# Intel 13th Gen Core "Raptor Lake" Desktop Processors Launched: +15% ST, +41% MT Uplift



## btarunr (Sep 27, 2022)

Intel today launched its 13th Gen Core "Raptor Lake" desktop processors, and companion 700-series motherboard chipset. These processors are built in the same LGA1700 package as the previous generation "Alder Lake," and are backwards-compatible with 600-series chipset motherboards through a BIOS update. Likewise, 700-series chipset motherboards support older "Alder Lake" processors. With the new 13th Gen Core, Intel is broadly promising an up to 15% uplift in single-threaded performance, which has a bigger bearing on gaming performance; and an up to 41% multi-threaded performance uplift; over the previous-generation, when comparing the top Core i9-13900K with its predecessor, the i9-12900K. Intel also claims to have outclassed the AMD Ryzen 9 5950X in multi-threaded performance, and the Ryzen 7 5800X3D in gaming performance.

Intel's performance claims are backed by some impressive hardware changes despite the company sticking with the same Intel 7 (10 nm Enhanced SuperFin) foundry node as "Alder Lake." To begin with, the single-thread performance uplift comes from the new "Raptor Cove" performance-core, which promises an IPC uplift over the previous-generation "Golden Cove," comes with more dedicated L2 cache of 2 MB per core (compared to 1.25 MB per core in the previous-generation); and significantly higher clock-speeds, going all the way up to 5.80 GHz. "Raptor Lake" has up to 8 P-cores, but the company has put in a lot of work in improving the contribution of E-cores to the processor's overall multi-threaded performance uplift. This is achieved by doubling the E-core count to 16. These are the same "Gracemont" E-cores as previous-generation, but Intel has doubled the L2 cache that's shared in a 4-core Gracemont cluster, from 2 MB per cluster to 4 MB. There are upgrades to even the hardware prefetchers of these cores.



 

 

 




Intel didn't go into the nuts and bolts of what makes up the "Raptor Cove" P-core, but broadly explained that it comes with improved speed paths that enable an up to 600 MHz P-core boost frequency uplift at comparable power to the previous-gen "Golden Cove" while staying on the same process. The Intel 7 node also seems to have got some technological improvements, with the company referring to it as the "3rd generation" of this node (optical 10 nm). This mainly concerns better electrical characteristics from improved channel mobility. Cushioning the P-core with a larger 2 MB dedicated L2 cache also appears to be contributing to the iso-power uplift, as the core spends fewer cycles fetching data from the L3 cache. We will learn more about "Raptor Cove" in the coming days, and will hopefully have a more detailed look at the new core in our reviews of these processors.


 

 

The E-core microarchitecture is the very same "Gracemont," but benefits from the node improvements to dial up E-core boost frequencies all the way up to 4.30 GHz. The cores also benefit from the larger 4 MB L2 cache that's shared among four E-cores in a "Gracemont" cluster. "Raptor Lake" has four such clusters, amounting to 16 on the silicon. The E-core clusters have access to the chip's L3 cache, just like the P-cores. As we mentioned earlier, the improved cache, and updated prefetcher algorithm should have an cumulative impact on E-core performance; and when you account for 16 of these, besides the improved 8 P-cores, you begin to see where Intel's 41% generational multi-threaded performance uplift claim is coming from.


 

 

 

 

Intel also made updates to the processor's uncore components. The L3 cache that's shared among the processor's P-cores and E-core clusters, is now enlarged to 36 MB, from 30 MB in the previous generation. This cache is a continuously addressable block due to the Ringbus interconnect making ring-stops at various physical segments of the cache. Intel has improved the clock-speed of this fabric, which now boosts up to 5.00 GHz, or 900 MHz higher than the previous-gen. 

The DDR5+DDR4 memory controllers also receive an update. The processor now natively supports up to DDR5-5600 JEDEC-standard memory speeds, when using 1 DIMM per 80-bit channel (which has two 40-bit sub-channels); or up to DDR5-4400 when using 2 DIMMs per channel (i.e. populating all four memory slots on your motherboard). 

Intel also updated the Thread Director middleware that gives the software some degree of awareness of the Hybrid architecture, and attempts to ensure that the right kind of workload is allocated to the right kind of CPU core. Intel has given TD greater thread class awareness through machine-learning techniques (the processor learns over time what the nature of the workload could be). The processor also takes advantage of new scheduling features of Windows 11 22H2 Update, which introduce PID QoS for system background tasks and user-initiated background tasks. 


 

 

Intel claims that "Raptor Lake" processors will be memory overclocking monsters, capable of speeds as high as DDR5-10000, when pushed to the limit with enthusiast-grade memory. For the P-cores, the company says that 8.00 GHz overclocks are now within reach for enthusiasts. The updated Intel Extreme Tuner Utility (XTU), allows you to set multipliers on a per-core basis, and tune your memory frequency on-the-fly (no reboots involved). 


 

Intel is launching the 13th Gen Core "Raptor Lake" desktop processor family with essentially three processor models—Core i9-13900K, Core i7-13700K, and Core i5-13600K; and their "KF" sub-variants that have disabled iGPUs, and are about $10-20 cheaper, depending on the model. 

The Core i9-13900K is the flagship part, with 8 P-cores, and 16 E-cores (8P+16E), with the full 36 MB L3 cache available on the silicon. The P-cores have a base-frequency of 3.00 GHz, and boost up to 5.80 GHz; whereas the E-cores run at 2.20 GHz base, boosting up to 4.30 GHz. The processor base power is rated at 125 W, and the maximum turbo power at 253 W (up from 241 W for the i9-12900K). The i9-13900K comes with an MSRP of USD $589, while the i9-13900KF (which lacks the iGPU), is priced at $564.

The Core i7-13700K is an interesting SKU, as it has the same 8P+8E core-configuration as the previous-gen i9-12900K, but with all the new updates detailed above. Intel carved this SKU out by disabling two of the four E-core clusters on the "Raptor Lake" silicon, and reducing the L3 cache to 30 MB. The P-cores have a base frequency of 3.40 GHz, with a maximum boost frequency of 5.40 GHz; while the E-cores run at 2.50 GHz base, and 4.20 GHz maximum boost. These chips have the same 125 W PBP and 253 W MTP as the i9-13900K. The i7-13700K is priced at $409, and the i7-13700KF at $389. 

The Core i5-13600K is an equally interesting processor with which the company hopes to hold on to the mid-range. It now comes with a 6P+8E core-configuration, compared to 6P+4E of the i5-12600K. And of course, you get all the generational improvements detailed above. This SKU is carved out by disabling two P-cores, and two E-core clusters; while also cutting down the L3 cache to 24 MB (which is still higher than the 20 MB of the i5-12600K). The P-cores run at 3.50 GHz base with 5.10 GHz boost; while the E-cores do 2.60 GHz base, with 3.90 GHz boost. While the PBP value is the same 125 W as the higher SKUs, the MTP is reduced to 181 W. Intel is pricing the Core i5-13600K at $319, and the i5-13600KF at $294. 


 

Intel is claiming gaming performance uplifts of up to 18% when comparing the i9-13900K with the previous-gen i9-12900K, across a wide selection of games; while the comparison with the AMD Ryzen 9 5950X "Zen 3" sees gaming performance gains range between 6% to 58%. The gap only widens when you consider the 99th percentile low-water-mark analysis. Although mainly compared with the 5950X, Intel also threw in gaming performance values it tested on the Ryzen 7 5800X3D, which is shown matching the i9-13900K in games where it's beating the i9-12900K, or within 10% of it in games where the i9-13900K gets ahead. This is interesting, as Intel thinks the performance of "Zen 4" Ryzen 7000-series processors should roughly match that of the 5800X3D. In our performance reviews published on September 26, the 5800X3D is 4.5-5% behind the Ryzen 7 7700X, which means "Zen 4" should end up within 5% of the i9-13900K in gaming performance, should these numbers for the 5800X3D from Intel hold up.


 

 

 

 

The platform I/O of these processors is identical to that of "Alder Lake." You get a 2-channel (4 sub-channel) DDR5 + 2-channel DDR4 memory interface. The processor puts out 28 PCI-Express lanes; 16 of these are Gen 5, and intended for the main x16 PEG slot; while the remaining are Gen 4. The main x4 NVMe interface of the processor is Gen 4, while the DMI chipset bus takes up the remaining 8 lanes (DMI 4.0 x8). You should still find motherboards with Gen 5 M.2 NVMe slots, but these would be eating into the x16 PEG bandwidth. Given that NVIDIA's latest GeForce Ada continues to be PCIe Gen 4, cutting into the bandwidth of the PEG slot to run Gen 5 M.2 SSDs could affect graphics performance (but we'll test this theory in upcoming PCIe-scaling articles with the RTX 4090).

The complete slide-deck for the processor launch event follows.


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## Space Lynx (Sep 27, 2022)

Can someone tell me what are the downsides to e-cores? In the recent Zen 4 cpu reviews, one of the negatives is "no problems with e-core compatibility" or something like that. Well what are the problems with e-cores at the moment and will it affect me in gaming?


----------



## v12dock (Sep 27, 2022)

CallandorWoT said:


> Can someone tell me what are the downsides to e-cores? In the recent Zen 4 cpu reviews, one of the negatives is "no problems with e-core compatibility" or something like that. Well what are the problems with e-cores at the moment and will it affect me in gaming?


One thing is the had to cut AVX-512 because of e-cores if you're into that sort of thing.


----------



## Lovec1990 (Sep 27, 2022)

CallandorWoT said:


> Can someone tell me what are the downsides to e-cores? In the recent Zen 4 cpu reviews, one of the negatives is "no problems with e-core compatibility" or something like that. Well what are the problems with e-cores at the moment and will it affect me in gaming?



problem with e-cores is that programs,games are not jet fully tought how to utilise Intel hybrid CPUs


----------



## TheLostSwede (Sep 27, 2022)

CallandorWoT said:


> Can someone tell me what are the downsides to e-cores? In the recent Zen 4 cpu reviews, one of the negatives is "no problems with e-core compatibility" or something like that. Well what are the problems with e-cores at the moment and will it affect me in gaming?


Still a lot of software compatibility issues, especially with older software, which means you have to disable the E-cores. Some of the motherboard makers even released utilities to make it easier to disable the E-cores.


----------



## bonehead123 (Sep 27, 2022)

Just gimme Gen 5 everywhere/everything, or gimme death, hehehe 

Surely with intel's gazillions of $$ for R&D, they can accomplish this, yes ?

Oh but wait, they would rather keep on milkin us with miniscule changes here & there from 1 gen to the next, so we will keep buyin their new sh*t over and over again.. go figure


----------



## P4-630 (Sep 27, 2022)

CallandorWoT said:


> Can someone tell me what are the downsides to e-cores? In the recent Zen 4 cpu reviews, one of the negatives is "no problems with e-core compatibility" or something like that. Well what are the problems with e-cores at the moment and will it affect me in gaming?



I have a i7 12700K, on windows 11 22H2, no gaming issues at all here....


----------



## Space Lynx (Sep 27, 2022)

P4-630 said:


> I have a i7 12700K, on windows 11 22H2, no gaming issues at all here....



even in older games like Civilization III or Dragon Age Origins or Stronghold HD?


----------



## P4-630 (Sep 27, 2022)

CallandorWoT said:


> even in older games like Civilization III or Dragon Age Origins or Stronghold HD?


Don't own those games, but I haven't had any issues with my own games sofar.


----------



## RandallFlagg (Sep 27, 2022)

13700K at $409?  When is retail launch?


----------



## Space Lynx (Sep 27, 2022)

RandallFlagg said:


> 13700K at $409?  When is retail launch?



I agree, doesn't seem like a bad price honestly. Considering it probably will beat Zen 4 in gaming. temps/power usage comparison (while gaming only) is mainly what I am interested in too. 

I agree with Der8auer that the Zen 4 chips have a thick heatsink over the ICC, its too thick according to him, and Intel has actually done some neat tricks regarding that in recent launches. So, it will be interesting to see temps and power usage while gaming only compared to Zen 4.

I may go raptor lake and rdna 3 this round. all depends on stock at MSRP.


----------



## P4-630 (Sep 27, 2022)

Waiting for reviews...


----------



## RandallFlagg (Sep 27, 2022)

CallandorWoT said:


> I agree, doesn't seem like a bad price honestly. Considering it probably will beat Zen 4 in gaming. temps/power usage comparison (while gaming only) is mainly what I am interested in too.
> 
> I agree with Der8auer that the Zen 4 chips have a thick heatsink over the ICC, its too thick according to him, and Intel has actually done some neat tricks regarding that in recent launches. So, it will be interesting to see temps and power usage while gaming only compared to Zen 4.
> 
> I may go raptor lake and rdna 3 this round. all depends on stock at MSRP.



Yeah that 13700K is effectively a 12900KS with better cache, improved prefetch, and better IMC based on the Z790 board ratings (midrange Z790 Tomahawk supports DDR5-7200).  

If it hits at that MSRP of $409 I'll be getting one on launch.  These prices are $40 - $150 less than I thought they'd be, and they are undercutting Zen 4 by a wide margin.


----------



## Super Firm Tofu (Sep 27, 2022)

Lovec1990 said:


> problem with e-cores is that programs,games are not jet fully tought how to utilise Intel hybrid CPUs





TheLostSwede said:


> Still a lot of software compatibility issues, especially with older software, which means you have to disable the E-cores. Some of the motherboard makers even released utilities to make it easier to disable the E-cores.



Can either of you point to some specific current examples?  Genuinely curious as I've been running Alder Lake-S since the beginning of the year and haven't run into anything.  Or maybe I have and just don't know it. :shrug:

I know at launch the hybrid arch. messed with game DRM, but that was resolved within a few weeks.

Waiting to see how the 13700k does against AL and Zen4.


----------



## ARF (Sep 27, 2022)

6 GHz KS SKU coming Q1 2023:


----------



## ShrimpBrime (Sep 27, 2022)

I thought read somewhere Intel is going to drop the Celeron and or Pentium line up?? I know Alder Lake has both, curious about 13th gen though.


----------



## TheLostSwede (Sep 27, 2022)

Super Firm Tofu said:


> Can either of you point to some specific current examples?  Genuinely curious as I've been running Alder Lake-S since the beginning of the year and haven't run into anything.  Or maybe I have and just don't know it. :shrug:
> 
> I know at launch the hybrid arch. messed with game DRM, but that was resolved within a few weeks.
> 
> Waiting to see how the 13700k does against AL and Zen4.


The main issue is that older software hasn't even been aware of the E-cores, so they bring nothing extra in terms of performance.
It might very well not be noticeable in a lot of applications, but due to how the CPUs are designed, the E-cores are a bit of an oddity to older software.
There were some DRM related issues and obviously some games had issues with the E-cores as well and I presume some still do, where you get a performance hit if they're enabled.


----------



## gffermari (Sep 27, 2022)

Ok....so we have 12gen, 13gen, 7000 and 5800X3D at the same level.
End of story. Let's read about gpus from now onwards...


----------



## Zareek (Sep 27, 2022)

It looks like this generation is going to come down to pricing/availability more than anything! CPU slug fest, sweet...


----------



## P4-630 (Sep 27, 2022)

And it's still on 10nm.... Imagine Intel CPU's on 5nm...


----------



## Ed_1 (Sep 27, 2022)

I am on Win10 and no problem with E cores, there are some programs that default to only E cores, like TM5.exe memory test but easy to fix this and run all cores, no need to Disable E cores unless you want to run AVX512 workload and you need 12th series with old bios even for that.
No issue with games I have seen so far.


----------



## ARF (Sep 27, 2022)

P4-630 said:


> And it's still on 10nm.... Imagine Intel CPU's on 5nm...



It depends on the architecture. In theory, even a Pentium 4 can be remade on a 5nm process.


----------



## P4-630 (Sep 27, 2022)

ARF said:


> It depends on the architecture. In theory, even a Pentium 4 can be remade on a 5nm process.


I mean i5s i7s i9s of course... I mean we know now what AMD could do on 5nm...


----------



## RandallFlagg (Sep 27, 2022)

P4-630 said:


> And it's still on 10nm.... Imagine Intel CPU's on 5nm...



And no longer monolithic.  I wouldn't hold my breath on Intel's first disaggregated (chiplet style) CPU being a performance paradigm shift, except maybe in the iGPU space.

I keep thinking Raptor Lake will be the LT1 of CPUs, the last and best of a dying breed of high power no holds barred performance CPUs.


----------



## birdie (Sep 27, 2022)

The most important chart.

Competition is f-ing great! Zen 4 with its crazy platform cost (DDR5/Motherboard/Cooler) has been short lived. ;-)


----------



## Wolfkin (Sep 27, 2022)

RandallFlagg said:


> 13700K at $409?  When is retail launch?


October 20th


----------



## Dirt Chip (Sep 27, 2022)

When can we see the actual reviews?
another month like in zen4 case?


----------



## IllIIIl (Sep 27, 2022)

For intel, Pre-sale has started in my region and my location is shipping on October 20th.
After currency conversion vs msrp
13900k is $690(590),
13700k is $492(410),
13600k is $380(320).

For amd, after currency conversion vs msrp,
7950x is $775(700),
7900x is $605(550),
7700x is $422(400),
7600x is $317(300)

Relative to amd's msrp, I don't know if it's intel being confident or they just want to make a fortune in my area


----------



## usiname (Sep 27, 2022)

It looks like many peoples on TPU does not know the meaning of the phrase "Up To"


----------



## Berfs1 (Sep 27, 2022)

I absolutely love how half the slides were disclosures


----------



## Space Lynx (Sep 27, 2022)

RandallFlagg said:


> And no longer monolithic.  I wouldn't hold my breath on Intel's first disaggregated (chiplet style) CPU being a performance paradigm shift, except maybe in the iGPU space.
> 
> I keep thinking Raptor Lake will be the LT1 of CPUs, the last and best of a dying breed of high power no holds barred performance CPUs.



I just want a 8-core Raptor Lake KF model with no e-cores. that's what I want. the 6 core no e-core variant just isn't enough for me.


----------



## john_ (Sep 27, 2022)

The price of i9 13900K shows how cheap it is for Intel to add 8 more E cores. Tremendous price advantage over Ryzen 9 7950X, while at the same time advertising more cores to the naives. 

That being said, we get very powerful platforms this year from both companies, but also very expensive platforms from both companies. 
With the exception of those who will pay anything to get the best and sell it when the next gen is released, people should consider buying the platform that will give them best value not just today, but for the next 2-4 years.


----------



## Berfs1 (Sep 27, 2022)

CallandorWoT said:


> I just want a 8-core Raptor Lake KF model with no e-cores. that's what I want. the 6 core no e-core variant just isn't enough for me.


So get a 13700KF and disable the e cores lol


----------



## ModEl4 (Sep 27, 2022)

Intel's partners are buying 13900K/KF and 13700K/KF at nearly the same price as what was buying 12th gen and 13600K/KF $30 more or so, depending on demand/supply we may see 13900KF/13700KF/13600KF at $579/$399/$299 street price if there is good availability effectively competing against 7900X/7700X/7600X on pricing.
But in reality probably with these low 1K unit prices we may see higher mark-ups from partners since the competition doesn't offer competitive enough pricing!
If i remember Alder Lake's early street pricing vs 1K unit prices was a little better, but we'll see in 3 weeks the real deal anyway.


----------



## Super Firm Tofu (Sep 27, 2022)

CallandorWoT said:


> I just want a 8-core Raptor Lake KF model with no e-cores. that's what I want. the 6 core no e-core variant just isn't enough for me.



As an Alder Lake owner I can tell you the E-Core hate is _way_ overblown.  I've run into _nothing_.

That being said, once someone reads something on the internet and has told themselves it's going to be a problem, they'll never be happy with said product.

Just buy a 5800x3d and be done with it.  Tons of still (relatively) inexpensive B550 and X570s boards available, and 32GB of fast DDR4 can be had for less than top end DDR5.

The 5800x3d is still the one to beat for *gaming* - it's miles ahead of vanilla Ryzen 5000, and overall a tie with AL. AM4 and DDR4 are super mature so smooth sailing out of the box.


----------



## Berfs1 (Sep 27, 2022)

john_ said:


> That being said, we get very powerful platforms this year from both companies, but also very expensive platforms from both companies.
> With the exception of those who will pay anything to get the best and sell it when the next gen is released, people should consider buying the platform that will give them best value not just today, but for the next 2-4 years.


It's sad that many builders say they are going to buy so and so motherboard and upgrade the CPU 2 years later... only to upgrade the entire motherboard and CPU and RAM when they get around to it. Older CPUs are fine too!


----------



## P4-630 (Sep 27, 2022)

Berfs1 said:


> So get a 13700KF and disable the e cores lol








I may upgrade to i7 13700K in the near future, not disabling any e-cores though....Haha,,
Currently my i7 12700K does the job, waiting for reviews of the RL CPU's.


----------



## Gameslove (Sep 27, 2022)

Overall Ryzen 7 5800x3d stay the best cpu gaming of the 2022.


----------



## Denver (Sep 27, 2022)

Interesting to note that the ryzen 5800X3D still manages to beat both Zen4 and RL in certain games.


----------



## john_ (Sep 27, 2022)

Denver said:


> Interesting to note that the ryzen 5800X3D still manages to beat both Zen4 and RL in certain games.


The probable reason why Intel decided to NOT put a standard bar for 5800X3D in it's slides, but "hide" the X3D's results in a small red line.


----------



## IllIIIl (Sep 27, 2022)

john_ said:


> The probable reason why Intel decided to NOT put a standard bar for 5800X3D in it's slides, but "hide" the X3D's results in a small red line.


I didn't realize 5800x3d existed until I saw your comment.

on game frame rate
5800x3d‹7600x‹7950x(≈13900k?)
7600x is very close to the 7950x ,and the 12700k is also very close to the 7600x, which means that the 13th generation intel products will basically not improve compared to the 12th generation?


----------



## v12dock (Sep 27, 2022)

Seems okay I can see why Pat made the comment about AMD having to much momentum. X3D is still ahead some a number of titles and 7000X3D will most likely be available 3-4 months after RL retail release.


----------



## R0H1T (Sep 27, 2022)

john_ said:


> The price of i9 13900K shows how cheap it is for Intel to add 8 more E cores. Tremendous price advantage over Ryzen 9 7950X, while at the same time advertising more cores to the naives.


I wouldn't be so sure of that, chiplets still yield better & AMD's making them on smaller/denser nodes. The profit margins on the R9 chips are insane! Intel on the other hand lost slightly more (less?) than a billion for the first time in many years.

If AMD really wanted they could price Intel out of the market completely, but just like Intel in the previous decade they won't do that. I'll let you guess *why*.


----------



## john_ (Sep 27, 2022)

R0H1T said:


> I wouldn't be so sure of that, chiplets still yield better & AMD's making them on smaller/denser nodes. The profit margins on the R9 chips are insane! Intel on the other hand lost slightly more (less?) than a billion for the first time in many years.
> 
> If AMD really wanted they could price Intel out of the market completely, but just like Intel in the previous decade they won't do that. I'll let you guess *why*.


I don't think you are right here. TSMC doesn't build chips for free. They get payed for those and in last years they had done some price hikes themselves affecting their customers. AMD is probably paying a high price for those chiplets. On the other hand Intel is taking money from one pocket and puts it in the other by building it's CPUs at it's own fabs. And they have so many models out there and so many customers and OEMs, that probably they are salvaging almost everything faulty they build. Probalem in iGPU? No problem. It's an F model. Problem in E core cluster? No problem. We just rename it. Problem in a P core? No problem again.


----------



## R0H1T (Sep 27, 2022)

That is true to a large extent wrt TSMC, but it has to show in numbers right? AMD's printing money like no tomorrow & their margins have only expanded. Intel's margins are nosediving & the vast majority of that is down to monolithic chips.

AT doesn't seem to have the latest chart, but they're only further down now ~


----------



## Space Lynx (Sep 27, 2022)

Berfs1 said:


> So get a 13700KF and disable the e cores lol



true. I had asked in another thread if all motherboards support disabling e-cores and no one answered me, so I wasn't confident this was possible except with high end motherboards.

I guess it is common though so I don't need to worry about that.

I might do this.


----------



## john_ (Sep 27, 2022)

R0H1T said:


> That is true to a large extent wrt TSMC, but it has to show in numbers right? AMD's printing money like no tomorrow & their margins have only expanded. Intel's margins are nosediving & the vast majority of that is down to monolithic chips.
> 
> AT doesn't seem to have the latest chart, but they're only further down now ~


Intel is probably selling CPUs to OEMs at a huge discount. They are probably selling server CPUs at a huge discount, or not sell enough compared to the past. Also they are losing money from GPUs, had to kill Octane, they are a huge company. Many reasons to make money, many reasons to lose money.

In the end Intel's and AMD's profit margins the last quarter was about the same. AMD, gone up, Intel way down, but still about the same. So AMD is not really making a gazillion of profits and definitely Intel still enjoys good profits. Just not as high as needed to cover a much bigger number of wages, much more departments, much more R&D budgets, let's not forget manufacturing expansion with new fabs and of course a dividend that AMD is not paying.


Also something else that I added in my previous post, after your reply, so decided to move it here.

AMD doesn't have the needed capacity to "price Intel out of the market completely". They would had to secure a huge number of wafers from TSMC, probably even compete with Apple as the top TSMC customer to have the capacity to offer enough Ryzen CPUs to cover the huge demand that will be the result of selling Ryzen CPUs at really low prices.


----------



## P4-630 (Sep 27, 2022)

CallandorWoT said:


> true. I had asked in another thread if all motherboards support disabling e-cores and no one answered me, so I wasn't confident this was possible except with high end motherboards.
> 
> I guess it is common though so I don't need to worry about that.
> 
> I might do this.



I haven't found a need yet to do this.


----------



## Frank_100 (Sep 27, 2022)

v12dock said:


> One thing is the had to cut AVX-512 because of e-cores if you're into that sort of thing.


So any software that uses Intel MKL Library will have a performance hit.

Obvious:
Mathmatica 
R

Less Obvious:
Waves Plug-ins.

but it may not be much of a hit.
All that stuff works on Apple.


----------



## TheinsanegamerN (Sep 27, 2022)

Super Firm Tofu said:


> As an Alder Lake owner I can tell you the E-Core hate is _way_ overblown.  I've run into _nothing_.
> 
> That being said, once someone reads something on the internet and has told themselves it's going to be a problem, they'll never be happy with said product.
> 
> ...


Guys, I can tell you that _THIS ISSUE_ has not affected _*ME*_ specifically and as we all know anecdotes are fact so there is _NO ISSUE_ so stop complaining!


----------



## Super Firm Tofu (Sep 27, 2022)

CallandorWoT said:


> true. I had asked in another thread if all motherboards support disabling e-cores and no one answered me, so I wasn't confident this was possible except with high end motherboards.
> 
> I guess it is common though so I don't need to worry about that.
> 
> I might do this.



Wiz answered you.  The answer was yes, and that you'd lose performance by doing so.

As for your list of requested games, and if they were negatively affected by e-cores, here's a screenshot of task manager running Dragon Age: Origins. 1440p, Max quality, 120fps lock.  E-cores are doing what they're supposed to do.


----------



## P4-630 (Sep 27, 2022)

Here running GTA V


----------



## mahoney (Sep 27, 2022)

john_ said:


> The probable reason why Intel decided to NOT put a standard bar for 5800X3D in it's slides, but "hide" the X3D's results in a small red line.


Find it hilarious how intel included the 3d chip while AMD didn't even bother with it for their Zen 4 presentation.


----------



## mplayerMuPDF (Sep 27, 2022)

i5-13600k is looking sooo good. People hate on the E-cores but don't forget that you are basically getting TWO old i5s (supposedly Skylake but let's say for the sake of the argument that they are Broadwell or Haswell equivalent instead) for free with your new hexacore i5 (think of it as a Ryzen 5). For productivity tasks this is just amazing. When I finally get to buy one of these (probably many years later second hand), I will be super excited to do some reencoding and compiling on this thing. Furthermore, DDR4 is STILL supported, so I could reuse my "old" 2x8 GB DDR4-3200 and save some money on that.


----------



## Super Firm Tofu (Sep 27, 2022)

TheinsanegamerN said:


> Guys, I can tell you that _THIS ISSUE_ has not affected _*ME*_ specifically and as we all know anecdotes are fact so there is _NO ISSUE_ so stop complaining!



Can you _please_ share what you've experienced?  I asked above for specific problems and got 'blah blah blah, cpu design, old software somethingsomethingsomething'.

I never claimed there wasn't a problem.  I said that in almost a year I haven't run into anything.  Please share what was broken for you with E-cores.  I'd like to attempt to duplicate it.


----------



## tussinman (Sep 27, 2022)

CallandorWoT said:


> Well what are the problems with e-cores at the moment and will it affect me in gaming?


From my understanding it's mostly really old games. From everything i've heard/read 2 common complaints is 1. the e-cores simply won't be utilized (which isn't technically a good or bad thing it just means you won't get any extra benefit) or 2. on some ancient games I've heard complaints of the e-cores running the game instead of the P cores (which I don't think technically matters to be honest, a game that's 10+ years old should be a joke to run anyways).


----------



## KarymidoN (Sep 27, 2022)

AMD just lost all their leverage and advantage with ZEN4/AM5.
Platform cost = Intel (supports z690/z790 boards and DDR4/DDR5 RAM)
Temps and Price/Performance = ZEN4 struggled to beat 12th GEN in some cases, 13th gen gonna wipe the floor with ZEN4.
Boy they gonna have to rush ZEN4+ or ZEN5 ASAP cause its not looking good.


----------



## P4-630 (Sep 27, 2022)

tussinman said:


> (which I don't think technically matters to be honest, a game that's 10+ years old should be a joke to run anyways).


Just remember already 8 year old GTA V.


----------



## AnotherReader (Sep 27, 2022)

Raptor Lake looks like it'll retake the gaming crown, but Zen 4 will provide stiff competition. We should all be glad that Intel and AMD are keeping each other on their toes. Note that Intel uses specint for measuring the single threaded and multithreaded speedup over Alder Lake. AnandTech ran specint in their review as is their wont. The 7950X was 15% faster than the 12900k in the single threaded test and 41% faster in the multithreaded test. So it seems that Raptor Lake will match or surpass Zen 4 in almost all applications.

*SpecInt Rate (from Anandtech): multithreaded test*


*Test**7950X**12900k**Increase over 12900K*500.perlbench_r134.6​103.82​29.6%​502.gcc_r89.6​79.13​13.2%​505.mcf_r55.8​52.1​7.1%​520.omentpp_r43.8​39.05​12.2%​523.xalancbmk_r99.9​63.94​56.2%​525.x264_r273.8​176.02​55.6%​531.deepsjeng_r144.4​90.31​59.9%​541.leela_r163.6​95.18​71.9%​548.exchange2_r234.9​140.71​66.9%​557.xz_r77.8​50.4​54.4%​*GEOMEAN*113.28​80.53​*40.7%*​

*SpecInt Rate-1 (from Anandtech): single threaded test*


*Test**7950X**12900k**Increase over 12900K*500.perlbench_r10.1​9.7​4.1%​502.gcc_r11.8​11.7​0.9%​505.mcf_r9.6​7.7​24.7%​520.omentpp_r7​6.1​14.8%​523.xalancbmk_r8.3​7.7​7.8%​525.x264_r14.9​13.7​8.8%​531.deepsjeng_r7.3​6.4​14.1%​541.leela_r7.5​6.1​23.0%​548.exchange2_r15.4​12.2​26.2%​557.xz_r6.4​4.8​33.3%​*GEOMEAN*9.39​8.15​*15.3%*​


----------



## RandallFlagg (Sep 27, 2022)

R0H1T said:


> I wouldn't be so sure of that, chiplets still yield better & AMD's making them on smaller/denser nodes. The profit margins on the R9 chips are insane! Intel on the other hand lost slightly more (less?) than a billion for the first time in many years.
> 
> If AMD really wanted they could price Intel out of the market completely, but just like Intel in the previous decade they won't do that. I'll let you guess *why*.



The number you are talking about is Net Income available to stock holders.  For Intel, it's that negative number in this list, Trailing 12 months (19.1B) then last quarter and so on.





For AMD this line looks like :




I should point out, Intel increased capital expenditures by $10B vs 2020.  This is mostly to start up their IDM foundries and improve their nodes - expenses AMD does not (directly) incur.

Now that you know the facts, how certain are you that you have a point?


----------



## Why_Me (Sep 27, 2022)

IllIIIl said:


> For intel, Pre-sale has started in my region and my location is shipping on October 20th.
> After currency conversion vs msrp
> 13900k is $690(590),
> 13700k is $492(410),
> ...


This is what a lot of gamers will be waiting for.

Intel Core i5 13400F + B660 / B670 board + DDR4 3600









						Intel's Core i5 13400 is shaping up to be a killer budget gaming chip
					

E cores come to our favorite budget CPU.




					www.pcgamer.com


----------



## tussinman (Sep 27, 2022)

P4-630 said:


> Just remember already 8 year old GTA V.


I only played the single player but even then my old ivybridge (which is slower than the e-cores) had no issues getting the full 75hz at the time. The only "ecore only" video I found for GTA 5 was averaging 100FPS on very high settings using only the 12600K's E-cores.


----------



## P4-630 (Sep 27, 2022)

tussinman said:


> The only "ecore only" video I found for GTA 5 was averaging 100FPS on very high settings using only the 12600K's E-cores.


Forced in BIOS?

Can't find this video...


----------



## Space Lynx (Sep 27, 2022)

tussinman said:


> From my understanding it's mostly really old games. From everything i've heard/read 2 common complaints is 1. the e-cores simply won't be utilized (which isn't technically a good or bad thing it just means you won't get any extra benefit) or 2. on some ancient games I've heard complaints of the e-cores running the game instead of the P cores (which I don't think technically matters to be honest, a game that's 10+ years old should be a joke to run anyways).



It does matter on super old games though, because I will be running those old games at 1440p 240hz someday, and I want the extra smoothness of highest frames possible, and I don't want e-cores holding me back.


----------



## zlobby (Sep 27, 2022)

CallandorWoT said:


> I agree with Der8auer that the Zen 4 chips have a thick heatsink over the ICC, its too thick according to him, and Intel has actually done some neat tricks regarding that in recent launches.


Yeah, like bending!   

But yeah, apart from that I can't wait to see how much power these new 13-series CPU draw and dissipate.

Pricing is quite sus, IMO. If intel were so confidwnt that they will beat AMD across the board, then why did they priced their offerings so low?


----------



## RedBear (Sep 27, 2022)

> The Intel 7 node also seems to have got some technological improvements, with the company referring to it as the "3rd generation" of this node (optical 10 nm).


Intel 7+++? Raptor Lake might turn out to be very good, especially in terms of value because of cheaper previous generation motherboards and DDR4 compatibility (*look at Ryzen 7000*), but I really hope for Intel that Intel 7 won't turn out to be the new 14nm...


----------



## Wirko (Sep 27, 2022)

btarunr said:


> Intel has given TD greater thread class awareness through machine-learning techniques (the processor learns over time what the nature of the workload could be). The


Now try to get a stable benchmarking score with this thing.


----------



## IllIIIl (Sep 27, 2022)

Why_Me said:


> This is what a lot of gamers will be waiting for.
> 
> Intel Core i5 13400F + B660 / B670 board + DDR4 3600
> 
> ...


Indeed, the new product performance of amd and intel may be very close.

Maybe 13100 is also worth looking forward to? If it can have that level of performance improvement of the 12100f.

And maybe amd's 7500 is
 not as bad as the previous generation?


----------



## tussinman (Sep 27, 2022)

P4-630 said:


> Forced in BIOS?
> 
> Can't find this video...


He used process lasso which can force whatever application you choose to use only the cores/threads that you manually select. He couldn't do bios option because the Bios requires you to have at least 1 P-core activated (you can deactivate all the e-cores in bios but can't deactivate all the p-cores)

He did the "ecore only" just to be funny but technically you can use the process lasso app to only run p-cores if you're having some sort of DRM or performance issue with older games


----------



## AnotherReader (Sep 27, 2022)

john_ said:


> I don't think you are right here. TSMC doesn't build chips for free. They get payed for those and in last years they had done some price hikes themselves affecting their customers. AMD is probably paying a high price for those chiplets. On the other hand Intel is taking money from one pocket and puts it in the other by building it's CPUs at it's own fabs. And they have so many models out there and so many customers and OEMs, that probably they are salvaging almost everything faulty they build. Probalem in iGPU? No problem. It's an F model. Problem in E core cluster? No problem. We just rename it. Problem in a P core? No problem again.


TSMC's latest nodes are very expensive, but AMD's small dies mean that they have low costs. Assuming that TSMC'S N6 costs the same as N7 and applying the 10% increase in 2022 to the prices in 2020, we get a manufacturing cost of US $ 68.21 for the 7950X and $ 45.28 for the 7700X. This doesn't account for packaging and R&D costs. The costs without the 10% increase, assuming a defect density of 0.09 per square cm for both N6 and N5, are below:


*Node**Wafer Cost**Good dies**Die Cost*N69346​460​20.32​N516988​815​20.84​


----------



## Wirko (Sep 27, 2022)

If the die annotations are exact, the size of an E-core is 32% of that of a P-core. Same as Alder Lake or close. So if anyone is trying to compare performance per unit area, don't simply round it to 1/4.



john_ said:


> And they have so many models out there and so many customers and OEMs, that probably they are salvaging almost everything faulty they build.


AMD collects the dies with one, two or three good cores but flawless L3, then assembles them into Epyc F-series processors, which are a special kind of monsters for low-threaded loads.


----------



## RandallFlagg (Sep 27, 2022)

AnotherReader said:


> Raptor Lake looks like it'll retake the gaming crown, but Zen 4 will provide stiff competition.
> 
> ​



Read the review, with a reasonable config of DDR5-6000 Intel never lost the gaming crown.

And it's not an anomaly.  Look at sites that used similar memory configs and you see similar results.  See wccftech's review, or eurogamer's.


----------



## truehighroller1 (Sep 27, 2022)

ARF said:


> 6 GHz KS SKU coming Q1 2023:
> 
> View attachment 263279




Why does he look so sick?


----------



## THU31 (Sep 27, 2022)

Pretty surprising pricing. Even though I still do not care about E-cores whatsoever, there is much more value here compared to Zen 4.

If the 13400(F) comes out under $200 with 6+4 cores and slightly higher boost clocks, it will be insanely good.


----------



## mplayerMuPDF (Sep 27, 2022)

truehighroller1 said:


> Why does he look so sick?


LOL "6 GHz OUT OF THE BOX!!!" in limited volumes and only if you wait another 6 months


----------



## AnotherReader (Sep 27, 2022)

RandallFlagg said:


> Read the review, with a reasonable config of DDR5-6000 Intel never lost the gaming crown.
> 
> And it's not an anomaly.  Look at sites that used similar memory configs and you see similar results.  See wccftech's review, or eurogamer's.


You're right. Most reviews show the 12900k as leading the 7950X in gaming; at best, it may be a match for the 12900k, but I haven't seen one beating it.


----------



## RandallFlagg (Sep 27, 2022)

AnotherReader said:


> You're right. Most reviews show the 12900k as leading the 7950X in gaming; at best, it may be a match for the 12900k, but I haven't seen one beating it.



In gaming, with a real-world build using DDR5-6000+, Alder Lake still has a slight edge.  

Zen 4 however does not lose as much as Alder Lake when you pair it with slower DDR5.  But then, if one is going to go lower than DDR5-6000 on Alder Lake, DDR4 comes into the picture. 

Honestly if I had a decent kit of DDR4-3600 C16 or better, I'd stay on DDR4.  I don't though, my kit was 32GB DDR4-3200 C16, I just don't want to cripple a $700 cpu/mobo combo with that.


----------



## wheresmycar (Sep 27, 2022)

[GAMER] I'm definitely liking RPLs i5 and i7 pricing... i was under the impression Intel would push something like a 13600K to $350-$380 being ZEN-4 platform costs are excessive. At $320, intels keeping it real. Look forward to independent reviews/benchmarks!


----------



## mechtech (Sep 27, 2022)

Was too many raptor memes...............so I gave up


----------



## Crackong (Sep 27, 2022)

All tests have PL1 = 253W but did not disclose the PL2


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Sep 28, 2022)

P4-630 said:


> Here running GTA V
> 
> View attachment 263307


?.

Task manager shows all core's as equal, no differentiation between P or E.
So how can you know that what it's showing is the core you think?.


----------



## qubit (Sep 28, 2022)

Looks like there's gonna be a proper head-to-head performance battle with AMD's Zen 4. This is perfect for the customer. Let's hope prices are kept reasonable and maybe, just maybe, even a price war.

EDIT: I might just go AMD this time. I hate E cores, feel I'm getting cheated out of performance and the Ryzen 7 7700X looks like the one for me as I'm only interested in gaming performance. Plus, it has the benefit of only one CCD, so no weird latency issues.


----------



## Steevo (Sep 28, 2022)

Great unbiased reviews, did they use a chiller again? Maybe phase change? Ice and alcohol? LN to keep boosts up?


All I see is a LOT of Intel provided best case scenario slides and people defending their specific scenario claims as defacto truth for all. I would wait for independent reviews in real world scenarios. AMD hyped the 7000 series and their thick IHS is the limiting factor, people are ignoring basic physics and the fact that the 12900 runs hotter and crying around about their theoretical system.


Wait for a review.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Sep 28, 2022)

john_ said:


> The price of i9 13900K shows how cheap it is for Intel to add 8 more E cores. Tremendous price advantage over Ryzen 9 7950X, while at the same time advertising more cores to the naives.
> 
> That being said, we get very powerful platforms this year from both companies, but also very expensive platforms from both companies.
> With the exception of those who will pay anything to get the best and sell it when the next gen is released, people should consider buying the platform that will give them best value not just today, but for the next 2-4 years.


I think Intel is still relatively cheaper since they still support DDR4 for people that have some decent DDR4 memory already. Then they just need board and CPU and they are set. Should be significantly cheaper than AMD.


----------



## mastrdrver (Sep 28, 2022)

Super Firm Tofu said:


> Wiz answered you.  The answer was yes, and that you'd lose performance by doing so.
> 
> As for your list of requested games, and if they were negatively affected by e-cores, here's a screenshot of task manager running Dragon Age: Origins. 1440p, Max quality, 120fps lock.  E-cores are doing what they're supposed to do.
> 
> View attachment 263306


I know of one person that streams and he gets better frames at least on BF2042 with e-cores disabled because he can push the overclock higher. If they are not disabled and he tries to do the same overclock on the p-cores, he gets crashes. So he actually gains performance in this instant with the e-cores disabled.


----------



## john_ (Sep 28, 2022)

MxPhenom 216 said:


> I think Intel is still relatively cheaper since they still support DDR4 for people that have some decent DDR4 memory already. Then they just need board and CPU and they are set. Should be significantly cheaper than AMD.


It is cheaper, but still expensive, meaning also the cost for a good motherboard. I could be wrong here, but can someone pair a top Raptor with a $150 or less motherboard and expect at least 95% of the performance?
People replacing their platforms every year or two, will go with Intel. people replacing their platform every 4-6 years, should consider investing on AM5 (I am not saying Zen4, but AM5).


----------



## Lionheart (Sep 28, 2022)

Those prices are better than I thought, that 13700k looking good. That and the 13600k are gonna be really competitive against AMD's lineup, hopefully AMD will respond either with lower prices or non X parts depending on the benchmark results.


----------



## THU31 (Sep 28, 2022)

TheoneandonlyMrK said:


> Task manager shows all core's as equal, no differentiation between P or E.
> So how can you know that what it's showing is the core you think?.


I expect they show up in order, just like P-cores and HT.

And you can easily verify it by assigning affinity and running a benchmark.


----------



## fevgatos (Sep 28, 2022)

CallandorWoT said:


> Can someone tell me what are the downsides to e-cores? In the recent Zen 4 cpu reviews, one of the negatives is "no problems with e-core compatibility" or something like that. Well what are the problems with e-cores at the moment and will it affect me in gaming?


Ive tested it excessively. Some games dont like ecores on, in which case - for example in riftbreakers, youll go from 188 average fps ecores on to 194 ecores off.

Some other games make extensive use or them (hitman 3 / spiderman remastered), in which case having them on will give you around a 20% fps boost. Thats the actual number on spiderman for example

Some other games dont like ht (again spiderman) in which case turning it off boosts fps by a lot.

Tldr, nothing wrong with ecores.



john_ said:


> The probable reason why Intel decided to NOT put a standard bar for 5800X3D in it's slides, but "hide" the X3D's results in a small red line.


Amd didnt put it at ALL....


----------



## Bwaze (Sep 28, 2022)

I'll have a lunch today at noon. But I'll only eat on October 20., and I'll get the menu right before then. 

Why are we calling it "launch" if we don't get either availability or the reviews, and we won't for another 3 weeks? This is not even a "paper launch", since there was never a plan to deliver the product on this day? I'm confused, what does the word "launch" mean in this context?


----------



## fevgatos (Sep 28, 2022)

Steevo said:


> Great unbiased reviews, did they use a chiller again? Maybe phase change? Ice and alcohol? LN to keep boosts up?
> 
> 
> All I see is a LOT of Intel provided best case scenario slides and people defending their specific scenario claims as defacto truth for all. I would wait for independent reviews in real world scenarios. AMD hyped the 7000 series and their thick IHS is the limiting factor, people are ignoring basic physics and the fact that the 12900 runs hotter and crying around about their theoretical system.
> ...


They used both a chiller and ln2 for their 65w results. We all know there is no normal way to cool down a 65w cpu. None.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Sep 28, 2022)

THU31 said:


> I expect they show up in order, just like P-cores and HT.
> 
> And you can easily verify it by assigning affinity and running a benchmark.


I think some assumptions are being made it doesn't label a full core different to a HT core either.
Without using affinity to verify you wouldn't be sure.

And if he'd answered I had question two, you expect the p core's to run the game, but both showed perhaps E core's doing not much, I would of expected some background utilisation, they do work in that way or am I mistaken ?!.


----------



## THU31 (Sep 28, 2022)

TheoneandonlyMrK said:


> I think some assumptions are being made it doesn't label a full core different to a HT core either.
> Without using affinity to verify you wouldn't be sure.


Well we know for a fact that logical cores are shown in pairs, so for example Core 0 and Core 1 means one core with HT.

Yes, it is an assumption just looking at task manager, but it is the easiest thing to verify.


----------



## Valantar (Sep 28, 2022)

These look like good updates overall, real-world reviews will be interesting. Also kind of fun to see Intel fight AMD so hard on value, with the 13900K suddenly being quite "affordable" (for its class, that is). AMD price cuts incoming? I certainly wouldn't mind that. The 13600K-7600X matchup will also be quite interesting to see tested.


----------



## Shocktruppen (Sep 28, 2022)

ARF said:


> 6 GHz KS SKU coming Q1 2023:
> What the caveat to this is it is for 2 cores only.
> View attachment 263279


----------



## Space Lynx (Sep 28, 2022)

fevgatos said:


> Ive tested it excessively. Some games dont like ecores on, in which case - for example in riftbreakers, youll go from 188 average fps ecores on to 194 ecores off.
> 
> Some other games make extensive use or them (hitman 3 / spiderman remastered), in which case having them on will give you around a 20% fps boost. Thats the actual number on spiderman for example
> 
> ...



Thank you.


----------



## phanbuey (Sep 28, 2022)

My prediction is that this is going to take the gaming crown from AMD, which AMD will take back with a 7800X3D at ~$550 and a 7950X3D at ~$999.

Welcome back to the days of the Athlon FX vs Pentium.


----------



## Space Lynx (Sep 28, 2022)

phanbuey said:


> My prediction is that this is going to take the gaming crown from AMD, which AMD will take back with a 7800X3D at ~$550 and a 7950X3D at ~$999.
> 
> Welcome back to the days of the Athlon FX vs Pentium.



I want that 7800X 3D.  gimmme gimme gimme


----------



## Bwaze (Sep 28, 2022)

phanbuey said:


> My prediction is that this is going to take the gaming crown from AMD, which AMD will take back with a 7800X3D at ~$550 and a 7950X3D at ~$999.
> 
> Welcome back to the days of the Athlon FX vs Pentium.



What about heat? Right now it's impossible to normally cool the Zen 4 CPUz even without the 3D cache - temperatures at 95 degrees aren't normal, no matter what AMD says. 

5800X3D saw lowered boost frequency because of the heat buildup due to 3D cache. What will the consequences be in Zen 4?


----------



## phanbuey (Sep 28, 2022)

Bwaze said:


> What about heat? Right now it's impossible to normally cool the Zen 4 CPUz even without the 3D cache - temperatures at 95 degrees aren't normal, no matter what AMD says.
> 
> 5800X3D saw lowered boost frequency because of the heat buildup due to 3D cache. What will the consequences be in Zen 4?



Same - the difference between 7950X at full stock vs 125W is not much vs 140W it's even less -- and the heat is manageable at both of those settings.  So they will cut boost clocks, but the X3D cache will more than make up the 5% performance loss that those extra 60W bring.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Sep 28, 2022)

Bwaze said:


> What about heat? Right now it's impossible to normally cool the Zen 4 CPUz even without the 3D cache - temperatures at 95 degrees aren't normal, no matter what AMD says.
> 
> 5800X3D saw lowered boost frequency because of the heat buildup due to 3D cache. What will the consequences be in Zen 4?


I bet on the engineering skills of AMD over you personally.
And via experience running at those temperature levels is fine long term.
Besides 98% of computers sit idle more than active so in reality a non issue.
Also game's don't push it hard enough anyway to hit 95, so all good.


----------



## fevgatos (Sep 28, 2022)

Valantar said:


> These look like good updates overall, real-world reviews will be interesting. Also kind of fun to see Intel fight AMD so hard on value, with the 13900K suddenly being quite "affordable" (for its class, that is). AMD price cuts incoming? I certainly wouldn't mind that. The 13600K-7600X matchup will also be quite interesting to see tested.


You think the 13600k - 7600x will be interesting? I thinks its going to be very one sided. The 7950X vs the 13900k will be the interresting one for me, the rest feel like a walk in the park for intel


----------



## Valantar (Sep 28, 2022)

Bwaze said:


> What about heat? Right now it's impossible to normally cool the Zen 4 CPUz even without the 3D cache - temperatures at 95 degrees aren't normal, no matter what AMD says.
> 
> 5800X3D saw lowered boost frequency because of the heat buildup due to 3D cache. What will the consequences be in Zen 4?


Normal? No. But fine? Yes. What is normal is just what we're used to. The silicon, substrate, socket and motherboard can all handle the heat. We just have to readjust our frame of reference for how CPU cooling works - from adjusting thermals with better cooling to adjusting performance with better cooling. We've already been moving this direction for years.

Of course, if you're a reasonably average user, just set your CPU to Eco mode and you'll get much lower power draw (and heat, unless you also scale back cooling) for a minimal performance loss.



fevgatos said:


> You think the 13600k - 7600x will be interesting? I thinks its going to be very one sided. The 7950X vs the 13900k will be the interresting one for me, the rest feel like a walk in the park for intel


We'll see. I don't think Intel's 15% ST gains will hold up in gaming, so the main question is whether it'll be noticeably faster or just another entry in the "yep, this is more than fast enough for anybody" club. And it'll be interesting to see how AMD responds to Intel's 13th gen pricing, of course.


----------



## RandallFlagg (Sep 28, 2022)

Bwaze said:


> What about heat? Right now it's impossible to normally cool the Zen 4 CPUz even without the 3D cache - temperatures at 95 degrees aren't normal, no matter what AMD says.
> 
> 5800X3D saw lowered boost frequency because of the heat buildup due to 3D cache. What will the consequences be in Zen 4?



I'd be more concerned about surrounding components than the CPU.  It's up to the motherboard manufacturers to compensate.  

I mean, I've actually seen pictures of motherboards where the thermal pads on the VRMs melted, stuff like that.   But then, in the real world, most people's PCs are idle 90%++ of the time so they are not really in danger of that.  Extreme performance users, might want to pick their motherboard carefully.  Overall, I doubt this will be an issue.  I could be wrong, again it's more a question of the motherboard makers testing their wares.


----------



## Valantar (Sep 28, 2022)

RandallFlagg said:


> I'd be more concerned about surrounding components than the CPU.  It's up to the motherboard manufacturers to compensate.
> 
> I mean, I've actually seen pictures of motherboards where the thermal pads on the VRMs melted, stuff like that.   But then, in the real world, most people's PCs are idle 90%++ of the time so they are not really in danger of that.  Extreme performance users, might want to pick their motherboard carefully.  Overall, I doubt this will be an issue.  I could be wrong, again it's more a question of the motherboard makers testing their wares.


You're not wrong, but this POV misses one thing: the cause for the high CPU temperatures is literally that _it's difficult for heat to move away from the core_. So, if it's sufficiently hard for heat to get from the core to the heatsink for temperatures to be this high, then why would it be easy for heat to get into the motherboard, which has much less direct contact?

VRM cooling _will _be more important with this generation, but that's due to higher power draws and more load on VRMs, not due to 95-degree CPUs. A 170W CPU dumps more heat into the socket and motherboard than a 105W CPU, yes, but it does so pretty much regardless if it's running at 95, 60 or 35. It's the amount of thermal energy released that matters, not the absolute temperature of the CPU core, which is a product of heat output and the specific thermal transfer characteristics of surrounding materials.


----------



## mahirzukic2 (Sep 28, 2022)

Valantar said:


> Normal? No. But fine? Yes. What is normal is just what we're used to. The silicon, substrate, socket and motherboard can all handle the heat. We just have to readjust our frame of reference for how CPU cooling works - from adjusting thermals with better cooling to adjusting performance with better cooling. We've already been moving this direction for years.
> 
> Of course, if you're a reasonably average user, just set your CPU to Eco mode and you'll get much lower power draw (and heat, unless you also scale back cooling) for a minimal performance loss.
> 
> ...


To be honest I expected the Intel's prices to be higher than what they announced, so a big surprise there.
I would like if this would force (incentivize) AMD to lower their prices, since I kind of like the new CPUs but they, as well as the whole platform are REALLY expensive, based on the first 2 days of it's release.
I've just checked Geizhals (gh.de) and price of 7950x dropped about 40 - 45 euros, so not too shabby. Still expensive though.
On the other hand, I have checked the AM5 boards, and the cheapest one grew 50 or so euros from yesterday. 
I think we are too early to tell and that it would be wise to wait for at least a month after Raptor Lake is released before making any purchases.
I would like a new platform after all, but I don't have the itch.


----------



## Dirt Chip (Sep 28, 2022)

I have no probles with 95 or 195 degree, I do care however about noise and spacial cooling requirements.
If I must use a good AIO at least (that`s basicly AMD recomandation) and that AIO will be 100% fan for every >5sec load than we have a problem, espacialy when intel top cpus can still stay under 95 (or 195..) with proper fan cooling and with a lowere overal noise for the same or higher wattage consumption\workload.

So if I must use a louder and more expensive cooler for the same level of performance than AMD`s "95 is the new 65" design choice is a design flaw.


----------



## Valantar (Sep 28, 2022)

mahirzukic2 said:


> To be honest I expected the Intel's prices to be higher than what they announced, so a big surprise there.
> I would like if this would force (incentivize) AMD to lower their prices, since I kind of like the new CPUs but they, as well as the whole platform are REALLY expensive, based on the first 2 days of it's release.
> I've just checked Geizhals (gh.de) and price of 7950x dropped about 40 - 45 euros, so not too shabby. Still expensive though.
> On the other hand, I have checked the AM5 boards, and the cheapest one grew 50 or so euros from yesterday.
> ...


Yeah, the way I see it, Z/X series platforms don't make sense for most users any more. PCIe 5 - who cares? Half a kilo of aluminium plating covering everything? No thanks. Additional PCIe 4.0 beyond the first m.2 and PEG slot? Meh - >99% of PCs have a single AIC and _maybe_ two SSDs. And PCIe 4.0 SSDs are no faster than 3.0 SSDs outside of sequential transfers anyhow. The way I see it, Z/X platforms are for people with very special needs/use cases, those who don't care about money, or those who want bragging rights. Give me a bargain-basement B650 with a workable VRM (with a heatsink) and two m.2 slots and I'll be happy.


----------



## RandallFlagg (Sep 28, 2022)

mahirzukic2 said:


> To be honest I expected the Intel's prices to be higher than what they announced, so a big surprise there.
> I would like if this would force (incentivize) AMD to lower their prices, since I kind of like the new CPUs but they, as well as the whole platform are REALLY expensive, based on the first 2 days of it's release.
> I've just checked Geizhals (gh.de) and price of 7950x dropped about 40 - 45 euros, so not too shabby. Still expensive though.
> On the other hand, I have checked the AM5 boards, and the cheapest one grew 50 or so euros from yesterday.
> ...



This entire cycle may be a dud.  I expected a lot of people to run out and buy Zen 4, but my local Microcenter still has plenty of stock of all SKUs (shows 25+ for all of them).  The only one I've seen sell out anywhere was the 7950X at Best Buy, but it came right back in stock.   

Same deal with motherboards.  Also as you say, very expensive, the *least* expensive AM5 is $260 - and that is an ASRock PG Lightning 14 phase VRM board.   Move up just a tad to the Steel Legend, which has an "ok" reputation, and it's $299.  The Z690 version of that board is $209.  Maybe ASRock did better this time, but their low and midrange board VRM designs were total garbage on Alder Lake.  The board next up is $470. 

I think this might be more of a macro-economic thing than having anything to do with performance.  If there is still a bunch of supply after this weekend, the whole PC / electronics space might be in trouble.  I still don't know a single person who bought an iPhone 14, for example.


----------



## Valantar (Sep 28, 2022)

Dirt Chip said:


> I have no probles with 95 or 195 degree, I do care however about noise and spacial cooling requirements.
> If I must use a good AIO at least (that`s basicly AMD recomandation) and that AIO will be 100% fan for every >5sec load than we have a problem, espacialy when intel top cpus can still stay under 95 (or 195..) with proper fan cooling and with a lowere overal noise for the same or higher wattage consumption\workload.
> 
> So if I must use a louder and more expensive cooler for the same level of performance than AMD`s "95 is the new 65" design choice is a design flaw.


This is the thing: you can't have your cooling set to hit 100% fan speed at high temperatures with this type of boost/thermal management system. It needs to be regulated by something else - a function of CPU power and thermals over time, for example.



RandallFlagg said:


> This entire cycle may be a dud. I expected a lot of people to run out and buy Zen 4


People have been buying PC hardware _like crazy_ for the past two years. These are not the conditions for a day one sell-out.


----------



## RandallFlagg (Sep 28, 2022)

Valantar said:


> People have been buying PC hardware _like crazy_ for the past two years. These are not the conditions for a day one sell-out.



I'm sure that factors in, but it's very relative.  

AMD users - esp those who would buy an 'X' performance chip -haven't had a new chip in 2 years.  There are a ton of people here still on Zen 2, Gen 9 and earlier, and like me Gen 10.  These type of users tend to upgrade frequently.   I do about every 2-3 years.  

I think a lot of this has to do with high inflation, and currency exchange rates.  High GPU prices may also be affecting these decisions, after all for a gamer what good does it do to say upgrade from a 3900X or 9900K when you've got a 2070 Super.  Quick calculation shows that's probably a $1500++ upgrade to see a difference.  $400 7700X + $300 (questionable ASRock) motherboard + $250 RAM + $700 GPU?   That's $1650 + Tax, in the US.


----------



## Jimmy_ (Sep 28, 2022)

P4-630 said:


> I have a i7 12700K, on windows 11 22H2, no gaming issues at all here....


With the ADL, the gaming issues were there in some Game - *Denuvo* *DRM*
*Intel had release a note previously - then they went on fixing those issues one by one.*


----------



## Lovec1990 (Sep 28, 2022)

if i may chime in:

I agree its a bad time to buy PC considering inflation,delivery issues and some manufacturers still try to ride mining time prices and now it looks like we are heading into recession plus current energy prices may lead to less people willing to pay such high prices so i belive that after few months manufacturers gonna fix prices in order to sell enough products


----------



## P4-630 (Sep 28, 2022)

Lovec1990 said:


> if i may chime in:
> 
> I agree its a bad time to buy PC considering inflation,delivery issues and some manufacturers still try to ride mining time prices and now it looks like we are heading into recession plus current energy prices may lead to less people willing to pay such high prices so i belive that after few months manufacturers gonna fix prices in order to sell enough products



Boycott, the only way....

Unfortunately people are still buying even when more expensive...


----------



## Lovec1990 (Sep 28, 2022)

we do not need to boycott considering current world state we can say they will adapt if they do not they will not sell as good as they want so they will adapt prices


----------



## RandallFlagg (Sep 28, 2022)

An interesting find over at Tom's.  Maybe accidental Raptor Lake HEDT appearance :


----------



## Why_Me (Sep 28, 2022)

john_ said:


> It is cheaper, but still expensive, meaning also the cost for a good motherboard. I could be wrong here, but can someone pair a top Raptor with a $150 or less motherboard and expect at least 95% of the performance?
> People replacing their platforms every year or two, will go with Intel. people replacing their platform every 4-6 years, should consider investing on AM5 (I am not saying Zen4, but AM5).


Intel Core i5 13400F + B660 / B670 board + DDR4 3600









						Intel's Core i5 13400 is shaping up to be a killer budget gaming chip
					

E cores come to our favorite budget CPU.




					www.pcgamer.com


----------



## Dirt Chip (Sep 28, 2022)

Valantar said:


> This is the thing: you can't have your cooling set to hit 100% fan speed at high temperatures with this type of boost/thermal management system. It needs to be regulated by something else - a function of CPU power and thermals over time, for example.


We will need to have thermometer on the cooler itself to relay on instead the cpu or use a nonexistent method than AMD hasn't provided yet.


----------



## wheresmycar (Sep 28, 2022)

Why_Me said:


> Intel Core i5 13400F + B660 / B670 board + DDR4 3600
> 
> 
> 
> ...



So many options at the close of 2022. This sort of combo is right up my alley if AMD fails to deliver reasonably priced B-series boards or if the 13400F/13600K beats the 7600X/7600 by a clear mile. I was gonna spend big and go all out on a 8 core processor, premium X/Z board and performance-scaled DDR5 memory sweet spot... but now re-evaluating everything... definitely ain't gonna pay £200-£400+ more for a measly uplift in performance at 1440p. Seeing NVIDIA and likely-AMD aren't behaving with Next Gen card prices... i'd be better off putting those savings towards a premium graphics card (4070/4080 RTX or 7600/7800 - if thats the next AMD naming sequence). 

Don't know about everyone else.... i'm still excited how things shape up towards the end of the year. The Intel/AMD price war will be interesting


----------



## Lovec1990 (Sep 28, 2022)

So when we will get reviews?


----------



## FeelinFroggy (Sep 28, 2022)

mahoney said:


> Find it hilarious how intel included the 3d chip while AMD didn't even bother with it for their Zen 4 presentation.



AMD did not include the 3d chip in their presentation because it beat all their Zen 4 chips in gaming.  Probably not good business to show last generation beating the next gen chips.


----------



## THU31 (Sep 28, 2022)

RandallFlagg said:


> An interesting find over at Tom's.  Maybe accidental Raptor Lake HEDT appearance :



You reckon there could be some HEDT SKUs with just P-cores (maybe at the lower end), or do you think they would add E-cores to all models?


----------



## Valantar (Sep 28, 2022)

THU31 said:


> You reckon there could be some HEDT SKUs with just P-cores (maybe at the lower end), or do you think they would add E-cores to all models?


With this many cores on MSDT, there isn't much of a market for HEDT in the first place. Outside of the Xeon workstation market, that is. There's a reason why Intel hasn't launched a HEDT chip since 10th gen.


----------



## wheresmycar (Sep 28, 2022)

FeelinFroggy said:


> AMD did not include the 3d chip in their presentation because it beat all their Zen 4 chips in gaming.  Probably not good business to show last generation beating the next gen chips.



Even if they did, it wouldn't bother me. the X3D offering was/is ahead of its time... surprisingly too good in the games which benefit and even more surprisingly what seemed like a chewed up and exhausted AM4 socket. Also adds an extra layer of excitement for 7000 series X3D models. In both cases i'm annoyed at AMD's higher premiums for these chips... i'd love to see a 7600X3D opposed to the 8-core supplement for lets say $350 MSRP but then again AMDs now got greedy mouths to feed too (just business)


----------



## RandallFlagg (Sep 28, 2022)

THU31 said:


> You reckon there could be some HEDT SKUs with just P-cores (maybe at the lower end), or do you think they would add E-cores to all models?



34 cores is an odd number, I'd bet it isn't a core count but a thread count => implies there are e-cores.

Edit: I'm wrong, it's 34 Raptor Cove cores.

Like @Valantar said though, there isn't really a market there.

Or perhaps I should say it's there but not what most people think it is.

Intel makes Xeon's (Ice Lake-SP and Cascade Lake based) in workstation guise for those who need massive IO.  You can build your own too, see socket 4189 CPUs and motherboards from newegg for the latest and greatest.  And ofc AMD does threadripper.  Compute is not the big thing in that space though, it's all about the IO.


----------



## Bruno_O (Sep 28, 2022)

Valantar said:


> the cause for the high CPU temperatures is literally that _it's difficult for heat to move away from the core_.


Incorrect.

The cause for these temps is because AMD, much like what happens on all mobile SOCs, decided to boost the frequency (power and temperature) all the way to 95 degrees to achieve higher frequencies, so better cooling like an AIO don't decrease temps much, but instead produce higher clocks. This is the case since Ryzen 5000.

It is automated overclocking. It will use more power, generating more heat, in order to reach higher clocks, like your iPhone or Galaxy phones do. 

There are a multitude of ways of limiting or disabling that. Some people just decrease PPT and other metrics in the BIOS, decreasing heat and power usage by like 40% while losing ~5% in performance. Or you can just disable boosting.

Again, these chips come literarily overclocked and not efficiently tuned, like most recent nVidia GPUs. You also don't need to have your fans at 100% at 95 degrees, since apart from CineBench, you'll never see these temps constantly during gaming, the most you'll see is 85 degree peaks and 70-75 on average.

Here I had a D15 and now an Arctic 280mm, and in both cases I set 80% fans at 95 degrees and a very slow ramp up of 6% per second (using Fan Control), resulting in a very quiet system that does not have constant ramp ups and downs. Still managed to achieve 16k on Cinebench on my 5.05 GHz 5800X.


----------



## Valantar (Sep 28, 2022)

Bruno_O said:


> Incorrect.
> 
> The cause for these temps is because AMD, much like what happens on all mobile SOCs, decided to boost the frequency (power and temperature) all the way to 95 degrees to achieve higher frequencies, so better cooling like an AIO don't decrease temps much, but instead produce higher clocks. This is the case since Ryzen 5000.
> 
> It is automated overclocking. It will use more power, generating more heat, in order to reach higher clocks, like your iPhone or Galaxy phones do.


Yes ... and because of the thick IHS, it actually sits at and targets a 95C temperature, unlike literally every single desktop CPU before it. Remember, Ryzen 5000 has very nearly as aggressive boost behaviour - it just has a lower thermal target (75C before it starts dropping boost clocks), as (with good cooling) it hits its peak sustainable clocks at lower temperatures. If this had a thinner IHS, that thermal target would likely be lower (though likely not as low as Ryzen 5000) with the same boost behaviour. And the things is: this is fine. It works, it's not overheating, it's not throttling, and it won't damage the CPU. It's just not something people are used to.

You seem to not have read any of the previous discussion here at all.


----------



## RandallFlagg (Sep 28, 2022)

P4-630 said:


> Boycott, the only way....
> 
> Unfortunately people are still buying even when more expensive...



IDK... that anecdotal thing I saw where the 7950X sold out momentarily, seems to be a trend.

The #1/#2 selling CPUs on amazon are Zen 3.  #3 is the 7950X.  The 7900X is a distant #8, and 7700X very distant #20.  The 7600X is way down there, thirty-something.  At MC, it's way worse, all the Zen 4 SKUs show up on page 2 just before an out of stock $399 11700K that happens to have an open box buy available.

It makes sense.  Nobody wants to upgrade to a $300 or $400 CPU when the rest of the platform (memory/mobo) will run you another $700.  If you're going to spend $700 on the mobo / ram, you go for 7950X.   

But most won't go for absolute max high end in the first place, so... 

Might be a big miscalculation on AMDs part.  Then again, they starved the market for Zen 3 and everyone bought Zen 2.  Maybe they just price everyone into Zen 3 this time.  Still, day 2 is almost done and I'm gonna call this a train wreck from a sales perspective.


----------



## Valantar (Sep 28, 2022)

RandallFlagg said:


> IDK... that anecdotal thing I saw where the 7950X sold out momentarily, seems to be a trend.
> 
> The #1/#2 selling CPUs on amazon are Zen 3.  #3 is the 7950X.  The 7900X is a distant #8, and 7700X very distant #20.  The 7600X is way down there, thirty-something.  At MC, it's way worse, all the Zen 4 SKUs show up on page 2 just before an out of stock $399 11700K that happens to have an open box buy available.


Again: people have been buying PC equipment like crazy for two years now. Things are bound to be slow at this point - the market is about as saturated as it has ever been. The 7950X is high up because it sells to the type of person who doesn't care about money, has plenty of it, and thus also doesn't care if it's a tiny improvement over their previous CPU.


RandallFlagg said:


> It makes sense.  Nobody wants to upgrade to a $300 or $400 CPU when the rest of the platform (memory/mobo) will run you another $700.  If you're going to spend $700 on the mobo / ram, you go for 7950X.


This obviously also plays into the decision - but mostly it's just new platform tax, coupled with a saturated market and a recession making people wary of spending in general.


RandallFlagg said:


> But most won't go for absolute max high end in the first place, so...
> 
> Might be a big miscalculation on AMDs part.  Then again, they starved the market for Zen 3 and everyone bought Zen 2.  Maybe they just price everyone into Zen 3 this time.  Still, day 2 is almost done and I'm gonna call this a train wreck from a sales perspective.


It's not going to change, and literally nothing they could do woud have changed this. Even if the 7950X was $300, there just aren't enough people out there looking to upgrade their PCs, and certainly not with a ton of money lying around.


----------



## RandallFlagg (Sep 28, 2022)

Valantar said:


> Again: people have been buying PC equipment like crazy for two years now. Things are bound to be slow at this point - the market is about as saturated as it has ever been. The 7950X is high up because it sells to the type of person who doesn't care about money, has plenty of it, and thus also doesn't care if it's a tiny improvement over their previous CPU.



They're selling worse than Intel AL.  It's the platform cost that is killing everything below the 7950X.






Thread director 2, playing riftbreaker on p-cores while e-cores run a Blender render :


----------



## fevgatos (Sep 29, 2022)

CallandorWoT said:


> Can someone tell me what are the downsides to e-cores? In the recent Zen 4 cpu reviews, one of the negatives is "no problems with e-core compatibility" or something like that. Well what are the problems with e-cores at the moment and will it affect me in gaming?


I made a video for you on a 12900k running spiderman with HWunboxed settings and E cores on. Look at that CPU usage, it is using Ecores like crazy.









						VEED - Marvel's Spider-Man Remastered 2022.09.28 - 21.48.23.01.mp4
					

Make stunning videos with a single click. Cut, trim, crop, add subtitles and more. Online, no account needed. Try it now, free. VEED




					www.veed.io
				




I can make you one with e cores off to compare, the fps will drop drastically. So whoever says e cores are  garbage, put them in your ignore list. Indefinitely.


----------



## Valantar (Sep 29, 2022)

RandallFlagg said:


> They're selling worse than Intel AL. It's the platform cost that is killing everything below the 7950X.


It's definitely affecting things, but the main thing that list shows is that Zen4 has been out for three days while the Intel chips have been on sale for the full week that's used to calculate the top sellers. There isn't enough pent-up demand to generate a launch sales boom, especially for an expensive platform, but lower costs wouldn't have alleviated that much - there just aren't that many people buying and building PCs right now. It's not a single factor, but a combination of many, and the one that could have overcome the others - a lot of pent-up demand - isn't there.


----------



## Bwaze (Sep 29, 2022)

I think the winner of this generation of Intel and AMD CPUs might as well be 5800X3D. :-D Much cheaper platform, cheaper RAM...


----------



## THU31 (Sep 29, 2022)

fevgatos said:


> I can make you one with e cores off to compare, the fps will drop drastically. So whoever says e cores are  garbage, put them in your ignore list. Indefinitely.



You misunderstand the issue.
If Spider-Main is using E-cores on the 12900K, it is using them for extra performance on top of the P-cores. The problem is when games use fewer cores, but they allocate their tasks to E-cores instead of P-cores. That can happen in Windows 10 and older games specifically, but it has even been shown in Windows 11.

Your video is impressive. But what do you think your framerate would be like if your 12900K had 10 P-cores and no E-cores? Impossible to say right now. But this would be a good game to test 6P+8E vs. 8P+0E, as both these configurations would occupy roughly the same die space.

I find it surprising that a console port can benefit from more than 8C/16T, especially being a port of a port from PS4. But Nixxes is one of the best PC developers in history, so it is certainly possible. 

If you had a bit of free time to spare, I would love to see the 6P+8E vs. 8P+0E comparison. Not to prove anyone right or wrong, but I am genuinely curious about the results.


----------



## fevgatos (Sep 29, 2022)

THU31 said:


> You misunderstand the issue.
> If Spider-Main is using E-cores on the 12900K, it is using them for extra performance on top of the P-cores. The problem is when games use fewer cores, but they allocate their tasks to E-cores instead of P-cores. That can happen in Windows 10 and older games specifically, but it has even been shown in Windows 11.
> 
> Your video is impressive. But what do you think your framerate would be like if your 12900K had 10 P-cores and no E-cores? Impossible to say right now. But this would be a good game to test 6P+8E vs. 8P+0E, as both these configurations would occupy roughly the same die space.
> ...


In terms of gaming, yeah i assume 10p cores would be equal in most games and better in a few edge cases that scale beyond 8 cores. Spiderman benefits a lot from ecores because they are not running game logic, they are actually decompressing assets on the fly. Farcry 6 exhibits the same behavior, ecores off drop framerate and especially frametimes.

Even if we had a 10p core part though, if its running all cores at 4.9 it would use considerably more power in gaming than an 8+8 configuration. So i think its a balancing act. I dont want to see ecores gone, but im not entirely sure that 16 of them is the way to go either, at least not for a gaming pc. 10+8 would probably be better than the 13900k we are getting

Sure ill test in the afternoon


----------



## THU31 (Sep 29, 2022)

fevgatos said:


> Spiderman benefits a lot from ecores because they are not running game logic, they are actually decompressing assets on the fly. Farcry 6 exhibits the same behavior, ecores off drop framerate and especially frametimes.



So you are saying that these games actually recognize the E-cores and allocate specific tasks to them? That sounds like a lot of work for PC ports (and Far Cry 6 is AMD sponsored), but it is very interesting if true.

I would definitely get on board with E-cores if devs started using them specifically.


----------



## Melvis (Sep 29, 2022)

AnotherReader said:


> You're right. Most reviews show the 12900k as leading the 7950X in gaming; at best, it may be a match for the 12900k, but I haven't seen one beating it.


----------



## Vario (Sep 29, 2022)

THU31 said:


> So you are saying that these games actually recognize the E-cores and allocate specific tasks to them? That sounds like a lot of work for PC ports (and Far Cry 6 is AMD sponsored), but it is very interesting if true.
> 
> I would definitely get on board with E-cores if devs started using them specifically.


I believe the theory is the Thread Director 2, and Windows Scheduler, should figure out how to allocate it.


----------



## THU31 (Sep 29, 2022)

Vario said:


> I believe the theory is the Thread Director 2, and Windows Scheduler, should figure out how to allocate it.


I do not think that is possible. Surely the thread director and Windows can only allocate the entire application to specific cores, but not certain tasks within the application. That would require a really integrated ecosystem where the application would tell the system everything it is doing.


----------



## fevgatos (Sep 29, 2022)

THU31 said:


> So you are saying that these games actually recognize the E-cores and allocate specific tasks to them? That sounds like a lot of work for PC ports (and Far Cry 6 is AMD sponsored), but it is very interesting if true.
> 
> I would definitely get on board with E-cores if devs started using them specifically.


Im not sure, i know for a fact some game developers are in fact now programming tasks to offload to ecores but i dont think any of those games are out yet


----------



## mahirzukic2 (Sep 29, 2022)

RandallFlagg said:


> This entire cycle may be a dud.  I expected a lot of people to run out and buy Zen 4, but my local Microcenter still has plenty of stock of all SKUs (shows 25+ for all of them).  The only one I've seen sell out anywhere was the 7950X at Best Buy, but it came right back in stock.
> 
> Same deal with motherboards.  Also as you say, very expensive, the *least* expensive AM5 is $260 - and that is an ASRock PG Lightning 14 phase VRM board.   Move up just a tad to the Steel Legend, which has an "ok" reputation, and it's $299.  The Z690 version of that board is $209.  Maybe ASRock did better this time, but their low and midrange board VRM designs were total garbage on Alder Lake.  The board next up is $470.
> 
> I think this might be more of a macro-economic thing than having anything to do with performance.  If there is still a bunch of supply after this weekend, the whole PC / electronics space might be in trouble.  I still don't know a single person who bought an iPhone 14, for example.


Yeah, that's the thing. The AM5 platform is really expensive, and naturally people are not flocking to buy it outright. Like they shouldn't.
So everybody will have to play the waiting game until the prices come down, just like with the GPUs after the Proof of Stake for the Etherum.
Just gotta have some patience, that's all. This might be hard for some people though.



RandallFlagg said:


> IDK... that anecdotal thing I saw where the 7950X sold out momentarily, seems to be a trend.
> 
> The #1/#2 selling CPUs on amazon are Zen 3.  #3 is the 7950X.  The 7900X is a distant #8, and 7700X very distant #20.  The 7600X is way down there, thirty-something.  At MC, it's way worse, all the Zen 4 SKUs show up on page 2 just before an out of stock $399 11700K that happens to have an open box buy available.
> 
> ...


I also saw only the 7950X sold out on the German Amazon website. I have checked US's and it was the same story.


----------



## thelawnet (Sep 29, 2022)

Bwaze said:


> I think the winner of this generation of Intel and AMD CPUs might as well be 5800X3D. :-D Much cheaper platform, cheaper RAM...



'cheaper' = $430.

13400f at $180 will offer most of the performance at a fraction of the price.


----------



## Bwaze (Sep 29, 2022)

Yeah, it's not dirt cheap, but for gaming it will apparently be comparable to the best and most expensive from AMD and Intel, and it can do it with a cheap motherboard and cheap RAM. 

Of course by lowering requirements we can look at cheaper processors, and if we don't require ultra high FPS at low resolutions, almost everything in the last several years is GPU limited then.


----------



## RandallFlagg (Sep 29, 2022)

mahirzukic2 said:


> I also saw only the 7950X sold out on the German Amazon website. I have checked US's and it was the same story.



Looks like the surge for the 7950X is over.  It's fallen to #5, 7900X fell to #13 from 8, and 7700X to  29 from 20.  7600X went from 30-something to 46.   BBuy is little better, with 7700X at #9.  7950X is showing sold out there, but is way down the list on best sellers (page 2) right next to a still available 7900X.

This has to be the slowest selling launch I've ever seen.


----------



## fevgatos (Sep 29, 2022)

THU31 said:


> I do not think that is possible. Surely the thread director and Windows can only allocate the entire application to specific cores, but not certain tasks within the application. That would require a really integrated ecosystem where the application would tell the system everything it is doing.


Im uploading the 6+8 and 8+0 comparison. Not much between them, I think they are pretty similar, although the 8+0 consumes 25% more wattage.

Don't pay much attention to temps and wattage though, I just threw 1.3 volts just for testing stability reasons. The 8+0 is running all cores at 5ghz and the cache at 4.7, since generally speaking the main reason to turn off E cores is to clock the cache thought it would be fair. The 6+8 configuration is running stock cache, P cores at 5ghz and E cores at 4ghz.

8+0

6+8


----------



## wheresmycar (Sep 29, 2022)

RandallFlagg said:


> Looks like the surge for the 7950X is over.  It's fallen to #5, 7900X fell to #13 from 8, and 7700X to  29 from 20.  7600X went from 30-something to 46.   BBuy is little better, with 7700X at #9.  7950X is showing sold out there, but is way down the list on best sellers (page 2) right next to a still available 7900X.
> 
> This has to be the slowest selling launch I've ever seen.



If this is true, its possibly the best case scenario for the price conscious buyer. Not interested in the 7900X/7950X but would love to see some combatant 7600X/7700X price discounted action. Paired with an affordable B-series board, we the value hunters might just have something to applaud. The 13600KF/13600K @ $300-$320 and presumably 13400F for $180-$200 sets an exciting reference point for both AMD and Intel battling it out.... there's gonna be blood on the battlefield (we just need to throw an unarmed NVIDIA in the midst of it all). 

BTW, here in the UK 5000-series is taking up all the top spots in the Best Seller count. Even the 3XD is now quickly climbing the ladder. I bet AMD anticipated the slow AM5 admission... maybe the 5800X3D and slashed non-X3D variants was a foreseen countermeasure? With X-series boards starting from £350 in the UK... i don't expect 7000-series to top the charts anytime soon.... maybe 7950X/7900X but the rest (majority) is a no-go. I thought pre-launch earlier speculations - "increased build cost" was evident in itself that Zen 4 wouldn't come out with a bang bang? Even if the reviews saw the 7600X outpacing the 12600K by a clear mile... i still wouldn't splurge up for a super expensive platform upgrade. I'm sure many (like myself) are waiting to see how B-series boards hold up, possibly small but relevant further trim on DDR5 prices and no doubt some Intel-AMD price war action at the close of 2022. 

Back to the battleground... any ideas how to throw Nvidia in the midst of clashing axes and swords? That would be the prettiest achievement of all!


----------



## THU31 (Sep 29, 2022)

fevgatos said:


> Im uploading the 6+8 and 8+0 comparison. Not much between them, I think they are pretty similar, although the 8+0 consumes 25% more wattage.
> 
> Don't pay much attention to temps and wattage though, I just threw 1.3 volts just for testing stability reasons. The 8+0 is running all cores at 5ghz and the cache at 4.7, since generally speaking the main reason to turn off E cores is to clock the cache thought it would be fair. The 6+8 configuration is running stock cache, P cores at 5ghz and E cores at 4ghz.
> 
> ...


Thank you!

Main thing I noticed is that with E-cores disabled the CPU usage is over 90% a lot of the time, and it almost maxes out sometimes. That is pretty crazy for a top end CPU with 8C/16T at 5 GHz. Game is definitely CPU-bound in 1080p on both configurations.

I think this thread count will be optimal for a long time and IPC will be the main factor for increasing gaming performance. Meteor Lake is supposed to have lower clock speeds with only a small IPC increase, so I think AL/RL are the ones to get for high framerate gaming.
I am really curious about Zen 4 with 3D cache. Those definitely have a chance of taking the crown.

And it seems that Ada Lovelace and RDNA3 GPUs will be severely CPU-limited in 1080p. Probably even in 1440p in some cases.
Good thing I game in 4K60, so I do not have to worry about CPU performance.


----------



## ARF (Sep 29, 2022)

Valantar said:


> Yes ... and because of the thick IHS, it actually sits at and targets a 95C temperature, unlike literally every single desktop CPU before it. Remember, Ryzen 5000 has very nearly as aggressive boost behaviour - it just has a lower thermal target (75C before it starts dropping boost clocks), as (with good cooling) it hits its peak sustainable clocks at lower temperatures. If this had a thinner IHS, that thermal target would likely be lower (though likely not as low as Ryzen 5000) with the same boost behaviour. And the things is: this is fine. It works, it's not overheating, it's not throttling, and it won't damage the CPU. It's just not something people are used to.
> 
> You seem to not have read any of the previous discussion here at all.



Maybe it works in the ideal scenario when everything is still new. Try it with an air cooler some months later with dust bunnies and old thermal paste.
It will either begin to throttle or will cause system instabilities - either dead chip or system shut downs.



> Before we dig into our test results, we need to talk briefly about overclocking with the Ryzen 9 7950X. This processor is rated with a maximum safe operating temperature of 95 degrees C. Even with our 240mm water cooler and the system installed in an open-air test bed, our processor still ended up hitting 95 degrees C during some of our tests. This is likely why AMD does not ship a stock cooler with the Ryzen 9 7950X; if a 240mm water cooler is barely up to the job of keeping this beast below 90 degrees, a stock air cooler certainly wouldn't be.


AMD Ryzen 9 7950X Review | PCMag


----------



## fevgatos (Sep 29, 2022)

THU31 said:


> Thank you!
> 
> Main thing I noticed is that with E-cores disabled the CPU usage is over 90% a lot of the time, and it almost maxes out sometimes. That is pretty crazy for a top end CPU with 8C/16T at 5 GHz. Game is definitely CPU-bound in 1080p on both configurations.
> 
> ...


Actually lots of games, when you optimize your ram, can hit similar high % usages with 8 cores cpu. Of course we have to keep in mind thats at extremely high framerates. Especially when it comes to intel cpus that have really good imcs compared to amd, ram can keep these cores fed like crazy and constantly hit 90+% utilization. My 10900k was maxing out in sotr / ac odyssey / watchdogs 2 etcetera with 4400c16 ram


----------



## RandallFlagg (Sep 29, 2022)

wheresmycar said:


> If this is true, its possibly the best case scenario for the price conscious buyer. Not interested in the 7900X/7950X but would love to see some combatant 7600X/7700X price discounted action. Paired with an affordable B-series board, we the value hunters might just have something to applaud. The 13600KF/13600K @ $300-$320 and presumably 13400F for $180-$200 sets an exciting reference point for both AMD and Intel battling it out.... there's gonna be blood on the battlefield (we just need to throw an unarmed NVIDIA in the midst of it all).
> 
> BTW, here in the UK 5000-series is taking up all the top spots in the Best Seller count. Even the 3XD is now quickly climbing the ladder. I bet AMD anticipated the slow AM5 admission... maybe the 5800X3D and slashed non-X3D variants was a foreseen countermeasure? With X-series boards starting from £350 in the UK... i don't expect 7000-series to top the charts anytime soon.... maybe 7950X/7900X but the rest (majority) is a no-go. I thought pre-launch earlier speculations - "increased build cost" was evident in itself that Zen 4 wouldn't come out with a bang bang? Even if the reviews saw the 7600X outpacing the 12600K by a clear mile... i still wouldn't splurge up for a super expensive platform upgrade. I'm sure many (like myself) are waiting to see how B-series boards hold up, possibly small but relevant further trim on DDR5 prices and no doubt some Intel-AMD price war action at the close of 2022.
> 
> Back to the battleground... any ideas how to throw Nvidia in the midst of clashing axes and swords? That would be the prettiest achievement of all!



I really don't think the price of the CPUs themselves is the hindrance here. 

Consider, cheapest 7600X / 7700X 32GB DDR5-5600 build I can do at Microcenter:
Assumption : You've got a case, PSU, KB / mouse, Wifi Card/wired connection, OS license, CPU cooler, and drives

ASRock X670E PG Lightning AMD AM5 : $259    (note, this just dopped $10 in price)
Corsair Vengeance 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR5-5600 C36 : $157
7600X : $299
$20 discount on MB/CPU combo : -$20
Total : $695

Sub 7700X @$399:
Total : $795

So, lets say AMD lopped off $50 on the CPU price.  That would save you 7% on the 7600X build, and 6.2% on the 7700X build.

Also keep in mind, with the build above, you're not going to see the kind of numbers in the reviews with it. 

You need faster memory, and a better cooler than a typical Zen 2/Zen 3 user has.   Assuming this mobo can actually hit DDR5-6000, you need to spend about $90 more on RAM and $120 on an AIO that can handle the heat.  That brings the totals up to $815 for  7600X build and $915 for 7700X build.  This still might not be enough, this is the cheapest ASRock mobo available, no idea how good it is but ASRock doesn't have a good rep right now on low and midrange boards, and most of the cheap boards you're *lucky* if you can hit DDR5-6000 (at least on Alder Lake). 

None of these boards seem to have Wifi either, whereas Z690 / Z790 chipsets have a built in AX211 wifi 6E controller - so many of the  boards have this for just $10-$20 more.  For example, the MSI Z690-A Pro Wifi DDR5 is $239 from MC (no markdown).  The Same Z690-A Pro DDR5 without Wifi is only $179 (marked down from $209).

i.e. if you have to buy a Wifi card, that's another $50 or so. 

At these prices, lowering the CPU cost $50 - helps - but not much.


----------



## fevgatos (Sep 29, 2022)

RandallFlagg said:


> I really don't think the price of the CPUs themselves is the hindrance here.
> 
> Consider, cheapest 7600X / 7700X 32GB DDR5-5600 build I can do at Microcenter:
> Assumption : You've got a case, PSU, KB / mouse, Wifi Card/wired connection, OS license, CPU cooler, and drives
> ...


To add insult to injury, a 12600k + Z690 pro A ddr4 + a patriot bdie kit goes for what, 500-550?


----------



## Wirko (Sep 29, 2022)

THU31 said:


> I do not think that is possible. Surely the thread director and Windows can only allocate the entire application to specific cores, but not certain tasks within the application. That would require a really integrated ecosystem where the application would tell the system everything it is doing.


It's possible, why not? The basic unit that the Windows scheduler manages, now with the help of the Director, is a thread. Various threads within a process do very different things, some put a heavy load on the cores, some mostly wait for something to happen, and so on. The scheduler must be smart enough to put each one on the suitable core. At the same time, it must also observe priority and affinity settings - those can be set per process, not per thread, because a process often starts new threads and ends them. (Very roughly, application = process, and task = thread)

Further integration the way you suggested it - yeah, I have similar ideas too, don't know if it's on the way to become reality though. A piece of code could be tagged with some metadata, like hints to help the scheduler decide what kind of core is the best fit for it.


----------



## wheresmycar (Sep 30, 2022)

ASRock X670E PG Lightning in the UK: £330 ​


RandallFlagg said:


> I really don't think the price of the CPUs themselves is the hindrance here.



^absolutely...

i think you overlooked the following from my previous post:

_*"paired with an affordable B-series board*_*"* 

_*"I'm sure many (like myself) are waiting to see how B-series boards hold up, possibly small but relevant further trim on DDR5 prices and no doubt some Intel-AMD price war action at the close of 2022"*_

*"Even if the reviews saw the 7600X outpacing the 12600K by a clear mile... i still wouldn't splurge up for a super expensive platform upgrade"*

I'm not looking to buy into pompously flaunting X/XE-series boards....  i'm waiting to see how B-series pans out (presumably a better fit for gamers)

Also I don't mind throwing a little extra cash at some high performance DDR5 memory. This is inescapable if going the DDR5 route, whether 13th Gen/Zen 4. For me its simple, wait towards the end of 2022 and re-configure all build possibilities and see where we are with best value configurations. If the AM5 socket isn't far ahead, i wouldn't mind forking out ~$50 (or more) to buy into the AM5 3 year+ support plan.


----------



## RandallFlagg (Sep 30, 2022)

wheresmycar said:


> ASRock X670E PG Lightning in the UK: £330 ​
> 
> ^absolutely...
> 
> ...



X670(E)xtreme in particular seems quite expensive.  About $90+ more than equivalent Intel Z690, while the Z790 pre-order prices (MSRP) are about $10 more than the Z690s.  I'm thinking the X670 will be more in line with the price of Z790.  Pretty sure AMD and their board partners are just trying to milk the early adopters as hard as possible.  There's just no way an X670E was 'easier' to make and get supplied than the other boards, quite the opposite.  It's done on purpose.


----------



## mahirzukic2 (Sep 30, 2022)

RandallFlagg said:


> Looks like the surge for the 7950X is over.  It's fallen to #5, 7900X fell to #13 from 8, and 7700X to  29 from 20.  7600X went from 30-something to 46.   BBuy is little better, with 7700X at #9.  7950X is showing sold out there, but is way down the list on best sellers (page 2) right next to a still available 7900X.
> 
> This has to be the slowest selling launch I've ever seen.


Yep, and it all has to do with the platform cost and not the Zen 4 being bad. On the contrary, it's very good, but also very expensive.
And you know what the people choose rather? Performance or cost? Cost every single time (most of the time ofc). 



RandallFlagg said:


> I really don't think the price of the CPUs themselves is the hindrance here.
> 
> Consider, cheapest 7600X / 7700X 32GB DDR5-5600 build I can do at Microcenter:
> Assumption : You've got a case, PSU, KB / mouse, Wifi Card/wired connection, OS license, CPU cooler, and drives
> ...


I totally agree with everything you said. And I think that's the problem, Zen 4 processors are not (necessarily) expensive, the whole platform around it is. And that's the real problem.
We need to have cheapest motherboard at 100 or 150$, not 260 or 320 euros in EU (this is the same MB as you listed here). We need RAM at 50 - 70% of its current cost. If you had this, your total cost would drop 50 - 80 for RAM and 110 - 160 for MB for a total of  200 on average. Which would be 4 times the savings compared to the CPU being dropped 50$, so 28% on the 7600X build, and 25% on the 7700X build.
This is BIG.

And this is the Achilles heel of the Zen 4 ecosystem. Platform cost.


----------



## Valantar (Sep 30, 2022)

ARF said:


> Maybe it works in the ideal scenario when everything is still new. Try it with an air cooler some months later with dust bunnies and old thermal paste.
> It will either begin to throttle or will cause system instabilities - either dead chip or system shut downs.


As someone who has seen a Threadripper system with a first generation Enermax LiqTech TR4 AIO cooler, I know for a fact just how well AMD's recent CPUs handle heat. That system chugged along nicely - at ~600MHz on all cores, 95°C thermals, with zero water circulation at all. Actually had to use it like that for a day or two doing backups and other stuff before the cooler could be replaced. No instability, no issues beyond it being stupidly hot and system responsiveness being understandably quite low.

Point being: what you're describing doesn't seem realistic. Yes, the worse the cooling, the lower the clocks. Keeping your system reasonably clean is a must - but this is nothing new. This happened on Ryzen 5000 if your thermals exceeded 75°C, so the threshold was _lower_ there, after all. As for "old thermal paste" - I've literally never seen a system I've built suffer thermally from old paste. Buy decent stuff, it'll last for years and years.

Will you see a few hundred MHz lower clocks if you don't clean your system more than, say, once a year? Sure. But that's true for essentially every system, unless your cooling is _massively_ overkill to begin with.


----------



## Wirko (Sep 30, 2022)

Valantar said:


> As someone who has seen a Threadripper system with a first generation Enermax LiqTech TR4 AIO cooler, I know for a fact just how well AMD's recent CPUs handle heat. That system chugged along nicely - at ~600MHz on all cores, 95°C thermals, with zero water circulation at all. Actually had to use it like that for a day or two doing backups and other stuff before the cooler could be replaced. No instability, no issues beyond it being stupidly hot and system responsiveness being understandably quite low.


Hah, interesting. Did you check the voltages in that state, to see if the CPU undervolts itself in addition to slowing down the clock?


----------



## Valantar (Sep 30, 2022)

Wirko said:


> Hah, interesting. Did you check the voltages in that state, to see if the CPU undervolts itself in addition to slowing down the clock?


Can't remember if I did, but I doubt it. No doubt the voltage at clock speeds that low is already very low from the stock V/F curve though. It's been a while since that incident, so my memory of it isn't all that clear.


----------



## OkieDan (Sep 30, 2022)

Dirt Chip said:


> We will need to have thermometer on the cooler itself to relay on instead the cpu or use a nonexistent method than AMD hasn't provided yet.


I use water temps from AIO for fan curves, it's much better than cpu temps as it prevents rpm fluctuations for short duration cpu spikes.


----------



## Dirt Chip (Sep 30, 2022)

OkieDan said:


> I use water temps from AIO for fan curves, it's much better than cpu temps as it prevents rpm fluctuations for short duration cpu spikes.


What is the equivalent at fan cooling?


----------



## mahirzukic2 (Sep 30, 2022)

Dirt Chip said:


> What is the equivalent at fan cooling?


I don't think there is.


----------



## Valantar (Sep 30, 2022)

Dirt Chip said:


> What is the equivalent at fan cooling?


CPU power + a decent amount of hysteresis might do the job. Though I don't think many motherboards allow you to control fans through CPU power draw - you'd need something like an Aquacomputer Quadro for that.


----------



## OkieDan (Oct 1, 2022)

Dirt Chip said:


> What is the equivalent at fan cooling?


You're probably stuck with using "Fan Control" or whatever 3rd party software I believe someone else mentioned in this thread, which allows you to control how fast fan speed can ramp up per second.


----------



## Dirt Chip (Oct 1, 2022)

Valantar said:


> CPU power + a decent amount of hysteresis might do the job. Though I don't think many motherboards allow you to control fans through CPU power draw - you'd need something like an Aquacomputer Quadro for that.


So that's a deal breaker for me with zen4.
Sad.



OkieDan said:


> You're probably stuck with using "Fan Control" or whatever 3rd party software I believe someone else mentioned in this thread, which allows you to control how fast fan speed can ramp up per second.


The thing is, I wouldn't take the "risk" with a new platform (and 12 years from my last upgrade) that might not allowe me to fine tune the heat to noise (fan speed). A very basic things I think.


----------



## OkieDan (Oct 2, 2022)

Dirt Chip said:


> So that's a deal breaker for me with zen4.
> Sad.
> 
> 
> The thing is, I wouldn't take the "risk" with a new platform (and 12 years from my last upgrade) that might not allowe me to fine tune the heat to noise (fan speed). A very basic things I think.


People take risks on a new intel platform ever other generation. If you don't want to upgrade to an AIO that can set fan curve based on temps though then I guess you're kinda stuck with loud fans if you want best performance or lower performance if you want to dial in a specific RPM to set a particular noise level or stick with intel only until if/when they go the same route as AMD.

I imagine most people on air coolers with Ryzen 7000 will set their fan curves to not ramp up until a much higher temp than in the past and simply set a max RPM they find tolerable for 90+ C. Obviously not every air cooler user will find that acceptable.


----------



## Dirt Chip (Oct 2, 2022)

OkieDan said:


> People take risks on a new intel platform ever other generation. If you don't want to upgrade to an AIO that can set fan curve based on temps though then I guess you're kinda stuck with loud fans if you want best performance or lower performance if you want to dial in a specific RPM to set a particular noise level or stick with intel only until if/when they go the same route as AMD.
> 
> I imagine most people on air coolers with Ryzen 7000 will set their fan curves to not ramp up until a much higher temp than in the past and simply set a max RPM they find tolerable for 90+ C. Obviously not every air cooler user will find that acceptable.


I will wait and see how the 13900\k behave before I decide.

Any rumers if and when 7900\7950 non X will arrive?


----------



## OkieDan (Oct 3, 2022)

Dirt Chip said:


> I will wait and see how the 13900\k behave before I decide.
> 
> Any rumers if and when 7900\7950 non X will arrive?


Good idea to wait for 13th gen reviews. I haven't seen anything about non X 7000 series yet.

You might request CPU package power monitoring to be added if not already supported in SpeedFan and "Fan Control" software. There could be a motherboard out there that can control fan speed off package power via bios or their software suite. I could see this feature being something more and more people who use air cooling will want with CPUs that hit thermal limits before hitting power limits.

Until the options exist I think a lot of people on air cooling will simply choose a noise level they're ok with and set their final fan curve to hit that speed at 90c or so. It's not like air coolers don't already ramp up at the slightest duration of high demand and ryzen 7000 isn't going to be 95c at idle or watching videos.

More advanced users may undervolt and set power limits like the videos linked in this post.


----------



## Chrispy_ (Oct 3, 2022)

The interesting thing here is that RPL architecture offers very small improvements over Alder Lake:






Of the 15% single-threaded performance, most of that is just a frequency bump from insane 250W PL2 madness on the refreshed process node. 5% actual IPC is nice to have as a bonus but it means that RPL probably isn't going to be significantly better than ADL outside of the flagship i9s and perhaps the i7-13700K.

More pedestrian non-K models like the i5-13400 aren't going to be running at almost 6GHz. Intel will of course artificially cap the turbo frequencies on those to avoid cannibalising ADL i7 inventory as they've done timeless counts in the past.


----------



## THU31 (Oct 3, 2022)

I think we always knew Raptor Lake was basically kind of a refresh. All the leaks were mostly mentioning more E-cores and higher clocks. What we did not know is that clock-for-clock efficiency is supposed to be much better.

Zen 4 improvements mostly come from the same thing - clocks and cache. And that is a completely new platform. Alder Lake was so much more impressive (and appealing) a year ago than Zen 4 is now. But this might change with 3D cache and cheaper boards.

Compared to Kaby Lake, Comet Lake and Rocket Lake, this is so much better in every way.


----------



## RandallFlagg (Oct 4, 2022)

Any thoughts on these comparisons?  Prices are from MC on 12th gen, newegg preorder on 13th.

12600K $250 vs <>
12700K $350 vs 13600K $329 
12900K $499 vs 13700K $459

I'm not sure I'm seeing the value on 13th gen vs current discounted 12th gen parts.

I don't see performance uplift being significant for 13600K outside of multi-threaded apps, heavy MT I don't care about as long as it is as fast as my current 10850K - which a 12600K is about equal.


----------



## Why_Me (Oct 4, 2022)

RandallFlagg said:


> Any thoughts on these comparisons?  Prices are from MC on 12th gen, newegg preorder on 13th.
> 
> 12600K $250 vs <>
> 12700K $350 vs 13600K $329
> ...


I just hope Raptor Lake isn't Rocket Lake 2.0

https://www.intel.com/content/www/u...-30m-cache-up-to-5-40-ghz/specifications.html 
Maximum Turbo Power: 253W


----------



## RandallFlagg (Oct 4, 2022)

Why_Me said:


> I just hope Raptor Lake isn't Rocket Lake 2.0
> 
> https://www.intel.com/content/www/u...-30m-cache-up-to-5-40-ghz/specifications.html
> Maximum Turbo Power: 253W



I'm not worried about that 253W or power in general.  Mostly because in order to get there, you need to do an all-core workload, and need to do it for a long time to become an issue.  

I'm not even sure what those numbers are supposed to mean, coming from a 10850K.   I have my 28 second average set to 180W and my short power max (7s usually) at 235W while my 240 AIO can handle _sustained _220W(ish).  In real life though, I never hit those numbers.

I've run HWInfo64 all day at different points since I've owned this 10850K and I know, without doing something to intentionally stress my CPU like a benchmark, typical for me is ~30-35W average, ~150W peak package power.  Heck I rarely even hit 150W peak, plenty of times I've seen it more like 100W peak, and the peaks are almost always caused by decompress and patch from steam or Windows update.

Maybe someone who is doing a lot of ray-tracing \ rendering should pay attention, but that's not me.


----------



## fevgatos (Oct 5, 2022)

RandallFlagg said:


> I'm not worried about that 253W or power in general.  Mostly because in order to get there, you need to do an all-core workload, and need to do it for a long time to become an issue.
> 
> I'm not even sure what those numbers are supposed to mean, coming from a 10850K.   I have my 28 second average set to 180W and my short power max (7s usually) at 235W while my 240 AIO can handle _sustained _220W(ish).  In real life though, I never hit those numbers.
> 
> ...


I went from a 10900k to a 12900k. 

First of all, major difference is the idle wattage. Holy cow the 12900k drops down to 2 watts. 10900k for me (oced) was always sitting at like 20w+. 

The truth is, at the same wattage, the 12900k is a little bit harder to cool, but not by much. It's still a huge die, and the bigger the die - the easier it is cooled.

If you are doing a lot of rendering / ray - tracing, none of that matters, cause no one is going to use any CPU at 250w to do that. You gain 3 to 5% performance going from 150w to 250w, and the same applies to AMD's zen 4. You power limit them and go on with your workloads. It's absurd - and I hope it stops now - listening to the amd crowd arguing about cinebench numbers and wattage, as if anyone in theier right mind will be rendering at 5ghz all core clockspeeds at 250w. It's just borderline silly.


----------



## DarthJedi (Oct 5, 2022)

E-core problems are just a myth nowadays. I've seen zero issues with that.
Of course, problems persist for the users of Windows 10, because hybrid CPUs need Windows 11 due to kernel changes (core scheduler/thread manager) fit for them.


----------



## RandallFlagg (Oct 5, 2022)

fevgatos said:


> I went from a 10900k to a 12900k.
> 
> First of all, major difference is the idle wattage. Holy cow the 12900k drops down to 2 watts. 10900k for me (oced) was always sitting at like 20w+.
> 
> ...



I can't agree more with this.  People making those arguments are mostly either ignorant, or just unabashed Intel haters whether they are\were consciously aware of it or not.  

I started HW Info yesterday when I posted that and my peak power since has been 105W and my average is 33W. And yes I played a game, Mordor Shadows of War, last night.  Otherwise it's email, RDP, web, MS Teams, and a few other normal \ light loads.

Factually speaking, I'm likely using far less energy than I would with a Zen 3 Ryzen simply because their platform idle power draw is typically much higher.  And I'm running Windows max performance setting with a 5Ghz all core and power limits raised from stock.

That's real life with an very mild OC 10850K.  Current power, min power, max power, average power for the last 20 hours or so.





Clock speeds :


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Oct 5, 2022)

RandallFlagg said:


> I can't agree more with this.  People making those arguments are mostly either ignorant, or just unabashed Intel haters whether they are\were consciously aware of it or not.
> 
> I started HW Info yesterday when I posted that and my peak power since has been 105W and my average is 33W. And yes I played a game, Mordor Shadows of War, last night.  Otherwise it's email, RDP, web, MS Teams, and a few other normal \ light loads.
> 
> ...


So let me get this right, you have that pc for light loads and gaming and you think others are daft to be bothering about power use.

Because you're doing ok on light load's, wow the informed Ness of it all (with 20 hours of doing nothing, turn it off FFS)

Be interesting to see your and fevgatos take on raptor lake post reviews since your  clearly one of those who prefer Intel's wares.


----------



## fevgatos (Oct 5, 2022)

TheoneandonlyMrK said:


> So let me get this right, you have that pc for light loads and gaming and you think others are daft to be bothering about power use.
> 
> Because you're doing ok on light load's, wow the informed Ness of it all (with 20 hours of doing nothing, turn it off FFS)
> 
> Be interesting to see your and fevgatos take on raptor lake post reviews since your  clearly one of those who prefer Intel's wares.


No, that wasn't what either one of us said.

What I'm saying, and it applies equally to Alderlake and LavaZen 4, is that you only see those 240w at heavy workloads. Assuming you are one of the users that do these heavy workloads, maybe you SHOULDN'T run them at 5GHZ all core at 240w? Maybe something like a 150w power limit would give you 90-95% of the performance? Dunno, just a thought.

Poweusage as a metric on it's own is absolutely useless. 7950x uses more power and is less efficient than the 5950x. So freaking what? You get one, you limit it to 150w and it wipes the floor with the 5950x in both performance and efficiency. Why do you need to run it at 99999 watts and 7GHZ? Doesn't make sense to me. It's funny but it's true, the only people that run the 12900k at 240w were the people that only cared about performance, and the people that wanted to complain that it uses too much power. And we both know which of those 2 you are


----------



## trieste15 (Oct 6, 2022)

Intel trolls have not changed one bit in the past 20 years.
My sympathies for the intelligent Intel users who know the subject matter in depth, but their good, objective analysis gets drowned out by the handful of Intel trolls.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Oct 6, 2022)

trieste15 said:


> Intel trolls have not changed one bit in the past 20 years.
> My sympathies for the intelligent Intel users who know the subject matter in depth, but their good, objective analysis gets drowned out by the handful of Intel trolls.


That's the plan sadly.


Throw enough shit and hopefully they're favourite Intel shine's through, pure assssss.

And your on ignore fevgatos, so I see yes but that drivel isn't even worth replying, nice troll attempt though sounds like you're sixth birthday is near go you.


----------



## fevgatos (Oct 6, 2022)

TheoneandonlyMrK said:


> That's the plan sadly.
> 
> 
> Throw enough shit and hopefully they're favourite Intel shine's through, pure assssss.
> ...


No worries, I also ignore everyone that's right but I can't argue against. That's why my ignore list has...0 people in it


----------



## RandallFlagg (Oct 6, 2022)

So the anecdotal Zen 4 isn't selling is no longer anecdotal.    17% revenue miss on already reduced expectations, AMD turns out to be in the same boat as Intel.

"The company reported preliminary quarterly revenue of approximately $5.6 billion. It had initially said it expected $6.7 billion in revenue for the quarter, plus or minus $200 million.

*This is breaking news. Please check back for updates."*











						AMD warns of third-quarter revenue shortfall on weaker PC demand, supply chain issues
					

Semiconductor company AMD issued preliminary third-quarter results Thursday that were well below its initial guidance.




					www.cnbc.com


----------



## AnotherReader (Oct 6, 2022)

RandallFlagg said:


> So the anecdotal Zen 4 isn't selling is no longer anecdotal.    17% revenue miss on already reduced expectations, AMD turns out to be in the same boat as Intel.
> 
> "The company reported preliminary quarterly revenue of approximately $5.6 billion. It had initially said it expected $6.7 billion in revenue for the quarter, plus or minus $200 million.
> 
> ...


It is probably due to the general economic malaise around the world; Zen 4 arrived too late to be the cause of this shortfall. Unlike Intel, AMD's Data Center business showed growth even in this quarter; the client segment was the biggest contributor to the miss. From your link:



> AMD’s Client segment revenue came in at about $1 billion, the company said, down 40% year-over-year. Its Gaming segment generated about $1.6 billion in revenue, up 14% year-over-year, and its Data Center business also generated about $1.6 billion in sales for the quarter, up 45% year-over-year.


----------



## wheresmycar (Oct 7, 2022)

RandallFlagg said:


> So the anecdotal Zen 4 isn't selling is no longer anecdotal.    17% revenue miss on already reduced expectations, AMD turns out to be in the same boat as Intel.
> 
> "The company reported preliminary quarterly revenue of approximately $5.6 billion. It had initially said it expected $6.7 billion in revenue for the quarter, plus or minus $200 million.
> 
> ...





AnotherReader said:


> It is probably due to the general economic malaise around the world; Zen 4 arrived too late to be the cause of this shortfall. Unlike Intel, AMD's Data Center business showed growth even in this quarter; the client segment was the biggest contributor to the miss. From your link:



You guys talk about this stuff like headline new'zies or cranky investors/shareholders. Sounds like great news for the consumer. Let both intel and amd increase production like theres no tomorrow and then drop 50% in revenue with stock piles of toasted bread so we ('THE CONSUMER') can pick up the crumbs. I love crispy crumbs!

Throw NVIDIA under the same crispy crumb bus and BOOM there's potential for great toasty hi-performance gaming builds within the $1000 range 

Its not "anecdotal", it's "optimism" hehe

---------------------------------------

Just curious - when NVIDIA sets GPU "MSRP"... is there a strict figure/% which forms the retailers taking? Public info or undisclosed? Also are retailers free to increase the price to any new highs?

The reason why i ask... i only recently learned AIB partners get thin returns on these cards. Hence curious what they actually make?


----------



## RandallFlagg (Oct 7, 2022)

AnotherReader said:


> It is probably due to the general economic malaise around the world; Zen 4 arrived too late to be the cause of this shortfall. Unlike Intel, AMD's Data Center business showed growth even in this quarter; the client segment was the biggest contributor to the miss. From your link:



This is just a projection of a miss, not the report out, so they are including projections of Zen 4 revenue.   They report on Nov 1, so yes Zen 4 will have been out for 5-6 weeks by then - almost half the quarter.  That definitely affects their revenue for the quarter.  Slow sales and follow up orders may be the reason for the warning.

Intel reports out Oct 27, and has not yet warned, they expected to earn .34/share.  If they were going to miss big too, they should be announcing within a week if not days.

Year over year comparisons are fraught with fallacies, and company filings and announcements are much like the promo materials for a product - meant to misdirect.  

+40% growth in data center in Q3 year over year.  But in Q2 it was 70% growth year over year.  So they went from +70%, to +40%... Sounds to me like they lost about 17% of their data center revenue as well, 140% is 82.3% of 170%.  The client decline explains 600M of the 1.1B miss.  The other 500M came from somewhere.  

Su was asked about this when Intel missed last quarter, and said that growth would 'slow' to mid single digits.  Many saw this as dubious, since we already had seen retail electronics sales in the tank.  Now we know, they didn't grow they shrunk.


----------



## AnotherReader (Oct 7, 2022)

RandallFlagg said:


> This is just a projection of a miss, not the report out, so they are including projections of Zen 4 revenue.   They report on Nov 1, so yes Zen 4 will have been out for 5-6 weeks by then - almost half the quarter.  That definitely affects their revenue for the quarter.  Slow sales and follow up orders may be the reason for the warning.
> 
> Intel reports out Oct 27, and has not yet warned, they expected to earn .34/share.  If they were going to miss big too, they should be announcing within a week if not days.
> 
> ...


Don't conflate the reporting date with the quarter end date. AMD reported Q2 2022 results on August 2nd, but they only included revenue till June 25. That being said, if this persists, the other parts of AMD will be affected too.


----------



## Why_Me (Oct 7, 2022)

An AM5 build vs Intel 13 gen build is pretty much dead even atm in the US (Newegg).  More boards due out.  The criteria was 7 core cpu , no Asrock boards _(they're meant for poors)_, no Realtek 897 codec, supports DDR5 and a minimum of two M.2 heatsinks.  Reviews / benchmarks are going to be a biggy.  Mid range and budget builds will go to Intel imo due to DDR4 support with the B760 boards + locked cpu's.

https://www.newegg.com/amd-ryzen-7-7700x-ryzen-7-7000-series/p/N82E16819113768
AMD Ryzen 7 7700X $399.00

https://www.newegg.com/asus-tuf-gaming-x670e-plus-wifi/p/N82E16813119586
ASUS TUF GAMING X670E-PLUS WIFI $329.99









						TUF GAMING X670E-PLUS WIFI｜Motherboards｜ASUS Global
					

TUF Gaming series distills essential elements of the latest AMD and Intel® platforms, and combines them with game-ready features and proven durability. Engineered with military-grade components, an upgraded power solution and a comprehensive set of cooling options, this motherboard delivers...




					www.asus.com
				




*Total: $728.99  USD*

https://www.newegg.com/intel-core-i7-13700kf-core-i7-13th-gen/p/N82E16819118415
Intel Core i7-13700KF $429.99









						MSI PRO Z790-A WIFI LGA 1700 Intel Z790 SATA 6Gb/s DDR5 ATX Motherboard - Newegg.com
					

Buy MSI PRO Z790-A WIFI LGA 1700 Intel Z790 SATA 6Gb/s DDR5 ATX Motherboard with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!




					www.newegg.com
				



MSI PRO Z790-A WIFI $279.99






						PRO Z790-A WIFI
					

PRO series motherboards tuned for better performance by 16 Duet Rail Power System, DDR5 memory, Lightning Gen5 PCIe, Pre-installed IO, Extended Heatsink, M.2 Shield Frozr, Wi-Fi 6E, 2.5G LAN, USB 3.2 Gen 2x2




					www.msi.com
				




*Total: $709.98 USD*


----------



## ratirt (Oct 7, 2022)

I wonder what the power consumption will be. Zen4 showed that the power grew for their CPUs a bit which is not ideal. Something tells me, the new Intel CPU will probably knock me unconscious when I see the power draw. I will definitely look at reviews.


----------



## Why_Me (Oct 7, 2022)

ratirt said:


> I wonder what the power consumption will be. Zen4 showed that the power grew for their CPUs a bit which is not ideal. Something tells me, the new Intel CPU will probably knock me unconscious when I see the power draw. I will definitely look at reviews.


If you mostly game then power consumption won't be all that important.  If you use something like Blender a lot then yes I can see where it will be important, especially if you live in the EU where they don't seem to be big on electricity these days.


----------



## ratirt (Oct 7, 2022)

Why_Me said:


> If you mostly game then power consumption won't be all that important.  If you use something like Blender a lot then yes I can see where it will be important, especially if you live in the EU where they don't seem to be big on electricity these days.


That is a funny way to justify something . Simply put, don't use it fully and you are good but still buy the most expensive one  
For me electricity is very important since the prices for that in Norway are insane. These literally bleed me dry. I hope something will change this month but I doubt it. I will find out soon.


----------



## Dirt Chip (Oct 7, 2022)

ratirt said:


> That is a funny way to justify something . Simply put, don't use it fully and you are good but still buy the most expensive one
> For me electricity is very important since the prices for that in Norway are insane. These literally bleed me dry. I hope something will change this month but I doubt it. I will find out soon.


Well nope. Winter Is coming and zen4 use more wattage at lower temperature, so don't count on that.
One thing though- you will save some fraction of a cent in a few month time because the fan will spin slower.


----------



## fevgatos (Oct 7, 2022)

ratirt said:


> I wonder what the power consumption will be. Zen4 showed that the power grew for their CPUs a bit which is not ideal. Something tells me, the new Intel CPU will probably knock me unconscious when I see the power draw. I will definitely look at reviews.


250w power limit, what are you talking about? Are you saying - unlocked and overclocked? Cause who cares


----------



## ratirt (Oct 7, 2022)

Dirt Chip said:


> Well nope. Winter Is coming and zen4 use more wattage at lower temperature, so don't count on that.
> One thing though- you will save some fraction of a cents in a few month time becuse the fan will spin slower.


I literally dont know what you are trying to say. Zen4 uses more wattage and lower temp? As far as I see, Zen4 is at 95c temp and uses more wattage than zen3. For Intel 13th gen I dont know since it has not been reviewed yet but considering AL (13th gen is an upgrade to that) the guess would be RL will use more power considering 6GHz frequency. It has to be higher than AMD no matter what the power draw cost will be. So I dont think RL will use less power.


----------



## Dirt Chip (Oct 7, 2022)

ratirt said:


> I literally dont know what you are trying to say. Zen4 uses more wattage and lower temp? As far as I see, Zen4 is at 95c temp and uses more wattage than zen3. For Intel 13th gen I dont know since it has not been reviewed yet but considering AL (13th gen is an upgrade to that) the guess would be RL will use more power considering 6GHz frequency. It has to be higher than AMD no matter what the power draw cost will be. So I dont think RL will use less power.


While it's true (see tpu article 7950x with different coolers), it's not relevant to this thread (I confused it to another). I also didn't intend to comper it to any other Intel\amd cpu. You can Ignore it, my bad.


----------



## ratirt (Oct 7, 2022)

Dirt Chip said:


> While it's true (see tpu article 7950x with different coolers), it's not relevant to this thread (I confused it to another). I also didn't intend to comper it to any other Intel\amd cpu. You can Ignore it, my bad.


No it OK to discuss things. Now you know a bit more about the new tech. In my eyes that's a win for you .
To be fair, Zen4 uses less wattage than zen3 but with those clocks up to 5.8Ghz, no wonder Zen gobbles substantially more power than zen3. But that also depends which CPu you are comparing. 7700x is not so bad.
I see your spec and I'm sure you are going to upgrade at some point. If you are going to upgrade, wait for intel's offering.


----------



## Dirt Chip (Oct 7, 2022)

ratirt said:


> No it OK to discuss things. Now you know a bit more about the new tech. In my eyes that's a win for you .
> To be fair, Zen4 uses less wattage than zen3 but with those clocks up to 5.8Ghz, no wonder Zen gobbles substantially more power than zen3. But that also depends which CPu you are comparing. 7700x is not so bad.
> I see your spec and I'm sure you are going to upgrade at some point. If you are going to upgrade, wait for intel's offering.


Yep, a big upgrade is on it's way. Already have the case, nvme's, cpu cooler and waiting for RL to come out with reviews.
I'm doing many primer pro edit that bebefit quick-sync so it's probably intel this round again (use to have athelon 3200+ back in the good old days..).


----------



## ratirt (Oct 7, 2022)

Dirt Chip said:


> Yep, a big upgrade is on it's way. Already have the case, nvme's, cpu cooler and waiting for RL to come out with reviews.
> I'm doing many primer pro edit that bebefit quick-sync so it's probably intel this round again (use to have athelon 3200+ back in the good old days..).


Oh boy. I wish I were in your shoes  It is still a good time to purchase some new PC stuff. I know, expensive but in the processor department it is not so bad and now you have some good stuff to choose from both camps.


----------



## Lovec1990 (Oct 7, 2022)

i do love pricing of preorder 13700K in my country its 5 euros more than 12700K


----------



## RandallFlagg (Oct 7, 2022)

Dirt Chip said:


> Yep, a big upgrade is on it's way. Already have the case, nvme's, cpu cooler and waiting for RL to come out with reviews.
> I'm doing many primer pro edit that bebefit quick-sync so it's probably intel this round again (use to have athelon 3200+ back in the good old days..).



Same here (bought the same stuff), but (for now) have access to 12700K at $350 (Microcenter).  Watching their stock level like a hawk though.  

I just need to see what the difference is between that and 13600K / 13700K in performance.   Hopefully we will see some reviews where they test Raptor Lake on Z690, as the Z790 is about $20-$30 higher MSRP - and in some cases a lot more than that where the Z690 is discounted.


----------



## Dirt Chip (Oct 7, 2022)

RandallFlagg said:


> Same here (bought the same stuff), but (for now) have access to 12700K at $350 (Microcenter).  Watching their stock level like a hawk though.
> 
> I just need to see what the difference is between that and 13600K / 13700K in performance.   Hopefully we will see some reviews where they test Raptor Lake on Z690, as the Z790 is about $20-$30 higher MSRP - and in some cases a lot more than that where the Z690 is discounted.


Yep, I'm thinking about z690 also. See no reason for z790 if it cost more. 25$ increase in the USA translate to 50-100$ increase in my country...


----------



## fevgatos (Oct 7, 2022)

RandallFlagg said:


> Same here (bought the same stuff), but (for now) have access to 12700K at $350 (Microcenter).  Watching their stock level like a hawk though.
> 
> I just need to see what the difference is between that and 13600K / 13700K in performance.   Hopefully we will see some reviews where they test Raptor Lake on Z690, as the Z790 is about $20-$30 higher MSRP - and in some cases a lot more than that where the Z690 is discounted.


The 13700k is plenty faster than the 12700k. Id personally go for that and an el cheapo z690


----------



## RandallFlagg (Oct 7, 2022)

fevgatos said:


> The 13700k is plenty faster than the 12700k. Id personally go for that and an el cheapo z690



That is kind of my thought too, but then the DDR5 Z690s keep selling out and what's left is low stock levels at both Best Buy and Microcenter. 

I don't want to buy one more than two weeks out from when Raptor launches, because local return policy is like 14-15 days.  So, maybe next week. 

I wonder how many people are thinking the same thing though.  Boatloads of DDR4 versions are there, but I don't want that.


----------



## fevgatos (Oct 7, 2022)

RandallFlagg said:


> That is kind of my thought too, but then the DDR5 Z690s keep selling out and what's left is low stock levels at both Best Buy and Microcenter.
> 
> I don't want to buy one more than two weeks out from when Raptor launches, because local return policy is like 14-15 days.  So, maybe next week.
> 
> I wonder how many people are thinking the same thing though.  Boatloads of DDR4 versions are there, but I don't want that.


If you are going for el cheapo, z690 pro A is the way to go imo. 

Considering you have a 10900k though, id skip this gen as well and go for meteorlake. Reason being, you need an expensive motherboard to run current high end DDR5 kits, and even these high end ddr5 kits arent anywhere near close to being end game. Next year 8k mhz ddr5 will be commonplace and I assume cheap mobos will be able to run them.


----------



## RandallFlagg (Oct 8, 2022)

fevgatos said:


> If you are going for el cheapo, z690 pro A is the way to go imo.
> 
> Considering you have a 10900k though, id skip this gen as well and go for meteorlake. Reason being, you need an expensive motherboard to run current high end DDR5 kits, and even these high end ddr5 kits arent anywhere near close to being end game. Next year 8k mhz ddr5 will be commonplace and I assume cheap mobos will be able to run them.



Naaah not going to skip.  I'm a bit iffy on meteor lake.  

That chip disaggregation thing with tiled GPU and tiled IO separated from the tiled Compute core I suspect will have some penalties, first gen and all.  It may also be a lot more expensive, seems TSMC wants quite the pretty penny for chips made on its N4 nodes (N4 A16 2.4x more expensive than N5 A15).

All this tile stuff is really a way to counter the increasing cost of new nodes by improving yield.  They're also going to be enabled to put a decent GPU on the chip via that tGPU, combined with rapidly increasing DDR5 speeds.  In a single chip you're now paying for a CPU, fairly competent GPU, and most of your chipset.  That's likely to come at quite a price tag.

Raptor Lake I think will be the last and best in a long line of 45 years of monolithic consumer CPUs.  I bet this is going to be a 7 year keeper, especially after everyone figures out the new crap will cost twice as much.


----------



## mahirzukic2 (Oct 9, 2022)

ratirt said:


> Oh boy. I wish I were in your shoes  It is still a good time to purchase some new PC stuff. I know, expensive but in the processor department it is not so bad and now you have some good stuff to choose from both camps.


I am in the same situation. I am thinking of probably waiting for the 7950x3D to come out and buy it. Until then the prices of DDR5 will have come down even more and cheaper B650 boards will be here with ironed out AGESA issues or some other issues. This would be my work horse for a long time.


----------



## RandallFlagg (Oct 9, 2022)

fevgatos said:


> If you are going for el cheapo, z690 pro A is the way to go imo.
> 
> Considering you have a 10900k though, id skip this gen as well and go for meteorlake. Reason being, you need an expensive motherboard to run current high end DDR5 kits, and even these high end ddr5 kits arent anywhere near close to being end game. Next year 8k mhz ddr5 will be commonplace and I assume cheap mobos will be able to run them.



I went ahead and ordered an open box at MC, Asus Z690 TUF D5 for $183.  Added the 2 year MC replacement plan for $19 so no hassle if there is an issue, with that it was right at $200 + sales tax, still $60 less than unopened.  The TUF is basically the same as a Prime Z690-A, less 2 power stages (14 vs 16), and plus wifi.  Even uses the same BIOS patches.

Now, I only need a CPU.  11 more days to launch, and I have that Thu/Fri off from work 



mahirzukic2 said:


> I am in the same situation. I am thinking of probably waiting for the 7950x3D to come out and buy it. Until then the prices of DDR5 will have come down even more and cheaper B650 boards will be here with ironed out AGESA issues or some other issues. This would be my work horse for a long time.



Might be careful about waiting too long in this environment.  Inflation isn't licked by a long shot.


----------



## mahirzukic2 (Oct 10, 2022)

RandallFlagg said:


> I went ahead and ordered an open box at MC, Asus Z690 TUF D5 for $183.  Added the 2 year MC replacement plan for $19 so no hassle if there is an issue, with that it was right at $200 + sales tax, still $60 less than unopened.  The TUF is basically the same as a Prime Z690-A, less 2 power stages (14 vs 16), and plus wifi.  Even uses the same BIOS patches.
> 
> Now, I only need a CPU.  11 more days to launch, and I have that Thu/Fri off from work
> 
> ...


Yeah, we have about the same kind of inflation here in Germany. Everyday stuff and groceries are about 50 - 60% more expensive compared to a two years ago.
But the way Zen 4 has been selling, it will only go down in price, as well as motherboards and RAM. 7950x3D might be about 50 - 100$ or € more. That would put it at around 800 - 900€.
I can live with that.

Since I have a brother in the US, I was contemplating having him buy the CPU + MOBO + RAM (might go without this) for example on newegg or microcenter or where ever they have it the cheapest and have him do the shipping to me overseas. Leave it somewhere to collect dust, afterwards put it in nondescript packaging and declare it for broken for parts so as to avoid the customs. I'd reimburse him of course.
I would save 30 - 40% this way. EUR is very weak nowadays compared to USD, on top of customs and taxes, all of which could be avoided.


----------



## RandallFlagg (Oct 11, 2022)

Well...





But then there's this :









						The Intel i5-13600K Beats AMD's Ryzen 7 7700X by 17% in Blender Benchmarks
					

Intel's Raptor Lake will hit the shelves by the 20th of October. While we still need to wait almost 10 days, these CPUs are currently being tested by




					appuals.com


----------



## Super Firm Tofu (Oct 11, 2022)

RandallFlagg said:


> Well...
> 
> View attachment 265072
> 
> ...


I can't see it going much lower than that.

That benchmark leak seems about where I thought it would fall.  I don't think Zen 4 will be really interesting until the 3D cache versions drop (I say that as a Zen 4 owner).


----------



## RandallFlagg (Oct 11, 2022)

Super Firm Tofu said:


> I can't see it going much lower than that.
> 
> That benchmark leak seems about where I thought it would fall.  I don't think Zen 4 will be really interesting until the 3D cache versions drop (I say that as a Zen 4 owner).



Well after doing some looking, that score is not entirely as impressive as it seems on the surface.  12700K was already faster in blender than 7700X.  If you do the math based on the 12700K score here at TPU, 13600K winds up being a little faster than the 12700K.  Most of that gain for the 13600K can be attributed to having 4 more e-cores and the 4% clock speed increases.  Not that anyone actually using Blender for pro work is doing it on a CPU.

So what do you think of the 7700X?

Edit :

Well I pulled the trigger on that 12700KF. 

With prime card discount + the 3% cashback, after tax I just got out the door with that 12700KF for $303.

A lot better than the $500+ I think the 13700K would have cost me.  I can use the $200 on a GPU.


----------



## Super Firm Tofu (Oct 11, 2022)

RandallFlagg said:


> Well after doing some looking, that score is not entirely as impressive as it seems on the surface.  12700K was already faster in blender than 7700X.  If you do the math based on the 12700K score here at TPU, 13600K winds up being a little faster than the 12700K.  Most of that gain for the 13600K can be attributed to having 4 more e-cores and the 4% clock speed increases.  Not that anyone actually using Blender for pro work is doing it on a CPU.
> 
> So what do you think of the 7700X?



After a little more than a week I've been trying to sum up my opinion on the 7700x.  At this point I guess I can say it's fine.  Nothing (positive or negative) about it has stood out.  It's a solid improvement in performance over the 5000 series, essentially bringing it in line with Alder Lake.

It's been a mostly pain free experience on a new platform.  I didn't run into any of the issues that some on here have alluded to (memory stability and AGESA problems).  I'm not saying those aren't valid concerns, I just didn't run into anything.  I bought an EXPO memory kit (6000 CL30) and while it wasn't a one-click setup exactly, it's been 100% stable after a couple of small tweaks.

Temperatures out of the box are what everyone says.  I ended up bringing temps down a bit and boosting a few benchmarks scores with a -25 all core CO and left the CPU at the default 105W TDP/142W PPT - Essentially the same thing I did with Alder Lake (Adaptive vcore, with a negative offset).

The only reason I'd recommend going AM4 over Alder Lake/Raptor Lake is what the X3D versions could bring, but gaming performance was the deciding factor for me.



RandallFlagg said:


> Edit :
> 
> Well I pulled the trigger on that 12700KF.
> 
> ...



Excellent choice and reasoning!


----------



## mahirzukic2 (Oct 12, 2022)

RandallFlagg said:


> Well after doing some looking, that score is not entirely as impressive as it seems on the surface.  12700K was already faster in blender than 7700X.  If you do the math based on the 12700K score here at TPU, 13600K winds up being a little faster than the 12700K.  Most of that gain for the 13600K can be attributed to having 4 more e-cores and the 4% clock speed increases.  Not that anyone actually using Blender for pro work is doing it on a CPU.
> 
> So what do you think of the 7700X?
> 
> ...


Wow 300$. That price can't be beaten. You got a very good deal. Enjoy it.


----------



## fevgatos (Oct 12, 2022)

RandallFlagg said:


> Well after doing some looking, that score is not entirely as impressive as it seems on the surface.  12700K was already faster in blender than 7700X.  If you do the math based on the 12700K score here at TPU, 13600K winds up being a little faster than the 12700K.  Most of that gain for the 13600K can be attributed to having 4 more e-cores and the 4% clock speed increases.  Not that anyone actually using Blender for pro work is doing it on a CPU.
> 
> So what do you think of the 7700X?
> 
> ...


Τhe choice between 12700 and the 13600 is basically dependant on whether you believe game devs are going to support e cores on feature games or not. The 12700 generally speaking is the safer choice with it's 8 big cores, and if you got it for that price, my hat's off. Good choice


----------



## RandallFlagg (Oct 19, 2022)

mahirzukic2 said:


> Wow 300$. That price can't be beaten. You got a very good deal. Enjoy it.



New vs old, and I just got started tweaking.  

If the temps are any indicator, I scored a golden die.  Having a hard time getting over 70F with a 240mm AIO.

+45% vs my OC'd 10850K so far.  Single core score is better than what AMD said the 12900K would get on their Zen 4 release slides, and I'm using a $183 motherboard   :


----------



## mahirzukic2 (Oct 19, 2022)

RandallFlagg said:


> New vs old, and I just got started tweaking.
> 
> If the temps are any indicator, I scored a golden die.  Having a hard time getting over 70F with a 240mm AIO.
> 
> ...


Awesome. I think those difference percentages are fudged.
Other than that, it looks very good.
Did you play with the voltage, rather under voltage in XTU? And the voltage curve and (negative) offset?


----------



## RandallFlagg (Oct 19, 2022)

mahirzukic2 said:


> Awesome. I think those difference percentages are fudged.
> Other than that, it looks very good.
> Did you play with the voltage, rather under voltage in XTU? And the voltage curve and (negative) offset?



lol, not fudged.  1426/100% * 145% = 2067.7

When I posted that nothing was changed on voltages.  In fact the only thing I did was adjust the per core clocks until it got unstable then back off 1 notch, and turn on XMP, that's it.  

Since then I let the Asus AI automatic OC do it's thing and basically got the same result - 5.3Ghz / 5.2 / 5.1 / 5.0 for 2/ 4 / 6 / 8 p-cores It also raised BCLK to 100.25


----------



## mahirzukic2 (Oct 19, 2022)

RandallFlagg said:


> lol, not fudged.  1426/100% * 145% = 2067.7
> 
> When I posted that nothing was changed on voltages.  In fact the only thing I did was adjust the per core clocks until it got unstable then back off 1 notch, and turn on XMP, that's it.
> 
> ...


But that's the thing, 2067.7 / 1426 = 145%.
But the difference is (2067.7 - 1426) / 1426 = 45%. 
I am being a bit pedantic here, but I had to when I saw the difference to be over 100%. I thought, that can't be.
And it wasn't. 

On a side note, try to play with those voltage curves and offsets, you might dial in even better settings.
Another thing, by the time you sell your old processor and board, it will turn out that for a difference in 150 - 200$ you got 50% CPU score improvements, and certainly removed any CPU bottlenecks you might have had in some of the games (if you had them to begin with).


----------



## RandallFlagg (Oct 19, 2022)

mahirzukic2 said:


> But that's the thing, 2067.7 / 1426 = 145%.
> But the difference is (2067.7 - 1426) / 1426 = 45%.
> I am being a bit pedantic here, but I had to when I saw the difference to be over 100%. I thought, that can't be.
> And it wasn't.
> ...



I will be tinkering with it extensively the next 4 days, especially memory OC.  

I think you're right, I imagine I can get another 100Mhz out of it, but this is better than what I had hoped already given I'm +300Mhz above normal 1-2 core turbo.  From what I've read and what I can see on Geekbench this is probably in the top 5% of 12700K/KF dies.  They are usually crap compared to 12900K, like 50% of people can't go past 5.1Ghz.

So now I'm waiting for RDNA 3, or a big price drop on last gen GPUs in general, or both.


----------



## mahirzukic2 (Oct 26, 2022)

I have decided to forgo the AMD's 7950x and have ordered the 13700KF with MSI 690Z Pro-A DDR4 with 64GB (2x 32GB) Patriot Viper 4 Blackout DDR4-3600 DIMM CL18 ram with Arctic Liquid Freezer 360 with the 1700 socket bracket.
Should be around 850 euro instead of around 1500 eur for AMD's.
DAMN you AMD.


----------



## RandallFlagg (Oct 26, 2022)

mahirzukic2 said:


> I have decided to forgo the AMD's 7950x and have ordered the 13700KF with MSI 690Z Pro-A DDR4 with 64GB (2x 32GB) Patriot Viper 4 Blackout DDR4-3600 DIMM CL18 ram with Arctic Liquid Freezer 360 with the 1700 socket bracket.
> Should be around 850 euro instead of around 1500 eur for AMD's.
> DAMN you AMD.



If it makes you feel better, I just ordered an AMD 6700 XT.  Got tired of waiting/looking for the A770.

It does have blue lights to go with my Intel rig though.


----------



## ARF (Oct 26, 2022)

mahirzukic2 said:


> I have decided to forgo the AMD's 7950x and have ordered the 13700KF with MSI 690Z Pro-A DDR4 with 64GB (2x 32GB) Patriot Viper 4 Blackout DDR4-3600 DIMM CL18 ram with Arctic Liquid Freezer 360 with the 1700 socket bracket.
> Should be around 850 euro instead of around 1500 eur for AMD's.
> DAMN you AMD.



Yes, AMD's wrong decisions will strike back at them.
Why didn't decide to make wider CPUs in lower TDPs?
24-core at 125-watt, 16-core at 105-watt, 12-core at 95-watt, 8-core at 65-watt? 8-core to be the new entry?
It is needed much more than the irrelevant "standards" that they chose to pursue (for whatever strange reason) such as PCIe 5.0 and DDR ,5 and that are totally worthless.



RandallFlagg said:


> If it makes you feel better, I just ordered an AMD 6700 XT.



No, the wait continues. Navi 31, Navi 32 and Navi 33 are just around the corner now.
8 days to go and we will know more.


----------



## THU31 (Oct 26, 2022)

ARF said:


> Why didn't decide to make wider CPUs in lower TDPs?
> 24-core at 125-watt, 16-core at 105-watt, 12-core at 95-watt, 8-core at 65-watt? 8-core to be the new entry?



Because they would lose in benchmark scores against Intel even more.

How many people would choose the X models if they could get cheaper ones with slightly less performance. And they could overclock them.
They did that with Zen 1 and 2, because they were behind Intel. Zen 3 put them at the top, so suddenly there was no need for non-X SKUs, until Alder Lake came out.
This is also why Intel has such good non-K SKUs - you cannot overclock them (for the most part). If you could push the 12400 past 5 Ghz, why would you buy anything higher for just gaming? Back in the day, the lowest tier SKU could always achieve the performance of the highest one after overclocking. No wonder they locked the multipliers over a decade ago.

AMD wanted to cash in quickly before Raptor Lake and they managed to do that. But now sales have drastically dropped, so they will have to respond.

We have to be grateful to AMD, because they are the reason we have such amazing CPUs right now. But none of those companies are good guys. They will only sacrifice profit when they have to catch up. And I guess you cannot really blame them for that.
AMD's main focus is on servers anyway.


----------



## mahirzukic2 (Oct 26, 2022)

RandallFlagg said:


> If it makes you feel better, I just ordered an AMD 6700 XT.  Got tired of waiting/looking for the A770.
> 
> It does have blue lights to go with my Intel rig though.


It doesn't make me feel any better, but it does make me laugh though, so it kinda does make me feel a little better. 
Why in the God's name would you buy Intel A770? Are you crazy?


----------



## RandallFlagg (Oct 26, 2022)

mahirzukic2 said:


> It doesn't make me feel any better, but it does make me laugh though, so it kinda does make me feel a little better.
> Why in the God's name would you buy Intel A770? Are you crazy?



75% of that choice would be for the free software, actually.


----------



## ARF (Oct 27, 2022)

THU31 said:


> Because they would lose in benchmark scores against Intel even more.



How do you know? A 24-core will be much faster than a heavily overclocked 16-core..


----------



## THU31 (Oct 27, 2022)

ARF said:


> How do you know? A 24-core will be much faster than a heavily overclocked 16-core..


But a 24-core would have to be super expensive. Three chiplets on the newest process, it costs money. Yes, it would beat the 13900K, but it would cost twice as much.

They specifically optimized Zen 4 to reach those super high clocks so they could squeeze out the most performance at the lowest cost. That is also why the thermal target is so high.
Selling Zen 4 with low clocks on desktop would not be viable at all. Intel is on a very mature (an cheap) 10 nm process, which means they can be very aggressive with pricing. Just look at the 13600K, which beats the $400 7700X. How much would a 65 W 7700 have to cost to compete with Intel? $300? $250? Would they even make any profit doing that?


----------

