Intel 12th-Gen Core Alder Lake Architectural Benchmark

[Strawman]

I agree, looking at benchmarks is not enough. You have to understand them. Apparently you don't. Of freaking course when you are comparing power unlocked CPU's in blender or other heavily threaded workloads they won't do well in efficiency. Who would have thought, right? If you actually limit them to the same watts, the difference is actually not that big. You can tell by igor's benchmarks, locking the 12900k to 125w (compared to stock 240) makes it way more efficient without much loss in performance.

Also, you keep ignoring lowly threaded apps. Anything that is not blender or cinebench alder lake completely crushes zen 3. Derbauer made a video as well, comparing consumption during gaming. It's not even close, the 12900k completely smashes the 5950x.

So yeah, high end Ryzen chips (5950x and 5900x) have an advantage in heavily threaded apps, alder lake have a huge advantage in lowly threaded apps and gaming. That is NOT a "huge lead in efficiency". That's just a flat out lie.

Also calling reviewers "paid by Intel" just because you don't like their numbers just makes it obvious you are just an amd fanboy. Alderlake won this time around, get over it.

 

[HardReset]

I agree, looking at benchmarks is not enough. You have to understand them. Apparently you don't. Of freaking course when you are comparing power unlocked CPU's in blender or other heavily threaded workloads they won't do well in efficiency. Who would have thought, right? If you actually limit them to the same watts, the difference is actually not that big. You can tell by igor's benchmarks, locking the 12900k to 125w (compared to stock 240) makes it way more efficient without much loss in performance.

Of course power unlocked CPU's are not that efficient. That's why Igor's PBO boosted figures for AMD's 12 and 16 core CPU's make no sense. You claimed 5950 efficiency is close to Intel's offerings, in reality they are far away.

Also, you keep ignoring lowly threaded apps. Anything that is not blender or cinebench alder lake completely crushes zen 3. Derbauer made a video as well, comparing consumption during gaming. It's not even close, the 12900k completely smashes the 5950x.

We are talking about 24/32 thread (X5900/X5950) or 20/24 thread CPU's (12700K/12900K). Intel CPU's also contain efficiency cores, just for multi threading. There's more than enough reason to concentrate on multi thread apps. On gaming Alder Lake is pretty fast yes, but again, if power consumption is limited on same levels full load as on AMD side, then it would be much tighter fight.

So yeah, high end Ryzen chips (5950x and 5900x) have an advantage in heavily threaded apps, alder lake have a huge advantage in lowly threaded apps and gaming. That is NOT a "huge lead in efficiency". That's just a flat out lie.

Talking about 20+ thread CPU's, focus has to be on high thread counts. Who buys 20 thread CPU for low thread loads? Right. Zen3's better efficiency is pure fact. You can read it almost on any review, expect few Intel biased of course.

Also calling reviewers "paid by Intel" just because you don't like their numbers just makes it obvious you are just an amd fanboy. Alderlake won this time around, get over it.

So like, AutoCAD is software that well reflects real world usage? What's your opinion? Now, AutoCAD also happens to been Intel optimized software for decades. That makes review clearly Intel biased, no question. Saying well known facts makes me AMD fanboy just because you cannot accept truth?

Alder Lake won what? Yeah, if you play games, don't care about power consumption or run low thread loads on 20+ thread CPU and don't give a damn about zero upgrade paths, then maybe. But considering everything, Alder Lake is far from clear winner. Luckily Zen 3 with 3D cache is coming soon.

 

[Strawman]

Of course power unlocked CPU's are not that efficient. That's why Igor's PBO boosted figures for AMD's 12 and 16 core CPU's make no sense. You claimed 5950 efficiency is close to Intel's offerings, in reality they are far away.

We are talking about 24/32 thread (X5900/X5950) or 20/24 thread CPU's (12700K/12900K). Intel CPU's also contain efficiency cores, just for multi threading. There's more than enough reason to concentrate on multi thread apps. On gaming Alder Lake is pretty fast yes, but again, if power consumption is limited on same levels full load as on AMD side, then it would be much tighter fight.

Talking about 20+ thread CPU's, focus has to be on high thread counts. Who buys 20 thread CPU for low thread loads? Right. Zen3's better efficiency is pure fact. You can read it almost on any review, expect few Intel biased of course.

So like, AutoCAD is software that well reflects real world usage? What's your opinion? Now, AutoCAD also happens to been Intel optimized software for decades. That makes review clearly Intel biased, no question. Saying well known facts makes me AMD fanboy just because you cannot accept truth?

Alder Lake won what? Yeah, if you play games, don't care about power consumption or run low thread loads on 20+ thread CPU and don't give a damn about zero upgrade paths, then maybe. But considering everything, Alder Lake is far from clear winner. Luckily Zen 3 with 3D cache is coming soon.

Load of horse ****.

I care about low threaded apps. EVERYTHING you do with your computer is low threaded apps. Apps that utilized 32 threads are the exception.

I already said that 5950x and 5900x have a slight edge on cinebench and blender. But they don't have an edge on pretty much anything else. Actually, in low threaded apps the difference is HUGE in favor of Intel. Gaming itself is a huge indicator. Oh wait, games are intel optimized right, that's why zen 3 was ahead last gen?

Alder lake won everything. I care about power consumption, that's why I bought a 12900k. Cause it is up to 50% more efficient in games compared to 5950x (check derbauers video). I also care about upgrade paths, again, that's why I bought a z690. It will support raptor lake, while AM4 is basically a dead end. Zen 3d are basically the exact same core with more cache stacked on them. THAT is basically a dead end. You think someone with a 5950x will upgrade to a 5950x with more cache? LOL

 

[HardReset]

Load of horse ****.

I care about low threaded apps. EVERYTHING you do with your computer is low threaded apps. Apps that utilized 32 threads are the exception.

When talking about efficiency with 20+ thread CPU's, no-one is interested about efficiency on low thread software. Simple as that.

Basically about same as running efficiency tests on 64-core 128-thread server CPU using few threads and then complaining it's inefficient.

I already said that 5950x and 5900x have a slight edge on cinebench and blender. But they don't have an edge on pretty much anything else. Actually, in low threaded apps the difference is HUGE in favor of Intel. Gaming itself is a huge indicator. Oh wait, games are intel optimized right, that's why zen 3 was ahead last gen?

Games do also care about low memory latency and high single core clock speeds. Something current Zen3's are not made for.

Zen3 was much faster than Intel so it was faster in games despite Intel optimizations. Simple as that.

Alder lake won everything. I care about power consumption, that's why I bought a 12900k. Cause it is up to 50% more efficient in games compared to 5950x (check derbauers video). I also care about upgrade paths, again, that's why I bought a z690. It will support raptor lake, while AM4 is basically a dead end. Zen 3d are basically the exact same core with more cache stacked on them. THAT is basically a dead end. You think someone with a 5950x will upgrade to a 5950x with more cache? LOL

Won "everything" but still you said AMD's have edge on high thread loads? Everything does not contain them? Other things where AMD is better are:

- Power consumption
- Upgrade paths
- Game compatibility
- Core and thread count

That's about "everything" yeah. You bought 12900K CPU for gaming? This is puzzling, you care about low thread loads but then buy 24-thread CPU. Highest thread count CPU available for LGA1700?

I didn't find that video.

Upgrade paths, you really think there will be upgrade from 12900K that actually makes sense? That's pretty laughable. LGA1700 is dead end upgrade wise since Raptor Lake won't offer any sort of reasonable upgrade. Someone who buys 5950X won't be considering any upgrades for same socket. Same applies to those who buy 12900K. For upgrade to make sense, mid end CPU should be bought first.

 

[Strawman]

When talking about efficiency with 20+ thread CPU's, no-one is interested about efficiency on low thread software. Simple as that.

That's not true. I am. I wanted a high end CPU for gaming. The 12900k is faster, WAY more efficient AND cheaper than the 5950x. It's not even a contest honestly...

Also, alderlake doesn't only have 20 thread CPU's. There is a 12600k as well, and probably a 12400. All of the alderlake lineup are WAY more efficient than zen 3 in lightly threaded workloads including gaming.

AMD is NOT better on power consumption or upgrade paths. Both the AM4 and Z690 will have one upgrade, and arguable the raptor lake is probably going to be more worth it than zen 3d.

Here is the video. The 12900k absolutely smacks the 5950x both in performance and efficiency. There is up to a 50% difference! But let me guess, derbauer is also paid by Intel, right?

 

[HardReset]

That's not true. I am. I wanted a high end CPU for gaming. The 12900k is faster, WAY more efficient AND cheaper than the 5950x. It's not even a contest honestly...

Also, alderlake doesn't only have 20 thread CPU's. There is a 12600k as well, and probably a 12400. All of the alderlake lineup are WAY more efficient than zen 3 in lightly threaded workloads including gaming.

OK, that's your choice.

Why you take CPU specifically made for high thread loads and compare it to CPU's made for low thread loads is another question. Not to mention Zen3 is already one year old.

AMD is NOT better on power consumption or upgrade paths. Both the AM4 and Z690 will have one upgrade, and arguable the raptor lake is probably going to be more worth it than zen 3d.

Here is the video. The 12900k absolutely smacks the 5950x both in performance and efficiency. There is up to a 50% difference! But let me guess, derbauer is also paid by Intel, right?

One upgrade and what kid of upgrade? Similar to 6700K vs 7700K? Not worth it. I highly doubt Raptor Lake will offer more than 8 performance cores that makes upgrade not worth it.

OK, again, let's look behind numbers:

PUBG: Intel optimized (developer said that), very badly optimized eSports game, nobody plays with 5950X. Also no-one cares about FPS going over 200 FPS. Both are more than fast enough.

BF 2042: New game where performance is equal (1 FPS difference). Intel CPU (and CPU only) consumes whopping 18 watts less. Now THAT's breaking. Another Battlefield test gives identical FPS and Intel is now 13 watts more efficient. Great? Btw that's nowhere near 50% you talked about. And this is at least some way modern game.

Far Cry 6: That's reskin of Far Cry 2, released 2012. Not much more needed to say. There you see 50% difference but again game is technically 10 years old.

Alder Lake may be much more efficient (looking only CPU) than 5950X designed for high thread loads if playing like 10 year old games. Next question: Who cares?

 

[Strawman]

OK, that's your choice.

Why you take CPU specifically made for high thread loads and compare it to CPU's made for low thread loads is another question. Not to mention Zen3 is already one year old.

One upgrade and what kid of upgrade? Similar to 6700K vs 7700K? Not worth it. I highly doubt Raptor Lake will offer more than 8 performance cores that makes upgrade not worth it.

OK, again, let's look behind numbers:

PUBG: Intel optimized (developer said that), very badly optimized eSports game, nobody plays with 5950X. Also no-one cares about FPS going over 200 FPS. Both are more than fast enough.

BF 2042: New game where performance is equal (1 FPS difference). Intel CPU (and CPU only) consumes whopping 18 watts less. Now THAT's breaking. Another Battlefield test gives identical FPS and Intel is now 13 watts more efficient. Great? Btw that's nowhere near 50% you talked about. And this is at least some way modern game.

Far Cry 6: That's reskin of Far Cry 2, released 2012. Not much more needed to say. There you see 50% difference but again game is technically 10 years old.

Alder Lake may be much more efficient (looking only CPU) than 5950X designed for high thread loads if playing like 10 year old games. Next question: Who cares?

So in whatever metric intel wins, its the software at fault and it doesnt matter.

Well ok, who cares about cinebench then, its amd optimised and nobody uses it. See, I can do that too.

Fact is alderlake is way more efficient in 99% of workloads. Its just a goddamn fact. The whole adobe suite is way faster and way more efficient on alderlake cpus, be it the 12600k or the 12900k. The same is true for most professional applications, intel is both faster and more efficient. Im sorry but it is what it is.
If farcry is 10 years old then ryzen needs 50% more power to run a 10 years old game... Thats why it's inefficient.

 

[HardReset]

So in whatever metric intel wins, its the software at fault and it doesnt matter.

Well ok, who cares about cinebench then, its amd optimised and nobody uses it. See, I can do that too.

No. But if developer tells software is Intel optimized, it probably is.

Look how bad Bulldozer was at Cinebench, it's not AMD optimized.

Fact is alderlake is way more efficient in 99% of workloads. Its just a goddamn fact.

Ah, another "fact" here. Some your other "facts":

And the 12700 is better on everything, therefore...how is amd a better option?

I care about low threaded apps. EVERYTHING you do with your computer is low threaded apps. Apps that utilized 32 threads are the exception.

So saying that zen 3 has a huge edge in efficiency is an outright lie.

No wonder I won't take your "facts" seriously.

The whole adobe suite is way faster and way more efficient on alderlake cpus, be it the 12600k or the 12900k. The same is true for most professional applications, intel is both faster and more efficient. Im sorry but it is what it is.

Adobe has been Intel optimized for decades. Also Adobe software tend to be crap overall too. Those things are undeniable facts. Anyone with decent experience knows that.

"Most professional applications" won't include Cinebench or Blender then? Can you even provide large scale data about efficiency on professional applications.

 

[Strawman]

Cinebench and blender are ryzen optimised, so I don't pay attention to them

 

[pyro226]

Needs more cinebench

 

[Sn4rk]

Ahhh I remember when AdoredTV essentially said that the FX series would age better and the gap would close against old i5 and i7 2nd gen parts, here the 2600k. The lolz.

The incredible thing is the 2600k is obviously very slow but still (kind of) viable at 1080p nearly eleven years later. Especially seeing as though you can dump another 20 percent clock speed on it quite easily.

That's only true with the FX 6300/8300 vs i3 and i5's from the 2nd and 3rd Gen and mostly on core heavy games, HT really helps the i7 to age better.