Intel "Raptor Lake" Core i9 Sample Powers Up, 8P+16E Configuration Confirmed

[btarunr]

An engineering sample of a 13th Intel Core "Raptor Lake" Core i9 processor hit the web, courtesy of wxnod on Twitter, which confirms its 8P+16E core-configuration in a CPU-Z screenshot. Based on the same LGA1700 package as "Alder Lake," and backwards compatible with Intel 600-series chipset motherboards, besides new 700-series ones, "Raptor Lake" combines eight "Raptor Cove" performance cores (P-cores), with sixteen "Gracemont" efficiency cores (E-cores).

"Raptor Cove" features a generational IPC increase over the "Golden Cove" P-cores powering "Alder Lake," while the "Gracemont" E-cores, although identical to those on "Alder Lake," are expected to benefit from the doubling in L2 cache per cluster, from 2 MB to 4 MB. The ISA as detected by CPU-Z appears to be identical to that of "Alder Lake." The processor is a monolithic silicon chip built on the Intel 7 (10 nm Enhanced SuperFin) silicon fabrication process.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site | Source

 

[ratirt]

I guess the 8c is the new sweet spot and it would seem Intel is doing the core stagnation again. This time it is with 8c and just add e cores to compensate. Core count is a core count in some people's eyes. It will be advertised as 24 core anyway.

 

[Bomby569]

I think the biggest problem for Intel will be the power consumption/heat, i will happily pay a little (not much) more for even a bit less performance (not much) if i don't have to deal with a thermal nuclear cpu.

 

[P4-630]

16E cores...So this means this CPU is clearly designed for more background, server tasks?.....

 

[qubit]

"The processor is a monolithic silicon chip"

Exactly the way it should be, the most efficient. No weird latency issues between chiplets this way.

RL might finally be the generation that I upgrade my ancient 2700K to, assuming the tanking economy doesn't make me too poor to afford it that is.

 

[PapaTaipei]

I genuinely wonder what's the point of E cores for enthusiasts PC. Do they add anything at all for gaming? Wouldn't it be better to have just 10 to 12 P cores and no E cores?

 

[R0H1T]

16E cores...So this means this CPU is clearly designed for more background, server tasks?.....

No more like competing against true "16c/32t" from you know who

Do they add anything at all for gaming? Wouldn't it be better to have just 10 to 12 P cores and no E cores?

If you look at some of the benchmarks in recent times they don't do as much as perhaps Intel was expecting them to, then again they aren't necessarily competing for performance or efficiency "crown" they just want more cores!

Spoiler

 

[ratirt]

I genuinely wonder what's the point of E cores for enthusiasts PC. Do they add anything at all for gaming? Wouldn't it be better to have just 10 to 12 P cores and no E cores?

ecores are energy efficient cores and these do boost MT performance without getting the CPU to self ignite. Also it is good for marketing. instead of 10-12c (like you mentioned) you get 24cores.
Since 8 cores are kinda OK with the tasks you throw at it in a regular desktop home environment. More pcores would be reserved for server segment or HEDT where you pay extra for these.

 

[PapaTaipei]

ecores are energy efficient cores and these do boost MT performance without getting the CPU to self ignite. Also it is good for marketing. instead of 10-12c (like you mentioned) you get 24cores.
Since 8 cores are kinda OK with the tasks you throw at it in a regular desktop home environment. More pcores would be reserved for server segment or HEDT where you pay extra for these.

So for gaming the E cores add nothing?

 

[Chrispy_]

This should be a beast at CPU rendering. Gamers may hate on E-cores but those of us rendering footage for a living know the power of extremely wide, efficiency-focused rack server farms.

I wouldn't be surprised if this thing rendered faster than a 5950X. It's 24 cores vs 16 cores and for rendering, AMD gets about 1.4 effective cores out of SMT. I think an E-Core is more than 40% the performance of a P-Core, especially in a PL2-limited full-load scenario, and Intel's P-cores render slightly faster than a Zen3 core.

 

[P4-630]

So for gaming the E cores add nothing?

Sure these cores will help with gaming as well when needed.

I was joking earlier..

 

[Crackong]

16E cores...So this means this CPU is clearly designed for more background, server tasks?.....

Hybrid design is a nightmare for server applications.

There is a reason why Sapphire Rapids remains all P-core design..

 

[ratirt]

So for gaming the E cores add nothing?

See for yourself. HWUB tested this scenario.

 

[docnorth]

I think the biggest problem for Intel will be the power consumption/heat, i will happily pay a little (not much) more for even a bit less performance (not much) if i don't have to deal with a thermal nuclear cpu.

RL is supposed to be more efficient than AD, if it doesn't come close to 6 GHz of course. BTW the multiplier begins from 4, not 8, I don't know if it's something new but looks promising for idle or low load consumption.

 

[Richards]

"The processor is a monolithic silicon chip"

Exactly the way it should be, the most efficient. No weird latency issues between chiplets this way.

RL might finally be the generation that I upgrade my ancient 2700K to, assuming the tanking economy doesn't make me too poor to afford it that is.

Duck tape glue

 

[stimpy88]

"generational increase"? So we are talking 1-3% IPC gains as usual? At least the cache increase will give them hopefully another 3-5% on top of that.

"The processor is a monolithic silicon chip"

Exactly the way it should be, the most efficient. No weird latency issues between chiplets this way.

RL might finally be the generation that I upgrade my ancient 2700K to, assuming the tanking economy doesn't make me too poor to afford it that is.

You're gonna cry when Intel needs more than 8 P cores. You'll also see some serious backtracking from Intel, and how their glue is the bestest evarrrr!

 

[R0H1T]

I wouldn't be surprised if this thing rendered faster than a 5950X.

This gen will be competing against zen4, Intel could still win but it will be heavily workload/application dependent.

 

[Tsukiyomi91]

that's a lot of E-cores.

 

[ravenhold]

I think the biggest problem for Intel will be the power consumption/heat, i will happily pay a little (not much) more for even a bit less performance (not much) if i don't have to deal with a thermal nuclear cpu.

Raptors will use 25% less power and more energy efficient.

Intel's upcoming Raptor Lake CPUs could use 25% less power and become more efficient thanks to D-LVR

With a new technical approach to voltage regulation, Intel plans to vastly improve the power consumption and energy efficiency of its upcoming Raptor Lake CPUs, which could be particularly advantageous for its mobile chipsets.

www.notebookcheck.net

 

[R0H1T]

"Could" moreover this ~

Intel adds another voltage clamp in addition to the regular voltage regulator. According to Intel's example, this clamp is active when a CPU requires a current of less than 40A, which should be the case in most mobile use cases. This consequently reduces the power drawn by the CPU.

So it's close to a best case scenario!

 

[Cr4zy]

See for yourself. HWUB tested this scenario.

I wonder if setting game core affinities to P core only with E cores enabled would yeild more performance? I can only assume FPS is lower because windows is scheduling some game threads onto the E cores, but if affinities told it not to would you gain performance again because other tasks are on those leaving more performance in the P core.

 

[Bomby569]

Raptors will use 25% less power and more energy efficient.

Intel's upcoming Raptor Lake CPUs could use 25% less power and become more efficient thanks to D-LVR

With a new technical approach to voltage regulation, Intel plans to vastly improve the power consumption and energy efficiency of its upcoming Raptor Lake CPUs, which could be particularly advantageous for its mobile chipsets.

www.notebookcheck.net

that's from last year, probably just calculation the savings you get from a new node, not taking into account all else.

 

[vMax65]

The P Cores are doing exactly what is needed on the gaming front with the E cores driving more performance along with the P cores for pro workloads like rendering etc. I think they have done a good job with Alder Lake as even the 12600K is up there with the 5800X across a wide range of workloads and at gaming it is still more than decent. Heck even the 12100 and 12400 are great on the gaming side...Raptor Lake should increase the performance across gaming workloads where to be honest 8 cores is more than enough but when it comes to pro and semi pro workloads the 16 additional e cores will make a big difference. Just my view and over to AMD as the competition will hopefully drive better performance and hopefully lower prices..

 

[bug]

I think the biggest problem for Intel will be the power consumption/heat, i will happily pay a little (not much) more for even a bit less performance (not much) if i don't have to deal with a thermal nuclear cpu.

Have you noticed the "65W" in the screenshot?

 

[ratirt]

Have you noticed the "65W" in the screenshot?

That would mean around 180W power consumption while boosting.