Intel Alder Lake chips now occupy all top 10 positions in the current PassMark CPU Mark single-thread performance chart for high-end desktop processors. The highest-ranked AMD chip is the Ryzen 9 5950X in a lowly 26th place. Hopes are high for Ryzen 7000 "Raphael", but there is a steep mountain to climb to topple the Intel Core i9-12900 family.
https://www.notebookcheck.net/Ryzen-7000-left-with-a-mountain-to-climb-as-Intel-Alder-Lake-occupies-top-10-places-in-PassMark-single-thread-chart-while-AMD-languishes-outside-top-25.601294.0.html
If you guys think AL has a snowball's chance in hell of beating Zen4, you're frankly delusional.
RL has a very small but tangible chance of beating Zen 4 (the Intel messaging of "up to double digit performance" isn't exactly confidence inspiring), which reverts back to a snowball's chance if there are V-cache SKUs. Best case for Intel here is that RL arrives early and Zen 4 arrives late, plus V-cache parts arrive even later or are non-existent.
ML is Intel's next big hope. If consumers are lucky supply will be plentiful in 2023. Assuming both ML and Zen 5 launch on time, it could be one hell of fight. If there's a significance difference in launch windows, the company that launches that generation first is going to benefit greatly.
Well we are comparing Intel's net generation against AMD's last generation, it will be interesting to see where AMD ends up once their chips launch. If you look at the High Performance chart for CPU AMD beat Intel for the top 9 spots and 17 out of 20 in the top 20. So yeah, if you are gaming and don't care about power usage then Intel looks ok for home. But Intel has a long way to go to regain the crown and AMD's next generation chips are not even here yet.
The article says single core, doesn't matter what unless ur using antique software/games that won't mean much. Also power consumption is still high, all Intel has done is put low power/performance chips to match during lower cpu usage tImes to save on power
Alder lake has an advantage over AMDs last Gen chips in single core and multicore but at the expense of huge power draw, In a desktop right now id 100% get an Alderlake but everywhere else AMD is a more sensible choice in both Servers and Laptops and AL isn't changing that yet. The 7000 series chips when they finally appear will likely further advance AMDs power draw lead and close the gap on raw single core performance although Intel has always lead here so I suspect that will continue. I don't get why people have to have such bias around CPU brands, I have an 11th Gen Intel in my laptop and an AMD 5600x desktop side which were both the best tool for the job at the time I bought them. It's time NoteBook check and others articles reflected that rather than being an Intel mouthpiece magazine.
Well obviously this article is not reliable at all and I will explain why. Firstly who is dealing with single core benchmarks in 2022? Why I should be happy with a single core results in a multi core future. Secondly how much power does the Intel chip needs to operate? I don't see the innovation and the progress in Intel's chips. They have along way to cover and at least try to compete in a descent fight with AMD.
To those asking why single core performance is important, take music and audio work for example. Every audio plugin on a track is processed in sequence, not in parallel, and as a result all the necessary number crunching has to take place on a single core. So for music production, single core speeds are the number one consideration in many use cases.
How much for Intel pay for this clickbait? No-one gives a fig about single core performance any more!
AMD fanboi: "but single core is meaningless in multicore chips!"
...
*Opens multicore score for 12900k* - REEEEE!!!
Just because you don't care for single thread speed does not mean that there would be no users. E.g., for all my everyday software, it matters while multi-thread speed is immaterial.
OTOH Intel had to bump its top CPUs to 250W just to stay slightly ahead, so I wouldn't worry too much about AMD.
It says top 10 but it is only 3 different CPU's in there, 12900, 12700, 12600...
Another garbo "article".
Now, besides what most other people pointed out...
The difference between 12900K and 5950X (~18,2%) is smaller than that going gen on gen from 3950X to 5950X (~24,4%), but somehow some genius here had a dream where obfuscating
Funny how by the same passmark charts, but for multithreaded, 5950X is 12% faster than the 12900K, but that somehow ain't a "mountain" to climb for Intel eh? lmao
I guess there isn't much these days that can't be spinned into a clickbait title. We all know that garbage like this bring in the ad revenue. Such a sad world.
Nonsense. Zen 4 can easily improve Passmark single core performance by 40% or even more. +20-25% IPC, +400-600 MHz boost, AVX512, DDR5, V-Cache (?). There are several aspects where Zen 4 can improve significantly. And as we know, since 2020 Passmark is somewhat biased towards Intel. Average single core advantage of 12900K is more like 15%, not 20%.
Intel better should design something more competitive than their big.LITTLE shitshow. 5950X ~140W 46173, 12900K ~240W 40612.
Quote from: Tristan Jakob-Hoff on February 19, 2022, 11:30:21
To those asking why single core performance is important, take music and audio work for example. Every audio plugin on a track is processed in sequence, not in parallel, and as a result all the necessary number crunching has to take place on a single core. So for music production, single core speeds are the number one consideration in many use cases.
But you can process the tracks in parallel. Image, video or audio processing are actually very good examples of the importance of a good multicore design. Yes, in my opinion single core performance is still important. But it's not that important anymore as 20 years ago or so. Even small budget CPUs have more than enough single core performance for your daily tasks. Multicore performance and efficiency is equally important nowadays.
Quote from: rs on February 19, 2022, 20:44:14Even small budget CPUs have more than enough single core performance for your daily tasks.
Cinebench R15 single thread 93+ on Core i is good enough for light multi-tasking, although one notices that it is not the fastest. A decade ago, such a CPU cost €50, nowadays it is closer to €100. The new budget €30 - 50 is too slow for really enjoying light multi-tasking, IMO.
Quote from: RobertJasiek on February 19, 2022, 21:45:53
Cinebench R15 single thread 93+ on Core i is good enough for light multi-tasking, although one notices that it is not the fastest. A decade ago, such a CPU cost €50, nowadays it is closer to €100.
You can get something like G6900 for ~50 USD/EUR. Which comes close to Ryzen 3600's CB R23 single core score. Ten years ago you didn't get more cores/threads for that money.
Single-thread performance is obviously important. It's what you'll actually notice in a lot of cases, and an improvement to single-thread peformance obviously improves multi-thread. We are getting to the point where many users will have more cores than they need (8-12).
Zen 4 will smash Alder Lake. Raptor Lake is an open question, but is likely to take back the lead in multi-thread. After that, it depends heavily on rumors .
How much did intel pay you to write this puff piece?
What a LIE the Intel 12900 is a single processor it's not six processors this practice of making six variants of their fastest processor by appending different letters to the same name and throwing out features should be disqualified! And the 5950X is 15% faster overall than the best 12900, which ties the 5900X
Look single thread performance means nothing when you are dealing with a computer. So many processes once you turn on the computer and the OS starts you are already working from a multi-thread aspect. Having a claim to fame because of single thread performance is grasping for straws. Only multi-thread speed matter these days. Not to mention the TDP difference is slightly laughable and quite honestly means more then performance because honestly performance doesn't change to much the actual speed - it's all about power consumption.
Single threaded performance is critical to many design applications and honestly most end users work but why desktop parts are an area of conversation for a laptop forum I'm not sure. I thought efficient performance was the focus for mobile users.
All very interesting...but as a photographer who used Lightroom, Photoshop and a number of 3rd party plugins, all loaded simultaneously, my current homebuilt desktop is an AMD Ryzen and my planned replacement, homebuilt desktop will be a Ryzen 7000 based system. Single threaded performance is important in games and applications which haven't been designed to make proper use of multithreaded cpus...that means non-optimised software to me as multi core, multi threaded processors have been with us for multiple iterations of software
After the launch of Zen3, it was said that most casual game players would be satisfied with 5600X. In fact, in some cases, the 5800X had lower FPS. Intel also has a policy of using up to 8 P-cores and more E-cores beyond that. These policies indicate that:
- For applications that we consumers use on a daily basis, we only need up to 8 fast threads and a few threads to offload trivial tasks.
- For specific applications such as encoders, the total performance of all threads will be important.