• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • Hey Guest. Check out the NeoGAF 2.2 Update Thread for details on our new Giphy integration and other new features.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Intel Rocket Lake-S features PCI-Express 4.0, Xe Graphics, New Architecture

Leonidas

Member
Mar 6, 2007
2,619
2,903
1,820

New Architecture could be two generations beyond Skylake
Xe Graphics
Expected Late 2020

Hoping the new architecture lends itself well to gaming, this could end up being the fastest gaming CPU once it arrives...
 

Leonidas

Member
Mar 6, 2007
2,619
2,903
1,820

Intel claimed that Ice Lake’s Sunny Cove delivers an 18% instruction per clock (IPC) improvement over Skylake. Willow Cove, in turn, might improve IPC another 5-10% or so.

This hinted at Rocket Lake using Intel’s long-announced mix-and-match chiplet strategy to mix a 14nm CPU with a 10nm graphics chip.

This new architecture will also come with support for both AV1 encode and decode, which is a big deal given how CPU intensive the codec is. This in turn implies that both Tiger Lake and DG1 will also support it, which is great news.

This all sounds very good/interesting.

Hopefully this ends up launching this year, could see myself doing a new upgrade with Rocket Lake + RTX 3000 for the ultimate gaming performance :lollipop_smiling_face_eyes:
 

PhoenixTank

Member
Jul 13, 2017
1,361
1,494
705
Finally backporting the architecture? Excellent if true.
Sadly would make Comet Lake a poor buy if rumours and timeline are accurate.
 

Agent_4Seven

Member
May 6, 2012
3,586
1,835
830
14nm? Again!?



GTFO Intel:messenger_tears_of_joy:
 

wordslaughter

Banned
Apr 17, 2019
1,377
3,952
445
So, they're 18 months behind AMD on PCIe 4.0 and they're STILL on 14nm, in LATE 2020 (probably delayed too knowing Intel)?

This is a joke right? Early April fools?
 
Last edited:
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: MightySquirrel
Dec 14, 2008
33,763
2,215
1,360
Intel actually backporting an architecture meant for a new node to the old one isn't a good thing. It means they still aren't ready for 10nm or 7nm with good yields and clock speeds and aren't planning to be for the foreseeable future.

Should be interesting to see how this compares to Zen 3 this year.
 

Leonidas

Member
Mar 6, 2007
2,619
2,903
1,820
Intel actually backporting an architecture meant for a new node to the old one isn't a good thing. It means they still aren't ready for 10nm or 7nm with good yields and clock speeds and aren't planning to be for the foreseeable future.

First new desktop architecture since Skylake is a good thing. This is potentially two architectures ahead of the fastest gaming CPU architecture on PC.

Architecture matters more than manufacturing node.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cartman414

Leonidas

Member
Mar 6, 2007
2,619
2,903
1,820
Finally backporting the architecture? Excellent if true.
Sadly would make Comet Lake a poor buy if rumours and timeline are accurate.

At least it will have the gaming performance crown and be a drop in upgrade for Rocket Lake later on.

There is no guarantee that Rocket Lake will improve gaming performance, but we can safely say Comet Lake will be the fastest gaming CPU upon launch.
 

smbu2000

Member
Mar 6, 2012
947
129
475
Intel still riding that 14nm train. I guess they are still having 10nm issues since their current 10th gen 10nm mobile chips can’t clock as high and have fewer cores than their 10th gen 14nm mobile chips.
 

PhoenixTank

Member
Jul 13, 2017
1,361
1,494
705
At least it will have the gaming performance crown and be a drop in upgrade for Rocket Lake later on.
Same socket confirmed? Did I miss that in the article? Just saw reference to 400 & 500 chipsets for Comet and Rocket respectfully. Would be sensible, but is usually the exception rather than the rule for Intel's boards.

There is no guarantee that Rocket Lake will improve gaming performance, but we can safely say Comet Lake will be the fastest gaming CPU upon launch.
Really depends on how things shake out. A little extra boost frequency, some extra cores on the top end. Not something anyone at the high end should wait for. Primary benefit is the mid range with HT, as you've said before. Hopefully better prices to go with it too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Leonidas

DESTROYA

Member
Jan 1, 2011
10,069
15,406
1,200
USA
As long as you have a good cooling system I really don’t see whats the huge difference between 7nm and 14nm if performance is there.
It’ll all come down to price as always. Either way I’m not in the market for a upgrade but I am looking to see the price/performance ratio with new hardware.
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: Elektro Demon

Leonidas

Member
Mar 6, 2007
2,619
2,903
1,820
Same socket confirmed? Did I miss that in the article? Just saw reference to 400 & 500 chipsets for Comet and Rocket respectfully. Would be sensible, but is usually the exception rather than the rule for Intel's boards.

Ah, I overlooked that part, yeah looks like Comet launches with 400 Series and Rocket Launches with 500 Series.

They are both LGA 1200 though so there is a possibility that 400 Series can be updated... Intel has allowed motherboards of the same socket to be upgraded to the new CPU in the past, where possible, don't see why they wouldn't allow it here.

They'll catch up with PCIe 4.0 one year after AMD, better late than never I guess. Too bad it's still 14nm. Maybe 10nm or 7nm in 2022?

And AMD might catch up to top tier 2017 gaming performance 3-5 years after Intel. Better late than never, right?
 

Elektro Demon

Shits and Giggles
Nov 9, 2019
4,528
7,953
815
Croatia
www.youtube.com
Ah, I overlooked that part, yeah looks like Comet launches with 400 Series and Rocket Launches with 500 Series.

They are both LGA 1200 though so there is a possibility that 400 Series can be updated... Intel has allowed motherboards of the same socket to be upgraded to the new CPU in the past, where possible, don't see why they wouldn't allow it here.



And AMD might catch up to top tier 2017 gaming performance 3-5 years after Intel. Better late than never, right?
Bro, what are you on about?

It's a few percent difference. The price of 9900k and 3900x is the same. Actually, 3900x is cheaper now.
And also, you get a solid cooler packed in the box. And 4 more cores. That comes in handy with non gaming stuff. And it's on 7nm. Which Intel dreams everyday about but can't seem to reach.
 
  • Fire
Reactions: GreatnessRD

Shin

Banned
Feb 4, 2013
5,865
4,532
995
and they're STILL on 14nm
To their credit and depending which sector of the market you belong to it's holding it's own against TSMC's 7nm.
Granted that I'd like to see the performance of Intels CPU's on 7nm, but outside of editing which doesn't apply to most of us they still fair well and/or better in gaming.
It's kinda fucked up when you think about it 14nm vs 7nm being almost equal or within margin of each other.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Leonidas

Insane Metal

Member
Mar 11, 2006
26,184
20,026
2,180
Br
Ah, I overlooked that part, yeah looks like Comet launches with 400 Series and Rocket Launches with 500 Series.

They are both LGA 1200 though so there is a possibility that 400 Series can be updated... Intel has allowed motherboards of the same socket to be upgraded to the new CPU in the past, where possible, don't see why they wouldn't allow it here.



And AMD might catch up to top tier 2017 gaming performance 3-5 years after Intel. Better late than never, right?
Well if you play at 720p or 1080p in 2020, maybe yes 🤷‍♂️ how about other tasks tho?
 
Last edited:
Jan 7, 2018
1,951
2,241
590
Bro, what are you on about?

It's a few percent difference. The price of 9900k and 3900x is the same. Actually, 3900x is cheaper now.
And also, you get a solid cooler packed in the box. And 4 more cores. That comes in handy with non gaming stuff. And it's on 7nm. Which Intel dreams everyday about but can't seem to reach.

The only important part is at higher resolutions [above 1080p] you're limited even by the fastest gpu on the market , thats how fast AMD zen 2 is now. 3700x makes Intel totally irelevant. 3700x is only 270 [pounds], while 9900K is 470 for a few percent difference. :messenger_grinning_squinting:
 
Last edited:

Leonidas

Member
Mar 6, 2007
2,619
2,903
1,820
The only important part is at higher resolutions [above 1080p] you're limited even by the fastest gpu on the market , thats how fast AMD zen 2 is now. 3700x makes Intel totally irelevant. 3700x is only 270 [pounds], while 9900K is 470 for a few percent difference. :messenger_grinning_squinting:

Ryzen 3000 is abysmal value compared to Ryzen 1000/2000.

Best Value = Ryzen 1000/2000
Middle Ground = Ryzen 3000
Best Gaming = 9700K/9900K
 
Jan 7, 2018
1,951
2,241
590
Ryzen 3000 is abysmal value compared to Ryzen 1000/2000.

Best Value = Ryzen 1000/2000
Middle Ground = Ryzen 3000
Best Gaming = 9700K/9900K
3600 is by far the best value out there right now, until zen 3 4000 series.

Ryzen 5 3600 will let you enjoy all next gen [7 years] of 60 + fps having 12 threads [that's what ps5 and xbxs will use for most games + 2 cores dedicated for streaming etc], but in order to get 60 + fps on next gen games you most likely need 9900K from Intel side, because 9700k does not have HT. 9900K is over 3 times more expensive than Zen 3600.

Intel offerings below 9900K are totally worthless, if you want to keep it for next gen. 9900K simply can't compete with AMD offering in price / perf. And I highly doubt upcoming Lake S will be able to compete with 4000 series either.
 
Jan 7, 2018
1,951
2,241
590
1600 AF kills it at $85. 3600 is over 2x the price.
True. I still like 3600 more. It's more than 3 times cheaper than 9900K and can give you same fps at above 1440p resolutions, but you're right 1600 AF is king if you play at 4K at just 85$ :pie_grinning_sweat:
 

Leonidas

Member
Mar 6, 2007
2,619
2,903
1,820
They will be fine at 60+ fps for whole next gen unlike say those poor chaps who got 9700K.

9700K is much faster than 3600 today and that's not going to change any time soon.

I'd take 9700K over next-gen console CPU. I'd take 9700K over 3600, even at twice the price. Much faster than console clocks and Intel performs better per clock than Zen2 in gaming.

3600 could easily fall behind next-gen console CPU, there is some uncertainty there. The clock speeds are barely faster than console with fewer cores. I'm sure it will run all the games fine, but then so would 1600 AF at $85, and you'd have saved $100.
 
Last edited:
Jan 7, 2018
1,951
2,241
590
9700K is much faster than 3600 today and that's not going to change any time soon.

I'd take 9700K over next-gen console CPU. I'd take 9700K over 3600, even at twice the price. Much faster than console clocks and Intel performs better per clock than Zen2 in gaming.

3600 could easily fall behind next-gen console CPU, there is some uncertainty there. The clock speeds are barely faster than console with fewer cores. I'm sure it will run all the games fine, but then so would 1600 AF at $85, and you'd have saved $100.
I heard the same nonsense before current gen about how i7 is not needed and i5 with its 4 threads are gonna be good enough. Well.. Same story will repeat again next gen where 9700K will choke compared to 3600.
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: wordslaughter

Leonidas

Member
Mar 6, 2007
2,619
2,903
1,820
I heard the same nonsense before current gen about how i7 is not needed and i5 with its 4 threads are gonna be good enough. Well.. Same story will repeat again next gen where 9700K will choke compared to 3600.

You heard it from people cheaping out and going with items that were on the verge of obsolescence. Kinda like the people today who recommend obsolete AMD GPUs with no next-gen features...

9700K will never lose to 3600 in gaming. And once the 10-series launches your argument is meaningless because every Intel desktop gaming CPU will have HT.
 
Last edited:

Leonidas

Member
Mar 6, 2007
2,619
2,903
1,820
Looks like Rocket Lake will be getting Z490 compatibility, a motherboard which launches imminently. Making this yet another Intel board getting two generations of support.


They wouldn't have put PCIe 4.0 support on those boards otherwise.
 
Last edited:

cartman414

Member
May 3, 2006
9,679
309
1,365
You heard it from people cheaping out and going with items that were on the verge of obsolescence. Kinda like the people today who recommend obsolete AMD GPUs with no next-gen features...

9700K will never lose to 3600 in gaming. And once the 10-series launches your argument is meaningless because every Intel desktop gaming CPU will have HT.

HT is one of those "nice to have but not absolutely crucial" things, at least as of now. The 9700K (my current processor, yay) was able to beat the 8700K in most benchmarks despite being non-HT.

The backporting is Intel finally course correcting. I've been satisfied with CFL-R, but this is a very good thing going forward.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Leonidas