Comment by dlevine | Hacker News Reader

Comment by dlevine | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

It is cool to see Intel reclaim the performance crown with an innovative new architecture. After years of stagnation at the high-end, the intensified competition between Intel and AMD is a big win for the customer in terms of both performance and price.

However, I do wonder whether they are going for the wrong thing. They are not competing against AMD's Zen 3 desktops at anything but the very high end, and their power consumption numbers are pretty insanely high. In both the laptop and server market, the thing that matters most is performance per watt rather than performance per dollar, and they aren't ahead in that metric.

My sense is that Apple's M1 and other ARM-based designs are getting to the point where they are "good enough" for the vast majority of use cases, even if they are insufficient for a few high-end applications. This is classic disruptive innovation, and we are seeing it reach its logical conclusion. It's kind of interesting that Alder Lake's dominance is due to them adopting something very similar to ARM's big.LITTLE

> However, I do wonder whether they are going for the wrong thing. They are not competing against AMD's Zen 3 desktops at anything but the very high end, and their power consumption numbers are pretty insanely high

How so? The $289 i5-12600K (or $264 for the version without integrated graphics) looks to outperform the more expensive mid-range AMD parts in many tests. It's even at the top of the Performance-per-dollar chart on page two: https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=intel-12... It also leads the performance-per-dollar average in the conclusion.

The i5-12600K also has lower average power consumption than everything but the low-end Ryzen 5600X, but it beats the power power-hungry AMD processors in most benchmarks. This is really impressive. I don't understand why everyone is convinced the Alder Lake is inefficient.

> In both the laptop and server market, the thing that matters most is performance per watt rather than performance per dollar, and they aren't ahead in that metric.

The i5-12600K is the performance-per-watt leader in many (maybe most) of these benchmarks. The "Per Watt Results" chart on page 12 is confusing, but the i5-12600K is the performance/watt winner in maybe half or more of the tests: https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=intel-12...

I think the mid-range i5-12600K is the real star of this show, matching the performance of the AMD 5800X but at a significantly lower price. I think people are putting too much focus on the enthusiast-oriented i9-12900K which was designed to be a no-compromise performance chip without regard to efficiency.

I agree i5-12600K is the best Intel desktop processor in it's price range for sale right now, this CPU would also force AMD to lower their prices. We should thank Intel for putting this out at this price, otherwise AMD/TSMC would have kept their prices higher.

I don't see why AMD would lower prices much. Almost every chip on display will sell anyway.

If I had to guess, AMD is going to wait and see if there's any reasonable volume that goes into the channel.

If Intel manages to get a lot of I5s out in the wild, then AMD could decide to drop prices. That scenario could have an impact on negotiations with ODMs and System manufacturers too. Keep in mind that most quoted OEM prices you see for CPUs mean about as much as a quoted Invoice price on a car.

They already lowered prices today at Microcenter.

https://www.reddit.com/r/buildapcsales/comments/qn4y1h/cpu_m...

There's a theme in the HN comments for any article talking about Alder Lake right now.

Comments implying the i9, a product that exists to gain max performance at all costs, should be put down for high power consumption. At the same time the same comments act like the rest of the range can be ignored because they're not the fastest of the bunch.

The CPU wars are starting to feel like sports teams for techies. Some people have picked a favorite team and they can't stand to see the other team win on game day (e.g. benchmark release day).

As a consumer, I love all of this competition. I have an M1 Max in my laptop, a 5950X in my homelab server, and I'll probably put this i5-12600K in my personal/gaming PC. They all have different strengths and I'm benefiting from it in every domain.

Starting to... ? :)

I agree, though, about all the competition, even if we don't agree on power consumption. But I think it's a use-case/personal preference thing. These are tools or toys, depending on use, and if you use a system as a tool, and a high-end CPU saves you time by doing things faster, overlooking power consumption makes sense.

Personally, I like to cut costs where possible, while also avoiding high power usage and fan noise, so I like efficient systems that do enough. The i5-12600K is enough, though it doesn't make sense in my personal situation where I could upgrade to a Ryzen 5000 chip without any other changes.

I also dislike Microsoft putting their latest and greatest CPU software in Windows 11, as I currently have no wish to change my gaming PC over to that system.

But the main thing is just that Intel has been cramming high power and heat into CPUs for quite a few years now, and I'm eager to see the other end of it, where top chips can manage what they're doing without 200W or more. We know it's possible, because AMD and Apple have efficient, performant chips.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I feel there's a lot of astroturf material in the comments (not that participants are bots or anything, just the same kind of comments you would get from such directly from a reputable user). I find this especially for large companies like Microsoft, Apple, or Amazon and I'd include Intel there too.

AMD and other smaller competitors seem to have a lot of "street cred" for being value-players. Strangely, so does Apple (at least on the computer front).

>It is cool to see Intel reclaim the performance crown with an innovative new architecture

for cost of increased power consumption

> for cost of increased power consumption

Read the "Per Watt Results" chart on page 12: https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=intel-12...

The i5-12600K leads performance-per-watt results in most tests.

They include power results for some tests, where you can even see the i5-12600K consuming less power while outperforming most of the AMD parts: https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=intel-12... This doesn't hold for every test, but the power consumption issue has been greatly exaggerated.

If power consumption is a concern, do not buy the i9-12900K. It's a no-compromise chip that disregards power efficiency for the sake of peak performance. Buy the i5-12600K, which is actually decently efficient.

people who need that kind of hardware don't give a fuck about 0.05$/hour it costs to run it at 100% load.

Personally I don't care about the 5c/hour electricity, but I do care about the jet engine fans this will need.

259 Watts max!!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com