Specifications K-Model Rocket Lake processors have surfaced

Published by

Click here to post a comment for Specifications K-Model Rocket Lake processors have surfaced on our message forum
#5881984
data/avatar/default/avatar14.webp
Terrible specs. The new i7, same cores and slower base and turbo.. oh dear.
#5882026
data/avatar/default/avatar10.webp
Richard Nutman:

Terrible specs. The new i7, same cores and slower base and turbo.. oh dear.
Why do we still these comments? Whos the F cares about clock speeds if the IPC improvements more than makes up for that?
#5882035
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/165/165018.jpg
vazup:

Why do we still these comments? Whos the F cares about clock speeds if the IPC improvements more than makes up for that?
it matters when comparing Intel to Intel. With lower clocks you end up with less of a net increase in performance over all compared to the previous gen.
#5882036
data/avatar/default/avatar15.webp
vazup:

Why do we still these comments? Whos the F cares about clock speeds if the IPC improvements more than makes up for that?
Even with the IPC improvements, the lower clock is taking part of that away. I think the performance is going to be underwhelming compared to 10th series. The i9 losing 2 cores, it performs significantly worse in multithreaded workloads. https://www.extremetech.com/computing/318065-leaked-benchmarks-paint-conflicting-picture-of-intels-rocket-lake
#5882043
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/227/227994.jpg
Think i'm going for a Non-K, seems FPS wise it's not a big deal in gaming.
#5882081
data/avatar/default/avatar29.webp
With a base frequency difference of 200 mhz in the 4Gzh realm i do not think you seen any stolen performance. the IPC improvements bring a cost of watt used, because of more transistor switching, per clock, without changing the underline technology of material i think those processor will be overall faster by a notch. You will get more performance compared to the 10th gen per watt used, how you get that is intel business clock or ipc we should not complain.
#5882551
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/246/246171.jpg
Kool64:

it matters when comparing Intel to Intel. With lower clocks you end up with less of a net increase in performance over all compared to the previous gen.
We're only talking a ~2% lower clock here. By your logic, that means the 2200G is a worse product than the A12-9800. Same socket, same company, same thread count, same wattage, etc, but the 9800 is clocked higher. @vazup isn't wrong to question why we're making a fuss about something pretty insignificant compared to the overall IPC performance gains. We don't want another Pentium 4 situation on our hands. We want lower clock speeds without sacrificing performance. That's what Intel is doing. This is a good thing.
#5882554
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/198/198862.jpg
So i7 and i9 is the same this gen? Holy crap intel lost it.
#5882612
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/165/165018.jpg
schmidtbag:

We're only talking a ~2% lower clock here. By your logic, that means the 2200G is a worse product than the A12-9800. Same socket, same company, same thread count, same wattage, etc, but the 9800 is clocked higher. @vazup isn't wrong to question why we're making a fuss about something pretty insignificant compared to the overall IPC performance gains. We don't want another Pentium 4 situation on our hands. We want lower clock speeds without sacrificing performance. That's what Intel is doing. This is a good thing.
No because obviously the IOC gain is significant enough to overcome lower clock speeds but 15%(just a number) IPC gains on the same or greater clock speeds is still more significant than 15% at slightly lower speeds.
#5882779
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/282/282657.jpg
Specs are just disappointing....only 8 cores....it seems Intel just wants to grab the gaming performance crown with this gen, but let´s wait and see for real performance reviews....AMD is clearly still ahead in core count, it makes them more usable for non gamer....
#5882792
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/216/216349.jpg
Kool64:

it matters when comparing Intel to Intel. With lower clocks you end up with less of a net increase in performance over all compared to the previous gen.
The lower clocks only exist so Intel can say the CPUs still have a TDP of 125w. In real conditions the turbo is going to kick in almost all the times and the TDP is going to shoot up. The 200Mhz lower clocks are academical, at best, so Intel can say that TDP is still decent, nothing more. The only thing missing is the prices, that could make or break this release.