• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Testing ARROW lake - power limited

Joined
May 24, 2023
Messages
932 (1.75/day)
I got myself a testing PC with 265K, Strix E board and ordinary RAM (32GB, 6000 MHz, CL36) and tested the CPU with two power limits 100 and 160W, and compared it to 13900KS with 4 E cores disabled, both with HT on and off.

265K test pc.JPG

265 power limited.png

As you can see, the results are pretty consistent, both apps in both power limits mean 24% performance improvement of Arrow lake compared to Raptor lake with HT disabled and 11% with HT enabled.

Most of the power inefficiency of Raptor lake is gone when it is so much power limited - Raptor lake is extremely efficient with 100W power limit. I believe that the result is pretty positive for Arrow lake with 20 threads against Raptor lake with 28 threads.

13900KS could be a little bit better than 14900K, but that is down to silicon lottery, I do not think it has a significant advantage compared to standard 14th gen CPUs.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Nov 27, 2023
Messages
2,179 (6.32/day)
System Name The Workhorse
Processor AMD Ryzen R9 5900X
Motherboard Gigabyte Aorus B550 Pro
Cooling CPU - Noctua NH-D15S Case - 3 Noctua NF-A14 PWM at the bottom, 2 Fractal Design 180mm at the front
Memory GSkill Trident Z 3200CL14
Video Card(s) NVidia GTX 1070 MSI QuickSilver
Storage Adata SX8200Pro
Display(s) LG 32GK850G
Case Fractal Design Torrent (Solid)
Audio Device(s) FiiO E-10K DAC/Amp, Samson Meteorite USB Microphone
Power Supply Corsair RMx850 (2018)
Mouse Razer Viper (Original) on a X-Raypad Equate Plus V2
Keyboard Cooler Master QuickFire Rapid TKL keyboard (Cherry MX Black)
Software Windows 11 Pro (23H2)
I mean, even any architectural changes aside, I would kind of hope for this being the case considering, you know, the massive node jump to TSMC 3N.
 
Joined
Feb 24, 2023
Messages
2,926 (4.71/day)
Location
Russian Wild West
System Name DLSS / YOLO-PC
Processor i5-12400F / 10600KF
Motherboard Gigabyte B760M DS3H / Z490 Vision D
Cooling Laminar RM1 / Gammaxx 400
Memory 32 GB DDR4-3200 / 16 GB DDR4-3333
Video Card(s) RX 6700 XT / R9 380 2 GB
Storage A couple SSDs, m.2 NVMe included / 240 GB CX1 + 1 TB WD HDD
Display(s) Compit HA2704 / MSi G2712
Case Matrexx 55 / Junkyard special
Audio Device(s) Want loud, use headphones. Want quiet, use satellites.
Power Supply Thermaltake 1000 W / Corsair CX650M / DQ550ST [backup]
Mouse Don't disturb, cheese eating in progress...
Keyboard Makes some noise. Probably onto something.
VR HMD I live in real reality and don't need a virtual one.
Software Windows 10 and 11
the massive node jump to TSMC 3N.
Yes, it's absurd.

NVIDIA, 2014: same node, give or take 40% more power efficiency (GTX 670 VS GTX 960).
Intel, 2024: 3x node shrink, up to 24% more power efficiency.
 
Joined
Sep 16, 2011
Messages
108 (0.02/day)
Could I ask you to test the CPU-Z 2.11 benchmark? The benchmark (2.09, 2.10, 2.11) can now be ran on a single coreset/cluster.

• Compare P-cores Golden/Raptor Cove vs P-cores Lion Cove
• Compare E-cores Gracemont vs E-cores Skymont

source:
https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/share-your-cpuz-benchmarks.216765/post-5286485
source:
Thank you in advance.
 
Joined
Dec 31, 2020
Messages
969 (0.69/day)
Intel, 2024: 3x node shrink, up to 24% more power efficiency.

That is if the CPU has the ideal voltage curve. But it might be able to get a bit more performance per watt with some fine tuning.

Also, the input voltage DLVR is 1.5 volts and must be stepped down to 1.2 as a resistor, so there is a 33% power loss in voltage conversion, as explained by Derbauer.
 
Last edited:
Joined
May 13, 2022
Messages
140 (0.15/day)
System Name Main PC
Processor I5 12400F
Motherboard MAG B660M MORTAR WIFI
Cooling Noctua NH-U12S
Memory Corsair Vengenance LPX 2x8 GB DDR4 3000 MHZ C16
Video Card(s) EVGA RTX 2060 KO
Storage WD SN550 500GB M.2-2280 (Main drive)/ Crucial MX500 500 GB 2.5" SSD/ SanDisk Ultra 2 TB 2.5" SSD
Display(s) Main: AOC C24G1 24.0" 1920 x 1080 144 Hz 1ms, 2nd: AOC 24B2XH 23.8" 1920 x 1080 75 Hz
Case Fractal Design Pop Air
Audio Device(s) Razer Kraken 7.1
Power Supply Be quiet System Power 9 500 CM 500 W 80+ Bronze Semi-modular
Mouse Razer Deathadder Chroma
Keyboard Corsair strafe (Cherry MX Silent)
Software Windows 10
Could I ask you to test the CPU-Z 2.11 benchmark? The benchmark (2.09, 2.10, 2.11) can now be ran on a single coreset/cluster.

• Compare P-cores Golden/Raptor Cove vs P-cores Lion Cove
• Compare E-cores Gracemont vs E-cores Skymont

source:
https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/share-your-cpuz-benchmarks.216765/post-5286485
source:
Thank you in advance.
In addition @BoggledBeagle if possible could you try to test the performance of some games with the E-cores disabled. I have a distinct feeling that Arrow Lake's gaming performance suffered during reviews due to scheduling issues. Appreciate the efforts
 
Joined
May 24, 2023
Messages
932 (1.75/day)
I am afraid I am not planning to do any advanced or time consuming testing.

I also have no spare graphic card I can use, and no quick or special RAM kit, so gaming testing is out of question anyway. These CPUs will perform just fine for normal realistic gaming scenario, when people are GPU limited. The "Arrow lake gaming disaster" is hugely overblown IMO.

1440p rel perf.png

Even with the most powerful GPU (how many people have such a GPU?), the CPUs are single digit % apart each other when you play in a normal resolution.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 12, 2019
Messages
2,141 (1.12/day)
Location
LV-426
System Name Custom
Processor i9 9900k
Motherboard Gigabyte Z390 arous master
Cooling corsair h150i
Memory 4x8 3200mhz corsair
Video Card(s) Galax RTX 3090 EX Gamer White OC
Storage 500gb Samsung 970 Evo PLus
Display(s) MSi MAG341CQ
Case Lian Li Pc-011 Dynamic
Audio Device(s) Arctis Pro Wireless
Power Supply 850w Seasonic Focus Platinum
Mouse Logitech G403
Keyboard Logitech G110
Overclock your e-cores and you shall see some higher fps… it won’t beat 7800x3d but apparently thats where the lost performance is, Microsoft needs to update to prioritize the cores better
 
Joined
Aug 9, 2019
Messages
1,668 (0.87/day)
Processor 7800X3D 2x16GB CO
Motherboard Asrock B650m HDV
Cooling Peerless Assassin SE
Memory 2x16GB DR A-die@6000c30 tuned
Video Card(s) Asus 4070 dual OC 2610@915mv
Storage WD blue 1TB nvme
Display(s) Lenovo G24-10 144Hz
Case Corsair D4000 Airflow
Power Supply EVGA GQ 650W
Software Windows 10 home 64
Benchmark Scores Superposition 8k 5267 Aida64 58.5ns
Interesting! I'm a bit surprised that the efficiencygain vs raptor is so small at 100W moving from 10nm to 3nm. Nvidia gained a lot more going from 8nm to 4nm, for instance 4090 being almost 100% more efficient than 3090.
 

Outback Bronze

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Aug 3, 2011
Messages
2,017 (0.42/day)
Location
Walkabout Creek
System Name Raptor Baked
Processor 14900k w.c.
Motherboard Z790 Hero
Cooling w.c.
Memory 32GB Hynix
Video Card(s) Zotac 4080 w.c.
Storage 2TB Kingston kc3k
Display(s) Gigabyte 34" Curved
Case Corsair 460X
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply PCIe5 850w
Mouse Asus
Keyboard Corsair
Software Win 11
Benchmark Scores Cool n Quiet.
Joined
May 24, 2023
Messages
932 (1.75/day)
Interesting! I'm a bit surprised that the efficiencygain vs raptor is so small at 100W moving from 10nm to 3nm. Nvidia gained a lot more going from 8nm to 4nm, for instance 4090 being almost 100% more efficient than 3090.
How I wrote, Raptor lake is extremely efficient when you run it at low frequencies when power limited.

I believe that the efficiency comparison of 4090 and 3090 is not very valid, because 4090 could draw much more power, and at its 450W(?) power limit it is already pretty power limited which means it has a big efficiency advantage over 3090 on top of the manufacturing process advantage.

Also, do not graphic cards tend to have much larger gen to gen performance improvements than CPUs?

Jay has apparently tested the cudimm memory:

I just checked and our largest retailer does not have a single stick of this RAM in stock, not even listed.

BTW how extreme is the overclock in the video, 5.1 GHz E cores seems pretty high, and also is not the cache overclock dangerous?
 
Last edited:

Outback Bronze

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Aug 3, 2011
Messages
2,017 (0.42/day)
Location
Walkabout Creek
System Name Raptor Baked
Processor 14900k w.c.
Motherboard Z790 Hero
Cooling w.c.
Memory 32GB Hynix
Video Card(s) Zotac 4080 w.c.
Storage 2TB Kingston kc3k
Display(s) Gigabyte 34" Curved
Case Corsair 460X
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply PCIe5 850w
Mouse Asus
Keyboard Corsair
Software Win 11
Benchmark Scores Cool n Quiet.
also is not the cache overclock dangerous?

Got no idea at this stage mate. What I'd really like to know if these cudimm's are compatible with Z790 or are they just for Z890. They run under XMP 3.0 and from what I understand Z790 supports XMP 3.0.

Would be interesting what they can do on Raptor Lake. Time should tell I suppose...

Congrats on your purchase! Must be nice to play around with the shiny new Z890 ;)
 
Last edited:

bug

Joined
May 22, 2015
Messages
13,718 (3.97/day)
Processor Intel i5-12600k
Motherboard Asus H670 TUF
Cooling Arctic Freezer 34
Memory 2x16GB DDR4 3600 G.Skill Ripjaws V
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX 1060 SC
Storage 500GB Samsung 970 EVO, 500GB Samsung 850 EVO, 1TB Crucial MX300 and 2TB Crucial MX500
Display(s) Dell U3219Q + HP ZR24w
Case Raijintek Thetis
Audio Device(s) Audioquest Dragonfly Red :D
Power Supply Seasonic 620W M12
Mouse Logitech G502 Proteus Core
Keyboard G.Skill KM780R
Software Arch Linux + Win10
Interesting! I'm a bit surprised that the efficiencygain vs raptor is so small at 100W moving from 10nm to 3nm. Nvidia gained a lot more going from 8nm to 4nm, for instance 4090 being almost 100% more efficient than 3090.
I'm still not sure why people conflate fab process with efficiency. Yes, individual transistors need less power to operate. But chip design is what actually dictates efficiency.
I mean, look back at Athlon XP vs P4. P4 was actually built on a more advanced node.
 
Joined
Aug 9, 2019
Messages
1,668 (0.87/day)
Processor 7800X3D 2x16GB CO
Motherboard Asrock B650m HDV
Cooling Peerless Assassin SE
Memory 2x16GB DR A-die@6000c30 tuned
Video Card(s) Asus 4070 dual OC 2610@915mv
Storage WD blue 1TB nvme
Display(s) Lenovo G24-10 144Hz
Case Corsair D4000 Airflow
Power Supply EVGA GQ 650W
Software Windows 10 home 64
Benchmark Scores Superposition 8k 5267 Aida64 58.5ns
I'm still not sure why people conflate fab process with efficiency. Yes, individual transistors need less power to operate. But chip design is what actually dictates efficiency.
I mean, look back at Athlon XP vs P4. P4 was actually built on a more advanced node.
I think of the potential of savings and here AMD has done a superb job vs Intel even though they use an inferior node.
 

bug

Joined
May 22, 2015
Messages
13,718 (3.97/day)
Processor Intel i5-12600k
Motherboard Asus H670 TUF
Cooling Arctic Freezer 34
Memory 2x16GB DDR4 3600 G.Skill Ripjaws V
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX 1060 SC
Storage 500GB Samsung 970 EVO, 500GB Samsung 850 EVO, 1TB Crucial MX300 and 2TB Crucial MX500
Display(s) Dell U3219Q + HP ZR24w
Case Raijintek Thetis
Audio Device(s) Audioquest Dragonfly Red :D
Power Supply Seasonic 620W M12
Mouse Logitech G502 Proteus Core
Keyboard G.Skill KM780R
Software Arch Linux + Win10
I think of the potential of savings and here AMD has done a superb job vs Intel even though they use an inferior node.
You're also still missing the point (the fab node is a small factor in the efficiency equation), but that's your right I guess.
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2013
Messages
7,479 (1.77/day)
the fab node is a small factor in the efficiency equation
Not really when you consider that Intel's been leading AMD on the "fab" front for a good 10-15 years till zen4(?) & now back in the lead again. This needs to be mentioned because while Dozer was a major mishap, its issues were compounded by the fact that it ran "hot" & used too much power ~ imagine the same chip using what 50% less power?

Intel's lead on the x86 front was often way too exaggerated & at times directly as a result of their superior nodes. You can say the same about Apple right now but let's forget the fruit seller atm :laugh:
 
Joined
Dec 28, 2012
Messages
3,831 (0.88/day)
System Name Skunkworks 3.0
Processor 5800x3d
Motherboard x570 unify
Cooling Noctua NH-U12A
Memory 32GB 3600 mhz
Video Card(s) asrock 6800xt challenger D
Storage Sabarent rocket 4.0 2TB, MX 500 2TB
Display(s) Asus 1440p144 27"
Case Old arse cooler master 932
Power Supply Corsair 1200w platinum
Mouse *squeak*
Keyboard Some old office thing
Software Manjaro
You're also still missing the point (the fab node is a small factor in the efficiency equation), but that's your right I guess.
You could easily argue the opposite too. go look at the efficiency improvements moving from samsung 8nm to TSMC 4nm for nvidia. The gap was MASSIVE. I mean, the argument you gave was P4 vs athlon XP. Those chips are old enough to drink now.

With Arrow lake, moving to tsmc 3nm, which as you seem to think shouldnt matter, intels power consumption was cut in HALF. That's a pretty big deal, and no, its not just core design. If it was, then intel would be using their own node instead of paying TSMC.
Not really when you consider that Intel's been leading AMD on the "fab" front for a good 10-15 years till zen4(?) & now back in the lead again. This needs to be mentioned because while Dozer was a major mishap, its issues were compounded by the fact that it ran "hot" & used too much power ~ imagine the same chip using what 50% less power?
it still would have been hot and slow, even at half power the FX 8000s pulled nearly twice what i5s pulled under similar loads while getting beaten by i3s.

That core design was just disastrously bad.
 
Joined
Feb 22, 2016
Messages
1,956 (0.61/day)
Processor Intel i5 8400
Motherboard Asus Prime H370M-Plus/CSM
Cooling Scythe Big Shuriken & Noctua NF-A15 HS-PWM chromax.black.swap
Memory 8GB Crucial Ballistix Sport LT DDR4-2400
Video Card(s) ROG-STRIX-GTX1060-O6G-GAMING
Storage 1TB 980 Pro
Display(s) Samsung UN55KU6300F
Case Cooler Master MasterCase Pro 3
Power Supply Super Flower Leadex III 750w
Software W11 Pro
Just for Z890 as the motherboard needs to support the clock driver, the memory will be XMP certified. Should be available later next month (November).

Supposedly

Raptor lake mobo will see a Gear 2 BIOS update for 9200 or above CUDIMM. How impactful that proves for general system improvements in gaming or OC is more interesting outside of Arrow Lake thread. Just clarifying the point here and moving on.
 
Joined
Nov 16, 2023
Messages
1,348 (3.79/day)
Location
Nowhere
System Name I don't name my rig
Processor 14700K
Motherboard Asus TUF Z790
Cooling Air/water/DryIce
Memory DDR5 G.Skill Z5 RGB 6000mhz C36
Video Card(s) RTX 4070 Super
Storage 980 Pro
Display(s) Some LED 1080P TV
Case Open bench
Audio Device(s) Some Old Sherwood stereo and old cabinet speakers
Power Supply Corsair 1050w HX series
Mouse Razor Mamba Tournament Edition
Keyboard Logitech G910
VR HMD Quest 2
Software Windows
Benchmark Scores Max Freq 13700K 6.7ghz DryIce Max Freq 14700K 7.0ghz DryIce Max all time Freq FX-8300 7685mhz LN2
compared it to 13900KS with 4 E cores disabled, both with HT on and off.

4 E-cores disabled? Why? Is that to make it closer to even playing field 20 cores? (I guess that's why, just wasn't explained at OP)

Would be nice to see the temp differences on this comparison as well. (my 2 pennies)
 
Joined
May 24, 2023
Messages
932 (1.75/day)
Intel 1 P core 16 E core | Ultra 9 285
source: https://www.reddit.com/r/intel/comments/1gf33lz
Perhaps not only Windows, but also games themselves are confused by that PP-EEEE-PPPP-EEEEEEEE-PP (or PP-EEEEEEEE-PPPP-EEEE-PP) and PP-EEEEEEEE-PPPP-EEEEEEEE-PP core ordering. I wonder if Intel really had to do this, possibly it was necessary to improve thermals? Are 265K always missing E cores in the upper stack, or it varies?

4 E-cores disabled? Why? Is that to make it closer to even playing field 20 cores?
Yes, 8+12 vs 8+12 cores.
 
Joined
Nov 16, 2023
Messages
1,348 (3.79/day)
Location
Nowhere
System Name I don't name my rig
Processor 14700K
Motherboard Asus TUF Z790
Cooling Air/water/DryIce
Memory DDR5 G.Skill Z5 RGB 6000mhz C36
Video Card(s) RTX 4070 Super
Storage 980 Pro
Display(s) Some LED 1080P TV
Case Open bench
Audio Device(s) Some Old Sherwood stereo and old cabinet speakers
Power Supply Corsair 1050w HX series
Mouse Razor Mamba Tournament Edition
Keyboard Logitech G910
VR HMD Quest 2
Software Windows
Benchmark Scores Max Freq 13700K 6.7ghz DryIce Max Freq 14700K 7.0ghz DryIce Max all time Freq FX-8300 7685mhz LN2
Yes, 8+12 vs 8+12 cores.
Cool, that's what I figured!

How where the temps on each CPU? In the future, can you include this information?
Think it would really help to understand the cooling methods needed for each also!

These where done on liquid??
I'm a dummy, there's a picture of an Air cooler HAHA. NVM dumb question.
 

bug

Joined
May 22, 2015
Messages
13,718 (3.97/day)
Processor Intel i5-12600k
Motherboard Asus H670 TUF
Cooling Arctic Freezer 34
Memory 2x16GB DDR4 3600 G.Skill Ripjaws V
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX 1060 SC
Storage 500GB Samsung 970 EVO, 500GB Samsung 850 EVO, 1TB Crucial MX300 and 2TB Crucial MX500
Display(s) Dell U3219Q + HP ZR24w
Case Raijintek Thetis
Audio Device(s) Audioquest Dragonfly Red :D
Power Supply Seasonic 620W M12
Mouse Logitech G502 Proteus Core
Keyboard G.Skill KM780R
Software Arch Linux + Win10
4 E-cores disabled? Why? Is that to make it closer to even playing field 20 cores? (I guess that's why, just wasn't explained at OP)

Would be nice to see the temp differences on this comparison as well. (my 2 pennies)
Don't worry about it, I'm sure TPU will have in depth core and RAM scaling reviews up in no time.

Perhaps not only Windows, but also games themselves are confused by that PP-EEEE-PPPP-EEEEEEEE-PP (or PP-EEEEEEEE-PPPP-EEEE-PP) and PP-EEEEEEEE-PPPP-EEEEEEEE-PP core ordering. I wonder if Intel really had to do this, possibly it was necessary to improve thermals? Are 265K always missing E cores in the upper stack, or it varies?
Games have no idea how the cores are arranged. If anything, having a shorter physical path between them, makes thread migration a tad smoother. Lowering thermals because P cores are not all close together anymore was just a bonus, I guess.
 
Top