• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Intel - Core Ultra 200S | Review Thread

DonkeyPunchJr

World’s Biggest Weeb
The real kicker is Intel not even confirming that Core Ultra N + 1 will be on the same socket or not, leading us to believe this is a one and done platform.
Yeah true. Old AMD’s saving grace was value. They stuck with AM2/AM2+/AM3 for a long ass time + their CPUs were at least cheaper than their better performing Intel competition.

I seriously don’t know why anyone would invest in Intel’s platform that might not even be supported for their next CPU, just so they can use the overpriced and underperforming 200 series.
 

Celcius

°Temp. member
Intel will need to put in a lot of work over next few years. Hopefully at least productivity performance is better vs gaming.

That aside, I am soooo tired of Microsoft’s bullshit and incompetency around Windows launches and updates. It’s like every yearly release we have to guess what is going to be broken now.

And of course them shoving ads, privacy issues and the stupid AI dependencies in underlying OS is beyond frustrating.
I don't blame MS for being incompetent... times are different these days and all these cpu manufacturers are releasing weird CPUs with core parking shenanigans, P-cores vs e-cores, and more whereas previous CPUs had designs where all of the cores were the same and so no special treatment was necessary.
 
Last edited:

winjer

Gold Member
I don't blame MS for being incompetent... times are different these days and all these cpu manufacturers are releasing weird CPUs with core parking shenanigans, P-cores vs e-cores, and more whereas previous CPUs had designs where all of the cores were the same and so no special treatment was necessary.

Android and iOS have been doing it well, for over a decade, without all these issues that Microsoft has with Windows.
The difference, is that Google and Apple test and optimize their code before releasing it to the public.
Even Linux doesn't have these issues, and a lot of it is coded by volunteers on their free time.
 

ap_puff

Member
Part of the problems seem to be related to the power profile. So maybe Intel can fix that with a new chipset driver that ads something better customized for the 200 series.
There also seem to be issues with the scheduling of Windows. Again. So Microsoft is to blame here. Again.
But the main reason seems to be a much higher memory latency. There are several games, that are sensitive to latency, where the 285K performs terrible.
Maybe tweaking the memory can shave a few ns, as usual. But it might require a new generation and a new design to bring that latency down, to more acceptable levels.
it's their first attempt to do chiplet arch on end-user cpus outside of servers, and on tsmc instead of their own foundries. The problem is they rushed the product out before it was fully ready, they seem to be rushing a lot of things lately - stuff like cancelling 20a and going straight to 18a seems like they're trying to rush their entire product pipeline and I don't think it'll end well.
 

JohnnyFootball

GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
Intel will need to put in a lot of work over next few years. Hopefully at least productivity performance is better vs gaming.

That aside, I am soooo tired of Microsoft’s bullshit and incompetency around Windows launches and updates. It’s like every yearly release we have to guess what is going to be broken now.

And of course them shoving ads, privacy issues and the stupid AI dependencies in underlying OS is beyond frustrating.
Yep, the sooner Linus becomes viable for gaming, I am fucking done with windows. Bazzite is pretty damn close right now
 

JohnnyFootball

GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
I'm more optimistic for Intel than in previous generations. This could be their Zen 1. Newer iterations will improve things and they will be competitive again, I think.

Also, with the right price, that could be an acceptable product. Everyone who wants to stay with Intel just need to wait for the discounts to buy one, or maybe stay with their current bomba for another gen, given that the power consumption and heat didn't bother, and that the processor don't die for the period.
I’d like to be optimistic but Intel doesn’t seem like they can afford anything less than a huge success for Arrow Lake. Sadly these first impressions make that less and less likely. Im actually thinking Intel may get acquired.
 

GHG

Member
Yep, the sooner Linus becomes viable for gaming, I am fucking done with windows. Bazzite is pretty damn close right now

The biggest hurdle will be the nvidia driver side of things for most people.

Until that's sorted I don't see it taking off in a big way.
 

StereoVsn

Gold Member
The biggest hurdle will be the nvidia driver side of things for most people.

Until that's sorted I don't see it taking off in a big way.
Latest Nvidia driver packages on 3000 and 4000 series cards are much better and improving.

Anti-Cheat and general wonkiness of running Windows games in Linux though can be an issue.
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: GHG

SolidQ

Member
untitled-png.368882

Latest windows seems bad for intel
 
I don't blame MS for being incompetent... times are different these days and all these cpu manufacturers are releasing weird CPUs with core parking shenanigans, P-cores vs e-cores, and more whereas previous CPUs had designs where all of the cores were the same and so no special treatment was necessary.

Especially when it's questionable how much optimization devs are going to do on PC. Or if they do optimization, that Arrow Lake breaks it.
 

ShirAhava

Plays with kids toys, in the adult gaming world
We need more tests on Windows 10 we are still about half the market damn it! but its prob a waste of time this sucks

As it stands Bartlett Lake is my only hope
help-me-obi-wan-kenobi-you%27re-my-only-hope-princess-leia-organa.gif


12 p-cores, No e-cores for virtualization/gaming is all I need coming from Comet Lake

if Intel fucks even BL up I'm going AMD for like a good decade and I haven't left intel for AMD since the Socket 478/P4 days
 

Kenpachii

Member
If they knew the chips would be performing this shit why not just drop the price drastically the same thing what AMD did when they launched zen 1. They ask 680 euro for 285k here and like 3 shops stock them lol.

Also 7800x3d went up in price massively in my country, from 350 to 500.
 
Last edited:

Zathalus

Member
The price of the 7800X3D is getting a bit silly. It’s almost €500 here in NL from a low a few months back of €319.
 
It's insanity.

We clearly underestimated Intel fanboys.

Everyone partial to Intel that was scared of the 13/14 gen might feel more safe with these. Assuming degradation issues aren't discovered with these as well.

If there was ever a time to go back to the Pentium days and get a couple of these chips on LGA 1700, this is it. Though it would likely be limited to the ddr5 boards only unless they could get a ddr4 controller worked into the package as well. The smarter move would have been to get these processors out on LGA 1700 for the main release, even if it hurt some features or performance. Would have gone a long way in soothing some of the rough edges with consumers and partners that felt screwed by the 13/14 gen processors.
 

Celcius

°Temp. member
Overclocking with the 285k:

tl;dr: OCing the e-cores makes a much bigger difference than the p-cores. Not really worth OCing though.
 
Last edited:

SonGoku

Member
If they knew the chips would be performing this shit why not just drop the price drastically the same thing what AMD did when they launched zen 1. They ask 680 euro for 285k here and like 3 shops stock them lol.

Also 7800x3d went up in price massively in my country, from 350 to 500.
Intel CPUs have more expensive silicon and packaging so if they engage in a price war they will lose money and AMD will still come on top considering they have bigger margins for price cuts
 

nkarafo

Member
Is there a single decent Intel CPU released after the i5 12400?

I honestly believe Intel's CPUs turn to shit after they started implementing e-cores.
 

marquimvfs

Member
12 series i5s were widely regarded as a better value over the 5600x.
Not that they're bad, but the efficiency and heat went totally out of control after 9th gen. I guess that the 9th was the last time that I used box coolers with an Intel processors without being afraid of overheating.
 
Last edited:
Not that they're bad, but the efficiency and heat went totally out of control after 9th gen. I guess that the 9th was the last time that I used box coolers with an Intel processors without being afraid of overheating.

So far mine has been running nice and cool, max under a prime95 maximum heat test is about 77 degrees. I'm only using an $17 Thermalright cooler paired with a $10 arctic fan. The i5s and even the i7s in the 1200 series don't do too bad with heat and power consumption in normal workloads.
 

marquimvfs

Member
So far mine has been running nice and cool, max under a prime95 maximum heat test is about 77 degrees. I'm only using an $17 Thermalright cooler paired with a $10 arctic fan. The i5s and even the i7s in the 1200 series don't do too bad with heat and power consumption in normal workloads.
I get that, still not the box cooler. Would you trust your processor with one of them?
 

xenosys

Member
If they knew the chips would be performing this shit why not just drop the price drastically the same thing what AMD did when they launched zen 1. They ask 680 euro for 285k here and like 3 shops stock them lol.

Also 7800x3d went up in price massively in my country, from 350 to 500.

Probably because the 285K's multi-core performance and some of the productivity benchmarks look competitive against the 9000 series from AMD , so productivity users might be tempted to part ways with that sort of money if they're Intel fanboys. I can see the price dropping quickly though when those sales numbers don't come through.
 
Last edited:

winjer

Gold Member
Probably because the 285K's multi-core performance and some of the productivity benchmarks look competitive against the 9000 series from AMD , so productivity users might be tempted to part ways with that sort of money if they're Intel fanboys. I can see the price dropping quickly though when those sales numbers don't come through.

I doubt Intel has much leeway to drop prices.
Not only they are in a bad financial spot right now. But these CPUs are being made at TSMC, all the while the Intel fabs are trying to make 18A work.
Running Fabs is extremely expensive, even when Intel was making their own CPUs. But while paying another company to make them, they become a huge burden.
 

Sophist

Member
Having Efficient and Performance cores do make sense if you have a battery and want to reduce power consumption. For desktop, just have Performance cores and downclock/overclock them on the fly. Not sure what Intel is trying to do here. Or maybe is about wafer-transistors; for general computing, it's better to have 4 Pcores+4 Ecores than six Pcores. For gaming, it sucks.
 
Top Bottom