Intel Core i9-11900K processor review

You seem very moved , means there is something on the subject It's not just me. Channel that anger on product that deserves good bashing.

 

what HH said is true,talking to you is like having an argument with a middleschooler.

you gotta understand this is not a YT comment section and we like it that way.

 

Rating systems are complex. One I would really appreciate would be one which would give some value to people like me, but nothing to others.
As such, I do not mind badges being representation of views. With views some agree some don't. Yet informational value of "badge" is supposed to be generalized and low in contrast to sheer volume of information provided in entire testing article.

 

I love Hilbert's reviews, one of the first sites I always go to for them. Recommended can be read different ways, certainly recommended if you're an intel fan who has deep pockets and can handle the heat - but I feel the message going out to people really has to be "It's fine, but if you can buy a 5900x, do this". I imagine reading the review would give you that sense though.

 

Maybe he wandered into News section thinking it's AMD subforum.

And if you're gonna post anything good about competition in AMD subforum, I believe you have to have a court order, yes?

 

Then it is good that some have it. Because nVidia's news in "AMD specific news/rumor" thread were not bashed in past. I have seen quite a few discussions there.
It is about tone people post with. Even I did recommend nVidia's GPU to some members in AMD section. Just because their use case did not have great product on red side.

But some people go there and on 1st glimpse they make troll posts.

 

Doesn't really change my viewpoint. The 5900x is better, more efficient, more future proof and the same price (well it was for me anyway)

 

Not going to argue any further because its completly off topic. But I won't let this fly either:

/done here

 

I wrote that back in November 2019 when we all still assumed that Rocket Lack was coming out in 2020, and I guess we all know now where the perf-per-watt landed.

Based on what I knew and lessons from history, it was almost a given to me that Rocket Lake was going to consume insane amounts of power. What I didn't know was that it was going to come with little to no performance advantage vs the 10900k. I mean I never thought they wouldn't at least come out on top in terms of pure performance, considering the efficiency they sacrificed to get here. Rocket Lake was supposed to have an IPC increase to match Zen2 or Zen3 but with a clockspeed that would make them pale in comparison.

How then, did this happen??

At any rate, here's to hoping that Alder Lake will bring us back to performance parity with AMD, and/or future ARM desktop CPUs have hardware x86/x64-to-AArch64 translation layers to accelerate x86/x64 code translation/execution on ARM CPUs so we can start migrating to greener pastures.

 

exactly.
this is the problem.

 

Honestly with DDR5 and PCIE5 right around the corner, are people actually looking at these CPUs? rumoured to be out with the next generation this just feels like a horrible generation to jump on.

If you have to have a PC right now this second, i'd get something cheaper that way you can sell it and get some money back for a new one coming out chances are end of the year/start of next

 

Is it just me or is the 11900K/this lineup even worse than Bulldozer? Even Bulldozer didn't go "backwards" in performance to my recollection and had a niche in very multithreaded workloads, no?

As it stands, I have no idea why you would get the 11900K over the 10900K -- in the tests I've seen, the 10900K typically performs the same or better than the 11900K.

The only chip from the lineup that seems even remotely reasonable is the 11600K since it more often beat the 10600K (if only by a very very small margin), but even that performed worse than its predecessor in some cases.

Or am I missing something? If Intel undercuts AMD's 5000 line by a decent amount/if the price is right I can see people still opting to grab one, but even then I'd expect the 10th gen to be even less expensive for the same performance. Like, we knew 11th gen would be a stopgap/not a huge leap forward and all that, but I didn't expect it to be this bad.

 

But they didn't get back gaming -- Ryzen 5000 still holds the high end and slightly outperforms the 11th gen in most cases as per the Gamer's Nexus/HU tests for example (5900X was most typically at the top of the stack/sometimes the 10900K).

If they compete on price then you'll get into the same ballpark while winning "some" games, but if you're going for price 10th gen will probably be a better value since it's almost exactly the same if not better performance in most games.

This gen doesn't even seem like a stop gap to me, it seems like it's a regression as often as its a slight improvement that wasn't worth the engineering time. I do hear you though on next gen, once Intel gets out actual next gen 10 nm desktop parts we'll get some meaningful gains ... I hope. I agree with you on the lower end part like 11600K -- that one does seem like the best of the bad situation.

 

It definitely went backwards, in some cases pretty massively:





@Hilbert Hagedoorn I went back today to older review threads from 2011 (bulldozer launch, I wanted to pull your data for the above post) and noticed a few things - the old graphs were in flash I guess, so they are no longer viewable. Is there any way to recover this? Also the first time I went back today, I swear I was able to click the "comments" section on the top of the post and it directly linked to the thread discussing the post:

https://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-fx-8150-processor-review,1.html

But now it doesn't. Did something literally change in the last few hours or am I crazy?

 

Composition Fallacy. Is same as saying that someone is always wrong, because he was once wrong. (Pinnacle of cancel culture.)
And I hope you know that people can click that little "arrow" on quote to see entire post. And what was before it.
(Wonder how big role you played there and how many replies got out of context then. Not really an pattern, right?)

 

thank god you're not a lawyer. you'd get me hanged over a speeding ticket.

that is if the jury members do not die one by one laughing at you for constantly falling over your lawyer books.

 

Hm. This CPU seems to perform worse than the 10900K. It's very strange it got an award.

 

Idk i think the strongest Thuban 6core really did outperform first bulldozer 8150 which is why many already mentions this. There was performance regression even in games.

Edit : as @Denial already mention.

 

Guess 11700kf it is then, I saw it "cheap" for 360e. Im sure it will be even cheaper a month or two later.

I dont want to go from Comet to Comet, want those higher L1,2 cache sizes..