Obviously they will, writing off a company of Intels caliber as completely incapable is silly. If AMD managed to pull through some really bad times when they were releasing straight trash in the CPU market, then Intel surely will bounce back.
Hell, not like their current offerings are awful. They might be somewhat inferior to AMDs in some regards, but still solid. We are a far cry from the absolute slaughter that was Bulldozer vs Sandy/Ivy.
This is absolutely true.
No where close or even a comparison to the slaughter of Bulldozer and variants vs Sandy/Ivy and Haswell and such before Zen vs Intel.
In fact in consumer desktop and laptop space not even a clear cut performance advantage for AMD if you take power consumption out the equation, Intel Raptor Cove P cores at clock normalized levels still provide belter IPC than Zen 4 by like 7% Even Golden Cove has a slight IPC lead over Zen 4 in most workloads though its tiny by like 2-3% at most if that.
So Intel in desktop and mobile space far from inferior to AMD based on above.
However when it comes to power draw and even Golden Cove having 2-3% better IPC and Raptor Cove like 7% better IPC only, power draw is enormously higher. And while thats not a concern to most enthusiasts who have huge cases and do not care about noise and/or water cool, it matters to those who like noise dampened cases and quiet systems with an RTX 4090 which in of itself dumps a lot of heat into the case. To add on top of that so much extra heat dumped into case heating up other components with an Intel CPU vs an X3D or other Ryzen 7000.
Yes LGA 1700 10nm nodes are easier to cool compared to 7nm and of course 5nm at same power draw, but that almost is irrelevant when power draw is so much higher with Intel that it still runs just as hot or hotter on dual tower air cooler. Plus the excess heat dumped into case heating up other components faster.
To me that matters as I use a Silent Base 802 with an RTX 4090 and oh boy with Intel it heats up more than with a 7800X3D despite 7800X3D being much harder to cool relative to its lower power but oh it dumps' so much less heat into the case than Raptor Lake.
Though both have pros and cons on each platform.
AMD platform is more advanced with PCIe lanes to CPU as you can get 2 dedicated X4 direct to CPU NVME without sacrificing the full X16 direct GPU lanes/ Where as Intel only has one. Though Intel at chipset level if a little more stable. AMD at CPU level probably more stable given Raptor Lake manual overclock random stability issues when thought to be stable then boom its not plus the inconsistent Intel DDR5 memory controller while more performant and capable of much higher speeds more random instabilities compared to AMD where if it boots at EXPO 6000 or DOCP1 its usually stable and no randomness.
SO both have pros and cons and competition between each other.
Now in the server and enterprise space, AMD is beating Intel badly as Sapphire Rapids despite being Golden Cove has severely slower L3 cache and gimped IPC compared to consumer/client Golden Cove.
I mean the Intel 12400 spanks Xeon 2455X at 200MHz less in CInebench 2024 single thread:
The Intel Core i5-12400 has 6 cores with 12 threads and is based on the 12. gen of the Intel Core i5 series. The processor uses a mainboard with the L
www.cpu-monkey.com
The Intel Xeon w5-2455X is a 12 core processor. It can handle 24 threads simultaneously and was introduced in Q1/2023. The Intel Xeon w5-2455X is base
www.cpu-monkey.com
SO while maybe not the slaughter in enterprise space that the Bulldozer days in consumer space was, AMD is whipping Intel there for now though Intel can survive more on brand name in that space.
SPR has IPC slightly worse than Zen 3 per Cinebench 2024 which is hugely disappointing as no HEDT option for more than 8 P cores with Golden Cove or better IPC unlike the Broadwell E and prior days which had same IPC as desktop Haswell and broadwell. Nevermind he fact also on a mesh which sucks for gaming. That was also case for Skylake X and Cascade Lake X though I do not think the later 2 had the gimped IPC SPR has compared to client versions despite gimped latency.
Latency with 4 KB Pages:
Last year, Intel’s Golden Cove brought the company back to competitive against AMD.
chipsandcheese.com
To answer the actual thread title question though as to whether Intel will deliver a processor or chipset worth waiting for, well I hope so.
I want something with more than 8 P cores on a single ring bus with the Golden Cove or Raptor Cove architecture and not just more e-cores and hybrid arch. I would buy such a CPU despite its power requirements.
I also wish AMD would have a CPU with more than 8 cores om a single CCD. They have CPUs with more than 8 P cores, but they are dual 8 core or 6 core CCDs and cross CCD latency terrible for gaming.
While true that right now 8 cores is enough or more than enough for high end gaming, it would be nice to have some head room without having to go e-core route with the scheduling issues or dual CCD scheduling issues for the rare games that may scale beyond more than 8 cores without sacrificing latency on all other games as a set and forget it solution without resorting to process lasso and such.
Intel has ability to do it so come I am wafting for it and its worth waiting for so deliver it Intel.
I am not interested in max 8 P core with no HTC and only 5% single thread uplift Arrow Lake with advanced e-cores. I would rather go 8 core Zen 5 X3D in such case despite that AMD is also going to max at 8 cores per CCD on Zen 5 on desktop space and even HEDT space, they will have a 16 core CCD, but those will be gimped cache Zen 5C cores, not regular Zen 5 cores on single CCD.
Its easier for Intel to make such a CPU than AMD as AMD is constrained by TSMC process and they just have all 8 core CCDs coming off and can only mark 2 defective or all good and sell 6 and 8 core single CCD CPUs or dual CCD 6 and 8 core CPUs which become their 12 and 16 core counterparts and they have been doing that since Zen 3 and appears will continue with Zen 5 as that is cheaper than separate CCDs with different core counts.
Intel on other hand makes their own and they even had separate dies for Comet Lake with the 10 core one being a different die form the 8 core and below.
So come on Intel deliver a 10-12 P core Golden Cove or Raptor Cove on a ring bus CPU on LGA 1700 or one on Arrow Lake whatever new Tile based tech or process its on. You have a buyer in me, If you just put more e-cores in, I am sticking with 8 cores X3D chips or 8 core regular singular CCD ones from AMD and will just deal with not taking advantage of games scaling beyond 8 cores and whatever penalty it is.
If it can do 5.5Ghz at same power that is still 1Ghz more. pretty good.
Im still not convinced that intel has a working 20A, or simply pulls a Bartlett lake 12 core and calls it a day.
the best part is if the "F" CPU arives without a GPU tile. So we don't overpay for something useless that just sits there.
I'd be very happy if Intel instead pulled a 12 P core Bartlett Lake (better be on a ring bus even if they ditched Arrow Lake 20A node). I would buy that and keep instead of Zen 5 even if/when Zen 5 has 15-20% or even higher single thread uplift as they will still have only 8 cores per CCD and I would still have the great Raptor Cove IPC but an extra 2-4 cores and as games become more threaded I would do just fine plus extra cores for background tasks without the potential e-core hybrid arch headaches.
