Intel 11th Gen Core "Tiger Lake" & Xe Graphics Launch Event: Live Blog

[londiste]

We both know which one of two is going to have the bigger discrepancy in terms of power.

Probably not by much this time around. On slides we see 1185H7 with a short peak around 50W and then staying at 28W limit. 4800U reviews show it peaking at 41-42W, sometimes a little more and staying long-term at 25W. Intel might have chosen a 15W-limited 4800U for comparison but shown results seem to hint at that not being the case.

 

[AsRock]

I'l believe it when i see proof, loosing faith in intel.

 

[Chrispy_]

I am so glad that Xe kicks the 4800U's Vega8 to the curb.

AMD has really been slacking with its APUs. Vega is 3-year-old tech and the only graphics improvement we've ever had in the entire history of Ryzen APUs is the die-shrink allowing more clockspeed and the DDR4 getting faster. AMD have contributed nothing and squandered their advantage.

All the naysayers claim that DDR4 is the bottleneck but if Intel can do 50-100% better whilst still using DDR4 then clearly it's just AMD/RTG slacking.

Does anyone at all think that dropping the APU Vega count (in silicon) from 11 to 8 was a good idea? Vega10 on Raven Ridge and Picasso allowed one defective CU and so there were no availability issues. Meanwhile, Vega 8 in the 4800U is practically unobtainable. It's so rare that even reviewers are unable to get their hands on them and most reviews are of the 4700U because that seems to (realistically) be the top obtainable Renoir U-series SKU.

 

[londiste]

96EU Xe is faster than Vega8 in Renoir but not that much faster. 768 ALUs in 96EU Xe vs 512 ALUs in Vega8 but Vega8 runs at much higher clock speed - 1.6-1.75GHz vs Xe's 1.3-1.35GHz. Intel's iGPUs have also usually had some weird balance of compute, ROPs and TMUs so some differences will come from there as well.

For the car game - which I think is GRID (2019) based on the screenshot - in addition to the DDR4 vs LPDDR4X memory thing Intel is banking on VRS. Xe has it but AMD will only get support for VRS in RDNA2 which gives Intel some time in the mobile iGPU space to lean on this. Slide deck reveals VRS being pretty heavily used in GRID.

Current implementations of VRS in PC games have had minor impact, with maybe 5% more performance for no visible image quality impact. VRS seems to be getting off the ground though with Xbox Series X slides saying they are looking at 10-30% performance gain (for tiny area cost) from VRS.

 

[Chrispy_]

AMD will only get support for VRS in RDNA2 which gives Intel some time in the mobile iGPU space to lean on this.

So 2023? Amd has confirmed that Cezanne will still be Vega CUs
Rembrandt in 2H 2022 will probably be a move to DDR5-tuned RDNA1

AMD have lost the IGP advantage, they're too far behind to catch up in the next two years. The only hope is for Rembrandt to undo the damage of Renoir's step backwards (on an already-dated architecture)

Vega 8 iGPU from upcoming AMD Cezanne laptop APU does not impress in latest SiSoft Sandra benchmarks

We already know that AMD's Ryzen 5000 laptop APUs launching next year will still be limited to Vega iGPUs, and the latest SiSoft Sandra benchmarks show that the further refined Vega 8 iGPU is barely faster than the current implementations. It seems like AMD is only focused on improving the CPU...

www.notebookcheck.net

AMD had the resources and expertise to make a 2020 Renoir with 12-16CU of RDNA1 but their excuse was that they were too busy with PS5/XBSX design, Zen3, Big Navi, and Renoir's monolithic design to do anything about the graphics core. They've conceded the win, and IMO slim laptops are the single most important market to concede because that's what 90% of consumers buy.

 

[Vya Domus]

AMD have lost the IGP advantage, they're too far behind to catch up in the next two years.

Huh ? Two years ? Why ?

 

[Chrispy_]

Huh ? Two years ? Why ?

Because 2021's product (Cezanne) is at ES stage and it's proving in benchmarks to be exactly as disappointing as the specs hinted at - Vega8 again, with no changes other than a 100MHz clock bump that will probably never even be reached in the 15W U-series. Perhaps desktop APUs will be able to benefit from the 6% clockspeed increase, but that's about it.

The next product on the roadmap is for 2H 2022, which is Rembrandt and when last interviewed, RTG said that they were planning to move away from Vega but confirmed it would not (and could not) be brand-new RDNA2/3, but likely a modified version of RDNA1 optimised for DDR5. So, unless AMD change their roadmap now, Vega8 is as good as it gets for another 24 months.

 

[Vya Domus]

So, unless AMD change their roadmap now, Vega8 is as good as it gets for another 24 months.

Maybe my math is off but Rembrandt is supposed to come out in Q2 of 2022 and they never said it's going to be Vega based. I also haven't actually seen any official roadmap from AMD about this anyway.

 

[Chrispy_]

Maybe my math is off but Rembrandt is supposed to come out in Q2 of 2022 and they never said it's going to be Vega based. I also haven't actually seen any official roadmap from AMD about this anyway.

Exactly, that's why I said Rembrandt will be moving off Vega to some kind of Navi.

The slides and leaks you see on the web, (eg https://tekdeeps.com/the-amd-roadma...tectures-of-cezanne-van-gogh-rembrandt-and-d/) are internal slides for production run, not actual consumer product dates, so Renoir (announced in January, available early April) was roadmapped as mid-2019. Any roadmap that says Q2 2022 will probably result in products available on store shelves in the fall.

I'm sure COVID hasn't helped, but we won't see the real impact that's had on the roadmaps until the next major APU launch (Cezanne)

 

[AsRock]

96EU Xe is faster than Vega8 in Renoir but not that much faster. 768 ALUs in 96EU Xe vs 512 ALUs in Vega8 but Vega8 runs at much higher clock speed - 1.6-1.75GHz vs Xe's 1.3-1.35GHz. Intel's iGPUs have also usually had some weird balance of compute, ROPs and TMUs so some differences will come from there as well.

For the car game - which I think is GRID (2019) based on the screenshot - in addition to the DDR4 vs LPDDR4X memory thing Intel is banking on VRS. Xe has it but AMD will only get support for VRS in RDNA2 which gives Intel some time in the mobile iGPU space to lean on this. Slide deck reveals VRS being pretty heavily used in GRID.

Current implementations of VRS in PC games have had minor impact, with maybe 5% more performance for no visible image quality impact. VRS seems to be getting off the ground though with Xbox Series X slides saying they are looking at 10-30% performance gain (for tiny area cost) from VRS.

Screenshots are total bullshit, they not even comparable, not saying Intel do\don't have a better chip but those screenshots are of different frames of the game. Sorry if they really had better i expect identical screenshots as if i could do it i am 100% they could of too.

 

[Crackong]

Still remember the AMD Mobile CPU launch event back in March.
In AMD's PPT they compare its 45W H series CPU with Intel's 95W desktop 9700k.

Now,
In Intel's PPT they had to label it "Running at 28W PL1" to avoid false advertisement accusations later

 

[semantics]

Probably not by much this time around. On slides we see 1185H7 with a short peak around 50W and then staying at 28W limit. 4800U reviews show it peaking at 41-42W, sometimes a little more and staying long-term at 25W. Intel might have chosen a 15W-limited 4800U for comparison but shown results seem to hint at that not being the case.

Intel isn't using TDP anymore and AMD 15w is TDP not it's power setting. 4800U is a 12-25w TDP configurable, 15w is the default but the OEM can set it up however they want. The lenovo they use was set up at the 25w TDP. I approve of intel moving away from TDP that number made no sense to anyone, actually just telling us the power limit just make sense.

Complaining about memory differences or age is pointless, it's comparing a new amd mobile cpu against a new intel mobile cpu. Laptops aren't plug and play lego blocks like desktop or server; you buy into a package. If the cost of the laptops are too different then you have complaints but considering you can't buy either laptop right now...

 

[Steevo]

Intel isn't using TDP anymore and AMD 15w is TDP not it's power setting. 4800U is a 12-25w TDP configurable, 15w is the default but the OEM can set it up however they want. The lenovo they use was set up at the 25w TDP. I approve of intel moving away from TDP that number made no sense to anyone, actually just telling us the power limit just make sense.

Complaining about memory differences or age is pointless, it's comparing a new amd mobile cpu against a new intel mobile cpu. Laptops aren't plug and play lego blocks like desktop or server; you buy into a package. If the cost of the laptops are too different then you have complaints but considering you can't buy either laptop right now...

Where in the Lenovo specs does it show the higher TDP?

 

[Crackong]

Intel isn't using TDP anymore and AMD 15w is TDP not it's power setting. 4800U is a 12-25w TDP configurable, 15w is the default but the OEM can set it up however they want. The lenovo they use was set up at the 25w TDP. I approve of intel moving away from TDP that number made no sense to anyone, actually just telling us the power limit just make sense.

Complaining about memory differences or age is pointless, it's comparing a new amd mobile cpu against a new intel mobile cpu. Laptops aren't plug and play lego blocks like desktop or server; you buy into a package. If the cost of the laptops are too different then you have complaints but considering you can't buy either laptop right now...

This was captured from my Lenovo laptop, it is running a 4650U , also a 15W TDP variant.
This was captured closing to the end of a R20 run, using the highest possible power setting available.
It is getting 25W PEAK, not Sustained 25W.

However Intel's 28W PL1 (long-term expected steady state power consumption ) means it is getting Sustained 28W and Peak much more than that.
For example,
The 10900k has PL1 of 125W , PL2 of 250W
So What is the PL2 setting in this Intel PPT TEST ?
The 10th gen 1065g7 is configurable "up to 25W" and has a PL2 of 51W
This one, maybe 57W ?

We all know a 4800u is allowed to have 25W sustained and 42W Peak power in its 25W configuration.
But why Intel's PPT not mentioning "The 4800u is in 25W configuration" ?
They used the name of the Power Profile instead.
Which is laughable.

 

[AsRock]

Intel isn't using TDP anymore and AMD 15w is TDP not it's power setting. 4800U is a 12-25w TDP configurable, 15w is the default but the OEM can set it up however they want. The lenovo they use was set up at the 25w TDP. I approve of intel moving away from TDP that number made no sense to anyone, actually just telling us the power limit just make sense.

Complaining about memory differences or age is pointless, it's comparing a new amd mobile cpu against a new intel mobile cpu. Laptops aren't plug and play lego blocks like desktop or server; you buy into a package. If the cost of the laptops are too different then you have complaints but considering you can't buy either laptop right now...

I hope it holds water better than their not using benchmarks any longer.

 

[GURU7OF9]

I have never read so much meaningless rubbish market speak, ever!

but as a PR machine INTEL are the Worlds BEST ! They have simply out done them selves this time! IMPRESSIVE ! HAHA

If your product does not stack up, baffle them with bullshit!

We shall see how they really stack up, with hopefully unbiased reviews in the future!

be interesting to see how they go!

 

[watzupken]

I am so glad that Xe kicks the 4800U's Vega8 to the curb.

AMD has really been slacking with its APUs. Vega is 3-year-old tech and the only graphics improvement we've ever had in the entire history of Ryzen APUs is the die-shrink allowing more clockspeed and the DDR4 getting faster. AMD have contributed nothing and squandered their advantage.

All the naysayers claim that DDR4 is the bottleneck but if Intel can do 50-100% better whilst still using DDR4 then clearly it's just AMD/RTG slacking.

Does anyone at all think that dropping the APU Vega count (in silicon) from 11 to 8 was a good idea? Vega10 on Raven Ridge and Picasso allowed one defective CU and so there were no availability issues. Meanwhile, Vega 8 in the 4800U is practically unobtainable. It's so rare that even reviewers are unable to get their hands on them and most reviews are of the 4700U because that seems to (realistically) be the top obtainable Renoir U-series SKU.

I feel it is premature to say that Xe is going to kick Vega 8 to the curb without independent reviews. Given the shady history of Intel's benchmark, there is absolutely no reason to take their marketing results to conclude. It is highly likely that the tests were performed with significant advantage to their own setup.

While I agree to some extent that AMD should not have regressed from Vega 10/11 to a Vega 8 with Renoir, but it is also proven that the Vega 8 can still be faster than the Vega 10/11 due to the significant clockspeed difference. In addition, I feel the reason why they made the decision to drop from Vega 10 to 8 is likely due to insufficient die space to accommodate an 8 core processor and a bigger GPU. Otherwise I see no reason for them to cut back on the GPU. As to why not RDNA, I suspect it is a stop gap solution to make their GPU more competitive in the short run, but will ultimately be replaced by RDNA2. Which kind of made sense why the rumors mentioned that post Vega, AMD will be using RDNA2 for their APU.

I feel reception to the Tiger Lake announcement seems very poor. In my opinion, Tiger Lake is a significant improvement for Intel, but did not bring anything exciting along with it. Sure the Xe graphics are much faster than their previous UHD graphics, and potentially as fast or faster than AMD's Vega 8, but it is not groundbreaking fast. AMD's APU graphics was significantly faster than any of Intel's UHD graphics back then, to the extend of being 2 to 3x faster in some cases. This was shockingly good back then which stirred up excitement and interest. In this case, Xe may potentially be faster, but the gains is nothing to be excited about in today's context. In addition, any excitement for Tiger Lake probably got tossed out because Intel scheduled their announcement 1 day after Nvidia's Ampere announcement.

Then again on the CPU side of things you have the same 4 core design which is getting long in the tooth in 2020. One can argue that Intel is still supreme when it comes to single core performance, but Renoir packed the surprise of 6 and 8 cores (highly competitive cores) which was unheard of on the ultra low power class of processors. All these likely contributed to making Renoir such a hot topic along with hot demand. I am using an Ice Lake laptop, and to be honest, I can't care much about Tiger Lake. In fact I was thinking of selling it to try out the new 8 core Renoir which sounds more exciting to me.

 

[Chrispy_]

I feel it is premature to say that Xe is going to kick Vega 8 to the curb without independent reviews. Given the shady history of Intel's benchmark, there is absolutely no reason to take their marketing results to conclude. It is highly likely that the tests were performed with significant advantage to their own setup.

While I agree to some extent that AMD should not have regressed from Vega 10/11 to a Vega 8 with Renoir, but it is also proven that the Vega 8 can still be faster than the Vega 10/11 due to the significant clockspeed difference. In addition, I feel the reason why they made the decision to drop from Vega 10 to 8 is likely due to insufficient die space to accommodate an 8 core processor and a bigger GPU. Otherwise I see no reason for them to cut back on the GPU. As to why not RDNA, I suspect it is a stop gap solution to make their GPU more competitive in the short run, but will ultimately be replaced by RDNA2. Which kind of made sense why the rumors mentioned that post Vega, AMD will be using RDNA2 for their APU.

I feel reception to the Tiger Lake announcement seems very poor. In my opinion, Tiger Lake is a significant improvement for Intel, but did not bring anything exciting along with it. Sure the Xe graphics are much faster than their previous UHD graphics, and potentially as fast or faster than AMD's Vega 8, but it is not groundbreaking fast. AMD's APU graphics was significantly faster than any of Intel's UHD graphics back then, to the extend of being 2 to 3x faster in some cases. This was shockingly good back then which stirred up excitement and interest. In this case, Xe may potentially be faster, but the gains is nothing to be excited about in today's context. In addition, any excitement for Tiger Lake probably got tossed out because Intel scheduled their announcement 1 day after Nvidia's Ampere announcement.

Then again on the CPU side of things you have the same 4 core design which is getting long in the tooth in 2020. One can argue that Intel is still supreme when it comes to single core performance, but Renoir packed the surprise of 6 and 8 cores (highly competitive cores) which was unheard of on the ultra low power class of processors. All these likely contributed to making Renoir such a hot topic along with hot demand. I am using an Ice Lake laptop, and to be honest, I can't care much about Tiger Lake. In fact I was thinking of selling it to try out the new 8 core Renoir which sounds more exciting to me.

Oh, I hear you. I'm an advocate of waiting for reviews, and agree that Intel really fluffed the launch yesterday.

In saying that, they're making some HUGE claims, and that's against a 25W 4800U, not a power-limited 20W 4700U running regular DDR4 - because that's all that I seem to be able to find on the market anyway. It's not just retail availability of the 4800U that's a problem, there are hardly any reviews of it either!

I'll wait for real-world benchmarks of course, but for Intel to be demonstrating 60% faster than a 4800U is either great news or hell of a lie that will backfire at launch. It's worth noting that very early samples of Xe were shown off at the beginning of the year and even those were matching Vega8.

 

[Crackong]

Oh, I hear you. I'm an advocate of waiting for reviews, and agree that Intel really fluffed the launch yesterday.

In saying that, they're making some HUGE claims, and that's against a 25W 4800U, not a power-limited 20W 4700U running regular DDR4 - because that's all that I seem to be able to find on the market anyway. It's not just retail availability of the 4800U that's a problem, there are hardly any reviews of it either!

I'll wait for real-world benchmarks of course, but for Intel to be demonstrating 60% faster than a 4800U is either great news or hell of a lie that will backfire at launch. It's worth noting that very early samples of Xe were shown off at the beginning of the year and even those were matching Vega8.

HardwareUnboxed just posted their review of 4800u

 

[Houd.ini]

HardwareUnboxed just posted their review of 4800u

That’s that’s murder!