Where's Intel 15th gen ?

[MathWizard]

Isn't Intel supposed to be launching new desktop chips ? I've looked for a few minutes, and I just see a few articles from mid-October, that said they were due out by the end of Oct.

I checked youtube, and there wasn't much there for "intel 15th gen", and the results were so frustrating, I gave up. IDK, maybe no one cares about next gen intel. Between all the ads, and the lame search results this year, I'm getting bored with youtube.

I just have the upgrade itch, so I'm hoping to snag a used 14900k, or see what the new chips are like.

[DutchGert]

under what rock you have been living ?

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Intel+Core+Ultra+9+285K&ia=web

TLDR: Its not so good chip.

[pcprogrammer]

Did Intel solve the issues with the 13th and 14th gen processors in the mean time? (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/general-computing/intel-seems-to-be-bleeding-out/)

I'm also thinking of building a newer gaming PC, but I will probably go for a 12th generation I7 or I9.

[Ice-Tea]

And no AMD platform.... because?

[Ranayna]

Did Intel solve the issues with the 13th and 14th gen processors in the mean time? (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/general-computing/intel-seems-to-be-bleeding-out/)

I'm also thinking of building a newer gaming PC, but I will probably go for a 12th generation I7 or I9.

Yes. Intel forced the mainboard manufacturers to properly set default values so that the CPUs are not in danger anymore.
They are also somewhat slower with these default values. Which is why these unsafe values even came to be.

The new generation is rather mediocre.
I think this is due to more conservative power planning as to not repeat the disaster. And due to a more secure design, avoiding Specte and Rowhammer style attacks.

For a gaming PC, i think at the moment there is no way around an AMD x3D CPU. They are beasts for gaming. Even the older generations beat similar Intel CPUs by a lot.

[pcprogrammer]

And no AMD platform.... because?

No real reason. I have always bought Intel before and they suited me fine.

Yes. Intel forced the mainboard manufacturers to properly set default values so that the CPUs are not in danger anymore.
They are also somewhat slower with these default values. Which is why these unsafe values even came to be.

So with tweaking, which is not something I'm into, one might risk running into the danger zone again?

The new generation is rather mediocre.
I think this is due to more conservative power planning as to not repeat the disaster. And due to a more secure design, avoiding Specte and Rowhammer style attacks.

I have not followed the development on modern PC for quite a while and just found out through this thread that there even is a new generation. 

For a gaming PC, i think at the moment there is no way around an AMD x3D CPU. They are beasts for gaming. Even the older generations beat similar Intel CPUs by a lot.

My current machine is used for both MCU development (strictly hobby) and gaming, but I want to separate those two. (Dual boot, Linux and Windows 10)

I have an I5-10400 with 32GB of RAM and a while back I added a Nvidia RTX4060, which really improved the gaming experience, but gives problems under Linux when I'm only using one of the two monitors connected to the system. Mainly seen when browsing with Firefox. A maybe 5% - 10% high band on the top of the screen flickers between full black and the actual image. Did things with the driver and it looked like it was solved, but lately it reappeared, but only when one of the two monitors is switched off.

Any suggestions on an AMD CPU with a comparable price/performance to a I7-12700KF?

[DimitriP]

And no AMD platform.... because?

Tell me which AMD CPU you would prefer instead of an Intel I'm sure we'll come up with at least one more reason other than "it's not Intel"

[Ranayna]

And no AMD platform.... because?

Tell me which AMD CPU you would prefer instead of an Intel I'm sure we'll come up with at least one more reason other than "it's not Intel"

For gaming, nothing comes past the 9800x3D at the moment. And AMD fully well knows this, as it is rather expensive
But i'm curious: Which Intel CPU would you suggest instead, and more importantly, why?

[DimitriP]

And no AMD platform.... because?

Tell me which AMD CPU you would prefer instead of an Intel I'm sure we'll come up with at least one more reason other than "it's not Intel"

For gaming, nothing comes past the 9800x3D at the moment. And AMD fully well knows this, as it is rather expensive
But i'm curious: Which Intel CPU would you suggest instead, and more importantly, why?

"for gaming" "currently", sure , as long as it's "for gaming"
As far as a machine that is used for "other things" ,   my current favorites are still 12700K , 13900KS, 14900K.
Depending on what motherboards and RAM I have laying around.

[Monkeh]

And no AMD platform.... because?

Tell me which AMD CPU you would prefer instead of an Intel I'm sure we'll come up with at least one more reason other than "it's not Intel"

For gaming, nothing comes past the 9800x3D at the moment. And AMD fully well knows this, as it is rather expensive
But i'm curious: Which Intel CPU would you suggest instead, and more importantly, why?

"for gaming" "currently", sure , as long as it's "for gaming"

And? You asked for a reason - that's a valid one. People use computers for gaming and AMD absolutely kick the stuffing out of Intel at every turn in that market.

They also happen to be very competitive in other tasks, and generally far more power efficient. But hey, Intel are king if you don't bother to look at alternatives.

[brucehoult]

"for gaming" "currently", sure , as long as it's "for gaming"
As far as a machine that is used for "other things" ,   my current favorites are still 12700K , 13900KS, 14900K.
Depending on what motherboards and RAM I have laying around.

I bought a Lenovo i9-13900HX laptop in February (cheap, as the 14900 ones were already available) and I'm very very happy with it. The same machine was available with a Ryzen 9 7945HX instead (though not at such a big discount). Internet research seemed to indicate that the AMD was very slightly faster on things that used all cores all the time, but the i9 slightly faster on more bursty loads, such as my typical software builds that alternate between using fewer than 8 cores (more like 1-4) and things than can use 100 cores if you've got 'em. But very little in it either way.

I was traditionally a 68k/PPC guy, but I bought a run-out price HP Pentium Pro 200 server specifically to run Linux. After that I went through K6-2, Athlon XP 700, 1800+, 3200+ before switching to Core 2 Duo, i7-860, i7-4790K, i7-6700K and then back to AMD with the 32 core 2990WX (better and much cheaper than the 18 core i9-7980XE).

I still use the 6 year old 2990WX sometimes but the 13900 laptop is faster at absolutely everything (and much faster at low thread count), uses 1/4 the energy at idle and 1/3 at full power, and weighs 20 kg less and fits in a briefcase.

In short: I'll get whatever of AMD and Intel looks best at the time, leaning towards AMD if the price & performance are similar. I'll eagerly switch to Arm or (preferably) RISC-V when they hit this core count and speed at a good price. The new M4 Mac Minis look attractive for a desktop-and-take-to-other-desktops machine ... but don't run Linux natively. But I'm ok with a VM/docker. Maybe a 16 core M4 Max MacBook Pro if I win the lottery :-)

[DimitriP]

And no AMD platform.... because?

Tell me which AMD CPU you would prefer instead of an Intel I'm sure we'll come up with at least one more reason other than "it's not Intel"

For gaming, nothing comes past the 9800x3D at the moment. And AMD fully well knows this, as it is rather expensive
But i'm curious: Which Intel CPU would you suggest instead, and more importantly, why?

"for gaming" "currently", sure , as long as it's "for gaming"

And? You asked for a reason - that's a valid one. People use computers for gaming and AMD absolutely kick the stuffing out of Intel at every turn in that market.

They also happen to be very competitive in other tasks, and generally far more power efficient. But hey, Intel are king if you don't bother to look at alternatives.

And?   Where did I dissagree? One trick pony "in that market".   Glad we are on the same page.

[DimitriP]

Internet research seemed to indicate that the AMD was very slightly faster on things that used all cores all the time, but the i9 slightly faster on more bursty loads, such as my typical software builds that alternate between using fewer than 8 cores (more like 1-4) and things than can use 100 cores if you've got 'em

There are FPS junkies, and single thread speed junkies.( ok, there are case color scheme junkies", rgb junkies, water cooling junkies and the list goes on but that's a subject for another thread)
I'll bet on single thread speed any day unless it's a machine built just "for gaming"

[brucehoult]

Internet research seemed to indicate that the AMD was very slightly faster on things that used all cores all the time, but the i9 slightly faster on more bursty loads, such as my typical software builds that alternate between using fewer than 8 cores (more like 1-4) and things than can use 100 cores if you've got 'em

There are FPS junkies, and single thread speed junkies.( ok, there are case color scheme junkies", rgb junkies, water cooling junkies and the list goes on but that's a subject for another thread)
I'll bet on single thread speed any day unless it's a machine built just "for gaming"

It's kind of crazy that the fans run the harder with one core running at 5.4 GHz than with 24 cores running at 3.9 GHz ... but Amdahl's law. That's where the 24 core i9 gains on the Threadripper with 4.2 GHz maximum.  Plus a nearly 30% improvement in IPC, ending up 1.6x faster on e.g. my Primes benchmark.

[Someone]

Internet research seemed to indicate that the AMD was very slightly faster on things that used all cores all the time, but the i9 slightly faster on more bursty loads, such as my typical software builds that alternate between using fewer than 8 cores (more like 1-4) and things than can use 100 cores if you've got 'em

There are FPS junkies, and single thread speed junkies.( ok, there are case color scheme junkies", rgb junkies, water cooling junkies and the list goes on but that's a subject for another thread)
I'll bet on single thread speed any day unless it's a machine built just "for gaming"

Ah, so you're an Apple fan-person?

[Monkeh]

And?   Where did I dissagree? One trick pony "in that market".   Glad we are on the same page.

Hardly a one-trick pony, but it was obvious where you stand to begin with.

[IdahoMan]

And: Where are these CPUs (AMD or Intel) made?

[MathWizard]

Ok I did look for i7-15700k, but I never noticed the name change, and never found them under i7,i9 on Newegg.

I have a z690 mobo, so I can upgrade to a 14th gen CPU. I haven't had an AMD CPU for over a decade, but I know they are good lately. If selling used stuff wasn't a headache, I might consider jumping ship. Maybe next time I do a system upgrade, but for now I'm still using DDR4 too.

I really love my computers, and I always feel I never get to know them good enough, before selling them. But at least I haven't had a CPU/mobo/ram failure for years now.

[DimitriP]

Ok I did look for i7-15700k, but I never noticed the name change, and never found them under i7,i9 on Newegg.

I have a z690 mobo, so I can upgrade to a 14th gen CPU. I haven't had an AMD CPU for over a decade, but I know they are good lately. If selling used stuff wasn't a headache, I might consider jumping ship. Maybe next time I do a system upgrade, but for now I'm still using DDR4 too.

I really love my computers, and I always feel I never get to know them good enough, before selling them. But at least I haven't had a CPU/mobo/ram failure for years now.

Which CPU and motherboard are you currently using and how much DDR4 RAM do you have installed ?
And... is this your one and only machine ?

[PlainName]

I'll bet on single thread speed any day unless it's a machine built just "for gaming"

Most "games" used to be single-thread, and I bet many still are. Of course, even in that case multi-cores are better because the "OS" isn't part of "the game", but it seems to be a fallacy that "games" benefit more than "non-games" from multi-cores.

What's with the scare quotes? Afraid you'll be tainted if you use proper words?

[SiliconWizard]

under what rock you have been living ?

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Intel+Core+Ultra+9+285K&ia=web

TLDR: Its not so good chip.

The 15th gen is the "Ultra" series, right?
It didn't look too bad. Probably overhyped, but the performance looks decent and from what I've seen, prices have been lowered. So that's still not a bad deal.

[DimitriP]

under what rock you have been living ?

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Intel+Core+Ultra+9+285K&ia=web

TLDR: Its not so good chip.

The 15th gen is the "Ultra" series, right?
It didn't look too bad. Probably overhyped, but the performance looks decent and from what I've seen, prices have been lowered. So that's still not a bad deal.

You must be one of those "rest of the people" that don't produce "builds" of gaming machines , don't have an "audience" and you don't say "please like and subscribe" a lot   (and maybe your RAM doesn't glow either).   

[brucehoult]

RGBs are the most important part of a build!

[DimitriP]

RGBs are the most important part of a build!

LOL 

[SiliconWizard]

under what rock you have been living ?

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Intel+Core+Ultra+9+285K&ia=web

TLDR: Its not so good chip.

The 15th gen is the "Ultra" series, right?
It didn't look too bad. Probably overhyped, but the performance looks decent and from what I've seen, prices have been lowered. So that's still not a bad deal.

You must be one of those "rest of the people" that don't produce "builds" of gaming machines , don't have an "audience" and you don't say "please like and subscribe" a lot   (and maybe your RAM doesn't glow either).   

 

That's right, my RAM is some plain-looking DDR4 ECC harvested from a decommissioned server.