Rocket Lake Dicussion Thread

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/techtu...-i711700QS

Intel's 11th Gen Core CPUs might be weeks away from launch, but that hasn't stopped a TechTuber from getting his hands on a qualifying sample of a Core i7-11700 to test. The Rocket Lake chip was put through a bunch of gaming, productivity, and synthetic benchmarks.

Qualifying samples are the final "prototype" chips to be produced before the real model enters production. So this i7-11700 QS is as close to the real thing as it gets. But, to state the obvious, this Rocket Lake SKU does not represent the final product, and drivers for the chip are still not finalized. So performance is subject to change.
...
Overall the results are interesting, but inconclusive at best. Since this is a qualifying unit, with unfinished drivers and a buggy L3 cache, there's no telling what shipping performance will actually be until all the bugs get ironed out and we see full-blown production variants of Rocket Lake out in the wild. At best, these results can give us some idea as to how the Core i7-11700 will compare to its arch-rival, the Ryzen 7 5800X. But if Intel delivers similar performance and can crank out Rocket Lake-S at volumes that actually meet demand, the blue team will undoubtedly sell a fair amount of its new silicon, despite yet another 14nm process node.

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/i9-11900k-geekbench-4

Courtesy of database detective @Leakbench on Twitter, we now have our first decent look at how Intel's next-gen Core i9-11900K Rocket Lake CPU will perform in our CPU Benchmark hierarchy. This test is the first clear result from Geekbench 4 for the 11900K, which is nice to see as it can be a more accurate gauge of raw CPU performance than the other benchmark results we've seen, like Passmark or Geekbench 5. The latest test results show that Rocket Lake will assuredly climb the gaming ranks, and if the price is right, the new chips could upset our list of Best CPUs.
...
Intel claims a 19% increase in IPC for the Rocket Lake chips, and that appears to be roughly accurate in this test. The Core i9-11900K was ~15% faster than its predecessor, the 10900K, in the single-core tests.

However, looking at the multi-core results, the inverse happens and the 10900K is 6.5% faster due to its higher core count. That's actually pretty impressive, though: The ten-core Core i9-10900K has two more cores than the eight-core Core i9-11900K, so we expected a much larger advantage in favor of the chip with two extra cores. Increased IPC truly floats all boats.

But against the 5800X, the single-core results are much closer, naturally, with Zen 3's much higher IPC performance. Here the 11900K pulls ahead of the 5800X by a mere 4.4%. Strangely though, the 5800X pulls ahead of the 11900K in the multi-core department by 17%, which is a larger delta than we expected because these are both eight-core chips.

This is but one benchmark, though, and several factors could influence the score, including early firmware with the Core i9-11900K. We expect more mature BIOS revisions will be headed out before launch. In either case, these results paint a competitive picture for the desktop PC space soon, one in which price (and supply in light of the shortages) will be exceedingly important.

https://www.techpowerup.com/278907/rocke...ance-intel

Intel claims that its upcoming 11th Gen Core "Rocket Lake-S" desktop processors offer up to 11% higher storage performance than competing AMD Ryzen 5000 processors, when using the CPU-attached M.2 NVMe slot. A performance slide released by Intel's Ryan Shrout shows a Samsung 980 PRO 1 TB PCI-Express 4.0 x4 M.2 NVMe SSD performance on a machine powered by a Core i9-11900K processor, compared to one powered by an AMD Ryzen 9 5950X. PCMark 10 Quick System Drive Benchmark is used to evaluate storage performance on both machines. On both machines a separate drive is used as the OS/boot drive, and the Samsung 980 PRO is used as a test drive, free from any OS role.

The backup page for the slide provides details of the system configurations used for both machines. What it doesn't mention, however, is whether on the AMD machine, the 980 PRO was installed on the CPU-attached M.2 NVMe slot, or one that's attached to the AMD X570 chipset. Unlike the Intel Z590, the AMD X570 puts out downstream PCI-Express 4.0, which motherboard designers can use to put out additional NVMe Gen 4 slots. On the Intel Z590 motherboard, the M.2 NVMe Gen 4 slot the drive was tested on is guaranteed to be the CPU-attached one, as the Z590 PCH puts out PCIe Gen 3 downstream lanes. A PCI-Express 4.0 x4 link is used as chipset bus on the AMD X570, offering comparable bandwidth to the DMI 3.0 x8 (PCI-Express 3.0 x8) employed on the Intel Z590. A drive capable of attaining 7 GB/s sequential transfers should be in a sub-optimal situation on a chipset-attached M.2 slot. It would be nice if Intel clears this up in an update to its backup.