Have to remember buy more nvidia stocks….
@@haukionkannelfine by me. More Radeon GPUs for meeeeee!!!!
@@Conradlovesjoy calm down fanboy
Their competition is now Snapdragon and their ARM CPUs for notebooks. That's why they are focusing so much on power usage, otherwise they'll lose market share on laptops and that opens up the market for ARM CPUs for Desktops.
Sooo... basically 7800X3D still is the way to go. Thanks intel.
Best purchase I've made in a while. Rock solid
if u play 1080P and think it s worth the overpriced cpu, yea
@@Joegengstah Same, i was bought him for 330 euros, 6 mont's ago.
Maybe for gaming, most of us don't just game
Thanks Steve
I used to be a gamer like you. Then I took an arrow to the lake.
go away dad your jokes are older than your kidney stones
@@punishthemeatpocketSkyrim will never get old. Source: rerelease every 4 months.
@@punishthemeatpocket Stop punishing your meat pocket and lighten up.
My advice: No matter the pain... avoid the moonsugar. Just saying. I met a Lusty Argonian Maid once, and it turned out to be a Goblin Chief in a mage robe. That stuff ain't good for you. Stick to drowning out you arrow pain with skooma.
@@punishthemeatpocket Don't talk to your dad like that!
It scares me how much the world relies on TSMC.
Same
That’s why US wants them to be partially involved in manufacturing in US mainland too, in case of conflict in that part of the world
that's why europe the us and china are investing massively to have their own fabs at home
What's dumb is that Intel 3 process is actually good! If Intel had planned for it, they could have avoided using TSMC for Arrow Lake and saved money. Saved even more money if they didn't go this dumb 'many tile' route and just stuck with a monolithic chip. A monolithic Arrow Lake on Intel 3 likely would perform better than this while being cheaper to design and manufacture. Intel just keeps tripping over their own feet.
@@maynardburger That tends to happen when all of your best engineers jump ship my man.
Zen 5%
Ultra 9 -2.85%
Best generation ever
Our world now in microcosm.
What do you think. We are at the limit of silicon
Sure is. That means you can keep what you have and spend your money elsewhere. Rather than constantly buying new stuff for really no reason other than to say that you did.
Note: The AMD numbers are reviewer numbers whereas the Intel numbers are Intel's own numbers. There's a good chance it'll be even worse in practice.
If it doesn't prematurely die or explode from overvoltage then it's already an improvement on previous gen Intel CPUs.
Slower, more expensive. Intel is back baby
LOL. That’s funny 😄
I mean they might not kill themselves like 13th and 14th gen so that’s progress right 😂
no thank you, i will stick with AMD
@@Valueshooter Same!
@@Valueshooter Same for me, no matter how hard Steve will spin things to try and make Intel look better.
Note for Baylen, I liked the circle talking head overlay on the slides! This was a nice touch and my first time noticing it (not sure if this is something you’ve done for a while). Cheers!
I've liked talking heads since the early 80s...
Hehe looks just like Loom or OBS with a mask - reminds me of my recorded university lectures.
@@ad_fletch Ha, Loom was my first thought as well!
I'm happy about the vastly improved power efficiency, but Intel 10nm to TSMC 3nm is a HUGE HUGE improvement, so I would have expected to see performance improvements too.
they're actually not that differenct. it's not like 3 times smaller. it's really hard to compare transistor size from different fabs
@@flxdrv5020 They are very different. Even a TSMC 5nm equivalent node would have been a big improvement on Intel 7 that Raptor Lake used. But it seems like a lot of the lack of performance improvement is coming from packaging architecture of Arrow Lake. If it were monolithic, it probably *would* be a good bit faster.
Intel had to make it in multiple tiles, otherwise it would be super expensive, TSMC 3nm node is a luxury.
A new node doesn't just increase performance. It increases clockspeed at the same wattage or decreases power consumption for the same clockspeed.
Hence the 2x perf/watt
The reason we see no inprovement singlethreaded is the tile design. Monolithic design is King but to expensive in future as chips get bigger and bigger. Intel had to do this.
looking forward to the 9800X3D launch on the 23rd 🙂
Why? It's gonna barely be an improvement on the 7800X3D, for like hundreds of dollars more.
@@maynardburger because cache on both ccd's can finally do productivity
@@IstyManame 9800X3D is gonna have only 1 CCD (most likely at least)
@@auritro3903 so whats the meaning of this in terms of gaming?
@@mrjoy1152 9800X3D 10-15 % Uplift go brrrrrrr, if u have 7800X3D dont upgrade. Wait for Am6.
This is the best meme generation ever. Zen 5% and Intel Core -2.85%
At least zen 5 on the positive side lol
It's windows fault for zen 5 performance
Zendozer 5% vs Intel Core Ultra -9%.Sorrow Lake somehow managed to outflop Zen 5%.
@@kevinerbs2778 cmon dude, did you say that for decades when intel was giving us tiny "positive side?" Intel used to get railed for 10% gains for decades.
@@trauma50disaster1 HUB got unrealistic idea that ever generation should be giving consumers 20% up lifts. you guys have no clue how rare a 20% increase in IPC actually is. I'm used to 10 to 12% being on the high end of IPC increases. 3D V-cache has spoiled gamers. Zen 4 3D is 20% faster than Zen 4, all while Zen 4 3D has 10% lower clocks too, that's pretty unusual. You can't expect that every generation.
People should be happy, barely an improvement meaning you can keep your older stuff and it’s still relevant. Fuck em, save your money.
Would you not be able to use your old stuff if these new CPUs were better? what kind of FOMO logic is that.
I just got a 7800X3D and feel pretty damn good about that right now.
Welcome to the realm of gaming, had it for 2 years now, don’t regret it one bit
If you want a little bit more performance switch SMT OFF 😂, Thank me later
@@Troonieliciousin select apps and games***
Hope you didn’t pay out the nose for it 😮
That's a good CPU to sit with for... Until the ARM and x86 mess gets cleaned up in 5 years
2:05 So Intel now said what they said AMD was doing a number of years ago and now admitting they are doing the same and glueing the CPU together?
I'd pay real money to see a journalist ask Pat "So you just glued the chips together?" with completely straight face.
Intel (probably): it's tiling and it's art
Glueing stuff next to eact other (cringe) versus glueing stuff on top of each other (based) 😂
@@janbenes3165 this is a job for Steve, either one would do
That remark / joke was also referencing core 2 quad, which was literally 2 core duos glued together, with fabric being mb southbridge.
Great reporting Tim. Your coverage is much more comprehensive. The disjoint between 285's power and performance between slides was already suspicious to me. Thanks for the insight.
Intel 285 seems to have AVX512 now so content creation is good. I am interested in that.
However, without upgrade path for LGA1851, I think I will go for 9950X3D. Unless that CPU is 5% too.
The E core improvement sounds like the most appealing part of Arrow Lake. Hoping they put out a sub-10W chip that is a serious improvement over current offerings.
Nah it’s 48 PCIE lanes.
@@ZackSNetwork All the 4.0 lanes are muxed into the 4 CXL lanes that connect the CPU to the chipset. So yes, you can use them, but you can't use all of them at full speed at the same time. If you need lots of lanes that "talk" at the same time you still need a workstation class CPU.
Further validation for my decision to go with the 7800x3D for my gaming desktop.
Or my decision with 7950x3d :D
IF you can buy any as stocks are nonexistent and its 550€ already. Looks like amd is doing it again. Cutting the supply so you would buy the 9800X3D instead for 600€.
so why tf you even watching a intel video?
No huge headline declaring it a huge disappointment or a complete disaster like Zen 5? I guess one thing Intel did right this time is not focus on performance uplift expectations in press materials.
AMD lied on their performance claims that's why
Of course, you can also put bad things in a nice way.
It is only a disaster for gamers tho.
Seems the architecture development are more focus on efficiency and server world. U see both AMD and intel new server chips are very impressive in performance.
Its more than a complete disaster because their chips are now actually slower lol 😂.
zen +5% > -2.85% doa lake
That was for zen 5 REVIEW, not for the zen 5 ANNOUNCEMENT, which this video also is.
Platform longevity for less than 2 generations is insane.
Less than 2 generation = 1 generation. Beeing serious, this is insulting, Am4 really spoiled us.
Is not just insane, it's pointless. Having only 1 gen per platform means there's no need for a socket. It is much better soldering a CPUs straight to the motherboard, the higher cost/quality motherboard gets a better CPU.
Keep in mind that 99% of customers don't upgrade their CPU. So platform longevity is overrated.
@PaintrainX I bet that percent didn't hold for the am4 platform where people had options.
@@PaintrainX >99% of customers don't upgrade their CPU
Yeah because they usually have no path to upgrade. Plenty of AM4 users upgraded... some TWICE. AM5 is gonna see the same thing. It's Intel that screws the consumer every time going back decades.
9800x3d/9950x3d with 105mb of 3d cache (someone said dual cdd will have cache on both) will be the cpu for new flagship gpu
I hope we get 9950X3D with cache on both dies, these days pushing clock speeds is not worth the hit to performance per watt in some applications. If Zen 5 X3D can clock into low 5Ghz (even 5.2Ghz) territory that'd be great.
Not sure how you ended up with 105MB. Are you including L1 (IC/DC)?
Not including L1's, 9950X3D with double X3D would have a whopping 208MB (L2+L3), or 144MB with just one X3D CCD.
@@catsspat total L3 cache on 7800x3d it's 90 or 96mb if im not wrong on the 9800x3d will be 105 mb i think total L3 cache, plus high clock speed and unlocked for overclock.....i don't remember L2 cache on 7800x3d but i think 8mb
ps.I read it online on hardware sites it can be true or not but AMD already admitted new change for 3d cpu
9900x3d and 9950x3d will get remake of 3d cash means Those will support PBO overclock tune and be lite better than 9800x3d in gaming but all those 3 support 8000Mhz ddr5 expo depending on x870 motherboard
@@Dangerman-zg3uiAMD already tried this, didn't offer more performance. Latency will be the issue.
At this point, I have to give Intel credit for what seems to be a reasonably honest assessment of the new architecture's performance. Independent testing will either confirm that, or refute it. Still, the information people really need is buried in the fine print.
I'll give them credit only when third party evaluates!
" honest assessment "
But they have 1 very intresting remark in their sc/mt 285k vs 9950x and 14900k benchmark slides - "among desktop processors targeting ~125w;" 😁. So they used default tdp for both their cpus - 285k and 14900k, but NOT for 9950x which is 170w by default 😅.
It is a perf/watt test... BUT in the worst possible way.
@@notenjoying666 I can't see that data anywhere. In a single slide where they show 9950x testing configuration, power isn't mentioned.
@@REgamesplayer "leadership core performance" and "arrow lake sets the bar for cpu compute" slides
It is not honest, it slight of hand marketing. You only get the perf advertise on 250w mode. The higher efficiency you only get in a lower TDP mode. You don't get both at the same time. They also don't mention the what the configuration was uae for 9950x.
Man this 7800X3D is shaping up to be a nice investment!
Yeah wish I could find one or not pay 700
Never heard your theme song anywhere until yesterday at work. The front desk girl runs a music playlist that comes through our entire floor. She was playing some chilled out music when Bensound - Dreams started up, so i asked if she was a hammer on box fan...she had no idea what i was on about.
Some people said this will " destroy " ryzen.
It looked like a Alder Lake moment but guess we were wrong.
@@Pultdach Pure copium. Ryzen is literally one of the best things AMD has done. Zen 5 is far from the massive disaster Intel is rn
Besides gaming these are clearly better
@@zee-fr5kw He says, on a gaming-focused hardware channel. Go RMA your 14900k, buddy.
I mean it will when tuned. Probably superior 1% lows.
Intel is pulling out all the stops to make “Zen 5%” a compliment to AMD. Compared to Raptor Lake we’re going to see (1) 5% clockspeed regression, (2) higher latency, potentially significantly impacting certain latency sensitive workloads like gaming, and (3) using a much more expensive packaging solution which will almost certainly lead to higher prices.
We have to wait until we get independent test results later this month, but from what they’ve revealed today this looks like a complete dud of a product.
Didn't see the same Roasting they gave ZEN 5! In fact it sounds like a upsell defence!👎
Exactly. ARL is much more expensive to produce but delivers even less performance. Too bad.
It wont lead to higher prices. Intel will simply eat the margin hit. They are thankfully one company not margins-obsessed and go for volume. They understand the importance of retaining market share.
Lower clockspeeds was obvious. Nobody is matching Intel 7's clocks
@@senilestix AMD marketing slides were deceptive. (Or they jumped the gun and used Win11 24H2 Beta).
At least Intel is not as blatant. But we will know at the end of the month if Steve is standing up again and thumbnail show FLOP in big bold letters!
I’m fine with CPU speed not advancing and superseding the 14900k. CPU being stable, power efficient, good core performance for productivity and gaming use should be their roadmap.
Just look at the processing power increment from 2nd gen to 10th gen. CPU last a ridiculously long time. While GPU doesn’t. Hope they shift their focus on battlemage
That's the way. If they don't put a limit into power usage, more and more laptops are gonna start using snapdragon ARM CPUs, making them lose market share. This seems like a sensible direction for both companies to take.
" I’m fine with CPU speed not advancing "
😰😰😰
for me CPU/GPU last about the same (3-4 years), the only issue is price/performance ratio which is not getting better with new generation
People thinking no performance progress after two years with two generations of architectural updates and a massive process leap is ok is insane to me. It's ridiculous how low consumer standards are nowadays. We are never going to get these two years of lack of progress back.
@@maynardburger We are indeed consumers now. We used to be valued customers.
I'd say for gaming the U7 265 KF looks like the sweet spot. Same number of p-cores as the U9 and only a minor relative drop in clocks. Which, on the face of it, might not really matter since it seems there's potentially quite a lot of headroom for overclocking anyway. If that results in 14900K levels of gaming performance from a significantly cheaper processor then that's a positive. I'm looking to upgrade next year from a 10th gen Intel and I'm going to be really interested in relative performance vs price. And far lower power consumption would be a big bonus given the direction of travel for GPUs these days.
For what it's worth, those slides look a lot more honest than they have been in a decade, certainly better than what AMD did for Zen5. Also, them going for the efficiency was the right choice to make, because however fast their CPUs were, the reviews were always "Hot mess, that can't compete with AMD". Now at least it's better at efficiency even if it loses to the X3D chips, this is similar to what Zen1 and Zen2 did, great multicore performance, decent single core performance. But yeah the prices should've been lower as well to compete, but I don't know how low can they go with them manufacturing at TSMC.
I just built my pc earlier this year and it runs everything pretty well so I'm just going to wait until something exciting releases lol
If AL is at best 10% faster than RL then it should get similar review to Zen 5. Underwhelming at best, but relatively bad. Especially at those prices. I hope Steve will be consistent with his opinion.
DramaUnboxed incoming. But not for Intel.
Not the same. 1) AMD lied about the uplift, and 2) AMD barely improved performance at the same power consumption.
ARL getting same performance at half the power is a 2x perf/watt improvement.
@@moist_ointmentWait for reviews before telling what they said it's true.
@@TheTaurus104 It's not like Steve have curbed his tongue when it comes to Intel's stability problems and refusal to state exactly what is the correct power settings for their CPUs. In fact, I remember him harping on about the latter point already 5 years ago.
@@jayvee8502 that's missing the point of the OP I'm responding to.
He's claiming people complained about Zen 5 because of only a 5% improvement, when it was mainly the lying *and* that it was 5% perf/watt and the efficiency claims weren't real.
If ARL matches the claims of 2x perf/watt, then why would the anger be as much? That's a bigger improvement.
First post as a member!
Still tied with 14900K and 7800X3D likely beats it. Zen5 is looking better now.
No it's not 'looking better' now. Both suck.
Zen 5 looked bad because of comparisons to Zen 4, not Intel. This changes nothing.
@@jonathansaraco zen 4 is the maxuimized tuned of the orginal zen architecture this is nore more ipc to gain out of and has it latency at its maxium achivable.
Thank you Tim for making this clearer !
Yep heard that too. Seems like everyone's dropping balls on all the courts. I'll be happy with my Zen 3 for a while longer
Steve just showed us that 5800X3D keeps winning, so why bother with all this newer, more expensive, more disappointing stuff?
People don't need to upgrade every year.
@@mjc0961it's not winning 7800 walks over it
7800X3D is still unimaginably fast for anyone not having one
Get a 4K monitor and enjoy your current CPU for another 5+ years.
Long term platform support - given what a non-event the 9000 series is I have discounted the value of platform longevity. If you buy at the top end and AMD iterates with a negligible difference, platform longevity means very little. The 7000 series to the 9000 series has been more or less a marketing update and a price reset, not a performance increase.
I was really hoping Intel would show up with a Bang ❗️ We need more competition, these companies getting comfortable
Intel's CPUs causing a "bang" isn't a good thing. Not recently.
Intel can still do a 290 and later 295 ,I guess they with Amds next 3d cpu
Intel doesn't have anything better to show. Last year, I though they would need to improve efficiency at least x2 to be competitive. It seems they achieved at least that, however, without any gaming perf increase at all, it's uninteresting to people who are already on modern processors.
Look at new generation Xeon and Epyc it is another story tho. In low power laptop CPU and server class one their showing are impressive
Just not desktop class CPU
Tho nowadays it isn't like Desktop CPU is the focus for both
theres always Qualcomm... umm, never mind
Thanks Tim! I think Intel will be good to go if they have brought similar performance with lower power usage as the Raptor Lake CPU's. Also, I think if/when they get rentable units off the ground, this strategy of removing HT will work out good. Zen 5 and Arrow Lake are probably going to be....meh, but Arrow Lake seems to have something to build upon IMO.
It's a bit weird. Next gen GPUs (5090) look to be massively faster and yet CPUs seem to almost be going backwards
It’s possible, or expectations are too high. But I like ur idea bc it sounds worse
AMD was giving us 25%-30% performance increase every generation for the past 4 or so generations + 3D vcache. One generation with lower performance increase is fine
other than the 5090 , evrything else is kinda mid the 5070 is around 4070 ti speed
5070 seems to be same as last gen with a little better RT, 4% in raster 20% with RT? it seems not only CPUs are stagnating, so only top GPU is faster it seems if leaks end up true, then it will be hillarious gen with too high expectations yet again
Current gen CPUs are currently massively overkills for 4090. We dont need new CPUs yet.
Thanks for the coverage, Tim!
The pricing for the 285K just doesn't make sense relative to the 265K... Comparing the other tiers pricing, for the specs, it's at least two tiers higher pricing than it should be.
Intel and their pricing has been stubborn for basically forever. Its more that the seven has gotten some nice improvements
Its probably just a trap for people who just buy the highest one or dont care how much they spend
They never have. That's how high end pricing works.
Bro you act like this is the first time you see how halo products are priced
That's the same gap between the 14900K and the 14600K, also same gap between the 4080 and the 4090. Nothing new here
The 9950x is more expensive than the 285k while being slower for productivity and pretty much on par in gaming, yet you don't say that its pricing makes no sense.
@@lumiere6950 I get that, I'm fully aware of how halo pricing works... Doesn't change the fact that it's a stupid price
The efficiency is very impressive and important, today's chips suck way too much power and reach way too high temps. People are so quick to judge, but I find this to be a great generation. If they get anywhere close to half of the power draw in testing, this is a giant win in my opinion
I want to see a comparison's of the 14900k with the same wattage limits in gaming and how close the performance ends up lol
Intel generation 15 does not prioritize games.. but production remains to be seen
i wonder how these things will overclock... i know that hasn't been a focus recently, but with intel looking to keep power consumption down it may create some headroom. personally, I don't care too much about power consumption as long as i can keep it cool and quiet.
Is this the new fad now? Launching news CPUs with worse gaming performance?
But still... gaming is just ONE thing you can do with desktop CPUs, seems like both companies are putting work and effort into improving other uses.
I am not quite sure if "circle-Tim" has made an appearance again 🤔but I like this choice when data/specs have to be shown on the screen
👍 Good job as always you guys! 😃
Zen 5 suddenly looks like a good generational uplift, huh? 😂😂😂
I guess those who already own Raptor Lake/Zen4 won't be upgrading, so with lower demand, i might get to snatch Zen4/5 CPU for a nice price. 7700 for 150$ would be sweet, or maybe 9700 comes out and gets discounted in a year's time. Zen3 will last me until then
Intel messed up completely. First 1-2% "14th" gen, then -3% ultra trash...
@@nipa5961 isn't at lower clocks though too?
@@kevinerbs2778 Yes, 5% lower clocks. Higher latency and only moderate IPC gains result in lower performance than previous gen. Intel needs to cut prices in half to be competitive with this.
@@nipa5961 then someone would have match & lock clock speeds with arrow lake & rapor lake to see the ipc differnces.
The review tjat did that with both zen 4 and zen 5 at locked 4.0ghz shows a totally different picture. The turbo on all these cpus can change to the point where both cpus look excatly the sames. Even through they hit slightly different mhz speeds.
only positive thing I can see is for creators... Battlemage gpus will probably be crap to play games with but the XE cores paired with the uhd will probably be a good competitor against the high end RX gpus and 7700x or higher!!
TLDR: Gamers should buy an AMD X3D cpu, if you are doing predominately productivity work it may be worth considering if you are comfortable overpaying for a new platform that is DOA with no future upgrade path and gaining ~5% over a 14900K or a 9900X.
AM5 mobos cost more and most people upgrade their CPUs every 5 years and who would want to use a 5+ year old board?
@@damienasmr922Me, who will just drop a Zen 6 CPU in my B650E board..like I dropped a 5800X3D in my older AM4 board.
I think it's safe to say a whole lot of people will do the same.
I know it's strange for people to understand, but you do NOT need an X3D chip for gaming. I dont know where this nonsense is coming from. Standard models are perfectly fine for gaming.
@@glynkatkinyou know that zen 6 is not confirmed to be on am5 right?
They said 2026, which could be zen6, or some refresh product like the 5800XT. Just don't set your hope too high
@@glynkatkin nice and then miss out on 5 years development in techs beside the cpu itself, well played.
I'd pick this for longevity. 48 PCIE lanes means it can go from home desktop with GPU + fast NIC to server role where it can sit for years with a quad SSD card and very fast non-onboard nic.
This a a far more balanced architecture and I'll bet it will scoop the bottom part of the NAS market. An extra few dollars for the CPU is nothing when you're looking at adding years to its useful life. Let's hope their chips don't burn out...
Will be interesting to see how the memory scaling on Arrow Lake ends up.
Steve, hi, I hope you will still compare the 5800X3D to Arrow Lake. Many of us looking to upgrade if the performance uptick is decent. Thanks for all you and Tim do.
I hope they don't mess things with arc gpus
People want a reason to upgrade even if they already have the bleeding edge or close to it.
I feel that enthusiasm for gaming hardware too, but honestly if it's a few more years before there's a compelling reason to upgrade again I'm fine with that. My savings account will be happy.
Intel: "Am I joke to you?"
Gamers: "Yes!"
Can't wait for your reviews 🙌
Intel is the new IBM.
I actually like their approach. CPU really doesn’t need to be more powerful than 14900k for multimedia or gaming use for a long run. It needs to be cheaper and less power consuming.
@@happybuggy1582 But Tim said it's price the similar to 14th gen so it's not cheaper! Hopefully Intel gets aggressive in reducing the price.
@@Justchuck69not happening since they re using TSMC silicon now
ouch
@@Justchuck69 i check it is 839 for 285K and 649 for 14900k Canada Alberta memory express
After endless generations of CPU's & GPU's bloating their power and size, therefore running into many issues... It is actually nice to have a CPU generation reset dedicated to slimming down/big efficiency gains/& vast future growth from that level. I think it'll pay off in 1-2 gens after, but it's a great start. Would be nice if GPU's spent one gen showing how insane they can go in size reduction/power reduction/a few hundred dollars in price reduction while giving at least a modest 10% in strength, type of reset. When you see what Apple has been doing since their M1 processors with crazy cool temps, tiny sizes, and finally beginning to bring some games... That would be the dream lol. I love my spec'd out new tower, but I'd love an Apple size lol. Hopefully these upcoming chips will start heading there, PC's shouldn't have to be this big, running warm, and using so much power if we push innovation moreso!
Thanks for reading!
DDR5 6400 as default RAM speed? Honestly that's impressive
der8auer stated that's only if using single CUDIMM per channel.
Single UDIMM per channel will be 5600MT/s and two UDIMMs per channel will be 4800MT/s, but he's not 100% sure yet.
I5 13500 тащит 6800 ddr5, 7200 на 34 таймингах запускается, но не стабильно. Но если поднять напряжение на контроллере, может потянуть…
And 8000 as sweet spot.
@@ОрешекОрешков-з2ъ плюсую, 12700kf 6600 cl38 просто поднятием частоты берёт
@@catsspatof course it's only officially 6400 using CUDIMMs, the JEDEC standard makes CUDIMM mandatory for 6400MT/s and above.
It's quite something to see that the most interesting CPU competition nowadays is seemingly on the laptop side.
I'm surprised every tile is being made at TSMC, that's not really a good sign.
TSMC dominance is becoming scaring
well.
the new intel cpus may perform at the level of the 14 gen or a bit below but at least they should not be plagued with instability and degradation issues, so its still an improvement i'd say. it would get such performance in a reliable way, and not by pushing the architecture beyond its capability as was done with intel 13 and 14 gen, so good for them.
i would expect these new cpus to be far better at single threaded applications, btw.
not to mention that if these cpus are as power efficient as is being said, they may not require as powerful coolers as 13 and 14 gen. who knows, maybe even the 285k can be reasonably cooled by good tower coolers, instead of requiring liquid cooling....
so people can save money on the coolers.
19:50 A 6 core 7600 for $200 compared to a 14 core 245k for just $294 makes the 7600 look like a terrible value because you are getting less than half the CPU's cores for more than 2/3rds the cost of the 245k. 21:40 You guys keep playing on the whole "Platform Longevity" but let's be real, only the bottom 1% of PC gamers actually care about that.
The fact that Intel created a new architecture based on efficiency shows they also think that previous one was eating allot of energy, the new architecture being able to keep up on performance is very impressive, to compare to new AMD is not fare because they refined their new one for few years, to compare would be first generation of Ryzen and Intel is way ahead there.
summarize this tech generation:
zen 5%
ultra -2.00%
rtx $5000
(from various commenters)
I am by no means an intel fanboy, ive been so mad at them in recent years, but this is actually a good thing. The current lower performance means that they cede ground to AMD, which will force Intel to do better with the generation after, this is also the first processor where they've done away with hyper threading, making it interesting, because realistically this is the first iteration and first iterations dont always go as planned, provided they learn from what is lacking with this new skew of processors, then they can definitely make the generation after Arrow Lake more impressive, give it time.
Sometimes, its not about improving on the previous product, when realistically the new set of products are structured completely differently (quite litterally)
I'm mildly positive. If these new CPUs are reliable like Intel used to be, they're pretty good. AMD 9000 series is very overpriced, especially in Europe.
Happy to see the lower power consumption. There hasnt needed to be a big cpu uplift for gaming for a while now. As long as GPUs are crazy prices, I dont see the point in CPUs pushing power limits
So I don't understand. Why are we supposed to buy those? What's the point?
Intel cpu that does not selfdestroy itself. What there is not to like!
😂
Wait for the benchmarks
Personally I wish intel would just fix their pricing, they're too stubborn for that.
charity.
Because it uses a lot less power.
Intel has been pushing more and more power through their CPUs for the past 7 years now. i9s that use 400W. It's crazy and everyone complained and compared them to AMDs old Bulldozer CPUs with how hot and power heavy they are.
Now they finally take 1 generation to give you still the same really good performance, but massively lower the power usage presumably from now on in every coming generation as well.
And people complain?
People wouldn't be happy unless you give them a 15% performance jump and cut power usage in half in one generation.
Agreed. While we would all like it to be magic, it really isnt magic sadly.
I do wish they would at least lower the prices though since that is something they can directly influence, too bad shareholder syndrome or whatever other explanation
To be fair, it's not that bad
It's just conservative upfront presentation, they probably don't want to be the same as Zen5 (too good claim)
But again, if it's not much different from 14th Gen
13th Gen seems to be a pretty good deal because both CPU and MB will get discounted even more. Power efficiency is nice, but if you don't run CineBench all the time, Raptor Lake is not that bad.
Lowering the appetite was actually very needed thing - processors were killing themself and were too powerhungry
I'm sure it's a quality product, but not sure how appealing it'll be for an upgrade.
@@justinhogue9861 New architecture - new troubles
Of course there will be problems and they will not be good for performance
Intel processors were .. leave AMD out of that
Processors weren't killing themselves. Intel was killing them in quest to keep up with AmD who were doing perfectly fine.
Please also test with 5 common apps like music player and drm apps like steam including browser for idle power consumption when the time comes.
Translation: If you want an X3D without having to sell your arm, you better buy it now.
Don't buy X3D unless your gpu is atleast 4080 super and you are using a 240hz+ monitor. Otherwise gains from this overkill CPU are very small compared to much cheaper 7500f.
I mean the 9600X3D and 9800X3D are just over the horizon and next year we're getting the 9900X3D and 9950X3D so I think we're good on that front lol
Kind of already have to. 7800x3d is like 440€ in my country at the moment (tax included).
@@alvisozolins4963 Or you play one of those strategy/4X game where CPU is king anyway and you want those beefy CPU for said game.
@@itachiaurion3198
I mean, I play lots of strategy games, they're really not that necessary. End-turn times you can see a benefit, but it's negligible in terms of actual experience and not worth several hundred (or more) to worry about.
the only thing here that excites me as a DBA is the ECC support.
Just as a heads up: Hearing some audio issues on the last 2 videos.
1. Some crispy crackling (often during transitions to B-role)
2. A kind of high pitch reverb. Sounds like a slight feedback from the microphone or some other acoustic body starting to reverb when Tim talks louder.
Just me?
@Hardwareunboxed On a sidenote I think it would be useful to do a chart for the same game of the $ per fps since older cards like 970 gtx or 660 gtx. To show the price creep for the segments of Nvidia.
I remember when a 6600 GT or 9600 GT were 150 euros.
A 970 gtx was 350 euros. A 1950 XTX was 400 euros.
Now ngreedia wanna sell a 5060 called 5070 for 800 euros...
We need to see how the fps per dollar evolved. Especially since the 970 and 1080 ti.
I expected way more efficiency going to tmsc 3nm tbh.
They are still pushing clocks quite a bit beyond its sweetspot. I bet if you compare performance at 5Ghz, Arrow Lake will beat Raptor Lake by a fair bit bigger margin.
Efficiency doubled.
@@maynardburger The 9950X boosts to 5.7GHz too. But is on N4. N3B should be a 7% improvement in clock speed at ISO power over N4.
@@moist_ointment No it didn't. Efficiency doubled if you limit the 285k to 125W. But nobody runs a k SKU like that. That's what the non-k parts are for. If I run my 7950X3D undervolted and at 50W it still retains 85% gaming performance and 70% all-core performance. Yes, we know you improve efficiency by limiting power. But it makes for pretty graphs... except the same bloody graph showed that if you run the 14900k at 125W too then the efficiency gain was only about 30%.
@@andersjjensen no, not if you limit it. The 50% reduction in power consumption was in gaming when PL1 was also set to 250W.
Gaming doesn't fully load all cores and didn't draw the full PL1 value on either CPU
Good performance at lower power seems like a great design choice for 99 percent of the market.
Works for OEM, datacenter and most gamers.
On the positive side, Intel isn't even pretending the new CPUs are significantly faster at gaming than last gen.
Unlike AMD, they owned up to their design goals.
On the negative side, just like Zen 5. the low and mid range CPUs seem really pricy.
The 65 watt 12th, 13th and 14th gen CPUs were fine for most people and you can still get great 12th gen parts cheap.
Lol, that slide comparing the 285K, the 14900K, and the 9950: they tested the 285K with 6400Mz memory, but the 14900 and 9950 were tested with 5600Mz. So not exactly like for like, eh Intel?
not that big of a diference, and they're just using base config for ram that are supported. which means the 285k probably support faster ram across the board compared to 14th gen intle or Zen 5 anyways
@@flxdrv5020 We're not talking about the 285K having a 10% advantage across the board where the memory difference is basically meaningless. These 2~5% gains are within the range of disappearing in some cases if you tested the other chips with the exact same memory settings. Sure, the base config might be different, but the RAM difference at these narrow margins makes a difference.
The memory clock makes little difference for gaming performance unless the game uses some kind of asset streaming. What matters more is the latency. Arrowlake has a latency penalty compared to raptorlake due to not being monolithic.
I do wonder what arrowlake will top out at. Raptorlake topped out at about 130gb/s of bandwidth and ~50-55ns latency.
They tested with 6400 CUDimm that is not available for Customers yet.
With normal DDR5 Ram the Core Ultra 200 only Supported 5600 MTs same as Ryzen 9000.
The LOL is Intel is back, low power CPUs that have i9 unlocked performance. They've crossed a memory barrier AMD has not. AMD just got some bad news
7800XD was a king, and still a king.
now who's glued together?
The tile design of Intel is important for better yields in future. Monolithic design doesent work good with huge chips.
@almond_exe they were wrong and backed. Tile design of Intel is mutch better than AMD's chiplet. Chiplet has huge latency problems. Even at Intel we see now what the cost of tile chip's is. Imagine if they just made a 14900k in 3nm. It would crush any desktop chip of today, just because of the mutch lower latency.
Guess I'll stick with my 13600K a few more years for gaming and work.
Offset timing? Isn't it like 1am or 2am over there, Tim?
They had info before and recorded and uploaded video a while ago, opening it for public as NDA lifted
Perhaps the most important thing about new Intel CPUs is the job security for tech review websites.
Whyyy intel why won't you just promise like 3 generations of CPU support for your platforms. It makes it so hard to recommend your cpus
Im really curious myself as to how or why
My (optimistic) guess is that, its better to not promise if you cant deliver it
likely a behind the scenes deal with motherboard manufacturers to keep sales consistent, there isn't a similarly large selection of motherboards on AMD side and this is likely due to that shady deal.
They also only released one single stable generation on LGA1700. There is no excuse to recommend Intel for anything right now.
DDR6 will be out so soon that it makes no sense to commit to releasing DDR5 CPUs for three more generations.
Thats actually a good point. Hmm.
I'm dissapointed they didn't manage to squeeze in Arc 140V graphics like on the laptop varient. Instead it's still the bare minimum for desktop.
I’m pretty miffed that they’re still skimping out on the iGPU for the HX CPUs. Previously they were just desktop CPUs soldered into a laptop, and so had to make due with the bare minimum iGPU that the desktops get for cost optimization. But now that the iGPU is totally separate, there’s no reason they couldn’t give the HX laptop CPUs the actual laptop centric iGPU for better battery life.
At the least though, I should given them _some_ credit that near as I can tell they have doubled the size of the iGPU, assuming I got the conversion rate between Execution Units and Xe cores correct, which I have zero confidence in.
Intel going the way of Kodak.
Creo que es muy necesario conocer el precio de las placas base... Los procesadores para mi son prometedores solo con mencionar el menor consumo y que no tengan riesgo de quemarse.
Hay que cambiar placas base , la arquitectura será interesante solo si el combo es accesible, para los que están con DDR5 es importante pero hay gente que esta usando Gen 12, 13 y 14 con DDR4 ...es una decisión mucho más difícil.
I think it is very necessary to know the price of motherboards... For me, processors are promising just by mentioning the lower consumption and the fact that they do not have the risk of burning.
Motherboards need to be changed, the architecture will be interesting only if the combo is accessible, for those who are using DDR5 it is important but there are people who are using Gen 12, 13 and 14 with DDR4... it is a much more difficult decision.
Why are people having such a problem understanding that this is the way cpus need to go? Constantly increasing power draws to increase performance is unsustainable. The 14th gen debacle proves that. If it weren't for new gen cooling coming in time, The temps on those were laughable. Right now Intel and AMD need to focus on efficiency improvements. And they have made a step in that direction. Is it really that surprising that intel lowering its cpu melting power draws means lower performance? AMD doesnt sound so bad now does it? They managed to lower power draws without sacrificing performance over the last gen (for the most part).
I honestly wanted a reason to upgrade from my 5800X3D and X470 motherboard, I can't justify only upgrading because I'm limited to PCIe Gen 3 speeds.
Guess we'll wait another couple years LOL
According to Chinese reviewers, the 285K is actually slower than the 14600K in gaming.
cause it's.....hot garbage...check and see...I have a junction temp of a 103....hot garbage...hot garbage!
@@Windupmykilt me when i don t understand what junction temp means; go back to school bot
@KoItai1 Who the heck is a bot on a tech channel? Dude those are joke song lyrics dude. Junction temp is a thing go Google it. Hot Garbage comes from the song Hot Burning, it was joking about Intel, not you! Yikes calm down buddy.
At this pace our CPUs will last many many years.
Better for the wallet
I normally switch back and forth. My current is a 7950X3D and before was a 12900K. Now it looks like i will stay with team red and wait for the 9950X3D.
Edit:
Nevermind: I'm building a new PC and started buying parts already. I'll get the 285 ultra with the 1851 motherboard when they become available.
I'll just recycle my old RTX 4090. Then when the 5090 comes out I'll get that on day one when it launches.
why do you build a new pc so often when you get almost no benefits from such small perfomance gains?
@@Celatra Just for fun, it's a hobby. I give my old hardware to family members.
if the "ultra 5" was priced in between the 7600(x) and the 9600x. So like $230 I would of picked one up.
This will be some very unpopular opinion, but I think basically zero upgradibility at all maybe ok for for Intel platform. In fact, it may be their key to regain leadership in the market.
Just commit and put your RAM on your chip and solder everything on the motherboard just like Lunar Lake, and use every efficiency headroom to clock both your chip but especially your memory to the level that just can't be archieved on socket modules. 3D Vcache may not help with their gaming but 8000 mts DDR5 probably will. Then let the user use those extra high speed memory as cache if they've installed additional RAM on sockets.
You already practically have zero upgradibility on Intel platform with 2-3 years upgrade path, the performance gain will never be worth it. Might as well just solder them together for better efficiency, compatibility verification, and quality control. Might as well still offer a seperate socket path for productivity users but I don't think gamers will mind if they get their performance and their efficiency at the cost of solder everything parts.
the integrated Memory as L4 cache and them extra dimms is good idea. but that project with limited IO is not going to be translated to DIY
@pedro.alcatra If they deliver the performances at a competitive enough price point, I don't think people will mind too much. Gamers especially. It can be a gaming specific solution, like AMD X3D, but also sell higher end parts in traditional socket package
One thing's for sure is that it's a future of a very stupidly named line of CPUs.
My 3800x 6700xt rig is still strong, but if i decide to upgrade ill go with 7800x3d and 7900xtx. Nothing else makes any sense at all.
get 5700X3D. You will not need anything else
Very good idea. You have to wait 6 months to get a "next gen" gpu anyway at a reasonable price
I've got 7900XTX running on 5800X3D (PBO max clocked ) with 1440p mon. And in most games ( not all ) I get the same fps if set to ultra vs medium graph. settings so 7800X3D is recommended. I'd say go for it, you won't regret.
@PiergrulliSfracellettinot at current prices
5600 + 6700 XT here. Not buying anything until at least 2026.
I am looking forward to the benchmarks from these parts. I expect it'll be a good laugh.
Hub was happy to create whole video series bashing Ryzen 9000. Hope they keep the same energy 😂
The issue was with AMD marketing slides. They may be using Win11 24H2 Beta + Admin mode for the slides and when HUB tested and found big discrepancies, things blew up.
Now that I'm running Win11 24H2, I can confirm that performance boost is real. AMD should have come clean in their slides.
Steve's gonna need new legs
WE NEED SAME ENERGY like Ryzen 9000 video
If the intel slides are actually truthful then it won't be that big of a deal. Just like "upgrade to this if you are running 10th gen or earlier, avoid if you have something newer". There are some sus claims but reviews will show us what's up
pretty sure that most of those efficiency gains is due to the better production node of TSMC and not because of Intel's improved tile design I think it will take another generation or two before they could fully grasp their version of Chiplets and be able to produce designs that could rival AMD's version.
This has nothing to do with their tile architecture being less advanced than AMD's. Quite the opposite, it's more advanced and uses less power. Intel simply made bad choices in their architectural details that will hurt gaming.
@@maynardburger Oh Hey Pat told you to stop shadow posting online and just use your real name already bad decisions where and whose decisions were those were they yours its nice to see you going online and defending your company instead of running it like your paid to do.