Will still loose in gaming to the 9800X3D for sure, and Intel said so. But this is a huge step forward for Intel in power efficiency and I wish Intel the best to keep this trend going forward.
I like the efficiency approach to Intel, not everyone wants their desktop gaming PC to be a space heater. If only the GPU vendors could do the same approach in the future as well, lowering the TDP as well as keep improving the performance. Maybe some EU directives would force both CPU & GPU vendors to aim for more efficiency in the long run, I believe something similar happened to TVs a while back (OLED TVs I think). The PSU requirements of upper end gaming PCs are getting a bit ridiculous if you ask me.
AMD CPUs have been around too, and have been consuming a lot less power than Intel for several generations now. Arrow Lake looks as if it might finally reach parity, or come very close, to AMD's efficiency, and that does make it more worth considering than prior generations.
I'm personally pretty tired of AMD not fixing some of the long-term issues like slow boot time and the shitty distributor where I live. This actually seems quite interesting to me, maybe I should give this a try!!!
I will be upgrading from my z390 to Arrow lake. Performance, if its even close to the 14900 the lower power draw will reduce the number of radiators and pumps I will need. This is new architecture compared to AMD and I will try this before AMD
Not a bad idea, I am on AMD after having both of my 13900k cpus fail. Around 6 months mark, and both were undervolted, cores pinned, and watt limited. So, I said that Raptor Lake had architectural issue, not just voltage. I upgraded to 13900k from i9-9900k and saw AMAZING results. 13900k was amazing when it was working (before failures exactly in the same fashion), and AMD is great too. Arrow Lake will be like 14900k, but at lower power consumption, which is key If I was upgrading from Z390 like you and wanted to stay on Intel, I would be pretty happy about it. I have good hopes for Arrow Lake because 14900k is equal 13900k, it is the same chip, just slightly higher frequency. Other CPUs for you to consider: 9950X, 7950x3D and upcoming 9950x3D from AMD All of 4 options will be amazing for gaming. I have benchmarks on my channel if you want to see how 7950x3D and 9950X is looking in games. Arrow Lake will be good, it just won't win over last gen like people expected. Still sounds like a great CPU. I would not move from 13900k if it didn't break twice, and Intel was graceful enough to give me a refund, so I wish them success in the end. Raptor Lake was a huge mistake architecturally.
I'm in the process of gradually building out a new desktop system. Been on my Alienware Area 51m laptop (9700k & RTX 2080) for years. Only reason I got a laptop was because for the last 10 years I've been an OTR trucker. I've had a pot of savings set aside for a full new build. This time I wanna go with 4k120/144hz. So planning on getting the Ultra 9 285k and RTX 5090. In desktop form factor with full ATX setup, should blow my laptop outta the water lol. I'm looking into and applying for local work, which is why I'm going back to a desktop. Getting me a big 4k TV and doing an HTPC sorta setup at home in my bedroom. It will be a nice change from gaming on my laptop in the cramped cab of my semi truck lol. My last desktop build I had was running a 3770k on Windows 7, been awhile since I've been able to enjoy a full on desktop setup lol.
How I see this limited to 125-250W without loss on workstation setup is very very good and if you are just surfing the internet and going through the media/video etc. But there is also opportunity to overclock and push more performance. MEG Z890 UNIFY-X from MSI for example has a switch between two BIOS's. You can save your system having lower performance that is enough or switch to performance when you want to play that game.
@@WSS_the_OG Intel is still leading AMD in many instances outside of gaming. AMD wins in a handful of titles, but it depends on the games. Some games Intel wins out just do to better optimization, or differences in core performance. For me I'm going 4k with my next build. In benchmarks at 4k the difference between Intel or AMD is virtually non existent, less than 1% in many instances. AMD may be the winner for 1080p and 1440p gaming, but that's the only clear cut victory. At 4k or in tasks outside of gaming AMD doesn't have such a lead. X3D loses to the normal X chips in general core performance. AMD is a great architecture, but they aren't beating Intel in same fashion as Intel was dominant back in the day. Back before Ryzen 5000 and further, Intel dominated in every category except price. Right now price to performance between Intel and AMD is pretty equal and on par in most instances. Really depends on ones setup and use case. It's a whole different story for GPU's, NVIDIA flat dominates in the high end. Even in the midrange NVIDIA still has an edge with more games being better optimized for their platform due too their lead in market share. As for the future who knows.. all Intel needs is a better design for their cache, and ring bus. Theit halo product for Arrow lake unfortunately got canned, the 8p/32e core skew probably had stability issues with ring bus over heating. We'll just have to wait for Nova lake, see if Intel can pull something outta their sleeve then. With Intel and AMDs partnership to enhance the X86 platform, it's hard to say what the future holds atm. I'll be curious to see what comes from them teaming up.
Taking the stance that AMD doesn’t have APO is an odd one. AMD already sort of does their own version by ensuring games run on the correct CCX. Intels hybrid CPUs greatly benefit from ensuring you use HT or not, disable E cores or not, use a certain number of cores/threads. That is why APO exists. Also Space Marine and does not have APO, at least not yet. Intel publishes which games have it on their APO website.
I am only worried on the Ultra 5 performance. It has so much less threads as compared to 14600K. when program needs multi core to run the older CPU may perform much better with more threads. Ultra 7 and 9 with much more cores will have no problems. I cannot find any comparison test on these entry CPU.
@@JDD_Tech_MODS It seems so (13/14th gen better for gaming). I just seemed that if Intel itself is claiming a gaming performance regression, that has to be true. If that does turn out to be the case, I wonder if will delay the release of the x3d parts.
I need to upgrade from my 10850k, but I see no upgrade path in ultra 9 285k. I have a feeling that after Intel will put a badass cpu out, that is better.
Well, im still on i7 3770 :D, time for upgrade i guess, still waiting for new x3d from amd, and yes world of warcraft is working fine on my old i7 and that is basically the only game i play
This seems a bit ho-hum from the perspective of performance loving enthusiasts. It seems like a workhorse, kinda like a mini-van or family focused SUV. It'll get the job done, but with zero excitement for those seeking cutting edge gaming performance.
Slides from INTEL are 250W/6500 RAM speed. Leaked specs put 295W as extreme and 8000 as the sweet spot for RAM speed and up to 10000. So the real performance most likely is lot higher. Also X870/Z890 boards have direct PCIe 5.0 lane to CPU "REBAR on steroids". Also you see 8 pin power for the PCIe 5.0 limited to handle 150W. Very interesting add on that will raise questions as INTEL ARC architecture is dual silicon GPU pairing to CPU. AMD/Nvidia are different architecture. So my conclusion is that it can only be for INTEL ARC. Maybe it will be a buffer of some sort between GPU and CPU to avoid bottlenecks. Just a guess. 13th and 14th were destroyed by Asus. W680 almost brought the internet down. So I think the Arrow Lake is under powered to limit what motherboard manufacturers can do. Note 100% motherboards are Chinese. 100% CPU's are western U.S/UK.
09:34 If we are going to complain about Intel using APO skewing results, then SMT in Ryzen needs to be turned off since these new intel chips don't have hyperthreading like Ryzen continues to. So, if we are going to complain about apples-to-apples comparisons, equal gimping of Ryzen needs to take place. This will make the comparison directly core vs core with no tricks, just raw power.
Hilarious. Intel made a conscious choice to remove hyperthreading. AMD made a conscious choice to give hyperthreading Saying AMD must remove SMT to be compared to APO skewed results is like saying Intel needs to disable 8 cores on their Arrow Lake to equal 16 cores of AMD Then it would be fair, then both of SMTs can be disabled and CPUs compared. Doesn't make any kind of sense to start cherry picking what actual features must be "removed" to level the test. If Hyperthreading is not there, you test without it, and you test the other CPU stock. That's an actual test. You don't turn off performance features on the car to make the 2nd car closer in performance. That's the whole point of the test. Having hyperthreading always hurts the CPUs performance for general OS tasks. Turning it OFF for gaming is much more beneficial than having it on, and that's where you would Process Lasso just the game to have SMT off, but if you compare CPUs, you compare max performance on both.
But wait. SMT = raw power too as It's how the core is designed. Intel's decision to delete SMT isn't a gimp, it was a design choice. Also, APO is not a "gimp either;" it's meant to increase performance. I'm a little confused by what you're saying. Unless you're saying APO is a gimp, and Intel's decision to leave out SMT is a gimp. It seems apples to apples to run the CPUs in their default configurations when comparing them.
Intel did testing with PL1=PL2=250W and did 125W only in power efficiency slide. You are late and dont offer the full view on the subject. I usually like your videos like seriously what happened?
If the early leaked benchmarks are legit this is really really bad for Intel, like really bad. Did I say bad? yeah bad. Bad bad bad. High AF Temps w/ a marginal power reduction while loosing performance and costing more. WTF INTEL???
Literally no one complains about CPU power consumption. They complain about the price, and performance. When a CPU doesn't drop in price and gain in performance for the consumer, they focus on power consumption.
With the price hikes in the last 3 yrs, yes we do worry about how much cpu's/gpu's use in electric, especially when at idle, or min browsing. And yes it works out to be a lot in cost and difference btween the 2 main cpu brands. AMD using more electric than Intel, strangely enough.
Power consumption aside, most PC users don't even know how to go into the BIOS and tune their settings.. The majority expect a plug and play solution like console. Doesn't really matter what brand or generation of system your on, fine tuning your settings and dialing in you frequency, voltage/offset, and thermals certainly improves the experience. The vast majority have no clue how to utilize the BIOS, let alone properly navigate and adjust their OS. Some may follow a video guide and building the physical system, but that's only the tip of the iceberg. Me and my friend on our Discord are constantly having to give people a play by play on fixing their problems, or optimizing their setup. We play quite a few heavily modded games, and most people just don't have the patience to go through all the fiddling, file tweaking, and adjustment to settings to get things working. Some people buy pre overclocked systems from OEM builders, and then complain when some games crash or fail to load. Some games or software doesn't like it when your system hardware is altered outside of the stock parameters. You have to know how to revert it to stock setting, or with new BIOS build out multiple different profiles. It's the same with vehicles as well. Most people own a vehicle, and most of them have no clue how to work on it themselves. Hell most people don't even know how to do a basic safety inspection before operating the vehicle. It's mainly an issue with the consumer base of such products being ignorant to how the product they bought actually function. I'm an OTR trucker and talk to people all over the country all the time. It's amazing how how clueless most of them are to such things..
@@marcusbrown3880Shut up. Someone did the math recently and it was nothing. Remember your CPU is not blasting 100% load 24/7 on cinebench. 6 hours of nonstop gaming a day everyday on 13900k vs 7800x3d resulted in 38$ more in electricity price annually. I highly doubt anyone is going to 6 hour game everyday which reduces the difference to absolutely nothing.
Will still loose in gaming to the 9800X3D for sure, and Intel said so. But this is a huge step forward for Intel in power efficiency and I wish Intel the best to keep this trend going forward.
I like the efficiency approach to Intel, not everyone wants their desktop gaming PC to be a space heater. If only the GPU vendors could do the same approach in the future as well, lowering the TDP as well as keep improving the performance. Maybe some EU directives would force both CPU & GPU vendors to aim for more efficiency in the long run, I believe something similar happened to TVs a while back (OLED TVs I think). The PSU requirements of upper end gaming PCs are getting a bit ridiculous if you ask me.
AMD CPUs have been around too, and have been consuming a lot less power than Intel for several generations now. Arrow Lake looks as if it might finally reach parity, or come very close, to AMD's efficiency, and that does make it more worth considering than prior generations.
I'm personally pretty tired of AMD not fixing some of the long-term issues like slow boot time and the shitty distributor where I live. This actually seems quite interesting to me, maybe I should give this a try!!!
I will be upgrading from my z390 to Arrow lake. Performance, if its even close to the 14900 the lower power draw will reduce the number of radiators and pumps I will need. This is new architecture compared to AMD and I will try this before AMD
Not a bad idea, I am on AMD after having both of my 13900k cpus fail. Around 6 months mark, and both were undervolted, cores pinned, and watt limited. So, I said that Raptor Lake had architectural issue, not just voltage.
I upgraded to 13900k from i9-9900k and saw AMAZING results. 13900k was amazing when it was working (before failures exactly in the same fashion), and AMD is great too.
Arrow Lake will be like 14900k, but at lower power consumption, which is key
If I was upgrading from Z390 like you and wanted to stay on Intel, I would be pretty happy about it. I have good hopes for Arrow Lake because 14900k is equal 13900k, it is the same chip, just slightly higher frequency.
Other CPUs for you to consider: 9950X, 7950x3D and upcoming 9950x3D from AMD
All of 4 options will be amazing for gaming.
I have benchmarks on my channel if you want to see how 7950x3D and 9950X is looking in games. Arrow Lake will be good, it just won't win over last gen like people expected. Still sounds like a great CPU.
I would not move from 13900k if it didn't break twice, and Intel was graceful enough to give me a refund, so I wish them success in the end. Raptor Lake was a huge mistake architecturally.
I'm in the process of gradually building out a new desktop system. Been on my Alienware Area 51m laptop (9700k & RTX 2080) for years. Only reason I got a laptop was because for the last 10 years I've been an OTR trucker.
I've had a pot of savings set aside for a full new build. This time I wanna go with 4k120/144hz. So planning on getting the Ultra 9 285k and RTX 5090. In desktop form factor with full ATX setup, should blow my laptop outta the water lol.
I'm looking into and applying for local work, which is why I'm going back to a desktop. Getting me a big 4k TV and doing an HTPC sorta setup at home in my bedroom. It will be a nice change from gaming on my laptop in the cramped cab of my semi truck lol.
My last desktop build I had was running a 3770k on Windows 7, been awhile since I've been able to enjoy a full on desktop setup lol.
How I see this limited to 125-250W without loss on workstation setup is very very good and if you are just surfing the internet and going through the media/video etc. But there is also opportunity to overclock and push more performance. MEG Z890 UNIFY-X from MSI for example has a switch between two BIOS's. You can save your system having lower performance that is enough or switch to performance when you want to play that game.
"This is new architecture compared to AMD and I will try this before AMD"
@@WSS_the_OG Intel is still leading AMD in many instances outside of gaming. AMD wins in a handful of titles, but it depends on the games. Some games Intel wins out just do to better optimization, or differences in core performance.
For me I'm going 4k with my next build. In benchmarks at 4k the difference between Intel or AMD is virtually non existent, less than 1% in many instances.
AMD may be the winner for 1080p and 1440p gaming, but that's the only clear cut victory. At 4k or in tasks outside of gaming AMD doesn't have such a lead. X3D loses to the normal X chips in general core performance.
AMD is a great architecture, but they aren't beating Intel in same fashion as Intel was dominant back in the day. Back before Ryzen 5000 and further, Intel dominated in every category except price.
Right now price to performance between Intel and AMD is pretty equal and on par in most instances. Really depends on ones setup and use case. It's a whole different story for GPU's, NVIDIA flat dominates in the high end. Even in the midrange NVIDIA still has an edge with more games being better optimized for their platform due too their lead in market share.
As for the future who knows.. all Intel needs is a better design for their cache, and ring bus. Theit halo product for Arrow lake unfortunately got canned, the 8p/32e core skew probably had stability issues with ring bus over heating.
We'll just have to wait for Nova lake, see if Intel can pull something outta their sleeve then. With Intel and AMDs partnership to enhance the X86 platform, it's hard to say what the future holds atm. I'll be curious to see what comes from them teaming up.
at 9:09 , the only one using apo was rainbow six as it was the only one with an * next to it..
Taking the stance that AMD doesn’t have APO is an odd one. AMD already sort of does their own version by ensuring games run on the correct CCX. Intels hybrid CPUs greatly benefit from ensuring you use HT or not, disable E cores or not, use a certain number of cores/threads. That is why APO exists.
Also Space Marine and does not have APO, at least not yet. Intel publishes which games have it on their APO website.
APO Apple is APO intel
I am only worried on the Ultra 5 performance. It has so much less threads as compared to 14600K. when program needs multi core to run the older CPU may perform much better with more threads. Ultra 7 and 9 with much more cores will have no problems. I cannot find any comparison test on these entry CPU.
Doesn't look like these will offer any gaming uplift over 13/14th gen :(
In fact, it's a performance regression for gaming compared to 13th/14th gen.
@@WSS_the_OG We will see that once review embargo lifts. 13/14th GEN way better for gaming.
@@JDD_Tech_MODS It seems so (13/14th gen better for gaming). I just seemed that if Intel itself is claiming a gaming performance regression, that has to be true. If that does turn out to be the case, I wonder if will delay the release of the x3d parts.
I'll be staying on z790
I need to upgrade from my 10850k, but I see no upgrade path in ultra 9 285k. I have a feeling that after Intel will put a badass cpu out, that is better.
That CPU is still fine. Last true monolithic beast with no e cores or seperate ccd with different purposes.
I'll be upgrading from my z690
Well, im still on i7 3770 :D, time for upgrade i guess, still waiting for new x3d from amd, and yes world of warcraft is working fine on my old i7 and that is basically the only game i play
This seems a bit ho-hum from the perspective of performance loving enthusiasts. It seems like a workhorse, kinda like a mini-van or family focused SUV. It'll get the job done, but with zero excitement for those seeking cutting edge gaming performance.
Slides from INTEL are 250W/6500 RAM speed. Leaked specs put 295W as extreme and 8000 as the sweet spot for RAM speed and up to 10000. So the real performance most likely is lot higher. Also X870/Z890 boards have direct PCIe 5.0 lane to CPU "REBAR on steroids". Also you see 8 pin power for the PCIe 5.0 limited to handle 150W. Very interesting add on that will raise questions as INTEL ARC architecture is dual silicon GPU pairing to CPU. AMD/Nvidia are different architecture. So my conclusion is that it can only be for INTEL ARC. Maybe it will be a buffer of some sort between GPU and CPU to avoid bottlenecks. Just a guess.
13th and 14th were destroyed by Asus. W680 almost brought the internet down. So I think the Arrow Lake is under powered to limit what motherboard manufacturers can do. Note 100% motherboards are Chinese. 100% CPU's are western U.S/UK.
Talking about support for 24/48gh dimms like 1700 or am5 doesn't already support it..
09:34 If we are going to complain about Intel using APO skewing results, then SMT in Ryzen needs to be turned off since these new intel chips don't have hyperthreading like Ryzen continues to. So, if we are going to complain about apples-to-apples comparisons, equal gimping of Ryzen needs to take place. This will make the comparison directly core vs core with no tricks, just raw power.
Hilarious. Intel made a conscious choice to remove hyperthreading.
AMD made a conscious choice to give hyperthreading
Saying AMD must remove SMT to be compared to APO skewed results is like saying Intel needs to disable 8 cores on their Arrow Lake to equal 16 cores of AMD
Then it would be fair, then both of SMTs can be disabled and CPUs compared.
Doesn't make any kind of sense to start cherry picking what actual features must be "removed" to level the test.
If Hyperthreading is not there, you test without it, and you test the other CPU stock. That's an actual test.
You don't turn off performance features on the car to make the 2nd car closer in performance. That's the whole point of the test.
Having hyperthreading always hurts the CPUs performance for general OS tasks. Turning it OFF for gaming is much more beneficial than having it on, and that's where you would Process Lasso just the game to have SMT off, but if you compare CPUs, you compare max performance on both.
But wait. SMT = raw power too as It's how the core is designed. Intel's decision to delete SMT isn't a gimp, it was a design choice. Also, APO is not a "gimp either;" it's meant to increase performance. I'm a little confused by what you're saying. Unless you're saying APO is a gimp, and Intel's decision to leave out SMT is a gimp. It seems apples to apples to run the CPUs in their default configurations when comparing them.
i need APO+intel
This is not best case scenario. Best case scenario would be 6ghz all core and ddr5 9000. This thing will demolish x3d chips with 1% low
Nope. Ram speed doesnt always equal 1% low. Architecture equals 1% low and the 9000mhz dogshit is on Intel's chiplet.
Wait. What?
Summary: it ain’t beating AMD new X3D chips
Doesn't support Co pilot pc then what's the point in buying Intel. Amd does. Looks like ad
Intel did testing with PL1=PL2=250W and did 125W only in power efficiency slide. You are late and dont offer the full view on the subject. I usually like your videos like seriously what happened?
If the early leaked benchmarks are legit this is really really bad for Intel, like really bad. Did I say bad? yeah bad. Bad bad bad. High AF Temps w/ a marginal power reduction while loosing performance and costing more. WTF INTEL???
Interesting video. Still no Intel for me.
Literally no one complains about CPU power consumption. They complain about the price, and performance. When a CPU doesn't drop in price and gain in performance for the consumer, they focus on power consumption.
With the price hikes in the last 3 yrs, yes we do worry about how much cpu's/gpu's use in electric, especially when at idle, or min browsing.
And yes it works out to be a lot in cost and difference btween the 2 main cpu brands.
AMD using more electric than Intel, strangely enough.
BS. Almost every review complains about Intels 13th and 14th gen power. They use stupid clickbait fire thumbnails.
Yeah right! Bulldozer was criticized for high power consumption, rightfully so.
Power consumption aside, most PC users don't even know how to go into the BIOS and tune their settings.. The majority expect a plug and play solution like console. Doesn't really matter what brand or generation of system your on, fine tuning your settings and dialing in you frequency, voltage/offset, and thermals certainly improves the experience.
The vast majority have no clue how to utilize the BIOS, let alone properly navigate and adjust their OS. Some may follow a video guide and building the physical system, but that's only the tip of the iceberg.
Me and my friend on our Discord are constantly having to give people a play by play on fixing their problems, or optimizing their setup. We play quite a few heavily modded games, and most people just don't have the patience to go through all the fiddling, file tweaking, and adjustment to settings to get things working.
Some people buy pre overclocked systems from OEM builders, and then complain when some games crash or fail to load. Some games or software doesn't like it when your system hardware is altered outside of the stock parameters. You have to know how to revert it to stock setting, or with new BIOS build out multiple different profiles.
It's the same with vehicles as well. Most people own a vehicle, and most of them have no clue how to work on it themselves. Hell most people don't even know how to do a basic safety inspection before operating the vehicle.
It's mainly an issue with the consumer base of such products being ignorant to how the product they bought actually function. I'm an OTR trucker and talk to people all over the country all the time. It's amazing how how clueless most of them are to such things..
@@marcusbrown3880Shut up. Someone did the math recently and it was nothing. Remember your CPU is not blasting 100% load 24/7 on cinebench. 6 hours of nonstop gaming a day everyday on 13900k vs 7800x3d resulted in 38$ more in electricity price annually. I highly doubt anyone is going to 6 hour game everyday which reduces the difference to absolutely nothing.
No hyperthreading no buy
Don’t buy it
The only thing you need to know about intel is to stop buying it 😂
people are already joking about this gen saying Intel is already in ICU about to die.