Intel Corei9 11900K Review
The flagship Rocket Lake CPU is a lacklustre last hurrah for Intel's 14nm processors.
This isn’t the Intel Core i9 11900K we should have. The actual heart of this processor is generally not quite the same as the one that was intended to have thump out a mood for Intel’s eleventh Gen Core CPUs, and that, eventually, is the reason I question anybody will feel great suggesting this ostensibly $539 CPU. I absolutely don’t.
The Rocket Lake scope of CPUs was in a tough situation from its initiation, and that rings particularly valid for the Core i9 11900K as the lead chip of this new age of work area processors. From the absolute first choice to make this arrangement of CPUs, Rocket Lake was consistently on the back foot, in light of the fact that Intel’s disappointment is the solitary justification its reality.
Tiger Lake. That is the thing that we ought to expound on with regards to this eleventh Gen arrangement. That is the thing that we’re doing on the portable side of Intel’s business, even the superior, gaming-centered chips that are coming out later in the year. In any case, rather than that continuation of the 10nm creation measure into work area structure, Rocket Lake is another 14nm chip, however one that is attempting to take the past 10nm center plan and fit it into 14nm silicon.
It’s not exactly a square stake in a round LGA attachment, yet it’s the motivation behind why Rocket Lake is a particularly shaking CPU age at the top end.
What’s distinctive about the Intel Core i9 11900K
The principal thing to note is that Rocket Lake isn’t Tiger Lake’s 10nm center back-ported into a 14nm CPU bundle. The Cypress Cove center engineering that controls the Core i9 11900K is basically the Sunny Cove configuration crushed into a chip that can fit in a similar attachment as the old Comet Lake Core i9 10900K. That was the 10nm plan utilized in the Ice Lake age of PC CPUs, while Tiger Lake utilizes a further refined Willow Cove center, one with new semiconductors improvements, an upgraded reserve framework, and higher IPC.
The subsequent thing to note is the reason a back-port was required in any case, and this is something for which I actually haven’t found a good solution out of Intel.
The essential circumstance is that Intel’s work day to more extensive 10nm assembling has been altogether affected by creation issues, first around the underlying Cannon Lake chips—which scarcely made it out of the fabs—and compelled by additional yield issues with the resulting Ice Lake plan. Neither CPU engineering was then fit for pushing the high frequencies expected of current work area processors thus those stayed stuck on the 14nm hub, and on humble cycles of the first Skylake center plan from 2015.
Yet, Intel couldn’t turn out another rendition of the 14nm Skylake design for its mid 2021 chip discharge on the off chance that it needed to get up to speed to AMD’s phenomenal Ryzen 5000-arrangement CPUs. The most recent Zen 3 CPUs have either gotten up to speed to, or outperformed, Intel’s relative processors with regards to gaming execution, and there’s actually nothing more Intel can extract from the geriatric Skylake center to push ahead.
So the choice was made to bring the Sunny Cove plan into one last 14nm CPU range, subsequently Rocket Lake was conceived. This would have likely been made while the Willow Cove center for Tiger Lake was being finished thus the most recent 10nm plan was presumably never truly considered for the eleventh Gen work area engineering.
This wouldn’t have been a choice Intel trifled with; there will consistently be penances engineers need to make to retool such a center for 14nm creation. The most clear of which concerns space. The issue is that, while a 10nm center can be more modest than a 14nm plan if it’s on a very basic level something similar, simply on a more modest hub, Sunny Cove, and likewise Cypress Cove, are unique. Intel initially utilized the more humble cycle to stick more rationale into the centers and the outcome is that by returning the architects have needed to downsize the Core i9 chip.
The most eminent setback is the center check. There was no chance to get for Intel to keep up a similar ten-center plan as the i9 10900K with the fatter Cypress Cove centers and still have the option to fit in the new Xe GPU. What’s the point in case we’re simply going to be lashing discrete designs cards to these CPUs in any case? All things considered, there’s an immense industry for Intel in transportation chips out to corporate customers which depend entirely on the incorporated illustrations of its processors and it would be too costly to even think about assembling completely various centers.
There are still F-arrangement Rocket Lake chips that need incorporated designs, yet those just have incapacitated GPU centers, and aren’t various CPUs with a hole where the 32EU Xe silicon ought to be.
The enormous thought behind Cypress Cove is equivalent to Sunny Cove: Deeper, Wider, Smarter. There is a more prominent measure of store at various levels of the chip, with more L1 Data reserve and more L2 store than with Skylake.
There’s as yet unchanged 2MB of L3 store per center, so that ‘Keen Cache’ number doesn’t change with Rocket Lake. Intel has additionally widened some vital features of the microarchitecture as well, however we’ll begin getting into names of things that us PC gamers likely don’t have to stress over the top over, for example, reorder cushions and execution ports. Do the trick to say there are a greater amount of them.
Also, the final product is a design which conveys higher guidance per clock execution—which Intel is guaranteeing at around 19% over Comet Lake—an equipment fix to the security blemishes (like Meltdown), more PCIe paths from the CPU (and those running at PCIe 4.0 paces), and more prominent memory speed.
It’s a clearly greater chip configuration contrasted and the last-gen Comet Lake CPUs, on account of growing to 14nm. In any case, that scale up doesn’t simply affect the actual size, it obviously affects the measure of force the less-proficient cycle requests. So, Rocket Lake is parched. Furthermore, that is another trade off Intel’s specialists have needed to make with the Core i9 11900K, the Sunny Cove back-port, and its somewhat upgraded adaptation of the 14nm+++ hub.
What’s inside the Intel Core i9 11900K?
As the leader processor of the Rocket Lake arrangement the Core i9 11900K is all that the eleventh Gen work area can be. Or, in other words an ostensible downsize on the best of the tenth Gen chips. The vital spec for the i9 11900K is the center check, and at eight centers and 16 strings that is lower than the less expensive i9 10900K. That will be an intense sell for Intel this time around.
Regarding clock speed, we’re likewise taking a gander at a chip that is more slow than its last-gen brethren. Its pinnacle of 5.3GHz is equivalent to the i9 10900K, and matches it by additionally being generally unfit to really nail that speed for more than a pico-second to a great extent. The base recurrence, nonetheless, is lower, which hardly matters by the same token. The top and lower part of Intel’s recurrence numbers are practically immaterial on the grounds that you’ll never truly see your chip working at those cutoff points.
What’s more significant is the all-center super number, and at 4.7GHz the eight-center Rocket Lake chip is again more slow than the 4.8GHz of the ten-center Comet Lake CPU. It additionally tends to quickly reduce to around 4.3GHz on account of the Intel power limits.
In any case, hello, in any event this high level processor can fit in a similar LGA 1200 attachment as the tenth Gen CPUs. In spite of the fact that at that point you’re passing up what feels the most like an unmistakable redesign for Rocket Lake, the PCIe 4.0 help. Presently, a ton of last-gen Z490 motherboards are getting BIOS updates to take into consideration PCIe 4.0 help with an eleventh Gen CPU, and many have effectively had them, however Intel has additionally delivered the Z590 chipset with heated in PCIe 4.0 help.
The Z590 chipset itself, be that as it may, is still unflinchingly running on PCIe 3.0, causing support still to feel like Intel’s just put a singular butt cheek into this. With 20 PCIe 4.0 paths coming from the Rocket Lake CPU alone, there is barely enough for a full x16 GPU space and a solitary x4 NVMe SSD. In fact you can cheerfully run your GeForce RTX 3080 or Radeon RX 6800 XT on a PCIe 4.0 attachment running at x8 speeds as it will in any case have a similar transfer speed as a full x16 PCIe 3.0 space, yet it is without a doubt a limit pushing ahead.
The TDP of the Core i9 11900K is a similar 125W as the Core i9 10900K, however on the off chance that you burrow a little more profound you’ll see that really Rocket Lake’s best eight-center chip has an optional force limit (PL2 for short explosions of higher frequencies) that is higher than the ten-center Comet Lake, especially the base level where it’s 203W versus 177W.
How does the Intel Core i9 11900K perform?
You may well have gotten this far through my survey considering what the heck the fact of the matter was for Intel going to all the exertion of back-porting Sunny Cove to 14nm just to make what resembles a more awful CPU on paper. All things considered, the real back-porting measure was not something simple for the Israel arm of Intel’s designing group to do, and the way that it has made Rocket Lake at all is as yet an amazing accomplishment.
However, it was additionally imperative to Intel overall, in light of the fact that with the Core i9 11900K it can again profess to have the quickest gaming CPU on the planet. Disregard the constraints of the eight-center plan with regards to multithreading execution against the Core i9 10900K and AMD’s Ryzen 9 5900X—the chips it most intently matches—since it can outgun them both in games.
Despite the fact that simply by a fringe insignificant sum, it’s still there in benchmark numbers, in simple to parse outlines each subsequent figures: The Core i9 11900K beats the Ryzen 9 5900X, our #1 CPU at this moment, with regards to gaming.
In everything other than Shadow of the Tomb Raider, it’s just ever by a simple modest bunch of casings each second. The delta is little enough that you could nearly put it down to difference in testing, however it is so reliably on the Intel chip that I feel pretty sure about expressing that the Core i9 11900K is the more capable of the two. Just the F1 2019 benchmark has the Ryzen 9 5900X with a 4 fps advantage.
The story is, unavoidably, totally extraordinary with regards to in a real sense anything outside of gaming. The Ryzen 9 5900X, and really the Core i9 10900K as well, is far better when it comes than genuine, y’know, handling. Clearly, the higher center checks of those two chips give them a lot more noteworthy multithreaded execution, and that is brought into the world out by the x264 video encoding and Cinebench delivering figures. The Ryzen 9 5900X conveys 68% and 45 percent higher scores separately in those two tests.
Regardless of whether you open the Intel power limits—which essentially every Z590 motherboard will do with a solitary setting in the BIOS—and empower Adaptive Boost Technology, giving the Core i9 11900K all the rope it needs to hang itself, it actually misses the mark concerning the proportionally valued Zen 3 CPU. Truth be told, despite the fact that that permits it to adhere unflinchingly to a 5.1GHz all-center clock speed, it’s still behind the Core i9 10900K.
To be reasonable, that implies that with the Intel shackles eliminated from the Rocket Lake chip (shackles there to permit Intel to consider it a 125W processor) those eight Cypress Cove centers can offer practically the equivalent multithreaded execution as the ten Skylake centers of Comet Lake. Which is an amazing, if especially parched accomplishment.
Furthermore, that addresses the engineering improvement the Sunny Cove back-port offers. That was something we tried by misleadingly evening the odds and locking both the 10900K and 11900K chips at 5GHz and with eight centers operational.
We just saw a 18 percent IPC increment from a solitary center Cinebench R20 run. What’s more, that totally doesn’t mean games, with game execution seeing commonly undeniably not exactly a 6 percent expansion by righteousness of the update to Cypress Cove.
Force is the failing Edison obvious issue at hand, notwithstanding. The Cypress Cove back-port, as I insinuated prior, is amazingly parched with regards to its force necessities. In the event that you leave the standard force restricts set up, the Core i9 11900K runs with 19% higher force levels than the 12-center AMD chip, and in the event that you eliminate those force sleeves the delta leaps to 80 percent higher.
Shouldn’t something be said about overclocking?
What’s more, shouldn’t something be said about the move to PCIe 4.0 help? At the present time, that is somewhat of a battle. In front of the delivery, with the Asus motherboard BIOS Intel provided for the Maximus XIII Hero, the SSD execution of Gen4 drives appears to be very far away the level set by AMD’s Ryzen 5000-arrangement.
It’s conceivable that the manufactured benchmarks we use aren’t working consummately with the new Intel stage in front of delivery, however AS SSD and ATTO are well beneath where a similar Sabrent Rocket 4.0 Plus drive performed on Zen 3.
The PCMark 10 stockpiling tests, in any case, do show an improvement for Intel, as does the straight 30GB record duplicate test. The game level burden time benchmark, utilizing the FFXIV: Shadowbringer test, in any case, features a plunge. Which to accept? Frankly, this seems like the most juvenile piece of the stage, and I feel like the SSD execution alone is probably going to change significantly throughout the following not many months.
What might be said about overclocking? Better believe it, that is the thing that I’d prefer to know as well. I didn’t get anything out of my example. Where I could get the Core i9 10900K easily running with a 5.3GHz all-center clock speed by undervolting it, and surprisingly somewhat flakier at 5.4GHz, this Rocket Lake chip is having none of it.
Accidents or out of nowhere forceful force limits kick in, in any event, when the shackles are as far as anyone knows off. Undervolting doesn’t help, and I think this is something I must return to a couple of BIOS refreshes down the line.
How might the Intel Core i9 11900K affect PC gaming?
The Core i9 11900K appears to exist exclusively so Intel can tell individuals it has the world’s quickest gaming processor once more. Our exhibition measurements do bear that guarantee out, however the numbers are just barely in support of Intel contrasted with our #1 AMD chip, the Ryzen 9 5900X. That implies game execution can’t actually be a characterizing factor when the opportunity arrives to pick your next CPU.
That possibly truly works if all the other things is equivalent, and that is not the situation with this age. Positively, it’s intense for me to suggest the Core i9 11900K simply on the rear of its slight gaming execution lead considering the broadness of stage that AMD as of now offers.
The lone battle for the red group, and the one spot where Intel could possibly collect a little inspiration around Rocket Lake, is in the way that the Ryzen 9 5900X has been in strong restricted stockpile for quite a bit of its life. Everything in PC gaming has been hard to find it appears, however in processor terms things have been no place as tacky as in the designs card market, and there are positive indications of a recuperation for the other Zen 3 CPU stocks.
The strong standard hex-center Ryzen 5 5600X is back marked down again at $350 and the eight-center Ryzen 7 5800X is available too at $490. On the off chance that the 12-center, $550 Ryzen 9 5900X was accessible it would 100% be the CPU to beat, something the Core i9 11900K just does just barely in gaming.
However, it’s not accessible, thus shouldn’t something be said about contrasted with the eight-center Ryzen 7 5800X? That is got a comparative degree of general preparing execution, if not a touch more, and is generally on par with regards to gaming as well, if not a little lower. It is much less expensive however, accompanies full PCIe 4.0 help across the whole foundation of CPU and chipset, and won’t be so requesting of your PSU for full-fat execution.
Thus, that actually feels like a more sensible chip to pursue than the recently delivered Rocket Lake processors. Consider the possibility that you need somewhat more at the top of the line however. Imagine a scenario where you want the guarantee the additional center check of the Ryzen 9 5900X offered, yet can’t go as far as possible up to the now ridiculously costly Ryzen 9 5950X. This is the place where Intel has a shot, and to some extent that is on account of Rocket Lake.
Since the new Intel eleventh Gen chips have been recently stamped the more established tenth Gen CPUs, which are as yet in beautiful sound stock on account of a veritable AMD elective evening out interest, are accessible at an incredible cost now. The Core i9 10900F, a ten-center, 20-string chip with a high clock speed, is the equivalent $350 as the six-center, 12-string Ryzen 5 5600X.
It actually feels like there’s a bad situation for Rocket Lake at the very good quality, however. Truly, it is ideal the organization coordinated its huge Intel Unleashed occasion before the arrival of these eleventh Gen work area chips in light of the fact that dependent on the Core i9 11900K you’d be excused for viewing at Intel like it had totally lost its direction. I’d absolutely have less expectation it could discover a way back without Pat Gelsinger’s certain feature a day or two ago.
Rocket Lake brings the same old thing to the table for all its brilliant retrograde designing
Back-porting its 10nm design to fit with its develop 14nm assembling ability presumably appeared as though a keen move of the dice when it was first mooted, yet the truth of that choice has uncovered a leader CPU that offers an answer for a difficult that doesn’t exist for anybody yet Intel. It’s Intel that required a chip to catch or beat AMD’s restored Zen 3 gaming measurements, not us.
Comet Lake exchanges blows with AMD, and we’ve spoken about what minimal mean for the CPU has on outline rates in genuine terms. So both of the tenth Gen or 5000-arrangement chips will follow through on those checks. So Rocket Lake brings the same old thing to the table for all its keen retrograde designing.
Aside from, that is, further down the stack. Back in the before time, the long, quite a while in the past, when Intel was prevailing, we would commend the force of the Core i7 (at that point the first in class) however suggest the Core i5 as the one most gamers should go for. Presently the Core i5 is the lone Rocket Lake anybody should go for.
That is a chip which enhances its progenitor on each level, comes in at the correct cost, and by and large tops its AMD hex-center comparable in the deal.
The part I actually don’t actually comprehend is the reason Tiger Lake itself wasn’t a choice. Was it basically down to the volume of superior 10nm chips that it would have to create to satisfy both the requests of gaming PC and work area clients? Could Intel not trust its 10nm fabs to convey all it required? Or then again was there some particular explanation it needed to get another chip age out toward the beginning of year?
I surmise the information that Alder Lake was in transit toward the finish of 2021 implied some other delivery timing would knock excessively close into that dispatch, so if Intel could depend on conveying the 10nm Tiger Lake design to work areas.
You may also like to check out:
- .Intel Tiger Lake-U PC CPU spill shows it could be extensively quicker than Ice Lake Chip
- ntel’s First 6-Core Gaming King: Core i7-8700K, Revisited 2020
- 2020 Envy 15 Creator Core i7 Review: An Answer To The Apple MacBook Pro
- What kind of SSD Would it Be Advisable for You to Purchase
- Harmony OS 2.0 Will Officially Come At HDC Together Conference (SEP. 10 – 12)