Intel Announces Core 14th Gen 35/65 Watt Desktop CPUs, 14th Gen HX Mobile CPUs

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Intel Announces Core 14th Gen 35/65 Watt Desktop CPUs, 14th Gen HX Mobile CPUs

Following last month's Meteor Lake announcement, Intel is using CES 2024 this week in Las Vegas for announcing their complete line-up of new Intel Core mobile CPUs as well as completing the line-up of Core 14th Gen desktop processors at 35 and 65 Watt TDPs.

https://www.phoronix.com/review/intel-core-14thgen

[raystriker]

The top-dog AMD processor is actually the Ryzen 9 7945X3D, which I believe handily beats the i9 14900HX in gaming (The AMD ZEN 4 with 3D V-cache is 2022 technology, technically). Just saying.

[sophisticles]

So these are all Raptor Lake not Meteor Lake and they have UHD graphics instead of Arc?

No thanks.

Also, the support for up to 192gb ram is largely academic as i doubt there will ever be a laptop with that much ram.

To me this is intel just cleaning out their inventory.

[coder]

LOL at the "65 W" i9-14900 that has a max turbo of 219 W. The "35 W" i9-14900T is a little more reasonable, with a max turbo of only 106 W, but then again those are really intended for small form factor PCs with tiny fans and heatsinks, and would probably sound like a hairdryer when dissipating 106 W.

Also, the support for up to 192gb ram is largely academic as i doubt there will ever be a laptop with that much ram.

The kind of "mobile workstation" laptops which usually feature HX-tier CPUs indeed sometimes do have 4 DIMM slots. And yes, you can buy DDR5 SODIMMs with 48 GB, today!

https://www.newegg.com/p/pl?N=100007609%20601416253

[HEL88]

LOL at the "65 W" i9-14900 that has a max turbo of 219 W.

It's all about improving responsiveness. Let's say that at 220 watts the cpu is 2 times faster than at 65. So an operation that takes 1 sec will take 0.5 - which gives better responsiveness in programs (such as filter preview in photoshop, etc.). As long as the small heatsink's thermal capacity will be able to take 220W for 0.5 seconds.

[coder]

It's all about improving responsiveness.

65 W is easily enough for a single thread. Most responsiveness is dependent on single-thread performance.

Moreover, the Tau limit for the i9-13900 is 28 seconds (don't yet know about 14th gen). That makes it seem to me less about interactivity and more about scoring higher on benchmarks.

https://www.techpowerup.com/cpu-specs/core-i9-13900.c2854

If you don't mind screaming fans or the cost & bulk of an overkill cooling solution for a "65 W" CPU, then it would help for moderately long tasks like incremental software builds.

[HEL88]

65 W is easily enough for a single thread. Most responsiveness is dependent on single-thread performance.

I've given you an example where high TDP with a short runtime can affect the responsiveness of programs such as graphics. Some filters and transormations in graphics programs are single-threaded, and some are not. Those that are multi-threaded will benefit from this and work on such a cpu is smoother.

As I mentioned it is only about the use of cooling heat capacity. You can set the fans to minimum and have silence, and benefit from a temporary boost in TDP.

[bug77]

I don't understand why people take issue with PL1 and PL2. The CPUs still consume the rated TDP when averaged over time (65W or whatever). But if they can handle short-term spikes, and they can, that's why Intel provides reference implementations and certifies designs, why not tap into that reserve?

[vladpetric]

I don't understand why people take issue with PL1 and PL2. The CPUs still consume the rated TDP when averaged over time (65W or whatever). But if they can handle short-term spikes, and they can, that's why Intel provides reference implementations and certifies designs, why not tap into that reserve?

It's called hate, mate

If one starts with a strong hate position, one can easily spin and cherry-pick the available information to match their pre-existing hate.

[coder]

I don't understand why people take issue with PL1 and PL2.

A few reasons. In the K-series Intel CPUs, it requires a lot of cooling capacity to keep them from thermal-throttling. You basically need either big water cooling radiators or a huge air cooler. A lot of the reviewers use the former, producing benchmark results that you can't replicate with a more modest setup.

Second, it makes your fans spin up at max speed, which can be obnoxious. If you limit your fan speeds or power limits, then you're reducing your performance even further.

If you do use a big cooler, it comes at the cost of a bigger and more expensive PC. Plus, there's the heat output, which I personally don't welcome in the summertime.

The CPUs still consume the rated TDP when averaged over time (65W or whatever).

On most mainstream motherboards, the K-series CPUs will boost for unlimited duration, by default! This makes a complete lie of the TDP figure, replacing it with whatever amount of the PL2 you can cool.

I believe non-K CPUs can't run with unlimited Tau, but 28 seconds is still long enough to create a lot of drama.

But if they can handle short-term spikes, and they can, that's why Intel provides reference implementations and certifies designs, why not tap into that reserve?

Turbo isn't inherently bad. However, Intel has gone way overboard with it. Do you really think it's okay to have a "65 W" CPU burning 3.4x that much power for up to 28 seconds?

If you want to talk about really short term spikes, the i9-13900K has a PL4 of 420 W!