FRONTPAGE Intel i9-11900K and i5-11600K Review: A Stopgap Until 10nm

[Overclockers.com]

The Intel i9-11900K and i5-11600K we have here today are part of Intel's Rocket Lake CPU line-up and bring with it some significant changes over its predecessors.

Click here to view the article.

 

[EarthDog]

Stopgaps ftw? Great review!

 

[mackerel]

Just been looking around at some local retailers. The model I want to buy is not available and I don't want to buy the higher priced ones. There's one data point I'd really like but it is too obscure for mainstream reviews. Even though many are happy to use Prime95 for max power, it seems no one uses (or understands) the built in benchmark. Can I request a Prime95 throughput benchmark? Set min/max FFT size to 128k, test HT off, rest can be default, reduce the duration to minimum of 5 seconds if desired as it doesn't really make a difference with adequate cooling. Observe running clock during the benchmark, optionally reported power. Bench output is the maximum iter/s (usually n workers, n cores at this FFT size).

 

[Culbrelai]

A stopgap? Yes a stopgap since ... Skylake. Nice one, Intel. The 11600k benches worse than the 10600k in some benches.

Im getting some real Pentium 4 vs Pentium III vibes lmao

 

[Robert17]

Well, well, well. Meh for me.

 

[David]

Im getting some real Pentium 4 vs Pentium III vibes lmao

Yeah, I was thinking of Willamette and it going backwards compared to Coppermine, and Prescott being ridiculously hot ...

At least with P4 the first generation chips set the stage for some really decent later chips... the longer pipeline paid off in the end. It was never going to work well on a 1.3 GHz chip, but once clockspeeds got towards the 3 GHz range NetBurst was a decent chip.

Rocket Lake isn't an architecture change or any sort of forward looking release. It's taking no risks to build a foundation for the next generation of chips. It's a oh-crap-better-release-something chip that just shows how behind Intel is at the moment.

 

[Johan45]

Just been looking around at some local retailers. The model I want to buy is not available and I don't want to buy the higher priced ones. There's one data point I'd really like but it is too obscure for mainstream reviews. Even though many are happy to use Prime95 for max power, it seems no one uses (or understands) the built in benchmark. Can I request a Prime95 throughput benchmark? Set min/max FFT size to 128k, test HT off, rest can be default, reduce the duration to minimum of 5 seconds if desired as it doesn't really make a difference with adequate cooling. Observe running clock during the benchmark, optionally reported power. Bench output is the maximum iter/s (usually n workers, n cores at this FFT size).

The 11900K ran at 3.6 with 125W PL and 4.5 at 250W 90C+ as for benchmarks, I'm currently testing the 5800X to add to the data set but will start on mobos soon and I can do it then.

 

[PolRoger]

"Using ASUS’ Multi-core Enhancement (MCE), the CPU now maintains a 250 W envelope and adjusts CPU speed accordingly, but the power usage and temperatures skyrocket. As we can see by the Prime95 small FFT results, the i9-11900K sucks down 377 W of power (at the wall) and reaches a peak of 99°C with the 360 mm EK Predator CLC we use. If you want to get the most out of this CPU, you will have to bring adequate cooling."


I can see the upcoming forum requests now by "noobs" asking for help in trying overclock their new cpu/mobo combos with a feeble 2nd rate air cooler and not understanding why they can't just dial in a 5.1/5.0/4.9 GHz... All core overclock.



"As for overclocking the i9-11900K, I chose to go with the new Adaptive Velocity Boost option, and you can see results that have been included with the benchmark tables. This seemed like the best approach to an easy, hassle-free option which saved a lot of time and effort. It also forgoes the need to disable any AVX options or setting offsets to maintain stability. The CPU now runs at 5.1 GHz on all cores when it can and will reduce the core speed when needed to accommodate the load plus; it maintains the 5.3 GHz boost speed for light loads. It really does seem like a win-win option."


Reminds me kind of like newer Ryzen systems... Dial in a max stable memory overclock and let CPU auto OC features adjust speeds on the fly.

 

[mackerel]

The 11900K ran at 3.6 with 125W PL and 4.5 at 250W 90C+ as for benchmarks, I'm currently testing the 5800X to add to the data set but will start on mobos soon and I can do it then.

Thanks, looking forward to it.

1.25x performance for 2x power... not a great tradeoff for my uses. In part why I'm hoping to get a 11700F, although I've not seen stock yet but have seen 11700 listed. Due to some other things going on I'll not attempt to buy until into next week, if I go ahead at all.

The P95 bench will confirm how the AVX-512 implementation works in that use case and related, which are really thirsty for FP64 execution. I have not come across other common benchmarks/tests that correlate with P95. Early AVX-512 implementations were listed as 1 or 2 unit, and that info seems to be missing with Rocket Lake. I had assumed it would be 1 unit to save space/power, but given the results reported with other AVX-512 loads that isn't clear. Or it might be different enough in implementation the old terminology is no longer relevant.

 

[Janus67]

https://www.anandtech.com/show/16495/intel-rocket-lake-14nm-review-11900k-11700k-11600k

couple more reviews there.

Looks indeed that the 11900K is pretty meh and the mid-range offerings at least have some positives. Overall worse than AMD almost across the board, and in many cases worse than the previous generation Intel part.

 

[Culbrelai]

This situation is also very similar to the Phenom II 1090t being better than the Fx-8150 in many benchmarks on release.

What causes such stagnation is my question...

 

[Johan45]

The review has been updated to include the Ryzen 5800X results we were missing.

 

[Woomack]

I will start some tests during the weekend. So far I have huge delays with samples. Only ASRock Z590 Extreme is waiting since early Feb.

I see that most reviews on the web are pretty stupid. If anyone wants to prove that Intel is bad then will prove it, if wants to say it's good then will also prove it. I don't know what people were expecting as all knew it's more like a refresh before the next bigger changes. On the other hand, all like AMD recently while AMD is not giving us anything much better. Unlock the power limit and you will see 100°C too. It's a matter of point of view and personal preferences. Nowadays simply Intel is bad so no matter what they do, on the web are mostly complaints.
No one says to buy the highest chip while lower CPUs are more than enough for gaming and are not heating up so much. Intel is also much cheaper than AMD right now.

I agree with PolRoger. Wait 2-3 weeks and we will see "how to OC 11th gen CPU to 5.2GHz+" topics as all will expect to have 5.5GHz on air cooling. Nothing is changing for a couple of years already. No matter if it's AMD or Intel, can't really count on OC. It's a battle of power-saving, various power limits, and auto-adjustment on both sides.

 

[SF101]

I Guess ill hang onto my 7900x for awhile longer.
they say 5.3 ghz but that's not guaranteed and its only 1 core its the same situation with basically most CPU since skylake, most will top out similar to what I have @ all cores with not much to gain otherwise except for some 1-2 better cores in the end it adds up to not much.

This whole market is nuts atm anyhow prices are almost double what they should be in Canada.

Even moving to the newest AMD setup won't yield much for someone in my shoes but it would cost a arm and leg to do it.

Its unfortunate because I love buying new things but when pc parts cost as much as used cars its tough to play for the fun of it anymore.

 

[Johan45]

Ok Mack, tried it out, not sure if this is exactly what you want. Did 128K min/max first test was 5 seconds and ran around 4.0 GHz second set is 30 seconds 1 core 4100 all cores dropped to 3.7 during the complex test

View attachment 213431

 

[MacClipper]

Comparing that to the Ryzen 7 5800X, which can be found for $489.00 on Newegg and comes with its own cooling solution, yields a $200+ difference.

Quite sure that the retail Ryzen 7 5800X comes without a bundled cooler.

 

[EarthDog]

Thanks for catching it, Mac!

...we all make mistakes, Dave.


EDIT: ...we'd love some help with editing!

 

[Johan45]

Quite sure that the retail Ryzen 7 5800X comes without a bundled cooler.

My apologies, AMD felt fit not to sample us with CPUs this time around so there wasn't any launch coverage or a lot of research done. I assumed the 8-core would come with a bundled cooler as they all have up until the 5000 series, even the 3900X has a bundled cooler.

 

[MaddMutt]

Typing on a I-Pad so this is not easy..
In the benching section with CB20, CB15, Povray, Ect, Ect... The 5800x takes the win in CB15 with 2608 vs 2603 for the 10900k. In this section the 5800x (8c/16t) wins 3/5 with the 10900k (10c/20t) winning the other 2.. You have it listed the other way..
Is intel going to jump to 7nm on its next release? This would have AMD at 5nm?
From the review, it looked like Intel had to drop 2c/4t just to stay under 400w:-(
Great write up

 

[MacClipper]

Thanks for catching it, Mac!

...we all make mistakes, Dave.


EDIT: ...we'd love some help with editing!

Aye, I hear you fellow human.

My apologies, AMD felt fit not to sample us with CPUs this time around so there wasn't any launch coverage or a lot of research done. I assumed the 8-core would come with a bundled cooler as they all have up until the 5000 series, even the 3900X has a bundled cooler.

No need to apologise for such a minor thing, it's a real pity that AMD took away that purty RGB Prism cooler cos I happily recycle them to my lower end Ryzens.