Intel Core i9-11900K first processor to break the 1900 point barrier (in Geekbench) (Updated)

Geekbench?
Doesn't that give extra scores by using AVX-512 support in Intel CPUs?

 

What about power consumption?

 

I think is normal for a cpu that gets out 4 months later to be faster than the previous of the competitor. 12% in single core would be great, unless is an edge case of a benchmark.

Is just sad that this first half of the year seems super unfortunate for who wants to build a new computer since you are still missing any gpu to buy. Let's see what happens.

 

One thing about this 14nm processor is that Intel should be able to satisfy demand, it will be interesting to see what pricing they do. As mentioned above though, if you want to do it along with a new gpu you might have to stagger it.

I'm quite interested in the 6 core prices and overclockability, apart from using video editing software most of my stuff doesn't use that many cores.

I could go AMD though, depending on availability and prices, it is good there is that possibility, both Intel and AMD are possibles.

 

Why would anyone be surprised by this? This CPU's entire raison d'etre is to brute force Intel back to the top of gaming charts. Looks like they will achieve this, and then some. With AMD no longer the budget option and suffering supply issues, if Intel can provide the volume, they will have a real winner on their hands (well, they will regardless...).

 

Power and heat. Have feeling will not look good.

 

if it's fast,well-priced and available it's gonna bury r5000 unless amd changes pricing and improves availability , r5000 has been the worst launch of all zen series.

 

Hot or not, it's impressive how they can still squeeze extra performance while still running on 14nm

 

nothing impressive,it's a forced backport from 10nm
don't bother me since I pay with my own money unlike people who are okay with 350 eur 6 cores,imma leave e-peen wars to them,since they like talking about nanometers so much

 

It will certain bury Zen3 as far as a preferred gaming platform is concerned, but that was to be expected. I don't know why anyone would buy a 5900X or 5950X purely for gaming. Literally every reputable review site said don't do that.

 

Why anyone would sacrifice a 50% multi-core performance advantage to gain 10% single IPC is beyond me.
Ryzen 5900X all the way.

 

If you spend 90% of your PC time gaming then your personally adjusted perceived cpu performance is heavily pondered by cpu single core performance (or ''low core count applications''). It's a specific use but a very common one.

 

Basically what Kraagenskul just said. Gamers. You don't need 50% multi core advantage, but 10% IPC is definitely noticeable in average gaming loads. This may change, but not in the foreseeable future. By the time it does, Zen3 will be long forgotten.

 

Without looking at frame rates, I seriously doubt you would notice a 10% single core IPC in a game.

 

I doubt like you, but if you don't use any heavy multithreaded applications then we are 100% sure that you can't perceive even a 4000% advantage in it : )

 

I would if I were on the cusp of 60fps. Ditto if I were to believe that frames win games. Besides, ever known a "hardcore" gamer who games without an fps counter? They rage at even slightest dips in frames, even if they don't see a difference Look, we're not talking rational decision making here. Gamers aren't rational. They want highest fps in games and this CPU will give them what they want. No one who plays first person shooters all day long cares about how quickly they can render something in blender.

 

I'm going to drop this here:

And in case you're so hard-headed not to watch I'll do a TLDR: if all you're gonna do is gaming, the 5600X is plenty enough. You're much better investing the difference on a GPU.

 

Unless you already have a top GPU and you're limited by CPU. Again, this CPU is aimed solely at gamers who want the absolute highest fps, whether they play competitively or just need to have their egos and e-peens massaged. It's made for bragging rights and marketing fluff. Does it make sense to buy it on 10% IPC improvement alone? Of course not, but who am I to tell rich people what to do with their cash.

Oh, and I suppose it should do well for memory overclocking, so there's another use case - competitive benchmarking.

 

Literally what Intel said


It is a great mistake to support such views simply by looking at the geekbench