add arrow-down arrow-left arrow-right arrow-up authorcheckmark clipboard combo comment delete discord dots drag-handle dropdown-arrow errorfacebook history inbox instagram issuelink lock markup-bbcode markup-html markup-pcpp markup-cyclingbuilder markup-plain-text markup-reddit menu pin radio-button save search settings share star-empty star-full star-half switch successtag twitch twitter user warningwattage weight youtube

Good read on Intel processors and their required watts.

Zerk2012

8 months ago

What Intel calls their watts is not correct for the turbo speed. Why even say it's 95 watts I don't know anybody that disables the turbo speed.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/13400/intel-9th-gen-core-i9-9900k-i7-9700k-i5-9600k-review/21

Comments

  • 8 months ago
  • 3 points

You need to reread the article to understand why that viewpoint is fundamentally flawed for both Intel and AMD processors as in neither case does TDP equate to power usage.

The entire point is at the end.

If you believe that TDP is the peak power draw of the processor under default scenarios, then yes, TDP is pointless, and technically it has been for generations. However under the miasma of a decade of quad core processors, most parts didn’t even reach the TDP rating even under full load – it wasn’t until we started getting higher core count parts, at the same or higher frequency, where it started becoming an issue.

But fear not, there is a solution. Or at least I want to offer one to both Intel and AMD, to see if they will take me up on the offer. The solution here is to offer two TDP ratings: a TDP and a TDP-Peak. In Intel lingo, this is PL1 and PL2, but basically the TDP-Peak takes into account the ‘all-core’ turbo. It doesn’t have to be covered under warranty (because as of right now, turbo is not), but it should be an indication for the nature of the cooling that a user needs to purchase if they want the best performance. Otherwise it’s a case of fumbling in the dark.

The entire page of the article is a suggestion to both companies how to relate power draw to a meaningful number to consumers.

TDP though has always been a thermal number for stock speeds on Intel and AMD. Turbo speeds have never been guaranteed and are always opportunistically scaling depending on thermal and power headroom.

  • 8 months ago
  • 2 points

TDP has always been a thermal number for stock speeds on Intel and AMD. Turbo speeds have never been guaranteed and are always opportunistically scaling depending on thermal and power headroom.

THIS ^

However, the TDP rating of a CPU doesn't reflect the real power consumption of the CPU.

I would rather say, that real power consumption of the CPU depends heavily from the quality of the CPU chip in regard to the current flowing through it and the core voltage on the processor.

The motherboard plays a role too and the heat dissipation ability of the cooler as well.

Sort

add arrow-down arrow-left arrow-right arrow-up authorcheckmark clipboard combo comment delete discord dots drag-handle dropdown-arrow errorfacebook history inbox instagram issuelink lock markup-bbcode markup-html markup-pcpp markup-cyclingbuilder markup-plain-text markup-reddit menu pin radio-button save search settings share star-empty star-full star-half switch successtag twitch twitter user warningwattage weight youtube