Intel Rocket Lake (14nm) Review: Core i9-11900K, Core i7-11700K, and Core i5-11600K
by Dr. Ian Cutress on March 30, 2021 10:03 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
- Intel
- LGA1200
- 11th Gen
- Rocket Lake
- Z590
- B560
- Core i9-11900K
Gaming Tests: Red Dead Redemption 2
It’s great to have another Rockstar benchmark in the mix, and the launch of Red Dead Redemption 2 (RDR2) on the PC gives us a chance to do that. Building on the success of the original RDR, the second incarnation came to Steam in December 2019 having been released on consoles first. The PC version takes the open-world cowboy genre into the start of the modern age, with a wide array of impressive graphics and features that are eerily close to reality.
For RDR2, Rockstar kept the same benchmark philosophy as with Grand Theft Auto V, with the benchmark consisting of several cut scenes with different weather and lighting effects, with a final scene focusing on an on-rails environment, only this time with mugging a shop leading to a shootout on horseback before riding over a bridge into the great unknown. Luckily most of the command line options from GTA V are present here, and the game also supports resolution scaling. We have the following tests:
- 384p Minimum, 1440p Minimum, 8K Minimum, 1080p Max
For that 8K setting, I originally thought I had the settings file at 4K and 1.0x scaling, but it was actually set at 2.0x giving that 8K. For the sake of it, I decided to keep the 8K settings.
For our results, we run through each resolution and setting configuration for a minimum of 10 minutes, before averaging and parsing the frame time data.
| AnandTech | Low Resolution Low Quality |
Medium Resolution Low Quality |
High Resolution Low Quality |
Medium Resolution Max Quality |
| Average FPS |  |
 |
 |
 |
| 95th Percentile |  |
 |
 |
 |
All of our benchmark results can also be found in our benchmark engine, Bench.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
279 Comments
View All Comments
SystemsBuilder - Wednesday, March 31, 2021 - link
and you are a Computer Science graduate? What Linus T. is saying is that AVX-512 is a power hog and he is right about that. Linus T. is not saying that "a couple dozen or so people" are able to program it. Power requirements and programing hardness are 2 different things.On the second point, I 100% stand by that any decent Computer Science/Engineering graduate should be able to program AVX-512 effectively (overcoming hardness not power requirements).
Also, I do program AVX-512 and I 100% stand by what I said. You just need to know what you are doing and vectorize algorithms. If you use the good old sequential algorithms you will not archive anything with AVX-512, but it you vectorize you're classical algorithms you will also achieve >100% benefits in many inner loops in so called mainstream programming. AVX-512 can give you 2x uplift if you know how to utilize both FMA units on port 0+1 and 5 and it's not hard.
Lastly, with decent negative AVX-512 offsets in BIOS, you can bring down the power utilization to ok levels AND still get 2x improvements in the inner loops (because of vectorized algorithmic improvement).
Hifihedgehog - Wednesday, March 31, 2021 - link
> and you are a Computer Science graduate?No, I am a Computer Engineering graduate. Sorry, but you are grasping at straws. Plus you are overcomplicating the obvious to try to be an Intel apologist. Just see this and this. Read it and weep. Intel flopped big time this release:
https://i.imgur.com/HZVC03T.png
https://i.imgflip.com/53vqce.jpg
SystemsBuilder - Wednesday, March 31, 2021 - link
So fellow CS/CE grad. I'm not arguing that AVX-512 is a power hog (it is) or that the AVX-512 offsets slows down the rest of the CPU (they do). I am arguing the premise that AVX-512 is supposed to be so incredibly hard to do that only "couple dozen or so people" can do is wrong today - Skylake-X with AVX-512 was launched 2017 for heaven's sake. Surely, I can't be the only CS/CE guy how figured it out by now. I mean really? When Ian wrote what Keller said (and keep on writing it) that that this AVX-512 is sooo hard to do that only a few guys on the planet can do it well, my reaction was "let's see about that". I mean come on guys, really!SystemsBuilder - Wednesday, March 31, 2021 - link
More specifically Linus is concerned that because you need to use negative offsets to keep the power utilization down when engaging AVX-512 it slows down everything else going on. i.e. AVX-512 power requirements overall CPU impact. The new cores designs (already Cypress Cove maybe? but Sapphire Rapids definitely!) will allow AVX-512 workloads to run at one frequency (with lower negative offsets that for instance Skylake-X) and non AVX-512 workloads at a different frequency on various cores and keep within the power budget. this is ideal.arashi - Wednesday, March 31, 2021 - link
This belongs in r/ConfidentlyIncorrect and r/IAmVerySmart, anyone who thinks coding for AVX512 PROPERLY is doable by "any CS/CE major graduate worth their salt" would be laughed out of the industry.Hifihedgehog - Wednesday, March 31, 2021 - link
Exactly. The real reason for the nonsensical wall of text is SystemsBuilder is trying desperately to overexplain things to put lipstick on a pig. And he repeats himself too like I am listening to an automated bot caught in a recursive loop which is quite funny actually.SystemsBuilder - Wednesday, March 31, 2021 - link
So you are a CE major, have you actually tried to program in AVX 512? If not, try to do a matrix by matrix multiplication of 16x16 FP32 matrices for instance and come back. You'll notice incredible performed increase. It's not lipstick on a pig, it actually is very powerful, especially computing through large volumes of related data SIMD style.Meteor2 - Saturday, April 17, 2021 - link
Disappointing response. You throw insults but not rebuttals.Me thinks SB has a point.
SystemsBuilder - Wednesday, March 31, 2021 - link
really? any you are one CS graduate? have you tried?MS - Tuesday, March 30, 2021 - link
What the he'll is that supposed to mean that you can't you can't get the frequency at 10 nm and therefore you have to stick with the 14 nm node? That's pure nonsense, AND is at 7 nm and they are getting the target frequencies. Maybe stop spreading the Coolaid and call a spade a spade....