Support NeoGAF

[Leonidas]

Intel's 11th Gen Processor (Rocket Lake-S) Architecture Detailed

11th Gen Intel Core S-series desktop processors (code-named “Rocket Lake-S”) will bring more performance to gamers and PC enthusiasts.

newsroom.intel.com

Here are parts of the article that monition gaming.

Why Frequency and IPC Matter: Games and most applications continue to depend on high-frequency cores to drive high frame rates and lower latency. In addition, the number of IPC improve on the performance that frequency delivers by executing more instructions. Intel continues to push the limits of performance with IPC gains and the frequencies necessary for gaming, content creation and multitasking.

How It is Optimized for Amazing Gaming: Some of the new features being introduced with 11th Gen Intel Core S-Series include:

• New Cypress Cove architecture featuring Ice Lake Core architecture and Tiger Lake Graphics architecture.
• Double-digit percentage IPC performance improvement.
• Better gen-over-gen performance.
• Up to 20 CPU PCIe 4.0 lanes4 for more configuration flexibility.
• Enhanced Intel UHD graphics featuring Intel Xe Graphics architecture.
• Intel® Quick Sync Video, offering better video transcoding and hardware acceleration for latest codecs.
• New overclocking features5 for more flexible tuning performance.
• Intel® Deep Learning Boost and VNNI support.

The 11th Gen Intel Core S-Series desktop processors, launching in 2021’s first quarter, will deliver amazing performance and flexibility to meet a range of needs for gamers and content creators.

This is the first IPC gain for Intel on desktop since 2015.

Despite that, Intel still has top tier gaming performance as of today, in Q4 2020.

It will be interesting to see who has the top tier gaming performance next quarter Q1 2021 after Rocket Lake-S launches.

 

[longdi]

14nm+++++ still
porbably low frequency or low core counts than comet lake

 

[DGrayson]

Man show me TDP...

I am not an engineer but it seems to me that half the gains of the last 5 years are just power increases. My 3770K was 75w...

 

[Armorian]

Interesting, why the fuck they even launched 10 gen on Skylake 2015 core and NEW chipsets/sockets? What a fucking waste of time/money...

12 series will probably be on something lower than 14nm finally.

 

[Rentahamster]

Hopefully it's good, otherwise AMD will continue eating their lunch. I don't want any one company getting too big for their britches again.

 

[Leonidas]

Man show me TDP...

I am not an engineer but it seems to me that half the gains of the last 5 years are just power increases. My 3770K was 75w...

125W PL1, 250W PL2, same as 10900K. Actual consumption should be similar to that CPU for the 11th Gen i9.

Gamers need not worry though as Intel power consumption in gaming is very similar to AMD, with Intel at 14nm being similar in power to AMD 7nm while playing games.

Interesting, why the fuck they even launched 10 gen on Skylake 2015 core and NEW chipsets/sockets? What a fucking waste of time/money...

10th gen was positive in a way IMO since Intel added HT to everything. 10th Gen motherboards should work with 11th Gen too since they are both LGA 1200 and many 10th Gen boards have PCIe 4.0 support.

12 series will probably be on something lower than 14nm finally.

That's confirmed already. Alder Lake, which arrives in H2 2021 (should be released about a year from now along with DDR5) will be on 10nm SuperFin, which is comparable to TSMC 7.

 

[PhoenixTank]

125W PL1, 250W PL2, same as 10900K. Actual consumption should be similar to that CPU for the 11th Gen i9.

Losing 2 cores going from 10 series to 11 series at that power draw.
Only Ice Lake IPC am I reading that right?

Edit: Yup Ice Lake mentioned on the page but not the PDF. Just "double digit IPC" gains there.

Skylake to Ice Lake was 18% for reference. Anandtech reckon it'll be lower because of the node difference.

 

[Leonidas]

Losing 2 cores going from 10 series to 11 series at that power draw.

The 8C/16T 10700K was 125W PL1 and 250W PL2 as well, with power consumption not much different than the 10900K.

 

[iHaunter]

Still mediocre gains, no new architecture. Intel is falling behind.

 

[Leonidas]

Still mediocre gains, no new architecture. Intel is falling behind.

This is a new architecture for desktop.

Intel is ahead today where it matters (gaming).

Intel has two new architectures next year. Rocket Lake next quarter (what this thread is about) and Alder Lake coming 2H 2021.

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

I hope Intel will introduce again some monsters like core 2 duo or iSeries.

 

[PhoenixTank]

The 8C/16T 10700K was 125W PL1 and 250W PL2 as well, with power consumption not much different than the 10900K.

TDP, yes; PL2, nope.

• Core i9-10900K: TDP is 125 W, PL2 is 250 W, Tau is 56 seconds
• Core i7-10700K: TDP is 125 W, PL2 is 229 W, Tau is 56 seconds
• Core i5-10600K: TDP is 125 W, PL2 is 182 W, Tau is 56 seconds

10700k does however have lower peak boost clocks by 200MHz - 5.3 -> 5.1

The Intel Comet Lake Core i9-10900K, i7-10700K, i5-10600K CPU Review: Skylake We Go Again

www.anandtech.com

You'll also note y-cruncher peaks of 254W on the 10900k, near enough to PL2, while the 10700k is down at 207W peak way below PL2.
I'm not saying it has anything to do with gaming - just what the actual peak draw and & PL2 headroom of the Comet lake 8 & 10 cores are vs the Rocket Lake 8 core projected values with relation to what you're saying.

Doesn't change the fact that the rumours about Rocket Lake being limited back down to 8 cores seem to be true. I guess that is the downside with the backport? Bigger die, more power, less room for acceptable yields with a 10 core? Not trying to be shitty here. I genuinely want to find out what the trade offs are and potentially one has been answered by this press release.

Intel is ahead today where it matters (gaming).

I let this slide once in the OP. Technically correct but, unless AMD has absolutely fudged the numbers, in a week it won't be true. They will be behind in everything. Tunnel vision like this is why people accuse you of bias, matey. You're not wrong but you have to know that isn't the whole picture.

I haven't run the numbers yet but fully expect Rocket Lake to pip Ryzen 5000 by a few %. Single digits. Which could just as easily be irrelevant for RX 6000 buyers if Smart Access Memory actually lives up as advertised. I'm glad there is a new desktop architecture from Intel but I was expecting a Tiger Lake backport if I'm honest.

 

[SupremeHoodie]

I bought a 10900k literally this July but can’t wait to sell it and upgrade even more. lol so excited.

edit: after reading more into this...I’m not giving up 2 of the 10 cores I have already. Hope we get more info soon.

 

[Insane Metal]

 

[PhoenixTank]

 

[Leonidas]

TDP, yes; PL2, nope.

• Core i9-10900K: TDP is 125 W, PL2 is 250 W, Tau is 56 seconds
• Core i7-10700K: TDP is 125 W, PL2 is 229 W, Tau is 56 seconds
• Core i5-10600K: TDP is 125 W, PL2 is 182 W, Tau is 56 seconds

10700k does however have lower peak boost clocks by 200MHz - 5.3 -> 5.1

The Intel Comet Lake Core i9-10900K, i7-10700K, i5-10600K CPU Review: Skylake We Go Again

www.anandtech.com

You'll also note y-cruncher peaks of 254W on the 10900k, near enough to PL2, while the 10700k is down at 207W peak way below PL2.
I'm not saying it has anything to do with gaming - just what the actual peak draw and & PL2 headroom of the Comet lake 8 & 10 cores are vs the Rocket Lake 8 core projected values with relation to what you're saying.

Doesn't change the fact that the rumours about Rocket Lake being limited back down to 8 cores seem to be true. I guess that is the downside with the backport? Bigger die, more power, less room for acceptable yields with a 10 core? Not trying to be shitty here. I genuinely want to find out what the trade offs are and potentially one has been answered by this press release.


I let this slide once in the OP. Technically correct but, unless AMD has absolutely fudged the numbers, in a week it won't be true. They will be behind in everything. Tunnel vision like this is why people accuse you of bias, matey. You're not wrong but you have to know that isn't the whole picture.

I haven't run the numbers yet but fully expect Rocket Lake to pip Ryzen 5000 by a few %. Single digits. I'm glad there is a new desktop architecture from Intel but I was expecting a Tiger Lake backport if I'm honest.

I acknowledge I overlooked the PL2 numbers (just glanced at Techpowerup who had Max Turbo stressed at 254 for 10700K). So it's a 9% difference for the temporary boost before going back down to the 125W TDP.
I acknowledge that 10900K may not be the undisputed fastest gaming CPU in November also, but as you pointed out there is a good chance no 2020 CPU will hold that title after Rocket Lake launches next quarter in Q1 2021 making that point moot for me personally, as someone who has an X470 board who will have to wait till Q1 2021 for a new CPU anyways.

 

[Myths]

I mean... if I see some return when it comes to heavy video editing then I don’t mind. As it is, I’m already at 8 so I wouldn’t be losing any cores.

 

[Silver Wattle]

People really need to stop buying Intel's IPC increase claims, they haven't done shit for IPC in years.

 

[Leonidas]

People really need to stop buying Intel's IPC increase claims, they haven't done shit for IPC in years.

Intel improved IPC on mobile in 2019 and 2020 with Ice Lake and Tiger Lake, respectively, and those claims were verified.

When has Intel lied about IPC gains? Everyone knows on desktop Intel refreshed Skylake for 5+ years in a row, that stops next quarter in Q1 2021.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Apparently Rocket Lake only goes up to 8 cores so haha ok then Intel good luck with that

 

[diffusionx]

The power of 14nm++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

[Soodanim]

How to AMD chips compare for power draw? It's always been a factor for me.

 

[LordOfChaos]

Alder Lake is when they try to catch up for multicore. This will no doubt be very fast for gaming, but Zen 3 is looming and aiming to catch up as well, while still holding the MC advantage if you need it.

RCL is an interesting product, but ultimately a stepping stone to ADL.

 

[Insane Metal]

Intel 8 Core & 16 Thread Rocket Lake Desktop CPU Benchmarks:

CPU Name	Intel Core i7-10700K @ 5.1 GHz	Intel Core i9-10900K @ 5.3 GHz	Intel Core i9-11900K? @ 4.2 GHz	Versus i7-10700K	Versus i9-10900K
1-Core	148	152	179	21% Faster	18% Faster
2-Core	292	302	368	26% Faster	22% Faster
4-Core	567	599	682	20% Faster	14% Faster
8-Core	1045	1156	1115	7% Faster	3.6% Slower
64-core	1553	1988	1623	4% Faster	22% Slower

Good ST perf, ok MT perf

EDIT: wait, this is coming only in 2021?

 

[ZywyPL]

Interested to see the results, going by mobile versions of Tiger Lake we can (finally) expect some really nice performance gains, especially considering the desktops are skipping ICL and going from SKL straight to TGL. Shame they won't be made with 10nm SuperFin tho.

 

[onunnuno]

I'm saving this thread for when 5000 series is release ask Leonidas "how about today's gaming performance"

 

[JohnnyFootball]

It's pretty sad that this is what Intel has become. The level of incompetence is staggering. nvidia to their credit continues to push the envelope. This time though they may not have anticipated that AMD would have a legit 3090 competitor.

 

[PhoenixTank]

Interested to see the results, going by mobile versions of Tiger Lake we can (finally) expect some really nice performance gains, especially considering the desktops are skipping ICL and going from SKL straight to TGL. Shame they won't be made with 10nm SuperFin tho.

Sadly no, they're Ice Lake cores on desktop. Tiger Lake is just for the iGPU. Gains are there, but not as pronounced.

New Cypress Cove architecture featuring Ice Lake Core architecture and Tiger Lake Graphics architecture.

Intel improved IPC on mobile in 2019 and 2020 with Ice Lake and Tiger Lake, respectively, and those claims were verified.

When has Intel lied about IPC gains? Everyone knows on desktop Intel refreshed Skylake for 5+ years in a row, that stops next quarter in Q1 2021.

This is honestly fair and accurate. Not sure why you're getting laugh reactions on this post. Instructions Per Clock, not overall performance is the context you're addressing there and that is literally all that was mentioned in the post by Silver Wattle

I acknowledge I overlooked the PL2 numbers (just glanced at Techpowerup who had Max Turbo stressed at 254 for 10700K). So it's a 9% difference for the temporary boost before going back down to the 125W TDP.
I acknowledge that 10900K may not be the undisputed fastest gaming CPU in November also, but as you pointed out there is a good chance no 2020 CPU will hold that title after Rocket Lake launches next quarter in Q1 2021 making that point moot for me personally, as someone who has an X470 board who will have to wait till Q1 2021 for a new CPU anyways.

Appreciate the gracious response. Mistakes happen - but the info is an important distinction. Found the page you mean - 10700 non-k in Prime95 - I assume with power limits just flat out removed there. 10700k stock is 223W or 237W with max turbo and it is a whole system load which isn't ideal for looking for CPU only limits like PL2.
The AT values are for the package instead which is a better fit, IMHO. Again, I fully recognise that this is worst case/heaviest workload and not indicative of a more normal workload but... that is literally what PL2 is about: Peak short lived heavy workloads and the allowed draw.
Honestly it scales pretty accurately with the AT values too. 10700K @ 207W x1.25 cores = 258 W. Close enough to the 254W peak they saw on the 10900K.

So I still see this 8c 11 series part as basically using up the available peak power draw from the 10900K without breaking their own specs for the existing Z490 boards. Entirely possible it actually will draw less than PL2 in heavy workloads like the 10700K too, but I see it as less likely than the previous option.

Regarding the X470 - sure for you personally that makes sense but that isn't the situation for most people and doesn't change the wider reality of it. When you're bringing in news a good topic tries to keep it even handed, y'know?

Also, you could upgrade your X470 to a newer board (not suggesting you do) so it is hardly impossible for you to get the benefit of Zen 3 in a week like anyone else who has the itch for a new system (to probably go along with a new GPU). Do you actually have a Z490 mobo already? If not then the situation is comparable across vendors except you have the option to wait for Zen 3 with X470.

I also thought you said you sold your X470 motherboard. I'd be surprised if you bought another X470?

 

[master0fdeception]

It really bothers me that you have to upgrade your mobo every 2 cpu gens. I have an i7-9700k. Why cant I just buy a 11gen cpu and just plug it in.

It's almost like they are trying to make money off me...

 

[Alexios]

It really bothers me that you have to upgrade your mobo every 2 cpu gens. I have an i7-9700k. Why cant I just buy a 11gen cpu and just plug it in.

It's almost like they are trying to make money off me...

Well, AMD at times keeps the socket through years but really, to get better gains they need to revise that aspect too so gotta give it up. Hence despite revisions the last hurrah for AM4 is Zen 3 so now isn't the time to think you can be futureproof in that aspect.

 

[Leonidas]

Also, you could upgrade your X470 to a newer board (not suggesting you do) so it is hardly impossible for you to get the benefit of Zen 3 in a week like anyone else who has the itch for a new system (to probably go along with a new GPU). Do you actually have a Z490 mobo already? If not then the situation is comparable across vendors except you have the option to wait for Zen 3 with X470.

I also thought you said you sold your X470 motherboard. I'd be surprised if you bought another X470?

I had an X570 board breifly, didn't like it so I got rid of it the same day I got it. Yes I bought another X470 board and it does everything I need as a secondary rig. No I don't have Z490, I've been on an 8700K @ 5.0 GHz for the better part of the past 3 years and I'm glad I might be able to finally justify another high end CPU purchase 3+ years later, next quarter, in Q1 2021. But if it's only single digit gains in gaming like Zen3 is supposedly (vs. Intel Skylake derivatives at 5.0 GHz), I'll just wait for Alder Lake or Zen4.

 

[ZywyPL]

Some pics and new info:

Intel 11th Gen Rocket Lake Desktop CPUs Pictured, First Engineering Chips Already With OEM & Board Partners

The first pictures of Intel's 11th Gen Rocket Lake Desktop CPUs which launch next year in the first quarter have been leaked

wccftech.com

Up to 5.6Ghz on the same old 14nm process, surejan.gif...

 

[onunnuno]

Leonidas

I'm saving this thread for when 5000 series is release ask Leonidas "how about today's gaming performance"

Hey Leonidas how about's today's gaming performance?

 

[duhmetree]

I'm waiting until late 2021 for my next upgrade. It will be Ryzen 6000 or Intel 12th gen on 10nm with DDR5 RAM

 

[ResilientBanana]

Cypress Cove is a nudist colony resort.

so 10nm Architecture on 14nm? This should be interesting.

 

[Pagusas]

Man intel really made some bad investments/choices, it’s honestly suprisingly they’ve stayed competitive this long against AMD at 14nm.

 

[ZywyPL]

I'm waiting until late 2021 for my next upgrade. It will be Ryzen 6000 or Intel 12th gen on 10nm with DDR5 RAM

The DDR5 being just around the corner is tempting for me as well. But I've learned that when a RAM generation ends, that's exactly the best moment to do the upgrades - the old RAM is super fast, with low latencies, the motherboards are refined, with all the modern I/O ports you can wish for, and a lot of them as well, while the new generation of hardware is always expensive, hence missing a lot of I/O ports on the mobos to not to blow up the price even further, and the new RAM itself isn't even faster at all, but with twice as high the latencies, and higher price, you're basically paying more and getting less. It's much better to but a previous-gen high-end components, than new gen low-end, because that's essentially how the new hardware stacks up compared to old one, and I don;t think it'll be any different this time around.

 

[duhmetree]

The DDR5 being just around the corner is tempting for me as well. But I've learned that when a RAM generation ends, that's exactly the best moment to do the upgrades - the old RAM is super fast, with low latencies, the motherboards are refined, with all the modern I/O ports you can wish for, and a lot of them as well, while the new generation of hardware is always expensive, hence missing a lot of I/O ports on the mobos to not to blow up the price even further, and the new RAM itself isn't even faster at all, but with twice as high the latencies, and higher price, you're basically paying more and getting less. It's much better to but a previous-gen high-end components, than new gen low-end, because that's essentially how the new hardware stacks up compared to old one, and I don;t think it'll be any different this time around.

I get what you are saying but everything I've seen, even at its minimum, DDR5 is faster than DDR4. Bandwidth, clock speed, lower power etc... The first offering going to be at least DDR5 4800? DDR4 offerings get close and you're right that usually DDR generations overlap... as in the past generation could be faster than the newer generation

From the get-go, DDR5 should be superior to the best DDR4 offering.

 

[Leonidas]

Leonidas


Hey Leonidas how about's today's gaming performance?

Intel 14nm is still top tier gaming

 

[PhoenixTank]

Intel 14nm is still top tier gaming

TPU seems to be the odd one out with the review results popping up today. Not sure what is up, but there are several rabid comments pointing to various potential issues with nothing really conclusive as of yet.

 

[Leonidas]

TPU seems to be the odd one out with the review results popping up today. Not sure what is up, but there are several rabid comments pointing to various potential issues with nothing really conclusive as of yet.

Rabid comments from fanboys will always point to what they want to see.

 

[onunnuno]

Intel 14nm is still top tier gaming

That's on me, I should have expected you would pick a biased website.

Let's try:

Civilization TPU shows that Intel beats everyone || Anandtech, Hexus, Linus, GamerNexus shows Intel being beaten
Tom Raider TPU shows that Intel beats everyone || Linus, GamerNexus shows Intel being being beaten, Hexus has them tied
AC TP shows that Intel beats everyone || Nobody uses that game as a benchmark (makes me wonder why TPU is using it)
Battlefield TP shows that Intel beats everyone || Linus shows a good lead for AMD, the rest of the reviews don't use it
Far Cry TP shows that Intel beats everyone || Only Anandtech has that game (there's a new one...), again AMD leading Intel

The pattern is always the same. But what astonishes me is that you're seeing the 10700 beating the 10900k in almost every test, and you say "yeah that's legit", there is NO WAY that CPU is beating the 10900K with a 2080Ti.

Please, not even you can be that blind

 

[Leonidas]

That's on me, I should have expected you would pick a biased website.

They praise good AMD products, they aren't biased.

 

[PhoenixTank]

Rabid comments from fanboys will always point to what they want to see.

No doubt, but TPU still seem to be an outlier compared to everyone else. I don't suspect them of intentional bias or anything like that, but even the reviewer is unsure why they are seeing a deficit compared to AMD's figures and other outlets.

 

[Leonidas]

No doubt, but TPU still seem to be an outlier compared to everyone else. I don't suspect them of intentional bias or anything like that, but even the reviewer is unsure why they are seeing a deficit compared to AMD's figures and other outlets.

I've seen other reviews, GN showed Intel winning some games AMD winning others. Same with Hardware Unboxed.

I posted TPU because that's legitimately the first review I saw and they are usually the numbers I post on boards such as this since they put their numbers in nice graphs.

At the end of the day, from what I've seen today Zen3 is at worst slightly slower than Intel 2015 arch. on average over a wide range of games or at best a a few % faster on average over a wide range of games, which is certainly not enough to get me to upgrade from my 3 year old 8700K @ 5.0 GHz.

Here's hoping there will be a CPU in 2021 which might be worthy of an upgrade from me.

 

[onunnuno]

They praise good AMD products, they aren't biased.

The fact that they show a 10700 beating a 10900k shows that their test methods are not to be trusted. That CPU will never boost as high as 10900k, never.

I've seen other reviews, GN showed Intel winning some games AMD winning others. Same with Hardware Unboxed.

GN showed them beating 1 game, that's it. one. So, you can say AMD won every game but one. That's it.
For Hardware Unboxed, yes, they showed the 10900k winning quite a few

 

[J-Rod]

I have no faith in Intel. They’ve spectacularly failed trying to implement the last two generations of Intel’s manufacturing process, costing them billions and putting them years behind their competitors.

They’ve already sold their SSD/Memory division to SK Hynix, and are talking about moving chip production from Oregon to Asia, which seems more like an inevitability at this point.

 

[PhoenixTank]

I've seen other reviews, GN showed Intel winning some games AMD winning others. Same with Hardware Unboxed.

Indeed. More of a wash than I expected but there are some huge gains for the "I need every frame I possibly can" crowd in certain games, particularly esports getting massive bumps. GN focused less on games with their 5950X review and I look forward to seeing a wider range in their reviews for the other parts.

I posted TPU because that's legitimately the first review I saw and they are usually the numbers I post on boards such as this since they put their numbers in nice graphs.

Nah fair - remember them being your go to in a lot of instances.

At the end of the day, from what I've seen today Zen3 is at worst slightly slower than Intel 2015 arch. or at best a 1-2% faster over a large range of games, which is certainly not enough to get me to upgrade from my 3 year old 8700K.

Here's hoping there will be a CPU in 2021 which might be worthy of an upgrade from me.

I don't disagree with that, but your current CPU didn't exactly stop the 9900k & 10900k getting "crowned", in your eyes, did it?

We now have a $300 6c that, in gaming, frequently beats or matches a 10900K that is meant to retail for ~$500 . That is very exciting to see.
Rocket Lake will fire back in a few months and we'll have actual sustained competition in the market again

 

[Rentahamster]

Intel 14nm is still top tier gaming

Are you serious? You do know that these benchmarks you posted are an outlier, right? Most other sites are showing AMD winning in everything except for one or two games.

 

[FireFly]

Intel 14nm is still top tier gaming

Those tests were run with 3200 MHz memory. DF showed up a 4% performance benefit from going from 3000MHz to 3600MHz. So with 3600MHz, performance is probably a wash.

But there are big variations in individual titles, so the choice of CPU is not insigificant (eg. Gamers Nexus found the Ryzen 5950X won in nearly all the titles they tested). It will be interesting to see how well AMD do in newer titles, since in the first leaked benchmarks they were ahead in Watchdogs Legion and Flight Simulator.