I am curious about the performance gain in the new 12th generation Intel CPU for a laptop like the i7-1260P versus the 11th generation like the one in my laptop, the i7-1165G7.
Both have 4-cores, but the 12th gen has 8 E-cores added to it. I use Linux on my laptop (an LG Gram 17) and was wondering what I could use the E-cores for. The 12th generation architecture is starting to feel more like ARM than x86. I just want to pick someone’s brain on this.
It’s quite a bit better if your laptop can handle the higher TDP otherwise it’s going to throttle a lot and performance difference isn’t all that great. As far as scheduling goes it’s all handled by your OS.
I was looking at getting a LG Gram with the 1260P but I doubt it will handle the higher TDP. Have a feeling it would throttle.
12th gen was a decent jump - Intel Core i5 12600K / Core i9 12900K "Alder Lake" Linux Performance - Phoronix. I’d go 12th gen just for that performance jump, and for DDR5 memory if you can.
In theory background tasks can go to the e-cores and use less energy. In practise i’m not sure how well that works out on real hardware. Intel tried moving this logic to the CPU (Intel Thread Director), instead of giving the OS scheduler the right info to do it. There was recently some work to improve Thread Director on Linux.
At least 11th gen LG Grams performed well but I would also expect that shoehorning a P-model into a thin laptop is less than ideal unless it’s a workstation. I would recommend that you look at a model with U-series instead despite being weaker on paper you’re like to see better overall performance and have a better experience when it comes to noise, battery performance and heat.
…and just to clarify this is something you see on Ryzen laptops too. 5000-series and newer are usually better at sustained performance however I do get the impression that AMD are still rougher around the edges and the lack of Thunderbolt is really a deal breaker in most cases if you’re planning to use your laptop as a desktop replacement.
12th gen CPUs are definitely more efficient than 11th gen CPUs. It’s just that 12th Gen CPUs have a much higher ceiling on socket power, so at maximum they get hotter. In a limited power situation like a laptop you shouldn’t have temp issues.
I’m going to say it depends, if you look at an average laptop they’re similar if you look at performance.
…if you then add P-model into this mix it’s also more or less the same.
So it’s pretty much pointless to go for a faster CPU as it will very likely throttle to similar performance as the more power efficient model unless you get a luggable workstation variant.
I’m not aware of any obvious advantages of 12th vs 11th gen except for possibly newer WiFi, HDMI 2.1 vs 2.0b. 11th supports AVX-512 while 12th doesn’t if that’s something of interest.
Gen11 is the [long awaited] 10nm debut, from Intel
Gen12 make their various subtle improvements, with likes of WiFi, TB, Xe, etc.
That greater core/thread ct., would be the largest point of gains, over the Gen11
One area, that Intel is still eFFang up on hard, is their damn SKU nomenclature
Gen11 was being initially pitched, to having a 10nm process. The fab yields [still] weren’t at desired rates, to allow it flourishing across entire lineup. Only laptops and some SoCs, were opportune points of receiving 10nm builds. Desktop CPU skus, ended up having the architecture rebuilt [insert 14nm++++ shtick] – That 14nm adjust costed on surface area, in turn sacrificing of some processing cores [higher tier CPU issue]. In order to be competitive, the juice was turned up
Gen11 desktop was better off, being a rebadged Gen10 stack [like LGA2066 did, from Gen7-9].
Gen12 did succeed with having 10nm, being across the board. Gen12 also introduce the BIG-little distribution of processing cores. I suppose time will tell, how well the process divvying comes to play [regardless of OS used].
This topic was automatically closed 273 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.