Papusan

Opera explains how it plans to keep uBlock Origin support as Google Chrome disables it neowin.net

Why the harsh complaints? Why so salty bro? Intel offer well above their promisses and expectations. Better performance and better power efficiency. Why ask for more. See for yourself... The performance uplift is quite substantial. Wccftech say it's an huge uplift over previous gen🤩 This looks like the ultimate chips for the gamers. Improved graphics performance baked into the Cpu is a big win for any gamer. And if people want better cpu's for office, web and browsing use... Why not wait for the Non K chips? They will even run more power efficient. You win even more. Intel’s Core Ultra 200S “Arrow Lake” iGPU With Just 4 Xe Cores Provides Huge Uplift Over Previous Gen, Up To GTX 1050 Ti Gaming Performance Me..... And as you can see... Intel continue improve the performance for Arrow lake. For nowadays gamers. Intel's new GPU driver brings Core Ultra 200S and Call of Duty Black Ops 6 support

Delta Airlines files lawsuit against CrowdStrike, the team behind the world's largest IT outage https://www.tweaktown.com/news/101329/delta-airlines-files-lawsuit-against-crowdstrike-the-team-behind-worlds-largest-it-outage/index.html

See bolded text in my post above. See also how the new and shiny perform etc in 3DM Time Spy cpu test. Disgusting? Almost no-one have posted results from Core Ultra 9 285K on hwbot. Then ask yourself... Why is that. I mean I can't see a single 3D benchmark the new and shiny tiled mess from TSMC and Intel can come close to 13th and 14th gen Intel chips. See also how Intel destroyed own flagship chips.... Castrated P-cores. Imagine how good Raptor Lake Refresh 2 would have been with same improved baby cores as the the new and shiny.

Something need to be fixed fast when you see something like this below... But how long will it take and will they be able to fix it within an reasonable time? And can everything be fixe or will this be Intel's Zen 1 moment and the fix will come with next gen chips? For Intel's sake, I hope it will be sooner rather than later. Because if not.... Their sales will be bad. Very bad. The gaming results may, similarly, be an issue of optimization. It’s not every day we see a CPU up to 23% faster than the competition in one game and up to 21% slower in another. We expect to see some variation, but that’s quite swingy. https://www.pcmag.com/reviews/intel-core-ultra-9-285k

24 P-cores that oc 2 bin. Hmm, that is even worse than baby cores that can manage 4-8 bin overlock. The choice between pest and cholera. Nothing in between, LOOL @tps3443your new home looks wonderful. The garden or garage if you haven't will be next. And you will never be finished with what you want or need. Thats life 🙂

Hehe. Was not meant as this... The babies perform well, but the P-cores and no HT is just sad. I would accept E-cores more if Intel had done a better job with the P-cores, continued offer HT and fixed the latency problems. I went back to the fence and rather wait for improvements. It may or may not come for Arrow Lake. We'll see when Intel finally open their eyes and see the sales going down the drain. I have instead spent some money on new tools for the house. I bought an Black&Decker table saw (half price) and a diving gun. I'm not keen buy new expensive tech that probably performs worse than what I already have for my hobby. Yup, you'll get better Cinebench and mem bench results with the Core Ultra 9 285K, but this two benchmarks is just a couple of many. Both for 2D and 3D. If it perform worse in over half of the benchmarks... So why bother? Have already spent close to $20.000 USD this fall on different needed upgrades on Papusan's plaza before this winter. And we need new plissé curtains for the new windows and the gliding terrace doors. And in Norway that won't come for cheap. $500 for every single window plissé curtain and double up for the gliding doors. So I need to be sure I spend the money well for tech. Buy tech that won't be an good upgrade for me is bad spent money. Edit. It feels almost as Intel don't want sell their brand new processors and rather hope they can continue produce and sell Raptor Lake to make up better profits. Remember the TSMC Tile mess cost them more than produce yesterdays tech as Raptor Lake/Refresh in-house. They needed something new due the press hunting but prefer sell old and well proven.

LOOL. Core Ultra 9 285K aka Arrow lake feels more like an mobil part. Spot on😆 From 16:29 Starfield, uses as many cores as possible, even 12 or even 24 if necessary. No wonder you see such results. I'm sure the new faster babies help boost the performance for this game. Again saved by the babies, LOOL

There is more.... At 4.0GHz for Raptor and Arrow Lake the difference is 18% better performance with 8 P-cores. The same with 5.7GHz. But most Core Ultra will top out at 5.7GHz on the P-cores even if you disable the baby cores. With 14900K/KS you can go on further and easly do 6.0GHz. 6.0 / 5.7 = 5% So you can extract 5% better performance from higher clock speed onolder Raptor Lake (Refresh). So it match very well the 23% performance gain I posted above. 8 cores bench fun with Intel is now dead and buried for hwbot. To do that you'll need older Intel chips. Is newer always better bro @ryan ? And I wonder how happy the Jokebook jockey's will be when they get their hands on Arrow Lake Mobile. They will probably kiss Pats toes when they see/or can feel better battery runtime in games with their brand new gaming Jokebooks. Pay more get less. Fantastic. The well known former overclocker 8-Pack managed to overclock the P-cores from 5.4 to 5.5GHz with an AIO. Yup, that's fantastic 1.8% overclock. And 5.6GHz with an custom water loop. Not bad😁 And can anyone try explain why Asus engineers had to do this stupid changes for this board? ASUS Z890 Hero motherboard feeds four of the CPU VRM phases from the 24-pin ATX connector, instead of all delivering all needed power from the 8-pin EPS connectors. What's the point with this idiotic MB design? Did they smoke something while the engineered this board? @Mr. Fox what the hell going on?

RIP Hans Rotmo. I'll miss you https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Rotmo

Here's more correct numbers. You lose 18% performance bro @Mr. Fox Intel give you 9% better peerformance then with the other hand take back the double. Great deal? Intel followed Apple to try make an more efficcient processors removing HT. They even follow Apple with phone cores. If AMD can give you an 15% IPC increase on P-cores then you should think Intel was able to do the same. But nope. You get faster baby cores as replacement for better P-cores. Intel Core Ultra 200S in the test: computerbase.de The fact that even the strongest Core Ultra 200S only delivers the performance of a Core i5-14600K in games out of the box is actually surprisingly weak. On average, the three K processors are always almost double-digit percentages behind their respective predecessors.

Why make it so complicated/difficult for themself? And why force all new modern tech from Jokebook hardware into desktop hardware? The Core Ultra 200S are the worst launch of 2024 and in Intel's history, not only because of performance, but because of its general problems The concept of AutoGV, or CCF Auto GV as some manufacturers call it, was introduced in Meteor Lake because it has a Tiles structure similar, if not identical, to Arrow Lake, or vice versa.

It seems we now have come to the days you can only extract 200MHz on flagship processors. Exactly as in the old days with Haswell low end mobile cpu's where you got 1 or 2 bin extra. And this on so called new gen pover efficient chips that can run colder than before. Regarding 10% IPC uplift nothing to scoff at. Nice. The P-cores will perform less than previous gen with HT fused into the chips for certain multi threaded tasks. Give the p-cores 10% more gas then take back +23% of the performance with the other hand. Yup.... it is about give and take in life😁 Summary and Conclusion igorslab.de Now it gets difficult if you want to remain objective. On the one hand, Intel has created three really interesting and efficient CPUs, but on the other hand, there are serious problems with performance in quite a few applications, especially those with fewer threads and, of course, especially in the all-important gaming. The fact that the new flagship can only compete with an older Core i5-14600K or a cheap Ryzen 5 9600X in some cases is almost depressing. Whats the point with this below? Will gear 4 help Intel to improve gaming? And will the gamers now switch from gear 2 to gear 4 because the higher ram speed? Because higher numbers is always better. Corsair teases DDR5-10000 CUDIMMs ahead of early November release There are two major catches with DDR5-10000 CUDIMMs. Firstly, this level requires Gear 4 mode.

Nope. But on paper he have much better binned P-cores. Sugi does 5.8 delidded while Falk can barely do 5.6 on on P-cores. Most of the 50.000 score is from better E-cores. And Sugis chips have of course better babies. And the chips is binned. Probalbly for ambient temps. And remember Intel traded HT for better power efficiency and better E-cores. The P-cores doesn't do the most work as for 12th, 13th and 14th gen. And I can't undertand why Intel couldn't do more than sub 10% IPC increase for the P-cores. Intel hit their goal without HT. Thanks to faster E-cores. So thei goal was low from the beginning. “It’s a combination of a couple things, actually,” Hallock told reporters. “First, we knew that we can actually save the wattage for hyperthreading by not including it on the product, and you see that we’re still coming out net ahead by roughly 15, 20 percent in [multicore performance] without it. So we’re able to bump up efficiency and still hit our goals in overall compute performance. “The other thing that I would say is, you know, these are the same designs as leveraged from Lunar Lake,” Hallock added. “We took those cores, those designs, and were able to immediately integrate them because of [Intel’s] Foveros [technology]. So that’s the kind of one-two punch that influenced our decision: speed to market and maximizing performance per watt.” https://www.pcworld.com/article/2480487/hyperthreading-is-dead-in-intels-new-core-ultra-pc-chips.html See bolded text in my post below...

And @Falkentyne's "fantastic" chips is SP93 (P: SP95 - E: SP 103). He can barely do an 2% overclock on the P-cores. Sugi's is P88 and E109. So high SP can offer trash bin. A real lottery and all weight is now put on the baby cores. An 9% IPC increase for the P-cores and a loss of +23% with HT just killed 8 core benching on the bot. Nice.

Yup. Could you please run CBR-20 and CBR-23 with only the P-cores enabled in bios? Also see if you can run same benchmarks again but with oc'd P-cores (no babies). Thanks I'm quite sure 8 P-cores benchmarks is dead now on hwbot. This because Intel have put all the eggs into the E-cores, to not look stupid in multi threaded performance with no HT on the real cores. Btw. Long time since I have seen no one sub benchmarks on hwbot with an brand new platform. That tells you something.

New is always better. @ryan Higher numbers doesn't always mean better. I'm sure the LN2 overclockers will keep their "free" 13th and 14th gen processors. High mem latency just kill the fun in SuperPi. But it won't make magic in games. Lower sales du less than expected (gaming) performance will hamper the sales. The reason we now will see AMD will boost their sales to gamer boys. Lower sales will also lower the profits. And Intel really need it now to please angry shareholders. And they failed doing that with Core Ultra. They have now the golden chance to continue produce 14th gen chips. They have still the workers and fabs to do so. Because TSMC make the parts for Lunar and Arrow Lake. Just put the right price-tag for the 14th gen chips.

What rub me in the face is this.... The website is called Overclocking.com and this is final conclution on Arrow lake... In conclusion, Intel has made the best choice of all by prioritizing improving the power consumption of its processors to the detriment of a significant increase in performance. https://en.overclocking.com/review-intel-core-ultra-9-285k-and-ultra-5-245k/13/#:~:text=In conclusion%2C Intel has made the best choice of all by prioritizing improving the power consumption of its processors to the detriment of a significant increase in performance.

I expect we had seen 285K chips eat 400W with HT. So the power efficiency they have talked so much about would go down the drain. Reason for removing HT is for the mobile junk. And we all know Intel will use same mess for coming gaming Jokebooks. And not so sure TSMC silicon can handle 400W long-term.

Reviews of Arrow Lake aka Core Ultra today....

All is about the E-cores. Even the SP ranking in Asus boards show it very well. With almost no OC headroom for the Big cores I can imagine there is not much that will be gained for gaming. P oc margin is very small. Even maintaining all P 5.7 may be hard for many 285K. E oc margin is big. Even 5.4+ on good cooling and silicon quality is possible. And here is from @Falkentyne Intel forgot to make good P-cores. @sugi0lover has a very good chip on the IA cores, but his memory controller seems to be lacking. He can actually do 5.8 ghz on a good day. My chip may be made for going cold. I can't even do 5.6 ghz on my P cores even with 1.425v set + LLC6 in power gate mode, I can barely keep stockfish stable without the room being very cold. 5.5 ghz requires 1.30v set + LLC6 (about 1.19v load, so I can try to target that in DLVR mode). Edit. My take on this.... https://www.overclock.net/posts/29381710/ And.... Disgusting! Is this a Joke or reality? Can't see 1. April on the calendar. We are still in Oct 2024. Can quote myself. No in hell an Arrow Lake Refresh will see the lights. Intel need to come up with something different. This isn't good enough. Maybe good enough for office machines but not for gamers or perfomance enhusiasts.

Not an official review under NDA so see it as it is... Real Jokebooks.

The ROG tax is real and what a shame and greed. Asus Z890 Apex cost $968.73 USD here home. Yup, close to $1000. Hmm. That's damn stiff even with awful currency exchange to USD and incl tax (rotten NOK currency exange to USD). ASRock Z890 TAICHI OCF cost $735 and I don't like the lack of old fashion USB ports on the I/O shield. The MSI Z890 Unify-X is noware to see (same it was with the Z690) and I expect more expensive than the ASRock board. This will be difficult. Depends on the price differences. One thing for sure, it will be easier to sell the Apex in the used market here to re-cup some of the spent money (Easier to sell at higher prices and more buyers are interested). Why only 5 USB ports ASSSRock? My old Asus Z890 have 8 of them. And Asus have also removed one and down to 7 for the new Z890 Apex. This trend reminds me all too much about Dell Alienware. This rub me the wrong way. Z790 Apex Encore And it seems everything need to be swapped out for new for every new gen hardware... Nice. Desktop hardware going the BGA route. Everything need to be changed. Yeah. Z890 Apex and X670e Gene have larger gap between the DIMM slots, which cause incompatibility issue with existing RAM DD blocks. So far only Safedisk and Audigy have the prototype of Supercool RAM DD block that is compatible with Z890 Apex and X670e Gene. Hopefully we will see it hits the market soon as well as new block from Iceman. That's epic fail if we need to buy new ddr5 coolers! And soon we have CAMM2.... Disgusting.