# Intel "Rocket Lake-S" Desktop Processor Comes in Core Counts Up to 8, Gen12 iGPU Included



## btarunr (Nov 28, 2019)

Intel's 11th generation Core "Rocket Lake-S" desktop processor will come in core-counts only up to 8, even as its predecessor, "Comet Lake-S," goes up to 10. Platform descriptors for Intel's next four microarchitectures surfaced on the web, detailing maximum values of their "S" (mainsteam desktop), "H" (mainstream notebook), "U" (ultrabook), and "Y" (low power portable) flavors. Both "Comet Lake-S" and "Rocket Lake-S" are 14 nm chips. "Comet Lake-S" comes with core counts of up to 10, a TDP of up to 125 Watts, Gen 9LP iGPU with 48 execution units, and native support for up to 128 GB of DDR4-2667.

The "Rocket Lake-S" silicon is interesting. Rumored to be yet another derivative of "Skylake," it features up to 8 CPU cores, the same 125 W maximum TDP, but swanky Gen12 iGPU with 32 execution units. The memory controller is also upgraded, which supports DDR4-2933 natively. There is no "Ice Lake-H" or "Ice Lake-S" in sight (no mainstream notebook or mainstream desktop implementations), ditto "Tiger Lake." For the foreseeable future, Intel will only make quad-core designs of the two 10 nm microarchitectures. "Rocket Lake-S" is slated for 2021 when, hopefully, we'll see Intel escape the 14 nm black hole.





*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## Object55 (Nov 28, 2019)

Literally started going backwards


----------



## davideneco (Nov 28, 2019)

RKL may be sunny cove or willow cove based


----------



## Crowley (Nov 28, 2019)

btarunr said:


> For the foreseeable future, Intel will only make quad-core designs of the two 10 nm microarchitectures. "Rocket Lake-S" is slated for 2021 when, hopefully, we'll see Intel escape the 14 nm black hole.



This is just sad, 2021 and we are "hoping" that we can get to 10nm on the S series of processors. SMH


----------



## birdie (Nov 28, 2019)

Sky Lake v6! Or is it 7 or 8 already? I've lost count.


----------



## davideneco (Nov 28, 2019)

Crowley said:


> This is just sad, 2021 and we are "hoping" that we can get to 10nm on the S series of processors. SMH



Wait

Nobody hope to get a 10nm with  4c at <4ghz in 2021


----------



## Freaky_Snuke (Nov 28, 2019)

It feels as if Intel is trying to stress how long the world will still say "What is this company called that makes every cpu? Ah yes Intel!" (indicating Intels massive dominance in this regard to the average joe) when AMD is continuously stealing market and mind share compared to Intel's countless refreshes that are just embarrassing and sad at this point.


----------



## yeeeeman (Nov 28, 2019)

Freaky_Snuke said:


> It feels as if Intel is trying to stress how long the world will still say "What is this company called that makes every cpu? Ah yes Intel!" (indicating Intels massive dominance in this regard to the average joe) when AMD is continuously stealing market and mind share compared to Intel's countless refreshes that are just embarrassing and sad at this point.


Intel is doing its best to make things progress on the 10nm front as well as keep revenue's high. People can't really comprehend how big of a problem is to screw up things with a fabrication process. First of all, they had issues from 22nm. It was a sign of the fact that if they don't change something on their fab recipe, they will have bigger and bigger issues. On 14nm, they had even more issues and delays. They managed to find solutions, whatever the problem was. But going smaller to 10nm and adding lots of brave changes did send them to a total failure that we see. Now, imagine yourself having a recipe for a process. A flow that you use that becomes not enough, non scalable, not working. You need to understand why, you need to find a solution or in a the worst case, start from scratch. We don't know exactly what route they took, but I am suspecting it is the first, but they see their fixes are still not enough, hence this indefinite delay. Maybe with this failure people will understand how amazing is the fact that foundries execute so fast each and every year and how hard is to keep this going. 
Intel doesn't have too many options. One of it is very bad, going fabless. Another is to keep working on finding a solution for their problem. Maybe buy some ideas from Samsung foundries.


----------



## lemonadesoda (Nov 28, 2019)

birdie said:


> Sky Lake v6! Or is it 7 or 8 already? I've lost count.


Intel's 11th generation Core "Rocket Lake-S"  with Gen12 GPU, what a mess


----------



## notb (Nov 28, 2019)

Object55 said:


> Literally started going backwards


Why exactly?
They can't make more fast cores on 14nm. They work with the technology they have. 8 core processors will remain mainstream for years.
AMD will dominate the high-end and Intel will keep making more money.


----------



## efikkan (Nov 28, 2019)

All it takes is a random picture from the great Internet and we got the Intel bashing train rolling again…
This information is either incomplete or incorrect. Rest assured, Intel will not replace a lineup with something worse.

Also keep in mind that we don't know if Intel will retain their current product segmentation(OEM, retail, etc.), if they will release a platform consisting of both 10nm and 14nm parts, and when we'll start to see MCM CPUs on the desktop.


----------



## R0H1T (Nov 28, 2019)

*MCM* CPUs are still some ways away, I predict* 2021* & *7nm* at the earliest.


----------



## Crackong (Nov 29, 2019)

Comet Lake -> Rocket Lake ->>>> shooting star Lake ?


----------



## ratirt (Nov 29, 2019)

Lets hope Intel will make this one better. 32U and 48U for graphics. That is not much though. AMD APUs will be faster.


----------



## Vayra86 (Nov 29, 2019)

Crowley said:


> This is just sad, 2021 and we are "hoping" that we can get to 10nm on the S series of processors. SMH



Not happening, I'll spoil it for you.

Intel will axe 10nm and jump to 7nm probably even at another fab as their own. They don't want to. But they will have to. Meanwhile, they're busy covering their 14nm woes, supply issues, completely uninteresting portfolio, and while they may sell, they won't be extracting fat margins. The clock is ticking, it is a matter of time before Intel makes a move that makes sense.

Quad cores on 10nm are a lost case to begin with, performance isn't really there as clocks are low, nice for low power but never going to be cost effective, Intel's 10nm profit will have to come off enterprise which is also what they said they'd try for 10nm first and foremost and where lower clocks don't hurt. "Just quads' also doesn't mix well with having a product stack where lesser chips can easily move down the stack.

But I'm very glad they managed to upgrade the GPU once again, and it still isn't capable of much beyond the standard fare 



Crackong said:


> Comet Lake -> Rocket Lake ->>>> shooting star Lake ?



More like Smoking Crater lake



efikkan said:


> All it takes is a random picture from the great Internet and we got the Intel bashing train rolling again…
> This information is either incomplete or incorrect. Rest assured, Intel will not replace a lineup with something worse.
> 
> Also keep in mind that we don't know if Intel will retain their current product segmentation(OEM, retail, etc.), if they will release a platform consisting of both 10nm and 14nm parts, and when we'll start to see MCM CPUs on the desktop.



Say what now... they've already replaced things with worse alternatives more than once. Forgot about Broadwell's Iris IGPs? Or the QLC 660p versus its predecessors? And if I start digging, I can surely expand the list.

I fail to see how they can replace it with something _better _when all we have is more of the same, on the same node, with minor IGP bumps. All I really read is another round of creative tweaking of specs and how those are explained to us, and 'benched' by Intel. Because effectively that is what everything post Coffee Lake has been: misdirection, bad information, confusion and vagueness, combined with bad user experiences of hot chips barely doing what they are specced for, while Intel is ready to respond to it with disclaimers "don't OC a K chip"...

Sry man, credit where it is due


----------



## notb (Nov 29, 2019)

Vayra86 said:


> Intel will axe 10nm and jump to 7nm probably even at another fab as their own. They don't want to. But they will have to.


No, they won't.
They'll make CPUs using 3 different nodes - assigning them for best results.


> Quad cores on 10nm are a lost case to begin with, performance isn't really there as clocks are low, nice for low power but never going to be cost effective


In the same sentence you've called it a lost case and nice for low power. So which one is it?
Why would they not be cost effective? A 4-core mobile SoC is way more expensive (and profitable) than a 4-core desktop one.
Check pricing on Intel ARK.


> But I'm very glad they managed to upgrade the GPU once again, and it still isn't capable of much beyond the standard fare


What exactly is it not capable of?
Aside from gaming, which it's not made for. It also can't sing or bring you coffee. You expect too much.


----------



## ratirt (Nov 29, 2019)

Maybe Intel will still stay with 14nm +++ node and not go 10 nor 7  The 10nm is still faulty and can't go high end desktop so who knows.


----------



## kapone32 (Nov 29, 2019)

ratirt said:


> Lets hope Intel will make this one better. 32U and 48U for graphics. That is not much though. AMD APUs will be faster.



Hardware unboxed did a video on the Mobile part and it was just as fast or faster than the 2500U so we will have to wait and see if that is indeed the case. We also don't know what Intel's plans are for the GPU(s) they are producing. It would not surprise me to see another (APU) released from Intel with updated Graphics. Unless AMD's next APU has RDNA instead of Vega.


----------



## ratirt (Nov 29, 2019)

kapone32 said:


> Hardware unboxed did a video on the Mobile part and it was just as fast or faster than the 2500U so we will have to wait and see if that is indeed the case. We also don't know what Intel's plans are for the GPU(s) they are producing. It would not surprise me to see another (APU) released from Intel with updated Graphics. Unless AMD's next APU has RDNA instead of Vega.


Yes it was but it had 64U packed. You think Intel is going to update the graphics? Since the 5 years time what Intel did is bump clocks 200 Mhz. Intel's last mobile got more graphics units and now they are cutting it again to 48. Besides it was faster in some scenarios but is others wasn't so it also depends. 
With the GPU Intel is going for OEM I think. Servers? Workstations? I doubt it will be desktops for games maybe much further in the future but I really doubt it. 

Watch this. It explains some stuff.


----------



## notb (Nov 29, 2019)

ratirt said:


> Maybe Intel will still stay with 14nm +++ node and not go 10 nor 7  The 10nm is still faulty and can't go high end desktop so who knows.


Why exactly is 10nm faulty?
They started making mainstream large-volume SoCs. They work perfectly fine.

Of course they can't make as many 10nm chips as they'd want to, but they need a bit more time to get their 10nm fabs fully operational. But that's really the only issue left.


----------



## efikkan (Nov 29, 2019)

Vayra86 said:


> Intel will axe 10nm and jump to 7nm probably even at another fab as their own. They don't want to. But they will have to. Meanwhile, they're busy covering their 14nm woes, supply issues, completely uninteresting portfolio, and while they may sell, they won't be extracting fat margins. The clock is ticking, it is a matter of time before Intel makes a move that makes sense.


They will not skip 10nm. 7nm will start low volume production in 2021 at the earliest, and will not reach a high volume until 2022 or later.
Intel is currently having more 14nm production lines than ever, with great yields on 14nm++, and even then can't meet the demand from either the consumer market or the enterprise market. This is poor planning from their part, but is in part caused by the delays of 10nm, since this have caused increased pressure on a single node.

We should reserve judgement about Intel's 10nm+ node until it reaches volume production next year. Intel recently claimed the "yields [are] ahead of expectations for client and data-center products". But even if 10nm+ yields are good enough, I'm still wondering if the total volume will still be a restriction, which may lead to having product lineups consisting of both 10nm and 14nm products, especially for OEMs, since the volumes required there are huge. And to make matters worse, Intel have decided to launch their new dedicated GPUs at the worst possible point in time…



Vayra86 said:


> I fail to see how they can replace it with something better when all we have is more of the same, on the same node, with minor IGP bumps. All I really read is another round of creative tweaking of specs and how those are explained to us, and 'benched' by Intel.


Well, they can't do much more on 14nm alone, not for the higher performance products anyway.
If they had planned better and at least had Sunny Cove on 14nm as well, it would have helped, but anything beyond 8 cores would still have been bottlenecked by the node.



Vayra86 said:


> Because effectively that is what everything post Coffee Lake has been: misdirection, bad information, confusion and vagueness, combined with bad user experiences of hot chips barely doing what they are specced for, while Intel is ready to respond to it with disclaimers "don't OC a K chip"...


Now you're not even serious any more.
Coffee Lake are excellent chips that have been doing better than expected, especially considering them being an "improvised" backup-plan.


----------



## Vayra86 (Nov 29, 2019)

efikkan said:


> Now you're not even serious any more.
> Coffee Lake are excellent chips that have been doing better than expected, especially considering them being an "improvised" backup-plan.



Of course its part jest, but still, since Kaby Lake, K CPUs have been running very hot and OC headroom has shrunk, TDPs are being played with handily through board makers, etc etc. Excellent, yes, but also clearly at a limit. Beyond the first batch of CFL things got worse _despite_ improvements under the IHS.

As for 10nm... who knows, a lot of things can happen in the meantime, but I'm not holding my breath. Its not like TSMC and others won't keep at improving their nodes either. Can and does Intel want to keep trailing that, or lead again?


----------



## ratirt (Dec 1, 2019)

notb said:


> Why exactly is 10nm faulty?
> They started making mainstream large-volume SoCs. They work perfectly fine.
> 
> Of course they can't make as many 10nm chips as they'd want to, but they need a bit more time to get their 10nm fabs fully operational. But that's really the only issue left.


I haven't seen 10nm Intel chip for desktop market. What we got is laptop and that is all Intel can do. Maybe faulty was a little bit of a stretch from my side. Let's just say not suitable for desktop. Allthough what Intel produced or tried in the desktop market with 10nm was faulty since it didn't make it to the market. 
As far as I know and you probably remember earlier this year Intel's CPU supply problem. The problem is with 14nm and yet Intel must fulfill the contracts.  


efikkan said:


> They will not skip 10nm. 7nm will start low volume production in 2021 at the earliest, and will not reach a high volume until 2022 or later.
> Intel is currently having more 14nm production lines than ever, with great yields on 14nm++, and even then can't meet the demand from either the consumer market or the enterprise market. This is poor planning from their part, but is in part caused by the delays of 10nm, since this have caused increased pressure on a single node.


Are you sure Intel won't skip the 10nm for desktop? 7nm will start in 2021 and you have to admit we have 2020 already. Roadmaps from Intel show they are still going for 14nm (delay 10nm over an over) and this will happen in the 2020. The 10nm will only be for laptops as it is now and for desktops, if any, another worthless refresh on 14nm node.


----------



## efikkan (Dec 1, 2019)

ratirt said:


> Are you sure Intel won't skip the 10nm for desktop?


Let me be precise so people don't misunderstand me;
I'm sure Intel is planning to ship desktop parts on 10nm. Delays can happen, plans can evolve, but as of right now, that is certainly their plan.
We know Intel recently said 10nm desktop was still on the roadmap, we know Intel has added driver support for 95W Tiger Lake desktop parts, and we know Ice Lake-X exists, so at least _something_ should be coming, unless disaster strikes. And to be clear, this will be late in 2020, not early.

The big question is to what extent will Intel ship 10nm on the desktop. While Intel claims yields are good on 10nm+, production volume may still be an issue. Due to large commitments and strong market demand, Intel may prioritize server and mobile, at the expense of mainstream desktop. We may very well see a mix of 10nm and 14nm desktop parts, I just hope they prioritize well. HEDT should at least be fairly safe, as these use CPUs unsuited for Xeons.



ratirt said:


> 7nm will start in 2021 and you have to admit we have 2020 already.


7nm parts will start to ship in the second half of 2021, which is almost two years away, and will not reach high volumes until 7nm+ in 2022, almost three years away. Intel also mentioned this May that 10nm++ is coming in 2021, so this will be the high volume node in 2021.



ratirt said:


> Roadmaps from Intel show they are still going for 14nm (delay 10nm over an over) and this will happen in the 2020. The 10nm will only be for laptops as it is now and for desktops, if any, another worthless refresh on 14nm node.


Which roadmaps are you talking about?


----------



## notb (Dec 1, 2019)

ratirt said:


> I haven't seen 10nm Intel chip for desktop market.


Correct. Intel is not making any desktop CPUs using their 10nm.
I just fail to see why this makes a node faulty...


> What we got is laptop and that is all Intel can do. Maybe faulty was a little bit of a stretch from my side. Let's just say not suitable for desktop.


But how do you know that?
Desktop CPUs is not a prioritized segment. They use the 10nm supply they have for CPUs that benefit the most - mobile.

The second segment that should get 10nm are servers, but Intel likely doesn't have the production capabilities to make the switch. There's no point in making 10% of Xeons on 7nm, which on paper will leave them unattractive compared to AMD.

Desktops will be the last to update, IMO likely already to 7nm.


----------



## ratirt (Dec 1, 2019)

notb said:


> Correct. Intel is not making any desktop CPUs using their 10nm.
> I just fail to see why this makes a node faulty...


There must be a reason why Intel doesn't make 10nm desktop CPUs. Even though Intel claimed there will be 10nm desktop parts still there isn't any.
You look for an excuse. Intel claimed there will be 10nm desktop chips. Do you see any? On their press they have said that the 10nm process is still faulty and needs improvement that is why you have 14nm+++ and for the 2020 you will still get 14nm+++ refresh. 10nm is not suitable because the processor they would have released would be nothing in comparison to the competition. Besides.
2020 isn't that far away. We will see if the 10nm desktops CPUs make their way to the market.



efikkan said:


> 7nm parts will start to ship in the second half of 2021, which is almost two years away, and will not reach high volumes until 7nm+ in 2022, almost three years away. Intel also mentioned this May that 10nm++ is coming in 2021, so this will be the high volume node in 2021.


Yes, and we will have 14nm+++ till then. 10 gen was supposed to be on 10nm. I don't see 10nm for 10the desktop get but 14nm+++. The only thing that is 10nm is laptops. I understand you want Intel to release 10nm for desktops and you want the desktop parts to be awesome, just don't be surprised if it won't happen.
BTW. Intel still has problems with 14nm supply and you expect 10nm desktops to fill the gap?
Not happening bro.


----------



## efikkan (Dec 1, 2019)

ratirt said:


> Yes, and we will have 14nm+++ till then. 10 gen was supposed to be on 10nm.


14nm_+++_? I suppose you mean 14nm++.
10nm was supposed to be ready in like 2016 or something.



ratirt said:


> I don't see 10nm for 10the desktop get but 14nm+++. The only thing that is 10nm is laptops.


Right now, yes, but that's beside the point.



ratirt said:


> I understand you want Intel to release 10nm for desktops and you want the desktop parts to be awesome, just don't be surprised if it won't happen.


What I want is irrelevant for what's going to happen, I don't believe I have the power to impact Intel's decisions.
I'm just citing the facts; Intel have said 10nm desktop is on the roadmap, and they have added driver support for 10nm Tiger Lake parts, clear evidence of them intending to release something, they don't do this just for fun. But it remains to see when they will ship, and in which quantities. And those are the facts, not my opinions.



ratirt said:


> BTW. Intel still has problems with 14nm supply and you expect 10nm desktops to fill the gap?
> Not happening bro.


There is no problem with 14nm supply, just that demand is strong. Intel is making more than ever.

If you read my previous posts carefully you'd see that I'm not concerned whether Intel can make the desktop CPUs on 10nm, but the quantity of such chips. Both laptop chips and OEM desktop chips requires very high volumes compared to what AMD is shipping, which poses a challenge for Intel when moving to a new node. With 10nm+ arriving in 2020 we will see a larger selection of 10nm based products, but I don't expect a full lineup. 10nm++ in 2021 will expand the volume further at the same time as the first 7nm products arrive.


----------



## ratirt (Dec 1, 2019)

efikkan said:


> 14nm_+++_? I suppose you mean 14nm++.
> 10nm was supposed to be ready in like 2016 or something.
> 
> 
> ...


Like I said 2020 is just around the corner. We will see if the 10nm desktops show up. My bet is there will be no 10nm desktops mass production. 
14nm+++ is an obvious exaggeration just like 14nm ++++++ and so on.  I can't see 10nm desktop Intel CPUs counter AMD's Ryzen but lets hope for the best.

I remember not long ago, when Ryzen CPUs came out and people were saying supply problem, bad management, oh what other stuff there was. When I mentioned market demands I was quickly shot down, it is not the demands but AMD's production problem. Yet with Intel is always demand right although Intel is losing shares so how does the demand look for Intel now? It was an extensive conversation and I'm sure you participated in that as well. I guess winds have changed again.


----------



## ppn (Dec 1, 2019)

10nm for desktop will show up in the form of 50% IPC. 20+30 for sunny and willow cove total. might be worth the wait. pcie lanes will move to the pch. I hope it doesn't require yet another socket, other than ddr5.


----------



## ratirt (Dec 2, 2019)

ppn said:


> 10nm for desktop will show up in the form of 50% IPC. 20+30 for sunny and willow cove total. might be worth the wait. pcie lanes will move to the pch. I hope it doesn't require yet another socket, other than ddr5.


We are discussing 10nm never making to the desktop market and you say it will show up with 50% IPC? On top of that you say it is worth the wait? 50% means the IPC is going to be halved in comparison to what Intel has now so how is this worth waiting? Unless you meant 150% IPC up which I don't see coming. Intel needs new architecture to achieve this since the "lake" architecture is basically pushed to the max. What else Intel can do with it? 10nm for desktop is not coming since if it really was, it would have been here now.


----------



## R0H1T (Dec 2, 2019)

ppn said:


> 10nm for desktop will show up in the form of *50% IPC*. *20+30 *for sunny and willow cove total. might be worth the wait. pcie lanes will move to the pch. I hope it doesn't require yet another socket, other than ddr5.


Yes & I have a bridge to sell you, by any chance would you be interested


----------



## ppn (Dec 2, 2019)

average +18% + the result upto 30%. this is a big core. skylake will look like pentium4 next to it.

"On average 18% increase in IPC in comparison to 2015 Skylake "
"willow Cove is forecasted to be up to 30% increase clock for clock compare to Sunny Cove."


----------



## hat (Dec 2, 2019)

Weren't there supposed to be >8 core mainstream desktop CPUs anyway? Unless they scrapped those ideas... /shrug

Either way, any -lake CPU remains uninteresting to me. If I'm not mistaken, Sunny Cove is supposed to be the next big thing? New architecture, hopefully with improved performance and none of these nasty security bugs. We had a good run, but the lake is dried up.


----------



## ratirt (Dec 2, 2019)

ppn said:


> average +18% + the result upto 30%. this is a big core. skylake will look like pentium4 next to it.
> 
> "On average 18% increase in IPC in comparison to 2015 Skylake "
> "willow Cove is forecasted to be up to 30% increase clock for clock compare to Sunny Cove."


What is this forecast based on? 18% later on 30% for Intel CPUs year after year when I remember pretty well how things were with Intel CPU's IPC back in the days. 1% 3% up not more. Why do you think now it will be any different? Because AMD is a competition now? Well true but Intel still doesnt have any answer for Ryzen nowadays. Today Intel got nothing and now it is really needed. I remember a year or 2 ago people here stating that intel already has CPU way more efficient than Kabylake but there is no competition and there's no point of releasing them. The competition is now and still nothing. Now you say 18% 30% willow cove, sunny cove, whatever cove. Maybe this AMD situation will mobilize Intel for some work now but I seriously doubt we will see 10nm launch for desktops with 18% or even 30% IPC uplift when there was absolutely nothing for over 2 years while AMD was flooding the market with Ryzens. Don't get me wrong I'd love to see it but saying 18% IPC increase from Intel is crazy?


----------



## efikkan (Dec 2, 2019)

ppn said:


> average +18% + the result upto 30%. this is a big core. skylake will look like pentium4 next to it.
> 
> "On average 18% increase in IPC in comparison to 2015 Skylake "
> "willow Cove is forecasted to be up to 30% increase clock for clock compare to Sunny Cove."


Where does this "forecast" come from?
Willow Cove will feature a cache redesign, but I was under the impression that it was a "smaller" upgrade over Sunny Cove. Golden Cove is expected to be the next jump in single threaded performance.



ratirt said:


> <snip>
> I remember a year or 2 ago people here stating that intel already has CPU way more efficient than Kabylake but there is no competition and there's no point of releasing them. The competition is now and still nothing. Now you say 18% 30% willow cove, sunny cove, whatever cove. Maybe this AMD situation will mobilize Intel for some work now but I seriously doubt we will see 10nm launch for desktops with 18% or even 30% IPC uplift when there was absolutely nothing for over 2 years while AMD was flooding the market with Ryzens. Don't get me wrong I'd love to see it but saying 18% IPC increase from Intel is crazy?


Not sure if I'm reading you correctly, but Ice Lake(Sunny Cove) were originally targeted for 2017(!) and Sapphire Rapids(Golden Cove) for 2019/2020, and both of these have been in development for over five years. Also, Cannon Lake, the failed 10nm port of Skylake, did have some smaller improvements to the design, improvements which are carried over to Sunny Cove of course. While some may claim that Intel have been holding back, but there is no substance to that claim. That's not to say that more competition wouldn't have motivated Intel further.
I think the big difference is that Zen has spawned attention around the term "IPC" (though often incorrectly applied), which is now practically in almost every CPU discussion, but were largely absent five years ago.


----------



## ratirt (Dec 3, 2019)

efikkan said:


> Not sure if I'm reading you correctly, but Ice Lake(Sunny Cove) were originally targeted for 2017(!) and Sapphire Rapids(Golden Cove) for 2019/2020, and both of these have been in development for over five years. Also, Cannon Lake, the failed 10nm port of Skylake, did have some smaller improvements to the design, improvements which are carried over to Sunny Cove of course. While some may claim that Intel have been holding back, but there is no substance to that claim. That's not to say that more competition wouldn't have motivated Intel further.
> I think the big difference is that Zen has spawned attention around the term "IPC" (though often incorrectly applied), which is now practically in almost every CPU discussion, but were largely absent five years ago.


Honestly there's so many of these names from Intel that people are getting confused. These coves and lakes? It is starting to get harder to count all of these. Problem is that these is all just Intel theories  about releasing something new and fresh.
10nm is not happening and the improvements that you are mentioning maybe are there but these are marginal. There should be 3 gen Intel not 10th. Some people here say 2 gen considering performance uplift. I wish Intel the best but I can see and start to realize it is not happening. I will believe it when I see it and as of now all you can be sure off is delay.


----------



## hat (Dec 3, 2019)

ratirt said:


> Honestly there's so many of these names from Intel that people are getting confused. These coves and lakes? It is starting to get harder to count all of these. Problem is that these is all just Intel theories  about releasing something new and fresh.
> 10nm is not happening and the improvements that you are mentioning maybe are there but these are marginal. There should be 3 gen Intel not 10th. Some people here say 2 gen considering performance uplift. I wish Intel the best but I can see and start to realize it is not happening. I will believe it when I see it and as of now all you can be sure off is delay.


You're not kidding. Remember when Ice Lake was supposed to be on 10nm, super awesome and not have security vulnerabilities?


----------



## ratirt (Dec 3, 2019)

hat said:


> You're not kidding. Remember when Ice Lake was supposed to be on 10nm, super awesome and not have security vulnerabilities?


I never kid about serious tech stuff.  I remember that each year we get info about Intel's new upcoming processors and how great they will be and the IPC gains will be enormous per core (sarcasm) and then it turns out it is not enormous per core but basically it is a refresh of a refreshed refresh processor and vulnerabilities are swarming. I don't care much about the vulnerabilities actually but since Intel claims the premium and best of all these should not be there ever and yet here they are. 
Maybe Intel should call it quits and just focus on its 14nm++++ stopping this embarrassment and promises Intel can't keep, brainwashing young people with its attitude and bogus fairy-tales about one of a kind processor that is just around the corner.


----------



## hat (Dec 3, 2019)

I do care about the vulnerabilities. Not so much that i'm worried about being hacked through them, but the other significant downside is all the fixes that come out for said vulnerabilities that break more than they fix.


----------



## ratirt (Dec 3, 2019)

hat said:


> I do care about the vulnerabilities. Not so much that i'm worried about being hacked through them, but the other significant downside is all the fixes that come out for said vulnerabilities that break more than they fix.


Well I said I don't care thinking it is self explanatory because who would want to hack my PC and what would they get. Hesitation from Intel's side with fixing the vulnerabilities is the performance hit the CPUs get. 10th gen is a good example and yet not all fixes are applied. On the other hand, OEMs are pissed with this and the value of the product is going down, OEMs are displeased because Intel cannot deliver and the constant delays of new CPUs and supply problems of older. Well this doesn't look good cause Intel doesn't have anything not even an excuse to justify all the delays. 
I remember hype about AMD CPUs at least these were justified. this 10th gen from Intel is a joke simply put. A joke that some people say here Intel's been nurturing, developing to get AMD? If that's Intel's 5-4 year work then maybe it would have been better for Intel to focus on something else.


----------



## Midland Dog (Dec 31, 2019)

lemonadesoda said:


> Intel's 11th generation Core "Rocket Lake-S"  with Gen12 GPU, what a mess


deadhorse lake, like heck they used to be bridges and wells, like why not performancewall and nodewall


----------



## R0H1T (Dec 31, 2019)

Huh? I think it's obvious that someone at Intel is fond of swimming or phfishing hence all these lakes


----------

