(birds chirping) (dirt breaking) (wings flapping) (intense music) (guy laughing) - 14 nanometers! Lives! It's better, faster,
stronger than ever before! Just like our sponsor. - [Narrator] Honey is the
free-to-use browser extension that helps you find some of
the best promo codes on over 30,000 sites. Get it today at joinhoney.com/ltt (upbeat music) - Yeah, yeah nanometers
aren't an accurate measure of anything, I know. But this process is old and this has huge performance implications which we'll test on the Core I9-11900K and Core I5-11600K that we have here today. To do that we've grabbed
the equivalent 10th gen core processors, along with
the Ryzen 5 5600X and Ryzen 9 5900X for
comparison with team red. Special note, we're
running both benches at one-to-one memory. More on that later. And we're running these tests under completely stocked turbo limits. Shadow of the Tomb Raider is the Core I9's first L. At a roughly eight
percent lower average FPS than Ryzen 9. While the Core I5 sees significantly better minimum frame rates than Ryzen 5. GTA5 has the Core I9 pulling ahead of the 5900X by five percent or more in minimum frames, while the
Core I5 again pulls off a 13 percent or so lead
over Ryzen 5's minimums. F1 2020's absurd frame rates really generational improvements Intel's manage here for the Core I5. The Core I9 appears roughly
in line with 10th gen thanks to fewer threads
and lower base blocks. Forza Horizon 4 has Intel
trading blows with AMD with better minimums and
worse averages on both new CPU's, while turn
times in Civilization 6 are about half a second or
so faster on 11th gen. Flight Sim 2020 has both
CPU's ahead of last gen, but falling short of AMD in all
but the minimum frame rates. CSGO is another bloodbath,
where AMD's Zen 3 architecture firmly curb stomps rocket lake. Perhaps, thanks to the gigantic amount of
sheer cash Ryzen enjoys. Although it's worth pointing out that every CPU here is already in overkill territory. Moving on to productivity,
Intel's single threaded Cinebench scores are much
better than last gen and higher than AMD's, but
not by a huge amount. While PugetBench for Creative
Cloud shows that even lightly threaded work loads
like Photoshop can still favor AMD, again, likely
thanks to the extra cash. It's not a big L though. That comes from Blender. The Core I5 falls behind by
10 percent in Gooseberry, while the Core I9, because
of stock turbo, is a staggering 40 percent slower
than Ryzen in the same test. Corona bench mark, being
much shorter, puts the Core I5 much closer to Ryzen
5 and the same goes for V-Ray. A test that only lasts about a minute. POV-Ray has Intel very close to AMD in single-threaded performance, while the Core I9 continues to struggle. SPECworkstation is mostly
another pain point for Intel. With some tests again
favoring the 10th gen Core I9, thanks to it's additional
cores and threads. Even the Core I5 struggles
with 10 to 14 percent lower aggregate scores than AMD
across the life sciences, financial services, and
energy segments of the test. Not looking great so far, at
least not for the Core I9. But now we need to talk
about power in thermals, and we're gonna talk a
lot, because if you recall Comet Lake was better than
Coffee Lake for thermals, but only because Intel
busted out all the tricks of the trade to make it happen. And now despite having two fewer cores, all early
reports had Rocket Lake pegged at basically being
a flame thrower in addition to the performance
concerns relative to AMD. At stock, both are Core I9
and Core I5 managed thermals that are reasonable. Thanks in large part to strictly conforming to Intel's rated 125 watt TDP, once turbo expires. They do draw much higher
power than last gen to hit their peak all core
turbo speeds, but in the Core I9's case, Intel's new
adapted boost technology impressively allows the
cores to run 300 megahertz higher all core than it's rated for. This new behavior is similar
to AMD's Precision Boosts Two, opportunistically
increasing all Core clocks within thermal and power
limits, but Intel's is still constrained by their finite
turbo period of 56 seconds by default. Upon disabling this turbo
limit using our motherboards multi-core enhancement
feature, the Core I9 draws a staggering 275 watts peak
with 260 watts sustained from the socket. That is nearly double
the Ryzen 9's power draw. And around 40 percent more than 10th gens. We did get about a 19
percent faster render time than stock, but even with our Noctua NHD 15S the I9 instantly hits 80 degrees and creeps up to
the mid 90s throughout the run. Bizarrely though, the Core
I5 manages better thermals and power draw with multi-core
enhancement compared to its own stock turbo,
thanks to a lower core voltage provided by the motherboard. These results however were for AVX 2. Intel added the AVX 512
instructions set and machine learning extensions to
Rocket Lake, and they're leaning heavily on the marketing. We don't have any benchmarks
for that right now, but we can do a quick stress
test with Prime95. Where at stock we've got
okay thermals, again, for our Core I9, but our Core I5
hits the 100 degree mark thanks to a higher turbo
speed before settling into the mid 60s to 70s. Power consumption roughly
matches the non AVX-512 testing, and unsurprisingly
both CPUs dropped straight to base clock after
the turbo window expired. It's when we remove the
limits again that, oh no. Intel, are, are you okay? The Core I9 can draw
over 290 watts at peak. The Core I5 once again draws
less power thanks to the motherboard SPID control,
but both CPUs still run toasty enough that our
dual tower cooler can just barely handle it. We're really at the limits of what Intel's reheated 14
nanometer process can do here. Thankfully you won't have
to reheat your drink for up to eight hours with a water
bottle from lttstore.com! But even without AVX-512
you have to ask, why is 11th gen so hot, with fewer
cores than last gen? Aside from AVX-512 taking up
a huge amount of dye space, it was originally built for 10 nanometers. That's right, Intel had
to backport this thing. And that's why we got this really
strange looking procstack. No fewer than 10 eight
core CPUs across Core I7 and Core I9. 9 six core CPUs in the Core I5 line, and everything else is just
a Comet Lake refresh. No Rocket Lake Core I3s or
Pentiums this time around. Without being able to rely
on core counts to cleanly distinguish between skews,
the differences are so minor in practice that they're
going to make most people think twice about
spending an extra $140 for a Core I9 when a Core
I7 is almost as good, or when AMD is a better
performer for the money. Granted, Core I9s get
thermal velocity boost and adaptive boost technology,
but you can mimic that by enabling multi-core
enhancement if your motherboard has it or by maxing out the
power loads manually in Intel XTU if it doesn't. All 11th gen core desktop
CPUs that we know about, have the same cash for core and
the same improved graphics core with expanded video
decode capabilities on skews that include them. Once more, they all have an
extra four PCI express gen four lanes on the CPU now for
MVME's storage like AMD does. Hit subscribe by the way
because even within the same models not all the
MVMESSDs are created equal, and we're calling out the worst offender. Now there is the issue
of gear one mode support. TLDR, it's just like
running infinity fabric in one-to-one mode with memory speed on Ryzen for better performance. The Core I9-11900K in
KF are supposed to be the only ones that handle
DDR4-3200 memory this way, but from our testing the
Core I5-11600K can too. It's just not the default. And it'll go even higher than that. It looks like the Core
I9's main draw will be in pre-built PCs that don't
expose these options. If the Core I7-11700K is
as Gamers Nexus put it, a waste of sand, the whole
Core I9 line up on paper is even worse. Especially the case skew that's just priced $10 less than Ryzen 9. Thankfully you don't need to
buy a high-end motherboard to use faster memory now,
so that's one savings that's no longer exclusive to team red. But that doesn't save the Core I9. In games matching Ryzen's
performance is a best case scenario, where even the
Ryzen 5 at times comes close. Granted it may not make or
break your game play, but the value's just not there. For work, unless you can
use AVX-512, the extra oomph from Ryzen 9's
12-cores means Intel is not going to be your first
choice this generation in that domain either. The real star of the show is the Core I5. It's only about two to six percent slower than the Ryzen 5 at stock across our testing, but it
costs $30 less at retail. Even better for Intel,
availability troubles means the 11600K is $100 cheaper
than Ryzen 5's street price. Making it a no brainer as long as Intel has the chips to sell. Bonus, if you don't overclock you'll lose very little by getting
a cheaper non-k skew and turning on multi-core
enhancement to offset the difference in baseclock. Just make sure you get a
cooler that can handle it. If you're worried about
upgradability, DDR5's impending arrival means
both teams sockets have an expiration date at this point, so you lose nothing either way if
you need a new CPU today. Or, or you lose everything depending on how you think about it. You know, glass half empty, half full. It might be rough going for
Intel for a while longer, but it looks like things are improving. A week ago their CEO, Pat Gelsinger, announced a renewed focus on fabrication and process
technology including a seven nanometer tile process
that will hopefully power Meteor Lake two generations from now. We've heard this kind of
promise from Intel before, so, time will tell. For now, just buy a Core I5 or AMD when the scalpers
have finished scalping. But if Linus won't scalp
you for sponsor segways, I won't either. Get the best prices and
best selection on computer hardware and everything else technology at any of Micro Centers 25 locations across the United States. Check out the Micro
Center custom PC builder to spec out the best PC for your budget. You can ensure all your
parts are compatible, find stock available at your
nearest Micro Center location, add it to you cart, and arrange for same-day in store pick up. For a fee, check the
box marked same-day pro assembly to have the Micro
Center expert technicians assemble your PC for you. If you want help deciding
what parts to put in your new custom gaming PC, join the new online Micro Center community. This is a great place to discuss tech with other enthusiasts. See the link in the description
below for a free pair of wireless Bluetooth headphones. Valid in store only. No purchase necessary. Thanks for watching guys. Go check out our video on
the dangers, or lack-there-of of mixing and matching memory. With these new memory
controllers it might be more important than you think. Or not. You just have to see.
Buy 10th gen for cheaper or just keep what you already have....
I just recently purchased a new i9-10900KF for $320. Not feeling so bad about my purchase so far.
so in the whole lineup, only the i5 is compelling since it's much cheaper than R5 but not much slower. lol Intel really becomes the budget option
Do watch because Anthony.
But TLDW Buy I5 its a good 5600x competitor. Dont waste your money on the i9. And if you really need the extra two cores get a an i7 or R7.
That difference in power draw. Almost twice compared to ryzen competition. My god
It's really amazing how well they're doing overall, given they're still on (slightly improved) Skylake manufacturing processes. I wouldn't want to buy in today on these, but I'm surprised they keep up where they do.
Disappointing with this launch but I wasn't too surprised. I'm also not worried about Intel either, it seems like they have good leadership finally. With their ramp of 10nm production, investments into their fabs, supposed progress in 7nm, they might be competitive again soon.
Anyone testing the iGpu? If it's on par with a 3200g it could be a really nice option during the GPU shortage.
Anyone know which is better for gaming 11600k or 10700k?
The extra €40/$60 for 10700k i can put down to getting 2 extra cores and 4 extra threads.
But in terms of gaming performance which wins?