ELI5 Intel's new chip offerings

[HCHTech]

It appears that chip choice is going to be getting way more complicated as the Core and Core-Ultra chips start making their way into machines. I've been trying to wrap my brain around this, as well as trying to equate new offerings to old as far as what to recommend for different types of workloads. It seems that benchmarking is going to have to change and suddenly we'll need to be interested in how many "Picojoules per bit" a particular chip has. 3 different kinds of cores now, plus starting over with naming conventions - they are not making it easy.

 

[timeshifter]

In case it’s not just me, ELI5 means explain it to me like I’m 5 years old. I’m presuming that’s what you meant?

I’m in the same boat, ELI5 and do it slowly and repeat multiple times.

 

[Blues]

Im just gunna read bench marking and see exactly what kind of testing they are doing to see what suits what like I always do. I love Ryzen chips for machines doing more heavy lifting on the CPU front over an Intel right now though I haven't looked at the latest chips this goes back to last gen Ryzen.

 

[Bryce W]

xfgxfbxbv

 

[Sky-Knight]

I despise Ryzen, and I objectively do not understand those that use them. Every single build performs subpar due to all sorts of memory issues. I build an Intel and the thing just works... Don't get me started with the AMD SKUs in Azure... so many issues there too! At least until we have this crap: https://www.techradar.com/computing...ly-fixed-but-some-owners-may-still-be-worried

As for Core vs Core ultra, it's explained here: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/docs/processors/core-vs-ultra.html

And honestly, it's not that hard to understand.

Intel Core CPUs are the "15th" generation iSeries as you know them.
Intel Core Ultra CPUs are the same as the above, with integrated GPUs... with a twist. These parallel cores are directly exposed via the CPU's microcode, and form Intel's version of an NPU (Neural Processing Unit).

This is Intel FINALLY putting nVidia on notice. ARC technology integrated into the CPU so completely that we have a uniform CPU construct that has normal cores, efficiency cores, and parallel computing cores ready for AI workloads. Today this capability doesn't mean much, but as time goes on with DDR5 getting cheaper by the day, this new paradigm will change the industry and eat into nVidia's monopoly extensively.

ANd those of you on the Red Team... ask yourselves...

AMD bought ATI ages ago exactly to do THIS... precisely THIS. Why is it that Vega sucks so much? Why have their APIs stagnated? Why do they continue to have terrible support, lifecycles, and software?

AMD above all else had the ability to be the company that rode th AI wave into history, and just screwed the pooch. Intel did too... they screwed up all over the place as well. But Intel via this new lineup is ready to take nVidia on directly with a VASTLY less expensive and quite capable product. I have one of these new Core Ultra's in my new laptop and I have to say... it's quite nice! It's not Apple's M Series nice, but of the currently available AMD64 capable CPUs on the market, it's bloody incredible!

And I can't wait to see how the market shifts, because it will be better for everyone! And once again... AMD is lagging the furthest behind, perhaps now they'll wake up and make Vega what it needs to be, and get their own NPU on the shelf. AMD does have XDNA, so it's not like they're out of the fight, but the price / performance ratio isn't in their favor and adoption... has been sluggish. We all need BOTH of these companies to get on their game. nVidia has a disastrous monopoly thanks to CUDA and their GPUs being AI powerhouses. Only the competition of two more giants will reign in prices.

I just hope Intel holds onto their US domestic silicon production, but that seems... hard.

Here's the SKU breakdown: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/processor-numbers.html

"15th" Generation is now "1st", we're just starting over on new names.

Also, the ARC pages are WRONG! Intel needs to fix this...

Intel® Core™ Ultra 9 Processor 185H (24M Cache, up to 5.10 GHz) - Product Specifications | Intel

Intel® Core™ Ultra 9 Processor 185H (24M Cache, up to 5.10 GHz) quick reference with specifications, features, and technologies.

www.intel.com

This CPU has 6 P-Cores, 2 E-Cores, and 8 GPU cores, relative to the 14th gen and older anyway... stuffed into a 2.3ghz base clock at 45W TDP and boost clock of 5.1ghz at 115W! The CPU in my laptop gets down to 15W! That's Snapdragon territory! The Low power high performance CPU Intel has been working on since generation 8 of the iSeries is FINALLY real!

 

[Blues]

I prefer AMD for desktop use typically if I need real graphic I will have a GPU in a system and as for any IGP I can say I find AMD's superior to Intel's. I do say though really I base it on the work/use and I know for my home use I do a lot of encoding and such work and in all testing I see on a price for performance scale AMD at least up to the Ryzen 5000 series we better performers. I also have never had any issues with any AMD system I have setup.

 

[britechguy]

I also have never had any issues with any AMD system I have setup.

Same here. I was a "primarily AMD" household up until recently. The custom-built machines I had made for the local business I was working with were done with Ryzen 5s because the bang for the buck was just much higher.

Just as I'm someone who has no undying loyalty to or strong preference for Coca-Cola over Pepsi, it's the same for AMD and Intel. I've worked with both for decades and never had any problems with one that I did not have with the other, and those did not generally come from the CPU end of things, either.

Let's face it, in the world market of chip makers and CPU designers, if you were producing crap you'd be gone in the blink of an eye. I doubt either AMD or Intel are going away anytime soon.

 

[fincoder]

I despise Ryzen, and I objectively do not understand those that use them. Every single build performs subpar due to all sorts of memory issues.

It's actually Intel 13th and 14th gen desktop CPUs that have stability issues. Intel has admitted to a design problem.

Intel Admits to Core Processor Problems, Will Issue Patch

Intel took the rare step this week of admitting to a flaw in some of its recent microprocessors that causes reliability issues.

www.thurrott.com

 

[timeshifter]

It's actually Intel 13th and 14th gen desktop CPUs that have stability issues. Intel has admitted to a design problem.

Intel Admits to Core Processor Problems, Will Issue Patch

Intel took the rare step this week of admitting to a flaw in some of its recent microprocessors that causes reliability issues.

www.thurrott.com

He acknowledged that in his post...

Don't get me started with the AMD SKUs in Azure... so many issues there too! At least until we have this crap: https://www.techradar.com/computing...ly-fixed-but-some-owners-may-still-be-worried

 

[Sky-Knight]

It's actually Intel 13th and 14th gen desktop CPUs that have stability issues. Intel has admitted to a design problem.

Intel Admits to Core Processor Problems, Will Issue Patch

Intel took the rare step this week of admitting to a flaw in some of its recent microprocessors that causes reliability issues.

www.thurrott.com

Yep... called that out, and I'm typing this post on a 13th generation system impacted that's running perfectly fine, but waiting on the final BIOS update. This issue is being serviced.

Meanwhile... the Ryzen 5 that's under my 17 year old's desk is still nothing but heat, fits, and fury. I gave AMD a shot, it couldn't pass my teenager test, it's junk. The 13 gen that's on my desk is a vast improvement, even with the "problems". Intel support once again proves why it will always beat AMD.

I also remind you, I sold appliances that ran NGFW for 15 years... I've done contract SOC manufacturing, I'm into the hardware deeper than anyone else on this board.

Go Intel, or go home!

The future will be decided not with the CPU, but the GPU. Intel finally has one, ARC is working! They are servicing the low power, low cost market... which again is king. nVidia is riding high with a CEO that thinks "$300" for an entry level GPU is appropriate, Intel will hand you a $300 CPU/GPU combo device, which is vastly more economical.

Meanwhile, AMD hasn't figured it out yet, after buying and gutting nVidia's chief rival. Man I miss ATI, such a great company. That being said, AMD GPUs are solid, but again have software issues and AMD really screwed the pooch here by not effectively countering CUDA. Again, they were the company that had the tools to take on nVidia and win. Both CPU and GPUs were in the house there!

Intel had to come from behind with a new GPU from scratch to get back in the game. Core Ultra is here, Intel is back baby! AMD is on the back foot AGAIN because they once again REFUSED TO COMPETE. I'm so sick of the games AMD plays, they're pathetic, their product is pathetic, and I'm sick of what they do to the marketplace. All they do is tread water... they can't innovate to save their souls!

 

[fincoder]

Yep... called that out

The ambiguous phrase "at least until we have this crap" with a link that doesn't show the article's title is not what I'd say is calling it out, it's minimising it.

This issue is being serviced.

It's yet to be seen whether the firmware patches will eliminate the issue.

Meanwhile... the Ryzen 5 that's under my 17 year old's desk is still nothing but heat, fits, and fury.

Might those issues be related to the motherboard or other components? I'm typing this on my custom office PC with Ryzen 5 5600G and it hasn't missed a beat since being installed several years ago. It has very good performance for a very good price. I've used more powerful and recent Ryzen CPUs in occasional customer builds (e.g. for video editing or gaming) and not had any returns.

I've also used Intel 13th/14th gen CPUs in builds and had none returned with the reported instability issues. I assume my customers aren't using them quite as heavily compared with other enthusiasts and professionals that report issues.

Ryzen CPUs have been used in many business-grade PCs like Lenovo Think models and HP Elite models. In my experience these are rock solid, and I haven't heard of any particular problems in these widely used business PCs.

 

[Sky-Knight]

The ambiguous phrase "at least until we have this crap" with a link that doesn't show the article's title is not what I'd say is calling it out, it's minimising it.

Your opinion, I don't communicate the way you like... And because I didn't format the link it's bad? Lazy on your part, I called attention to the issue, and linked a common source. Intel's response on this specific issue has been... problematic at best. I'm NOT happy.

It's yet to be seen whether the firmware patches will eliminate the issue.

Very true! Also the 3rd fix is still beta for far too many devices.

Might those issues be related to the motherboard or other components? I'm typing this on my custom office PC with Ryzen 5 5600G and it hasn't missed a beat since being installed several years ago. It has very good performance for a very good price. I've used more powerful and recent Ryzen CPUs in occasional customer builds (e.g. for video editing or gaming) and not had any returns.

Yes, and that's still AMD's fault, you seem to be missing the boat here. AMD allows this via garbage specs, and has done so for my entire life, the only time they didn't do this is when they were subcontracted to build Intel gear so Intel could get government contracts back in the 80s. If you were around then you may recall there were other companies in the mix, such as Cyrex.

You will also note, desktops are the only supported place for AMD, and yes they "work", and your customer's not returning the things doesn't mean anything because they know even less about the marketplace, and its quality than we do. On the server side there is a niche where AMD really shines though, because we wind up with a power efficient chip with more, lower speed cores per die. This is helpful, until you go to move the workload off that platform to an equivalent... then things collapse.

I've also used Intel 13th/14th gen CPUs in builds and had none returned with the reported instability issues. I assume my customers aren't using them quite as heavily compared with other enthusiasts and professionals that report issues.

The most recent fix is for platforms that fry at idle... heavy use isn't what triggers the degradation, voltage shift is. You're demonstrating exactly the ignorance I'm calling attention to here.

Ryzen CPUs have been used in many business-grade PCs like Lenovo Think models and HP Elite models. In my experience these are rock solid, and I haven't heard of any particular problems in these widely used business PCs.

Lenovo yes, HP not so much... I live in a desert, these things love to burst into flames. Lenovos are better about active cooling settings, and all we get are noise complaints. Still, the firmware isn't up to the task for anything more than office duty workloads, anyone that's working on high end engineering or AI work will prefer the Intel core as it doesn't turn the room into a sauna while it does the job.

All of the above is what I'm getting at, AMD lives because people don't know their history and don't know any better. They are an 80% solution, sold to the lowest bidder. I design to account for the 20% AMD loses in, because my junk has to operate in adverse conditions, and be readily replaceable in all circumstances. As soon as you slap an SLA on a thing, AMD is out. They don't support their chips correctly, and they don't support them long enough. But if you're in the 80% space? Meh... anything will work at that point.

 

[NviGate Systems]

My i5-4590T has you all beat. It's the best at everything! Leaking data, running cool, you name it it can do it! It even cost me a bargain of $25. HA! Beat that modern CPU's.

Just Kidding.

But, for what I paid for it ($25) It's my second Quad Core since the Veteran Q6600. I just wanted to brag that I got a Quad Core for $25. Aside from that, the 4590T is actually a solid chip. I swear some of the older chips are better. I was even thinking of moving to 7/8th Gen but (in my brief budget range and quick comparisons) I couldn't find a decent priced chip/system that could actually beat or give a serious run for the money. Some systems I found for reasonable price were i3 and only managed to do 10% better, but at a larger cost.

 

[britechguy]

AMD lives because people don't know their history and don't know any better.

And, again, we see that the Sky-Knight opinion is the only valid one. You really need to get over the idea that this is true.

AMD would not exist as a company in the cut-throat business it's in for decades if it were consistently inferior to Intel or others. You don't like 'em, and that's fine, but the hubris you display in your declarations by fiat are breathtaking. Much of the tech world disagrees with you, and has for a very long time.

Just as there are people with a very strong preference for Macs over PCs, there are people who won't touch Intel and prefer AMD. They're not wrong, and you're not wrong. Every person to his or her own taste.

 

[fincoder]

AMD allows this via garbage specs, and has done so for my entire life

They were terrible prior to Ryzen, with low-performing laptop APUs, and earlier than that with cheap third-party motherboard chipsets.

your customer's not returning the things doesn't mean anything because they know even less about the marketplace, and its quality than we do

Huh? They know if their computer is unstable or won't start!

the firmware isn't up to the task for anything more than office duty workloads

And that is obviously the vast majority of users.

So it turns out you have some specific complaints about Ryzen in certain environments and usage. Pointing out those specifics would have been much more useful to readers rather than the blanket AMD=bad.

 

[britechguy]

And that is obviously the vast majority of users. [only need office duty workloads to work well]

Yup. Capacity/capabilities far in excess of what's used in the most processing and memory intensive activities is an expensive, dead asset.

Everyone absolutely does not need the top of the top tier for routine office or home use. It does them a disservice to sell them more than they need.

 

[Sky-Knight]

They were terrible prior to Ryzen, with low-performing laptop APUs, and earlier than that with cheap third-party motherboard chipsets.

Huh? They know if their computer is unstable or won't start!

And that is obviously the vast majority of users.

So it turns out you have some specific complaints about Ryzen in certain environments and usage. Pointing out those specifics would have been much more useful to readers rather than the blanket AMD=bad.

Apparently you didn't bother to read earlier posts. I have a Ryzen APU in this house, I built it because I listened to people like you... Ryzen good!

I gave it to my 16 year old... and it's the worst decision I've ever made in a desktop. Asus mainboard, no cheap components, this is a SOLID build all components verified compatible, all of them have "good reviews."

The system is objective garbage, performance is sub par, the memory bus cannot utilize the performance of the RAM installed unless I unlock it, which forces the CPU to disable its throttling controls and keep itself at 100%, this in turn generates enough additional heat to warm the room... The amount of energy consumed in the process is comparable to the other THREE machines that live in that bank COMBINED. I have four kids each have their own desktop, one is on a Generation 8 based Intel rig, the other two are still using 4th generation units built ages ago.

I've seen one of the 4th gen units, which packs the ancient but venerable i3-4130, with 8GB of RAM, and a 500GB SATA attached SSD, paired with an extremely hobbled EVGA GTX1080 OUT PERFORM this Ryzen 5 5600G, with it's 16GB of ram, 500GB NVME hard disk, and RTX 3060. This is a relatively rare circumstance, but one that's utterly unacceptable. And I'll leave out the stability issue with Steams, O365 applications, and OBS the thing reguarly suffers from despite having the most recent patches, drivers, and firmware applied across the board. Every crash researched, all error codes associated with... shockingly... AMD CPUs. Single core performance is also pathetic... This has to be the weakest 3.9GHZ CPU ever built when it's working correctly to boot.

Oh... and I had to purchase 4x the recommended CPU cooler to get the thing to run at an acceptable temperature.

Never... again. Not worth it, I can order Intel based on a spec sheet and it runs like a dream all day every day. I can get Intel based SOC units on contract order easily, and quickly. I've got drivers everywhere, Linux support, WIndows support, I can do ANYTHING with my Intel based equipment. AMD can't handle my teenager.

 

[Sky-Knight]

I need to correct some things here.

The Core and Core Ultra series CPUs are using a 7nm process, and are best described as a 14.5 generation iSeries.
There will be a 15th generation iSeries, and these will be built on a 2nm process.

So point against Intel, they be stupidly confusing right now.

Oh, and Dave has stuff out on it:

Side note, it seems Intel is abandoning Hyperthreading, which is interesting.

 

[timeshifter]

The Core and Core Ultra series CPUs are using a 7nm process, and are best described as a 14.5 generation iSeries.
There will be a 15th generation iSeries, and these will be built on a 2nm process.

So the Core and Core Ultra will be lower end than the 15th gen i series?

 

[Sky-Knight]

So the Core and Core Ultra will be lower end than the 15th gen i series?

That appears to be the case, they appear to be a tock of 14th gen, and the prototype release with the integrated NPU.

I'm not sure if the 15th gen will have the NPU integration (parallel cores), or if Intel plans to unify the lines later. The 15th gen product docs I have clearly show zero virtual cores, they've dropped hyper threading from all of the SKUs. Again, I don't have an issue with this because that use case is covered by an e-Core... and those are vastly more useful in general. Anyone that wants to make use of these on the desktop level needs Windows 11 23H2 at a minimum, and benefits from the scheduling updates in 24H2.

I hope they unify the product lines at some point, we've got enough SKUs to kill an elephant here, and getting a functional machine together is hard enough.

Note, on the Windows Server side the same issue holds, if you have CPUs with e-Cores you need Server 2022 or younger to use them.