Spotted: 24 cores and 32 threads, Intel plans Raptor Lake designs with more E-cores this time.

Venix

2021-12-06 21:52

guys the little cores are no slouches and they can fit almost4 little cores on the same space they fit a big one , while there are some workloads the little cores are meh at best in the majority of workloads they are more than pulling their weight to add up perfomance . Sadly gaming is not one of the workloads they benefit from little cores , but those are cpus can do a lot more than just gaming.

#5971010

Fishbone

2021-12-07 17:25

I refuse to support Intel.

#5971038

nizzen

2021-12-07 19:02

Fishbone:

I refuse to support Intel.

Cool story bro.... Get a job. The best advice you'll ever get 😉

#5971051

mackintosh

2021-12-07 19:29

Jesus Christ, nizzen. You just can't help yourself m8, can you.

#5971106

Dragam1337

2021-12-07 23:17

Kaarme:

That's a good theory, but at the moment, hard to test. With Alder Lake, the P cores get a lot more work done than the E cores, understandably. Unfortunately it's also impossible to test if 16 P cores got more work done than 8P+8E, considering the power and thermal limits, because no such CPU exists. Actually, I had been underestimating the E cores, before I now read more about it. They are apparently comparable to Skylake cores, so they are far from useless. I suppose the real question is indeed one that could only be "solved" mathematically, in theory: If all P cores downclocking to meet the power/thermal limits would still beat P+E. Intel would have various reasons for doing what it's doing, so it would be hasty to say that P+E must be the best because Intel chose that way.

Intel claims that the e-cores are equal to skylake cores, but they arent... watch hardware unboxed videoes. Sadly everyone is buying into all the bs pr... as usual...

#5971173

Kaarme

2021-12-08 08:04

Dragam1337:

Intel claims that the e-cores are equal to skylake cores, but they arent... watch hardware unboxed videoes. Sadly everyone is buying into all the bs pr... as usual...

I think it was an Anandtech Alder Lake review where I got it. Their tests showed the E-cores performing at around 50-60% of the P-core performance. Although it changed significantly depending on what kind of process is being run on the core. But of course, I don't have one myself, so I can't speak for it personally.

#5971273

nizzen

2021-12-08 17:16

Dragam1337:

Intel claims that the e-cores are equal to skylake cores, but they arent... watch hardware unboxed videoes. Sadly everyone is buying into all the bs pr... as usual...

Did they test Cinebench with the cheap cores? 😛

#5971297

MonstroMart

2021-12-08 18:46

KissSh0t:

https://i.imgur.com/lTuQ8LT.jpg

https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/55145696e4b00e32840b0f94/1477401952719-G5HEVSPE246H96GDYJO1/image-asset.jpeg?format=750w

#5971319

Agent-A01

2021-12-08 20:28

Dragam1337:

Intel claims that the e-cores are equal to skylake cores, but they arent... watch hardware unboxed videoes. Sadly everyone is buying into all the bs pr... as usual...

They are equal to skylake cores. What you are seeing in tests for hardware boxed are issues arising from having high interconnect latency to the ring bus. The e cores aren't designed for low latency bound applications. Take applications where latency isn't an issue and you see that e-cores perform very well considering all else.

#5971324

Dragam1337

2021-12-08 20:34

Agent-A01:

They are equal to skylake cores. What you are seeing in tests for hardware boxed are issues arising from having high interconnect latency to the ring bus. The e cores aren't designed for low latency bound applications. Take applications where latency isn't an issue and you see that e-cores perform very well considering all else.

Which basically confirms what i've been saying the entire time - the E cores are wasted die space on gaming cpu's. We would have been better off with zero E cores, and 2 more P cores. But we already gone over that in another thread 🙂

#5971329

tsunami231

2021-12-08 20:59

E cores can be great IF and when they work for the with out issues. Those P cores could be use for games while the E cores could be use for background stuff like running the OS and other mundane stuff. we are long ways from that happen. Wattage is still out of control even on IDLE these new cpus pull more wattage then none P/E cores design from what i been reading, then again I think Wattage on CPU and GPU have gone to dark side aka use more power to get better performance.

#5971331

Agent-A01

2021-12-08 21:02

Dragam1337:

Which basically confirms what i've been saying the entire time - the E cores are wasted die space on gaming cpu's. We would have been better off with zero E cores, and 2 more P cores. But we already gone over that in another thread 🙂

Correct for gaming there's no benefit(typically). Unless you're a streamer or something where additional cores to offload load off P cores could be beneficial. For most games, e cores aren't good. But multi-threaded rendering etc will benefit a lot from additional e-cores.

#5971339

Dragam1337

2021-12-08 21:32

Agent-A01:

Correct for gaming there's no benefit(typically). Unless you're a streamer or something where additional cores to offload load off P cores could be beneficial. For most games, e cores aren't good. But multi-threaded rendering etc will benefit a lot from additional e-cores.

Considering how MASSIVE pc gaming is now, you'd think intel could make cpu's specifically configured for it, rather than just giving us the same power saving stuff they made for mobile chips...

#5971348

southamptonfc

2021-12-08 22:00

Dragam1337:

Considering how MASSIVE pc gaming is now, you'd think intel could make cpu's specifically configured for it, rather than just giving us the same power saving stuff they made for mobile chips...

I suspect they don't offer that because it would have better performance than their entry level X CPU which has 10 cores while at the same time consuming at lot more power. It again highlights how stuck we are in-terms of transistor size.

#5971353

Dragam1337

2021-12-08 22:14

southamptonfc:

I suspect they don't offer that because it would have better performance than their entry level X CPU which has 10 cores while at the same time consuming at lot more power. It again highlights how stuck we are in-terms of transistor size.

In other words : greed

#5971358

tsunami231

2021-12-08 22:23

Dragam1337:

In other words : greed

its all about greed and how much one can get away with

#5971374

BLEH!

2021-12-08 23:43

This will probably push the power draw well over 300W. Those P cores are really inefficient compared to AMD's design on Ryzen it seems...

#5971383

nizzen

2021-12-09 00:17

BLEH!:

This will probably push the power draw well over 300W. Those P cores are really inefficient compared to AMD's design on Ryzen it seems...

not in gaming 🙂

#5971417

Why_Me

2021-12-09 05:13

Dragam1337:

Considering how MASSIVE pc gaming is now, you'd think intel could make cpu's specifically configured for it, rather than just giving us the same power saving stuff they made for mobile chips...

The upcoming locked Alder Lake cpu's won't have e-cores.

Dragam1337:

In other words : greed

tsunami231:

its all about greed and how much one can get away with

You want to know what greed looks like .. I'll show you. Greed is AMD leaving the budget cpu market so that they can get higher dividends in the high range market. https://www.amazon.com/12-Thread-Unlocked-Desktop-Processor-Stealth/dp/B08ZMFS7R8/ AMD 5 3600 $249.00 https://www.newegg.com/amd-ryzen-5-5600x/p/N82E16819113666 AMD Ryzen 5 5600X $299.00 https://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/searchtools/item-details.asp Intel CORE I5-10400F $149.99 https://www.newegg.com/intel-core-i5-11400-core-i5-11th-gen/p/N82E16819118241 Intel Core i5-11400 $189.98

#5971440

Astyanax

2021-12-09 07:47

AMD hasn't left the budget cpu market.