Friday, October 29th 2021
Intel "Alder Lake-S" Comes in a 6+0 Core Die Variant
Intel's 12th Gen Core "Alder Lake-S" silicon apparently comes in two variants based on core count. The first one is a larger variant with 8 P cores and 8 E cores, while the second variant is a visibly smaller die with only 6 P cores, no E cores. This was revealed by an MSI Insider video presentation where pictures of LGA1700 packages with the two die types were shown off.
MSI also confirmed die-sizes and dimensions of the two. The larger C0 die measures 10.5 mm x 20.5 mm, working out to 215.25 mm² area. The smaller H0 die measures 10.5 mm x 15.5 mm, and a die area of 162.75 mm². The H0 silicon completely lacks "Gracemont" E-core clusters, and physically features six "Golden Cove" P cores. It's possible that given the 3 MB L3 slice size on the larger C0 silicon, the smaller H0 silicon physically features 18 MB of shared L3 cache.Apparently the 12th Gen Core i5 series will have two classes of SKUs. One based on the C0 silicon, with 6+4 (P+E) configuration, and the other based on the H0 silicon, with 6+0 core configuration. The already launched Core i5-12600K/KF are 6+4 core, and it's expected that the i5-12600 (non-K) will have the same core-count, too. The lower Core i5 SKUs, such as the i5-12400 and i5-12400F, could be 6+0 core. Intel probably adopted this segmentation within the Core i5 lineup to ensure that the $170-$190 SKUs, such as the i5-12400/F don't cannibalize sales of the i5-12600/K/KF/F. The company had been carrying out similar segmentation within the Core i3 series in the past few generations, where the i3-xx100 and i3-xx300 series SKUs are differentiated with L3 cache sizes.We recently spotted an i5-12400 engineering sample that confirms this core-configuration. The decision to create a smaller die for desktop could be purely economics-driven. The lower end of the Core i5 series, the Core i3 series, Pentium, and Celeron, sell in high volumes, and it makes sense for Intel to use physically smaller dies to maximize wafer utilization on its latest Intel 7 node (10 nm Enhanced SuperFin). It's also possible that the 12th Gen Core i3 series will be carved out from this silicon, by disabling two of the six P cores.
Source:
MSI Insider (YouTube)
MSI also confirmed die-sizes and dimensions of the two. The larger C0 die measures 10.5 mm x 20.5 mm, working out to 215.25 mm² area. The smaller H0 die measures 10.5 mm x 15.5 mm, and a die area of 162.75 mm². The H0 silicon completely lacks "Gracemont" E-core clusters, and physically features six "Golden Cove" P cores. It's possible that given the 3 MB L3 slice size on the larger C0 silicon, the smaller H0 silicon physically features 18 MB of shared L3 cache.Apparently the 12th Gen Core i5 series will have two classes of SKUs. One based on the C0 silicon, with 6+4 (P+E) configuration, and the other based on the H0 silicon, with 6+0 core configuration. The already launched Core i5-12600K/KF are 6+4 core, and it's expected that the i5-12600 (non-K) will have the same core-count, too. The lower Core i5 SKUs, such as the i5-12400 and i5-12400F, could be 6+0 core. Intel probably adopted this segmentation within the Core i5 lineup to ensure that the $170-$190 SKUs, such as the i5-12400/F don't cannibalize sales of the i5-12600/K/KF/F. The company had been carrying out similar segmentation within the Core i3 series in the past few generations, where the i3-xx100 and i3-xx300 series SKUs are differentiated with L3 cache sizes.We recently spotted an i5-12400 engineering sample that confirms this core-configuration. The decision to create a smaller die for desktop could be purely economics-driven. The lower end of the Core i5 series, the Core i3 series, Pentium, and Celeron, sell in high volumes, and it makes sense for Intel to use physically smaller dies to maximize wafer utilization on its latest Intel 7 node (10 nm Enhanced SuperFin). It's also possible that the 12th Gen Core i3 series will be carved out from this silicon, by disabling two of the six P cores.
64 Comments on Intel "Alder Lake-S" Comes in a 6+0 Core Die Variant
That sentence makes perfect sense to me: The author is postulating that the product segmentation is set up so that the xx400 SKUs don't take away sales from the xx600 SKUs. Not sure what "proper terminology" you're referring to here
What I suspect it comes down to is what combination gives the best performance to stay competitive vs AMD and still not go absolutely overboard with powerdraw.
From what I can read from early numbers and rumours, it doesn't look that brilliant for Intel.
Intel seems to have the edge in single core performance, but in multi core it's a different matter. Intel looks to be able to beat AMD's Ryzen 5800x and maybe 5900x, and come close to 5950x ... as long as Intel can run in High Power mode, but as soon as the heat goes up and clocks go down AMD has the upper hand, and it looks like Intel can only do this at a significant higher powerdraw.
But that is only the impression I get from early numbers, we will soon see what's what when reviews drop come Thursday.
I want my reviews to review on the weekend :)
Intel demand Win11 scheduler for a reason
The Win10 scheduler problem must be either one of these:
1. Focus on the E cores and leave the P cores idle
2. Focus on the P cores and leave the E cores idle
3. Complete mess in scheduler choosing between P and E cores
You kinda spoiled the entire picture by saying No.1 is wrong.
No.3 seems like a logical guess for why Intel refuses to "Leak" any Win10 related scores.
better way is to take a Socket 1200, 10400 or 11400 and even cheapter boards too.
In the class where are E Cores usefull they dont bring them (non k 65w, 35w), but with 125w u get E Cores :kookoo:
Is there any logic by Intel ?, it seems not.
For big.LITTLE these differences between Win10 and 11 are significant, but others not so much. We're talking losing 2 out of 187 FPS for Win 11 on Zen 3 - and no the patch didn't make any difference in the aggregate.
For that matter, Rocket Lake lost 1 FPS. That kind of difference is really in the margin of error (185 vs 187 on Zen 5900X, and 174 vs 173 on RKL) :
www.anandtech.com/show/16959/intel-innovation-alder-lake-november-4th/3
Alder Lake isn't quite the same as Lakefield in that the hardware-based Thread Director means that it technically isn't wholly at the mercy of Microsoft like Lakefield was.
Allegedly, the core switching based on window focus goes away when you use a High Performance power plan. I guess it's time for Intel users to share in the angst of Windows' load balancing shenanigans.
Unfortunately, if Ian is right, the end result looks much the same as Ryzen 3000/5000 and Lakefield. The Windows scheduler still reigns supreme over Thread Director, the latter only "suggests" changes to the former. Same deal as Ryzen where the first ranked CPPC core may be significantly better quality, but Windows demands two "first-ranked" cores to be available, and will still use Core 0 even if CPPC says it's dead last quality, whenever it pleases.
And much like AGESA, it looks like Thread Director's logic isn't dynamic (doesn't learn as it goes with say DL), but might be possible to continuously improve through microcode updates, much like AGESA. So we could either see both companies focus on long-term firmware support, or Intel goes back to its old ways and Alder Lake quickly falls into neglect in favour of the next "latest and greatest".
Not bad. But nothing game changing either and it speaks volumes of Intel's faith/long term plan with this stuff. They're in wait and see mode, I reckon, while its the best they can come up with at the same time.
But then again, mainstream desktop is also not the best view of the market, let's face it. We're in no-mans land here, DIYing with our PCs. No allegiance to anyone. We get scraps and leftovers, which is ADL-S.
Apparently it hits not so much when you do a fresh install of Win 11, but when you subsequently swap out to a different AMD CPU.
This may explain why some people are reporting really bad results, and others are reporting no or negligible differences.
Edit: Farther down he is tracing this back to what appears to also be Radeon drivers affecting Win 11.
So, have to swap an AMD CPU and have an AMD GPU, or so it appears right now.
Another Windows 11 exclusive.
Tom's did a bunch of tests that showed effectively no difference between Win 11 and Win 10 with Zen 3, but they probably have a cleaner process than the majority youtube reviewers, i.e. clean install or even separate but identical test rigs with just different CPU and a totally clean install on each and so on. Youtubers having fewer resources are more likely to be re-using the same gear and taking shortcuts without totally clean installs, so they are stumbling onto this.
Why would it be an Adrenalin driver problem?
In 4k, YES
1080p, Nope