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

[Selaya]

[ ... ]
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.

i wouldve been surprised if it actually wasnt faster than a 5950x - it better be, given the age of the 5950x now.

 

[BArms]

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

I was joking earlier..

Doubtful, there's not a single game out there that will use those 16 E cores, and the vast overwhelming majority won't even use the 8 P cores.

E Cores are BS for desktop PCs imo.

 

[CrAsHnBuRnXp]

Im at a loss here. I was actually debating getting Raptor Lake but im disappointed with the amount of P cores. Was hoping for at least 10-12. I dont need more cores for background tasks.

 

[bug]

Im at a loss here. I was actually debating getting Raptor Lake but im disappointed with the amount of P cores. Was hoping for at least 10-12. I dont need more cores for background tasks.

If you need that many P-cores, maybe look at Threadripper instead?

 

[CrAsHnBuRnXp]

If you need that many P-cores, maybe look at Threadripper instead?

Way too expensive.

 

[P4-630]

Doubtful, there's not a single game out there that will use those 16 E cores, and the vast overwhelming majority won't even use the 8 P cores.

This is what it looks like when I play GTA V.

 

[bug]

Way too expensive.

Yeah, well, I need a Lamborghini for $20,000, too.

 

[Prima.Vera]

So core Core7 13700K will be the same as Core9 12900K ??

 

[ppn]

Im at a loss here. I was actually debating getting Raptor Lake but im disappointed with the amount of P cores. Was hoping for at least 10-12. I dont need more cores for background tasks.

Well get used to it i guess. Meteor lake is even worse 8P _32E

 

[Leshy]

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?

What for ? 8 p cores is more than enought for a ST applications an E cores are more effective.

Let's use math. 12900k uses 303w for just 8 p cores. Let's assume, that it ll scale perfectly so 12p cores ll use 450w that's insane.

With E cores enabled it uses 297w and performance is 37% faster in cinabench and 2.5% slower in gaming

So with + 8 E cores u get other 40% for 50w maybe ? For 4p cores u ll get 50% for 150w

Note: only if it scales perfectly. With +150w heat there is no way, that it ll boost as fast as 8p

So that's why Intel goes for more E cores. They have no room for more p cores in power budget

 

[phanbuey]

What for ? 8 p cores is more than enought for a ST applications an E cores are more effective.

Let's use math. 12900k uses 303w for just 8 p cores. Let's assume, that it ll scale perfectly so 12p cores ll use 450w that's insane.

With E cores enabled it uses 297w and performance is 37% faster in cinabench and 2.5% slower in gaming

So with + 8 E cores u get other 40% for 50w maybe ? For 4p cores u ll get 50% for 150w

Note: only if it scales perfectly. With +150w heat there is no way, that it ll boost as fast as 8p

So that's why Intel goes for more E cores. They have no room for more p cores in power budget

The thing is, 12900K undervolted/underclocked by is way more efficient for negligible performance loss. They could have easily done 10P cores with less volts on the refined process if they didn't yeet the P cores way past the point of diminishing returns.

Intel Core i9-12900K Alder Lake Tested at Power Limits between 50 W and 241 W - Application Performance | TechPowerUp

so for 51W extra watts you gain 2.1% performance :/...

Drop the power curve, add 2 P cores and more cache, and you would be in the same power envelope with much better performance.

 

[Leshy]

Im at a loss here. I was actually debating getting Raptor Lake but im disappointed with the amount of P cores. Was hoping for at least 10-12. I dont need more cores for background tasks.

I don't get it ? Why do u need more p cores? In gaming it wont make a difference. And in MT task e cores are better.

 

[P4-630]

Drop the power curve, add 2 P cores and more cache, and you would be in the same power envelope with much better performance.

But would it be that easy.

 

[Bomby569]

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

like TDP means anything anymore

 

[Aquinus]

The E cores are going to be great for anything that isn't latency sensitive and/or can benefit significantly from concurrent operation of a task.

 

[bug]

The thing is, 12900K undervolted/underclocked by is way more efficient for negligible performance loss. They could have easily done 10P cores with less volts on the refined process if they didn't yeet the P cores way past the point of diminishing returns.

View attachment 252236

Intel Core i9-12900K Alder Lake Tested at Power Limits between 50 W and 241 W - Application Performance | TechPowerUp

so for 51W extra watts you gain 2.1% performance :/...

Drop the power curve, add 2 P cores and more cache, and you would be in the same power envelope with much better performance.

That's not undervolting. And only indirectly underclocking. It's just manually constrained TDP. I have my 12600k constrained to 75/125W and couldn't tell a difference. I lost a second or two in SuperPi 8M, won't miss them. I appreciate the silence, tho.

And I also believe the 12900k was pushed too far just to claim victory against 5950x. But it's otherwise a pretty efficient beast.

 

[Leshy]

The thing is, 12900K undervolted/underclocked by is way more efficient for negligible performance loss. They could have easily done 10P cores with less volts on the refined process if they didn't yeet the P cores way past the point of diminishing returns.

View attachment 252236

Intel Core i9-12900K Alder Lake Tested at Power Limits between 50 W and 241 W - Application Performance | TechPowerUp

so for 51W extra watts you gain 2.1% performance :/...

Drop the power curve, add 2 P cores and more cache, and you would be in the same power envelope with much better performance.

And if u restrain power further, u ll loose 20% for saving 48% power and ofc by lowering clock Intel would lose performance crown.

So basicly Intel could have 250w 20p CPU with 187% performance for productivity

 

[phanbuey]

And if u restrain power further, u ll loose 20% for saving 48% power and ofc by lowering clock Intel would lose performance crown.

So basicly Intel could have 250w 20p CPU with 187% performance for productivity

Right my point just was that if you wanted to, you can create a 350W 4 P core model as well, there's a balance / sweet spot around the 8-12 core range. But ST performance benefits from cache as well so IMO 8 cores yeeted to the max for an additional 2.1% would overall lose to a 10/12 core lower on the curve with more cache even in light threading - it's purely academic argument.

Im still very interested in rocket lake even with 8 cores since that's more than enough, and the e cores actually work amazingly well for me and my workloads with a 12600k. I will probably be capping power though with a low volt OC.

 

[Deleted member 185088]

I'm perplexed by those e-cores, what do they do exactly? Alder Lake parts are very fast but pathetic when it comes to efficiency, in laptops they are way worse in battery life. Seems to me thru lost the core count battle so they just throw those useless e-core and give lots of power to the p-cores.

 

[CrAsHnBuRnXp]

I don't get it ? Why do u need more p cores? In gaming it wont make a difference. And in MT task e cores are better.

I video edit too. I also stream on occasion.

 

[qubit]

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?

Exactly. I can't stand it.

 

[P4-630]

Windows 11 was designed for P and E core CPU's wasn't it?

 

[CrAsHnBuRnXp]

Windows 11 was designed for P and E core CPU's wasn't it?

Yes.

 

[P4-630]

Yes.

Guess it's only a waiting game till AMD does the same?

 

[Calmmo]

Can i take the alternative timeline intel 13th gen where that 16e core space is taken by an aditional 8 pcores instead?