5800X performance for $50 less?! Intel Rocket lake i7 11700K Review

cagoblex

n00b
Joined
Aug 28, 2020
Messages
63
Hello everyone and welcome to another review. Today we will be looking at the i7 11700K and i9 11900K. We have covered the basics for Rocket lake and Z590 in the past, and you can check them out in my former reviews. So we finally got the top of the line 11900K, and the second best Rocket lake 11700K.



We will be taking a look at the 11700K first and see how it performs. Spec wise it is the same as the 11700 we reviewed last time. The only difference is it has a higher TDP of 125W compares to 65W of 11700, and it’s unlocked. The turbo frequency is 4.6Ghz all core and 5.0GHz single core with Turbo Velocity boost. Spoiler alert, it is almost the exact same chip as the 11900K we will review next.



1.png




In today’s review I am pairing it with the Asus Maximus XIII Hero we reviewed last time, 16 GB of Gskill DDR4 3200MHz CL14 memories, Western digital SN850 PCI-E4.0 SSD and the EVGA 3080 FTW3 video card.



Let’s start with CPU-Z. So as expected, it’s a 8 cores 16 thread parts, with 125W TDP. Let’s run CPU-Z benchmark first.



2.PNG




cpu-z.png


It is getting slightly higher score than the 11700 non K version. And it’s getting higher score than the 5800X in both single core and multi core testing. It would be a serious competitor to the 5800X.

aida 64.png


Let’s move on to Aida64. Intel is still having problem with memory performance on Rocket lake. However even with the lower numbers on memory performance, it still pulling ahead in all benchmarks compares to Comet lake.

blender.png


Next is Blender. We are rendering both classroom and BMW with the processor. And here is the results.

The 11700K is slightly faster than the 5800X in BMW but about 10% slower in classroom. It gets very close to a unlocked 11700.


7 zip.png

In 7 zip, again it’s very similar to a 11700 with unlocked TDP. It is about 20% faster than 10700 Comet lake processor but it’s still slower than the 5800X.



Next is Cinebench. We are running both R15 and R20 here. R20 would utilize AVX instructions so AVX frequency offset does matter here.


r15.png

In Cinebench R15, we also tested the OpenGL performance with the iGPU. Same as the few other Rocket lake chips we reviewed, it has a 30% increase over Comet lake. So the new XE architecture is really something to be excited for. As for the CPU part, it is not much faster compares to the non K 11700, but it’s still a 25% increase over Comet lake. It’s a very impressive increase considering it’s still on the 14nm node.

r20.png


For Cinebench R20, it is getting the same single core score as 5800X, while being slightly slower in multi core. However it is the fastest among the Intel desktop CPUs we’ve tested so far.



Next is V-Ray. It’s a rendering benchmark that tests the CPU’s performance in rendering pictures.


vray.png



Again the 11700K is not as fast as the 5800X, but it’s still marginally faster than Comet lake. It has an average clock speed of 4.55GHz, which is the same as 11700.

handbrake.png


In Handbrake, we are transcoding a 1:31 second 4K 30fps video into 1080P H.264.



It is two seconds faster than the non K version, and it’s a tie with 5800X.



For Y-cruncher, it is a few benchmarks that can utilize AVX512. It’s almost exactly the same speed as the non K version, while being almost 60% faster than 5800X in multi threads benchmark. So if your workload is AVX heavy, you still have a good reason to choose Intel over AMD.




ycruncher.png





Next let’s take a look at the gaming performance.



First let’s run 3D mark Time Spy.


3dmark.png

It is running about 2% faster than i7 11700. But it’s still slightly slower than the 5800X.






hitman2.png



In hitman2, it is about 2fps faster than the non K version, which is within the margin of error. They 5800x is pulling way ahead in Hitman.



horizon.png


In Horizon, the trend continues. However this time it’s a tie between Rocket lake and 5800X.



dirt5.png


In Dirt 5, the 11700K is pulling about 3fps ahead of the other two Rocket lake. It is also about 8% faster than the 5800X.


sot.png



For Shadow of the Tomb Raider, It’s also the fastest among the group. However it’s still slower than 5800X in CPU games.



Lastly for stock frequency, let’s run Prime 95 and check the thermal and power consumption for 11700K. The cooler we are using today is a Corsair 360mm H150Pro AIO cooler with three PWM controlled fans. I enabled AVX512 so that we can see the maximum possible power consumption and heat dissipation. It thermal throttles even under default clock speed, and the maximum power consumption recorded was 260W. This is ridiculous for a desktop processor. But that’s how AVX512 works, and that’s why the LGA3647 Xeons are limiting the AVX512 frequency at a much lower speed to keep the thermals in spec for passive cooled servers.


3.PNG



Alright, enough of the default benchmarks. Since we have a K version, the whole point is to overclock it right? As we discovered in the past few reviews, Rocket lake requires a much higher voltage compares to Comet lake. I am seeing voltages close to 1.5V even at stock speed. Let’s enter the BIOS and see what ASUS has to say about this chip. So we have a super low SP score of 60. It is predicting that it needs close to 1.7V for 5.3GHz all core. So let’s start with 1.5V 5.2GHz, and it’s a freeze. Our goal here is to complete Cinebench R20. I did get it to 5.3GHz all core with 1.62V voltage however the chip is thermal throttling really badly. And the Cinebench score is actually worse than 5.2GHz. After some tweaking the best score I was able to get was at 5.2Ghz all core with 1.55V core voltage. The CPU temprature is among the low 90s and we are getting great improvements in CPU-Z and Cinebench R20 tests. We ran Cinebench R15, R20, V-ray and CPU-Z benchmark to test the improvement of the overclocking. A 700+ CPU-Z single core score is the highest among any processors on the market so far.


4.PNG




cpuz 5.3.png




vray 5.1.png


Somehow V-Ray reported 5.5GHz but this can't be true...


r20 52.png



OC.png



Overall I am very impressed by how it performs. At $399 MSRP, it’s very hard to say no to it. It trade blows with 5800X but with the addition of AVX512 support and a wider motherboard choice. It supports Thunderbolt 4 which would be the standard for external devices in the near future. The only drawback I can think of is the higher power consumption and the high heat dissipation. But still, even at stock speed it is still way faster than Comet lake. Should you buy one? It depends. If you are upgrading from Kaby lake then it’s definitely a game changer. But if you have Coffee lake or Comet lake, you would be better off to wait for Alder lake which will come out at the end of this year.

I understand there are Intel fanboys and AMD fanboys and it's an endless debate that has already last for a decade. But let's be honest here, Zen 3 is a great architecture, that is without any doubt. But Intel is at least catching up this time with Rocket lake, and keep in mind Intel did this on 14nm node compares to 7nm. This is almost an impossible task to do but Intel did it. So big thumb up to Intel!

You can watch a video version of it here:







Thanks!
 

learners permit

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 15, 2005
Messages
1,045
Really good price/performance if msrp holds up. These days that's less than 50/50. What were the stock temps like and what cooling solution was used?
 

cagoblex

n00b
Joined
Aug 28, 2020
Messages
63
Really good price/performance if msrp holds up. These days that's less than 50/50. What were the stock temps like and what cooling solution was used?
The cooling used is Corsair H150pro. Stock thermals are decent. It’s mostly in the 60-70 range with the exception of AVX512 workloads. Full AVX512 can bump up the temp to around 90
 

doubletake

Gawd
Joined
Apr 27, 2013
Messages
837
Really good price/performance if msrp holds up
idk man, that performance bump just doesn't seem worth it now that the 10700k can be had for ~$250. For anyone who doesn't care for or need the PCIe 4.0 connectivity, it's still going to be a hard sell, imo, although it definitely should sell hand-over-first compared to the 11900k. But then again, the i9-10850k also still exists....

This just seems like a total skip for anyone that wasn't already on at least a 6-core *Lake CPU, as OP pointed out, because it would be kinda goofy to wait 3+ years to upgrade from a Sky/Kaby 4-core to a non-PCIe4 platform, at least.
 

cagoblex

n00b
Joined
Aug 28, 2020
Messages
63
idk man, that performance bump just doesn't seem worth it now that the 10700k can be had for ~$250. For anyone who doesn't care for or need the PCIe 4.0 connectivity, it's still going to be a hard sell, imo, although it definitely should sell hand-over-first compared to the 11900k. But then again, the i9-10850k also still exists....

This just seems like a total skip for anyone that wasn't already on at least a 6-core *Lake CPU, as OP pointed out, because it would be kinda goofy to wait 3+ years to upgrade from a Sky/Kaby 4-core to a non-PCIe4 platform, at least.
I totally agree with you on that. But most of the times people upgrade simply because it’s nice to have...I mean just like upgrading from 1080ti to a 2080. So cost isn’t the determine factor in many cases. But again, I totally agree with you on this, it’s not a necessary upgrade
 

TheRookie

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 21, 2019
Messages
213
Sorry, but $50 less than the Ryzen 7 5800X isn't going to cut it.

In other to extract the full potential out of Core i7-11700K requires a beefy cooler (in this case, a 360mm AIO) and a motherboard with beefy power delivery (i.e. VRMs).

More electricity is needed to keep the platform itself running and to cool the room (i.e. AC cost)

The higher platform cost and operation cost is more than $50.
 

TheRookie

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 21, 2019
Messages
213
Is PBO enabled for the AMD processor?

After all, if you have multicore enhancement (MCE) enabled on the Intel processors, it is only fair that you enabled precision boost overdrive (PBO) on the AMD processor.

Either that or disabled both MCE and PBO.
 

cagoblex

n00b
Joined
Aug 28, 2020
Messages
63
Is PBO enabled for the AMD processor?

After all, if you have multicore enhancement (MCE) enabled on the Intel processors, it is only fair that you enabled precision boost overdrive (PBO) on the AMD processor.

Either that or disabled both MCE and PBO.
Yes PBO is set to Enable. And MCE doesn’t really matter for K processors anyways.
 

legcramp

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Aug 16, 2004
Messages
12,273
Sorry, but $50 less than the Ryzen 7 5800X isn't going to cut it.

In other to extract the full potential out of Core i7-11700K requires a beefy cooler (in this case, a 360mm AIO) and a motherboard with beefy power delivery (i.e. VRMs).

More electricity is needed to keep the platform itself running and to cool the room (i.e. AC cost)

The higher platform cost and operation cost is more than $50.

Not sure if serious, I can run an overclocked 5900X and a 3080 RTX 3080 off one 360mm rad.
 

DooKey

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 25, 2001
Messages
11,391
I've been running a 5800X and all prior Ryzen gen CPU's. I'll probably go with Alder Lake later this year to swing back to Intel for a little bit. I like them both.
 

sabrewolf732

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 6, 2004
Messages
4,776
Nice concise review! thank you!

Just something I noted though, the benchmarks where the 5800x wins in gaming has th e x axis start at 0, whereas the one game the 11700k wins (dirt 5) the x axis starts at 108 and it makes the 11700k look like it has a much larger lead than it actually does.
 

chameleoneel

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 15, 2005
Messages
5,946
The 11 series i9 have some extra turbo features which make it act like Ryzen where there isn't a hard cap on turbo. It uses an algorithm to do whatever it can within the heat and power budget offered by your system. Too bad they didn't put that on the i7 and i5.....but I guess that's all they had left to differentiate the i9 this time around. However, assuming the i9 are a better bin....it could have interesting results.

Excellent review BTW. I think the only thing I'd like to see is the 10700 non-k numbers with the turbo values maxed.

IMO, the non-K processors are a good value, with the ability to tweak the turbo values. And you don't have to buy a Z490/590 to do that. and the H570 and B560 allow memory overclocking (even for 10 series). So Intel has some better mid-range potential in motherboards.
 

DPI

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 20, 2013
Messages
12,197
Overall I am very impressed by how it performs. At $399 MSRP, it’s very hard to say no to it.

The time you took to write that review up is appreciated. That said, I wanted to say yes to it. I even had a motherboard picked out - the pricey $409 Z590 Aorus Master, because I wanted onboard 10GB ethernet. I really wanted an excuse to run that board.

I'm running a 10700k now, and sitting here in sealed boxes are a 10900k@$329 and two 5600X@$279 that were waiting on final Rocket Lake reviews before I built with them. 99% of my builds over the last two decades have been intel.

But after the GN review, sadly I'm not finding it hard to say no to 11700k.
 

cagoblex

n00b
Joined
Aug 28, 2020
Messages
63
That CB20 single seems too low for a PBO enabled score.
Just to clarify this. I am not using the same cooler for 5800X. I can't find my AM4 bracket for Corsair H150pro. So it is not boosting to the frequency it's supposed to. Will fix that in the 11900K review. Sorry everyone. Didn't mean to be biased
 

cagoblex

n00b
Joined
Aug 28, 2020
Messages
63
So, is it safe to say that the a.holes at anandtech are nothing but a bunch of attention seeking whores with that skewed review of them?
Didn't they stop being relevant back in 2006 though?

Now I got an inch for 11700K....gets down in price, I may consider it. $399? Hope microcenter sells it for $330-$350, maybe!!!!
It's really lucky to have a local Microcenter isn't it lol
 

cagoblex

n00b
Joined
Aug 28, 2020
Messages
63
The 11 series i9 have some extra turbo features which make it act like Ryzen where there isn't a hard cap on turbo. It uses an algorithm to do whatever it can within the heat and power budget offered by your system. Too bad they didn't put that on the i7 and i5.....but I guess that's all they had left to differentiate the i9 this time around. However, assuming the i9 are a better bin....it could have interesting results.

Excellent review BTW. I think the only thing I'd like to see is the 10700 non-k numbers with the turbo values maxed.

IMO, the non-K processors are a good value, with the ability to tweak the turbo values. And you don't have to buy a Z490/590 to do that. and the H570 and B560 allow memory overclocking (even for 10 series). So Intel has some better mid-range potential in motherboards.
That is true. B560 motherboard prices are very reasonable to my surprise. the non K 10700 is with MCE enabled but without the extra Turbo bin enabled. I actually don't have that CPU anymore so I won't be able to retest it...
 

NightReaver

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 20, 2017
Messages
1,222
So, is it safe to say that the a.holes at anandtech are nothing but a bunch of attention seeking whores with that skewed review of them?
Didn't they stop being relevant back in 2006 though?

Now I got an inch for 11700K....gets down in price, I may consider it. $399? Hope microcenter sells it for $330-$350, maybe!!!!
Right....so it's okay to dismiss one review in favor of another because...it confirms what you want to believe?
 

sabrewolf732

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 6, 2004
Messages
4,776
So, is it safe to say that the a.holes at anandtech are nothing but a bunch of attention seeking whores with that skewed review of them?
Didn't they stop being relevant back in 2006 though?

Now I got an inch for 11700K....gets down in price, I may consider it. $399? Hope microcenter sells it for $330-$350, maybe!!!!

The review at anandtech seemed pretty similar in terms of results to this one lol, it trades blows with the 5800x at way higher power consumption. The only difference was the recommendation.
 

TurboGLH

Gawd
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
697
Hey, well now there's a GN review to add to the averaging as well. Or is that just another "attention seeking whore"?

Talking to a wall here. Intel's one remaining win (ST performance) is gone, and suddenly accounts that have been inactive for years start posting again with lots of comments about how great Intel is, and how AMDs issues are huge world ending problems that you can avoid but sticking with Intel/Nvidia.

https://hardforum.com/threads/intel-vs-amd-popularity.929661/#post-1027982423

"Yes, I'll never ever in my life will I consider buying or recommending amd, not will I post a single thread or post in the amd forum. I got class! I don't bother with what I don't like."

Exactly why I keep going with Intel (ASUS, Western Digital, Corsair) if I build a system. The part of having of finding out if a certain memory kit will or will not work with my new system is SO OLD, it shouldn't be a concern these days, I mean........nobody worries about IRQ anymore, so why the memory concerns?

But I'm also going with longevity, I keep giving my old systems to family or friends and they are happy, my son who barely uses a PC has my old Q6600 system, my sister the 4690K and currently, I have a 7700K and 9900K and I'm going to build a 10600K because I'm bored out of my mind and I know I ain't going on vacation (meaning outside the country) this year and I got a bag of money burning my pocket, so I'm going, yet again, to build me a new Intel system. The same goes for video cards, thank God nVidia is not plagued with driver and overheating issues.

So, reliability, stability, and quality are never going to be a concern for going out of style when it comes to Intel. IMO, after all these years.

Let's just hope that when they come out with a new architecture and ends up being faster.............it's not going to send the competition back to the stone age for another 14-15 years. 15 YEARS!!!!! Hot Dang!!!

Is that why amd was so innovative, refining, and cutting edge for 15 years straight? Or was it because Conroe buried them for 15 years? So, improving is "innovation", Intel created AGP, later replaced by PCI. And I wonder who created the "Northbridge"?

Despite the fact that RTX cards run cooler and have rock-solid drivers and are better cards?
And the USB issues on the motherboard when using that CPU and having to revert to PCIe 3.0?
And there's a higher CPU failure rate..........indeed! Rocks.

It will probably work just fine, but when it comes to issues that people report? No thanks! I ain't got time to waste on defective or glitchy products. Reason why I don't buy gigabyte crapware of any kind.
For me overclocking is the reason why I go with Intel, I get my 9900K to 5.2GHz on all 8 Cores, and never an issue. Sure, heat is not an issue either because I spent a crapload of money on a Custom Water Loop. With amd? I think they suck at overclocking and I know 6 to 8 Cores is way more than enough for my needs. I rather higher frequencies than 12-16 cores that can't overclock for s**t. And I'm not fond of active cooling on the chipset either.

I rather a woman slim and killer body and ugly face than a cute fat chick and everyone goes: But you're pretty!! That's what amd is right now the cute fat chick. But hey! That's me!

The "issue" has a simple fix, go into the network control panel and turn it on and off again, and that's only in the STRIX boards (not other brands). Unlike amd which you're stuck with a platform with a plethora of issues, not just USB or ONE brand.
.
Besides, it's not a chipset issue but a network issue, unlike amd, which is as a whole. Then again, not even their video card drivers have ever been reliable.
.
https://www.pcinvasion.com/x570-and-b550-motherboard-usb-issues/
.
Don't forget to report to amd guys, they depend on you! Because they can't even find their own errors.
.
Meanwhile.........Intel fixes their own "issues": https://www.intel.com/content/www/u...057261/network-and-i-o/ethernet-products.html
 

NightReaver

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 20, 2017
Messages
1,222
Talking to a wall here. Intel's one remaining win (ST performance) is gone, and suddenly accounts that have been inactive for years start posting again with lots of comments about how great Intel is, and how AMDs issues are huge world ending problems that you can avoid but sticking with Intel/Nvidia.

https://hardforum.com/threads/intel-vs-amd-popularity.929661/#post-1027982423

"Yes, I'll never ever in my life will I consider buying or recommending amd, not will I post a single thread or post in the amd forum. I got class! I don't bother with what I don't like."
I gave this a like more because it's informative. Thanks for the heads up.
 

LGabrielPhoto

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 5, 2006
Messages
3,178
Talking to a wall here. Intel's one remaining win (ST performance) is gone, and suddenly accounts that have been inactive for years start posting again with lots of comments about how great Intel is, and how AMDs issues are huge world ending problems that you can avoid but sticking with Intel/Nvidia.

https://hardforum.com/threads/intel-vs-amd-popularity.929661/#post-1027982423

"Yes, I'll never ever in my life will I consider buying or recommending amd, not will I post a single thread or post in the amd forum. I got class! I don't bother with what I don't like."
I will NEVER understand fanboys. I was using Intel since the i7 920 (switched from an AMD phenom 965) up to the 9900k because every time I wanted to update, Intel was offering the CPUs that fit my needs best. This time, it was AMD that had the ones that made more sense so I switched. NEITHER company gives me free CPUs so I owe them no loyalty.
 

noko

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 14, 2010
Messages
6,781
Where is that 11900k review OP?!
With the above review making the 11700K rather bla and almost pointless over the 10700K and especially the 10850K (about the same price), the 11900K will probably seem even more pointless or less of a buy over a 5900x. Need to see more about the platform differences, strengths and weaknesses. AMD has PCIe 4 off of the X570 PCH while Intel does not. AMD has more PCIe lanes 24 (16 for PCIe, 4 for NVME, 4 for PCH) vs 20 from Intel. Anyways the 5800x seems to be the winner depending upon final price of the 11700K. In general faster in a non meaningful amount in games, faster meaningfully in productivity scenarios.
 
Last edited:

seanmcd

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 20, 2003
Messages
1,455
With the above review making the 11700K rather bla and almost pointless over the 10700K and especially the 10850K (about the same price), the 11900K will probably seem even more pointless or less of a buy over a 5900x. Need to see more about the platform differences, strengths and weaknesses. AMD has PCIe 4 off of the X570 PCH while Intel does not. AMD has more PCIe lanes 24 (16 for PCIe, 4 for NVME, 4 for PCH) vs 20 from Intel. Anyways the 5800x seems to be the winner depending upon final price of the 11700K. In general faster in a non meaningful amount in games, faster meaningful in productivity scenarios.
Thanks for your great opinion, but I'm not interested in AMD.
 
Top