11900K Benched

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
58,216
280W CPU only stress? For an 8-core CPU?? :eek:

Yikes.

This isn't all that much. Many CPU's can go well beyond that. AMD's Ryzen 9 3950X for example can pull upwards of 300w by itself. I measured over 384 watts at the wall stressing only the CPU. The Core i9 10980XE is even worse, pulling over 617w at the wall stressing only the CPU. Granted, that's the whole system but the GPU at idle only pulls like 15w, chipsets pull 6-15w depending on which one, etc. AMD's top end offerings pull just as much as Intel's under the right circumstances. The difference is that AMD gives you upwards of 16 cores while Intel gives you a max of 10 cores at the same power envelope. With Rocket Lake, you only get 8.
 

Nasgul

Weaksauce
Joined
Jun 11, 2005
Messages
125
Intel gives you a max of 10 cores at the same power envelope. With Rocket Lake, you only get 8.
AND!!! Let's not forget the 11th Gen has an integrated USB 3.2 controller, a "NEW" and more powerful GPU, whereas the other boards came with the horrible ASMedia controller and low tech GPU. And it's also a 14nm chip, not 7nm which Darkswordz doesn't know.

My 10700KF pulls 214w full load, no GPU, and yet, horrible ASMedia controller.
 

noko

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 14, 2010
Messages
6,278
This isn't all that much. Many CPU's can go well beyond that. AMD's Ryzen 9 3950X for example can pull upwards of 300w by itself. I measured over 384 watts at the wall stressing only the CPU. The Core i9 10980XE is even worse, pulling over 617w at the wall stressing only the CPU. Granted, that's the whole system but the GPU at idle only pulls like 15w, chipsets pull 6-15w depending on which one, etc. AMD's top end offerings pull just as much as Intel's under the right circumstances. The difference is that AMD gives you upwards of 16 cores while Intel gives you a max of 10 cores at the same power envelope. With Rocket Lake, you only get 8.
That is double the number of cores, so with AMD you get double the cores, same power envelope as compared to Intel in general.
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
58,216
That is double the number of cores, so with AMD you get double the cores, same power envelope as compared to Intel in general.

It's not precisely a 2:1 ratio for cores vs. power consumption. But, generally speaking AMD does give you double the cores (in some cases) as Intel at a similar power envelope.
 

noko

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 14, 2010
Messages
6,278
It's not precisely a 2:1 ratio for cores vs. power consumption. But, generally speaking AMD does give you double the cores (in some cases) as Intel at a similar power envelope.
Right, that is what it appears to be. Anyways 3960x, all 24 cores 48 threads @ 100%, if HWinfo is accurate,es Core + SOC power of 231.6w. Mining Monero. PB only for CPU. Using PBO it is easy to push 360w+ on the 3960x, for very little gain I might add to go with it.
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
58,216
Right, that is what it appears to be. Anyways 3960x, all 24 cores 48 threads @ 100%, if HWinfo is accurate,es Core + SOC power of 231.6w. Mining Monero. PB only for CPU. Using PBO it is easy to push 360w+ on the 3960x, for very little gain I might add to go with it.

HWInfo's data being accurate is debatable, but probably close enough for our purposes. I'd say it probably is. That being said, I've seen these chips pull more than 300w. Typically though, you need to manually overclock them to achieve that.
 

Makaveli@BETA

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 24, 2004
Messages
2,408
The CPU Z benchmark numbers are alittle lower than I expected based on previous leaks.

ST 674
MT 6800
 

OrangeKhrush

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
1,673
The CPU Z benchmark numbers are alittle lower than I expected based on previous leaks.

ST 674
MT 6800
Something is odd about that as the 11700K is about 5600, the all core boost is not that much higher to get 6800. That is probably a fixed max overclock score.
 

D-EJ915

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 31, 2003
Messages
1,413
AND!!! Let's not forget the 11th Gen has an integrated USB 3.2 controller, a "NEW" and more powerful GPU, whereas the other boards came with the horrible ASMedia controller and low tech GPU. And it's also a 14nm chip, not 7nm which Darkswordz doesn't know.

My 10700KF pulls 214w full load, no GPU, and yet, horrible ASMedia controller.
well the usb is through the pch not the cpu so is a z490 vs z590 difference on that one
 

Comixbooks

Fully [H]
Joined
Jun 7, 2008
Messages
16,830


Might be a worthy upgrade for someone who needs one.
 
Last edited:

Armenius

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
25,822
Looks like it's certainly the fastest in a number of program benchmarks. I recall reading somewhere that gaming performance was taking a hit this gen, so that was expected. As was the heat output with this Intel 10nm being backported to 14nm. Not a big deal if you're gaming at 4K, anyway. Regardless, the 5800X is the better CPU overall.

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/intel-core-i9-11900k/
 

noko

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 14, 2010
Messages
6,278
That was much worse than expected, I don't see the $200 extra value in the 11900K, pitiful at best. It is priced higher than AMD 5900X with the 5900X slaughtering it in productivity and which is also slightly better than the 11900k in gaming (gaming experience would be pretty much the same regardless for most folks). Now one good reason to go with Intel is the iGPU, where you can't find GPUs at reasonable prices even at all -> You can build working systems now with Intel and upgrade when better pricing and availability comes about. Now if one does more productivity work and don't even need a strong GPU. I expect a lot of OEM systems using Intel CPUs everywhere due to this.
 

OrangeKhrush

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
1,673
a perfect Intel launch, hype and false claims for 2 months with the internet bombarded by clickbait. on review day it is almost like rocket lake doesn't exist.

the 11600k is kind of at the FX8350 treatment of buy if you want cheap, though some places have a 5600x for around 300 dollars which is a good price for a 65 watt part that massacres the 600k and at times beats the 900k.

I don't see the value of a 5600 release with the 5600x already at 65w, a 5600xt 90w part could kick Intel's proverbial dead horse a little more.

pretty sad to see
 

NightReaver

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 20, 2017
Messages
472
a perfect Intel launch, hype and false claims for 2 months with the internet bombarded by clickbait. on review day it is almost like rocket lake doesn't exist.

the 11600k is kind of at the FX8350 treatment of buy if you want cheap, though some places have a 5600x for around 300 dollars which is a good price for a 65 watt part that massacres the 600k and at times beats the 900k.

I don't see the value of a 5600 release with the 5600x already at 65w, a 5600xt 90w part could kick Intel's proverbial dead horse a little more.

pretty sad to see
I think we only see non X ryzens if the KF and non K skus end up being any good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kac77
like this

NightReaver

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 20, 2017
Messages
472
Unless the "plan" is to have APUs in the under $300 space.
I'd love if ryzens across the board started having iGPUs as an option. I love my 5600X, but sometimes I just wanna play something really simple and don't need the 1080ti for that.
 

kirbyrj

Fully [H]
Joined
Feb 1, 2005
Messages
28,490
I'd love if ryzens across the board started having iGPUs as an option. I love my 5600X, but sometimes I just wanna play something really simple and don't need the 1080ti for that.

I have a feeling that the choice right now is either a large cache or an iGPU from AMD's perspective. The cache helped more when there was less cores per CCX, but now that the easily accessible CPUs have only 1 CCX anyway (5600x / 5800x), throw in the iGPU and reduce the clockspeed to account for the extra heat (e.g. 5700G and maybe a 5550G or something like that).

In a perfect world, the iGPU would be essentially a drop in CCX replacement on die instead of a complete respin of the architecture.

iGPU is the best feature about an Intel CPU at the moment though. The old platform stability argument has gone out the window as the 5xx boards are a mess from everything I've seen.
 

NightReaver

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 20, 2017
Messages
472
The APUs really need to get from "releasing" to "released" already. There hasn't been a non-OEM APU since the 3400G.
Exactly. My brother just put together a new pc to play some older early-mid 2000 games on (he was lucky enough to get a 580 for $125 right before the attack of the miners). As much as I wanted to recommend a Ryzen, they just didn't have anything interesting. Same old 3200/3400. He instead went super budget with a 10100F.
 

next-Jin

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 29, 2006
Messages
6,812
I’m looking at building a new workstation for the wife (using company funds). She only uses ArcPro for GIS stuff and does some spatial/3D stuff every now and then but they want to move in that direction at some point. Right now she has to use Parellels with a MacBook Pro which is painful for me to watch much less her using it.

I was originally only looking at 5800X (availability) platform but apparently having two GPUs for spatial stuff is a good idea since only having one can lock up the screen processing tasks.

The new Intels could run it fine on iGPU then use a Quadro RTX4000 for CUDA work/3D stuff.

I could still get the 5800X but I’m having a hard time rationalizing 2 GPUs even if the company gave her a 5k budget. ArcPro doesn’t need powerful stuff just strong IPC single core and in her case a mid range quadro.
 

sk3tch

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 5, 2008
Messages
1,844
Still have an 11900K coming from BBY (they have some kind of delay) but tempted to just get an 11600K. I'm stuck on Z490 and want the latest gen for PCIE4 and playing around with new stuff. It's a WC build too so I can handle hot and heavy.
 

NightReaver

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 20, 2017
Messages
472
Still have an 11900K coming from BBY (they have some kind of delay) but tempted to just get an 11600K. I'm stuck on Z490 and want the latest gen for PCIE4 and playing around with new stuff. It's a WC build too so I can handle hot and heavy.
If you really want the 8 core, why not just get the 11700k then if you're already considering not going with the 11900k? It's at least less of a joke.
 

sk3tch

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 5, 2008
Messages
1,844
If you really want the 8 core, why not just get the 11700k then if you're already considering not going with the 11900k? It's at least less of a joke.
Honestly? I’m the problem. It’s “not the best”. Heh.

Plus, I have a feeling that all the boost stuff won’t ever work well for Z490 so I’d like to be a guinea pig as part of that journey lol. Gonna complain here!
 
Top