Alder Lake consumes up to 28% more energy at peak usage than Rocket Lake

Published by

Click here to post a comment for Alder Lake consumes up to 28% more energy at peak usage than Rocket Lake on our message forum
#5935575
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/275/275892.jpg
Do we need to re-wire the whole house for the 13th generation of Intel processors I wonder...
#5935577
data/avatar/default/avatar03.webp
oh boy this will be good . .. ok peeps pls dont disappoint I wanna see you lose your mind, despite this having nothing to do with the end user or his experience in any way, shape or form. go to town! ;)
Devid:

Do we need to re-wire the whole house for the 13th generation of Intel processors I wonder...
VERY NICE! thx
#5935594
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/227/227994.jpg
So that's still only 51 watt compared to my current 11700 which uses only 40 watt during gaming. Not bad.
#5935599
data/avatar/default/avatar36.webp
TheDeeGee:

So that's still only 51 watt compared to my current 11700 which uses only 40 watt during gaming. Not bad.
You play Tetris or pacman? Because it uses 90-130W normally on gaming at 1080p.
#5935609
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/172/172560.jpg
TheDeeGee:

So that's still only 51 watt compared to my current 11700 which uses only 40 watt during gaming. Not bad.
Nah, ~40-50W was for 10 series, Rocket Lake uses at least 80W without v-sync while doing the same thing with ~10% more fps. Really dumb architecture.
#5935610
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/282/282473.jpg
gx-x:

Nah, ~40-50W was for 10 series, Rocket Lake uses at least 80W without v-sync while doing the same thing with ~10% more fps. Really dumb architecture.
peak power draw difference can be even bigger
#5935612
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/282/282473.jpg
good grief pass on this i may be tempted to get a rkl-s next year if it goes on sale like 10th gen and pcie4 drives (the good ones) drop from 250eur for 1tb adl-s will be ridiculously expensive and power hungry like the devil.
#5935613
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/198/198862.jpg
Zen4 it is then. Thank you Intel.
#5935617
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/282/282473.jpg
Undying:

Zen4 it is then. Thank you Intel.
well,you'd never buy intel anyway,even at twice as good value. all i hope for is 11th gen dropping as low as 10th at some point.they're a waste of silicon indeed,but name a price low enough and they'll be a great buy.
#5935621
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/198/198862.jpg
cucaulay malkin:

well,you'd never buy intel anyway,even at twice as good value. all i hope for is 11th gen dropping as low as 10th at some point.they're a waste of silicon indeed,but name a price low enough and they'll be a great buy.
Its not true. I had Sandy-E 3930k before i went to amd again.
#5935627
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/282/282473.jpg
Undying:

Its not true. I had Sandy-E 3930k before i went to amd again.
was there really any other option ? not really. and frankly,for gaming 3930k->2700x is a sidegrade at best.
#5935666
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/227/227994.jpg
Fediuld:

You play Tetris or pacman? Because it uses 90-130W normally on gaming at 1080p.
I have a Non-K, playing Fortnite @ 1200p max settings. I do cap at 60 FPS, cuz i only have a 60 Hz monitor. HWInfo64 shows 40-45 watt max during gaming.
#5935683
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/198/198862.jpg
cucaulay malkin:

was there really any other option ? not really.
cucaulay malkin:

was there really any other option ? not really. and frankly,for gaming 3930k->2700x is a sidegrade at best.
Generally it was an upgrade a big one even in gaming. We have fond memories of sandy bridge but its old and slow for todays standards. 8700k is 13% faster than 2700X in 1080p and 7% in 1440p Are you seriously saying 3930k is up there lol [youtube=11GvlWamF2E]
#5935686
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/246/246171.jpg
Suddenly, the little cores make a lot more sense. And this is coming from someone who was looking forward to them regardless.
cucaulay malkin:

was there really any other option ? not really. and frankly,for gaming 3930k->2700x is a sidegrade at best.
Back then, the Phenom II x6 was a compelling product if you cared about multi-threaded performance.
#5935689
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/282/282473.jpg
schmidtbag:

Suddenly, the little cores make a lot more sense.
what for ?
Undying:

Generally it was an upgrade a big one even in gaming. We have fond memories of sandy bridge but its old and slow for todays standards. 8700k is 13% faster than 2700X in 1080p and 7% in 1440p Are you seriously saying 3930k is up there lol [youtube=11GvlWamF2E]
8700k running at stock 4300mhz with 3200 memory is nothing special by today's standards,13% slower than that is gonna be like 30-40% slower than current upper mid range (300-400eur cpus) do I think 3930k (oc'd with qc ram) can get there ? yes. it's not a high bar really to get close to 2700x in games. https://www.photobox.co.uk/my/photo/full?photo_id=504030696284
#5935691
data/avatar/default/avatar36.webp
TheDeeGee:

I have a Non-K, playing Fortnite @ 1200p max settings. I do cap at 60 FPS, cuz i only have a 60 Hz monitor. HWInfo64 shows 40-45 watt max during gaming.
at 60hz you are never at max load with any cpu of the last 4 years.
#5935693
data/avatar/default/avatar20.webp
Im sorry but the title is highly misleading! As you might know Power=Voltage times Current. What is listed here are Power and Current, but no Voltage. Judging by the fact that ALD-S is 10nm, one should assume lower voltages compared to the 14nm RKL-S, hence for the same wattage, the current has to rise. One could only assume higher power, if the voltage would be known and identical.
#5935694
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/246/246171.jpg
cucaulay malkin:

what for ?
Is that a serious question? The little cores are less power-hungry. So, these power estimates would likely be higher if the little cores were replaced with full size cores. Intel is likely using them to yield more performance without making the already high TDP higher.
jststojc:

Im sorry but the title is highly misleading! As you might know Power=Voltage times Current. What is listed here are Power and Current, but no Voltage. Judging by the fact that ALD-S is 10nm, one should assume lower voltages compared to the 14nm RKL-S, hence for the same wattage, the current has to rise. One could only assume higher power, if the voltage would be known and identical.
If you have the power and current, you can calculate the voltage... Just rearrange the equation you mentioned. Though in any case, TDP isn't actual power consumption. It could be higher, it could be lower.
#5935695
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/282/282473.jpg
schmidtbag:

Is that a serious question? The little cores are less power-hungry. So, these power estimates would likely be higher if the little cores were replaced with full size cores. Intel is likely using them to yield more performance without making the already high TDP higher.
so are big cores when they downclock,big whoop how many little low power cores does it take to match a regular big core ? can you provide your estimates please ? cause you seem very confident. show me the data then. when I see that small cores can outperform big ones in power eficiency I'll believe they are useful. or are they only good in comparison to very inefficient big ones ?

Next Page