[NoteBookCheck] 10th gen 'Ice Lake' Core i7-1065G7 Geekbench score reaffirms Intel's hegemony in laptops, offers single-core performance on par with an AMD Ryzen 9 3900X - Page 2 - Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community
Forum Jump: 

[NoteBookCheck] 10th gen 'Ice Lake' Core i7-1065G7 Geekbench score reaffirms Intel's hegemony in laptops, offers single-core performance on par with an AMD Ryzen 9 3900X

Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #11 of 38 (permalink) Old 07-22-2019, 10:13 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
EniGma1987's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 6,400
Rep: 342 (Unique: 252)
Quote: Originally Posted by WannaBeOCer View Post
Intel confirmed a 18% IPC increase over Skylake. They also stated these Ice Lake U notebooks have 16 hours of video play back.

Only 18%? That's pretty trash considering IceLake has increases in many core execution resources by 50% and this was supposed to be their big new arch advance for Core.
And also considering Skylake came out in 2015, and IceLake and 10nm were slated for 2016 release date. 4 years later to barely get a mobile version out the door with very poor increase in performance for extra transistors spent is really bad.


Last edited by EniGma1987; 07-22-2019 at 10:46 AM.
EniGma1987 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #12 of 38 (permalink) Old 07-22-2019, 10:29 AM
PC Gamer
 
oxidized's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Rome, IT
Posts: 1,354
Rep: 24 (Unique: 23)
Quote: Originally Posted by PontiacGTX View Post
again how long Intel has been using 14nm? and when was the original Ice Lake(cannon lake) Release date?
Meaning what, they've been sleeping for the last 7 years, now they seem to be starting waking up, that's what i was talking about mostly, i don't honestly think AMD will be able to answer back after how intel will answer to ryzen, and 14nm++++++ isn't probably even close to the answer i'm referring to. But surely bulldozer/piledriver times definitely passed.

Last edited by oxidized; 07-22-2019 at 10:40 AM.
oxidized is offline  
post #13 of 38 (permalink) Old 07-22-2019, 11:13 AM - Thread Starter
sudo apt install sl
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 5,907
Rep: 183 (Unique: 126)
Quote: Originally Posted by EniGma1987 View Post
Only 18%? That's pretty trash considering IceLake has increases in many core execution resources by 50% and this was supposed to be their big new arch advance for Core.
And also considering Skylake came out in 2015, and IceLake and 10nm were slated for 2016 release date. 4 years later to barely get a mobile version out the door with very poor increase in performance for extra transistors spent is really bad.
Considering how processors growth are currently I see 18% as a huge improvement. Intel pretty much confirmed they won't be releasing a 10nm part for desktops so we'll see the IPC improvement of their 7nm part. AMD's Zen 2 currently has a 9% IPC improvement over Skylake.

Intel's large change will be from Ocean Cove which will be out between 2022-23.

Silent
(20 items)
CPU
Core i9 9900K... CoffeeTime! @ 5.1Ghz w/ 1.36v
Motherboard
Maximus VIII Formula
GPU
Radeon VII @ 2100Mhz/1250Mhz w/ 1218mV
RAM
TeamGroup Xtreem 32GB 3200Mhz CL15
Hard Drive
HP EX950 2TB
Hard Drive
Samsung 850 Evo 1TB
Hard Drive
Samsung 850 Evo 1TB
Power Supply
EVGA SuperNova 1200w P2
Cooling
EK Supremacy Full Copper Clean
Cooling
XSPC D5 Photon v2
Cooling
Black Ice Gen 2 GTX360 x2
Cooling
EK-Vector Radeon VII - Copper + Plexi
Case
Thermaltake Core X5 Tempered Glass Edition
Operating System
Clear Linux
Monitor
Acer XF270HUA
Keyboard
Cherry MX Board 6.0
Mouse
Logitech G600
Mouse
Alugraphics GamerArt
Audio
Definitive Technology Incline
Audio
SMSL M8A
▲ hide details ▲
WannaBeOCer is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #14 of 38 (permalink) Old 07-22-2019, 11:43 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
azanimefan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 1,906
Rep: 142 (Unique: 101)
Quote: Originally Posted by WannaBeOCer View Post
Intel's large change will be from Ocean Cove which will be out between 2022-23.
considering how every single intel release for the past 4 years has been delayed, changed or scrapped I don't think counting on a new chip in 4 years time is a good stratagy.

[URL="https://www.overclock.net/t/1490324/the-intel-devils-canyon-owners-club/0_40"]Intel Devil's Canyon Owners Club
CPU
Ryzen r5 3600
Motherboard
Asus ROG Strix x470-I Gaming
GPU
GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 2070 Super Gaming OC 8G GV-N207SGAMING OC-8GD
RAM
GSkill Ripjaw V DDR4 3600
Hard Drive
Samsung Evo 970 m.2
Hard Drive
Samsung Evo 850
Power Supply
Seasonic X-650
Cooling
AMD Wrath Cooler
Case
Fractal Design Nano S
Operating System
Windows 10 Pro
Monitor
Acer K242hl
Monitor
Acer K242hl
Monitor
Acer K242hl
Keyboard
Corsair Strafe RGB Mechanical Gaming Keyboard
Mouse
Corsair Scimitar RGB Optical MOBA/MMO Gaming Mouse
Audio
Sennheiser - MOMENTUM Over-the-Ear Headphones
▲ hide details ▲
azanimefan is offline  
post #15 of 38 (permalink) Old 07-22-2019, 12:00 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
Waltibaba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Vienna, Austria
Posts: 279
Rep: 13 (Unique: 13)
What is TDP?

That is a massively clickbaity and really badly written article. I was expecting more from NBC...

Intel's TDP != AMD TDP.
Intel's is long-term sustained maximum heat generation at base clock, while AMD's is absolute peak load power consumption.
The Intel CPU turboing to 3.88GHz on a single core will be drawing far over 15W. AFAIK it allows around double TDP by default on single core peak turbo for a very short while (just enough for the duration of the geekbench single core benchmark).
The 3900X will be using 105W maximum on all core full load, though with only 1 core loaded will realistically be in the 40-50W range. It can, however, sustain that load over more than a few seconds or minutes.

Even given enough cooling, Intel's CPU wouldn't come anywhere near the 3900X in single core performance running any load for more than 5 minutes. Once the peak turbo timer runs out, it will return to stable turbo or even lower, close to stock, which is likely around 2 Ghz.

I really dislike these super short benchmarks, they don't say anything about actual performance. Who's gonna play a game for only 5 minutes?
I really couldn't get along with any of the dual core ULV Intel's even for normal (non-productivity) use, they are just too freaking slow. While these quad cores have made it a little better, their sustained performance vs battery consumption (note: I didn't say TDP) is not good enough compared to an old Sandy, Ivy or Haswell 35-45W socketed quad core to warrant upgrading.

Funny Quotes (Click to show)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kplonsky go_quote.gif

Droid should just change the lock screen to having the user drag an apple into a garbage can to unlock the phone.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mjolnir go_quote.gif

A cop. On his last day of retirement...
Really? So he goes back to work tomorrow?
I wiep for whut tha Engrish rangwage have becum.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vagrant Storm go_quote.gif

what do you call dirt from Mars though? On Earth we can say earth...no capital E...to mean dirt. Would an earth mover on Mars be a mars mover? The English language obviously was never meant for inter-planetary travel.

Quote:
Originally Posted by computerparts go_quote.gif

In my experience, the 2500k struggles on fully loaded 64 player maps in BF3 where as the FX-8120 does not.
Waltibaba is offline  
post #16 of 38 (permalink) Old 07-22-2019, 12:24 PM
Laptop Enthusiast
 
Imglidinhere's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 9,176
Rep: 447 (Unique: 333)
Quote: Originally Posted by Waltibaba View Post
That is a massively clickbaity and really badly written article. I was expecting more from NBC...

Intel's TDP != AMD TDP.
Intel's is long-term sustained maximum heat generation at base clock, while AMD's is absolute peak load power consumption.
The Intel CPU turboing to 3.88GHz on a single core will be drawing far over 15W. AFAIK it allows around double TDP by default on single core peak turbo for a very short while (just enough for the duration of the geekbench single core benchmark).
The 3900X will be using 105W maximum on all core full load, though with only 1 core loaded will realistically be in the 40-50W range. It can, however, sustain that load over more than a few seconds or minutes.

Even given enough cooling, Intel's CPU wouldn't come anywhere near the 3900X in single core performance running any load for more than 5 minutes. Once the peak turbo timer runs out, it will return to stable turbo or even lower, close to stock, which is likely around 2 Ghz.

I really dislike these super short benchmarks, they don't say anything about actual performance. Who's gonna play a game for only 5 minutes?
I really couldn't get along with any of the dual core ULV Intel's even for normal (non-productivity) use, they are just too freaking slow. While these quad cores have made it a little better, their sustained performance vs battery consumption (note: I didn't say TDP) is not good enough compared to an old Sandy, Ivy or Haswell 35-45W socketed quad core to warrant upgrading.
My thoughts exactly. Yeah the potential for super high performance in bursts is excellent, but when it's literally limited to something like... 30 seconds for these super low TDP parts, that's falling flat on its face for when it really has to sit there, chugging away. AMD doesn't have this problem.

"Now, before drawing any conclusions, we'd also like to point out that this score is the highest we've seen for the Ice Lake 1065G7 so far. In a previous leak, we've seen the same CPU score somewhat lower (5234) in a Dell XPS 13 7390 although, there could be many factors for the same including pre-production units, unoptimized software, etc."

I'm sorry what though? Unoptimized software? Excuse you? It's freakin' INTEL. They've been the only serious choice for gamers and other CPU users in laptops and desktops since until two years ago! You mean to tell me that this new processor scores substantially lower in a LAPTOP, the environment in which the performance actually matters, because software may be unoptimized? Or is it because they can't mount a desktop cooler on it and keep this chip unrealistically cool under load with unlimited power and TDP restrictions lifted as well?

Lord, look a the 8750H for example. How many laptops are there with varying performance numbers in subsequent Cinebench runs? Initial runs are spot on, but after like... 10+ runs, unless the laptop has top-tier cooling, the scores are anywhere from 10-15% lesser than the first runs, generally. It's kinda funny. The 45w TDP thing needs to stop being used in the spectrum of "technically it's 45w TDP because..." and go back to "It's 45W TDP."

SKYNET v3.1
(17 items)
SKYNET Mobile v3.0
(13 items)
Inspiring Greatness
(13 items)
CPU
Ryzen 5 2600
Motherboard
ASRock B-450M Pro4
GPU
6GB GTX 1060
RAM
16GB Corsair DDR4 LPX @ 3000 CL15
Hard Drive
Sabrent 256GB NVMe SSD
Hard Drive
1TB WD Black NVMe SSD
Hard Drive
512GB Samsung 840 Pro SSD
Hard Drive
1TB WD Black HDD - External
Power Supply
650w Antec NeoECO
Cooling
AMD Wraith Stealth
Case
Fractal Design Define Mini-C
Operating System
Windows 10 Pro
Monitor
DELL S2419NX
Keyboard
RedDragon K556
Mouse
Logitech G502 Proteus Spectrum
Audio
HyperX Cloud Revolver-S Headset
Audio
Bose Companion 2 Series III
CPU
i7-8750H @ 3.9GHz
Motherboard
Intel HM370
GPU
6GB GTX 1060
RAM
32GB DDR4 2666
Hard Drive
256GB SSD
Hard Drive
500GB Samsung 840 Pro
Hard Drive
1TB Western Digital Black NVMe SSD
Power Supply
180w Power Adapter
Case
Tongfang GK5CN6Z
Operating System
Windows 10 Home
Monitor
1920x1080 144hz IPS Display
Mouse
Logitech G502 Proteus
Mousepad
Xtrac Ripper
CPU
Intel Core i5-6300HQ
Motherboard
Dell Proprietary
GPU
4GB Nvidia GTX 960M
RAM
Samsung 12GB (1x8GB 1x4GB) DDR3L 1600 MHz
Hard Drive
256GB SanDisk M.2 SSD
Hard Drive
1TB HGST 7.2k HDD
Power Supply
130w PSU
Cooling
Custom Cooling by Dell Solutions
Operating System
Windows 10 Home 64-Bit
Monitor
15.6" 1920x1080 IPS Screen
Keyboard
Dell
Mouse
Logitech G602 Wireless
Mouse
Xtrac 'Ripper' Mouse Pad
▲ hide details ▲
Imglidinhere is offline  
post #17 of 38 (permalink) Old 07-22-2019, 12:30 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
dantoddd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,491
Rep: 35 (Unique: 30)
Wow! even if you factor in all the issues with understated TDP etc, it's still quite impressive. If they can get a 6/12 part with higer clocks that will be the new chip for Gaming Laptops

CPU
(4 items)
CPU
i7 8700k
GPU
RTX 2080Ti
RAM
16GB DDR4
Operating System
Windows 10 Pro
▲ hide details ▲
dantoddd is offline  
post #18 of 38 (permalink) Old 07-22-2019, 12:34 PM - Thread Starter
sudo apt install sl
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 5,907
Rep: 183 (Unique: 126)
Quote: Originally Posted by Imglidinhere View Post
My thoughts exactly. Yeah the potential for super high performance in bursts is excellent, but when it's literally limited to something like... 30 seconds for these super low TDP parts, that's falling flat on its face for when it really has to sit there, chugging away. AMD doesn't have this problem.

"Now, before drawing any conclusions, we'd also like to point out that this score is the highest we've seen for the Ice Lake 1065G7 so far. In a previous leak, we've seen the same CPU score somewhat lower (5234) in a Dell XPS 13 7390 although, there could be many factors for the same including pre-production units, unoptimized software, etc."

I'm sorry what though? Unoptimized software? Excuse you? It's freakin' INTEL. They've been the only serious choice for gamers and other CPU users in laptops and desktops since until two years ago! You mean to tell me that this new processor scores substantially lower in a LAPTOP, the environment in which the performance actually matters, because software may be unoptimized? Or is it because they can't mount a desktop cooler on it and keep this chip unrealistically cool under load with unlimited power and TDP restrictions lifted as well? [IMG class=inlineimg]/forum/images/smilies/tongue.gif[/IMG]

Lord, look a the 8750H for example. How many laptops are there with varying performance numbers in subsequent Cinebench runs? Initial runs are spot on, but after like... 10+ runs, unless the laptop has top-tier cooling, the scores are anywhere from 10-15% lesser than the first runs, generally. It's kinda funny. The 45w TDP thing needs to stop being used in the spectrum of "technically it's 45w TDP because..." and go back to "It's 45W TDP."
Run Clear Linux and you'll see how unoptimized Windows runs on Intel hardware. A Core i7 8550u averages around 12.9w with a peak of 29w when all threads are under load. Of course it's not going to run that turbo speed on all 4 cores. Just like AMD's turbo doesn't run on all 8 cores.(It doesn't even run on one)

Edit: If we do want to compare it to a 4c/8t Zen processor it would be a 3400g based on Zen+.

This chip provides desktop class performance in a 15w package.

1065G7: https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu...0003;&q=1065g7

3400G: https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu...ulticore_score
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	aidax264.png
Views:	26
Size:	290.7 KB
ID:	282824  


Silent
(20 items)
CPU
Core i9 9900K... CoffeeTime! @ 5.1Ghz w/ 1.36v
Motherboard
Maximus VIII Formula
GPU
Radeon VII @ 2100Mhz/1250Mhz w/ 1218mV
RAM
TeamGroup Xtreem 32GB 3200Mhz CL15
Hard Drive
HP EX950 2TB
Hard Drive
Samsung 850 Evo 1TB
Hard Drive
Samsung 850 Evo 1TB
Power Supply
EVGA SuperNova 1200w P2
Cooling
EK Supremacy Full Copper Clean
Cooling
XSPC D5 Photon v2
Cooling
Black Ice Gen 2 GTX360 x2
Cooling
EK-Vector Radeon VII - Copper + Plexi
Case
Thermaltake Core X5 Tempered Glass Edition
Operating System
Clear Linux
Monitor
Acer XF270HUA
Keyboard
Cherry MX Board 6.0
Mouse
Logitech G600
Mouse
Alugraphics GamerArt
Audio
Definitive Technology Incline
Audio
SMSL M8A
▲ hide details ▲

Last edited by WannaBeOCer; 07-22-2019 at 12:51 PM.
WannaBeOCer is online now  
post #19 of 38 (permalink) Old 07-22-2019, 12:54 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
Hwgeek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 634
Rep: 15 (Unique: 13)
4C/[email protected] 2.2Ghz arent desktop performance level, my 8250U needs over 40W to run @3.4Ghz all core.
Hwgeek is offline  
post #20 of 38 (permalink) Old 07-22-2019, 12:59 PM - Thread Starter
sudo apt install sl
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 5,907
Rep: 183 (Unique: 126)
Quote: Originally Posted by Hwgeek View Post
4C/[email protected] 2.2Ghz arent desktop performance level, my 8250U needs over 40W to run @3.4Ghz all core.
If it performs the same as a 3400g wouldn't that mean it provides desktop performance?

Silent
(20 items)
CPU
Core i9 9900K... CoffeeTime! @ 5.1Ghz w/ 1.36v
Motherboard
Maximus VIII Formula
GPU
Radeon VII @ 2100Mhz/1250Mhz w/ 1218mV
RAM
TeamGroup Xtreem 32GB 3200Mhz CL15
Hard Drive
HP EX950 2TB
Hard Drive
Samsung 850 Evo 1TB
Hard Drive
Samsung 850 Evo 1TB
Power Supply
EVGA SuperNova 1200w P2
Cooling
EK Supremacy Full Copper Clean
Cooling
XSPC D5 Photon v2
Cooling
Black Ice Gen 2 GTX360 x2
Cooling
EK-Vector Radeon VII - Copper + Plexi
Case
Thermaltake Core X5 Tempered Glass Edition
Operating System
Clear Linux
Monitor
Acer XF270HUA
Keyboard
Cherry MX Board 6.0
Mouse
Logitech G600
Mouse
Alugraphics GamerArt
Audio
Definitive Technology Incline
Audio
SMSL M8A
▲ hide details ▲
WannaBeOCer is online now  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off