Sunday, October 24th 2021
Intel Core i5-12600K 47% Faster Than Ryzen 5 5600X in Leaked CPU-Z Benchmark
The Intel Core i5-12600K is set to feature 6 high-performance cores and 4 high-efficiency cores running at base speeds of 3.7 GHz and 2.8 GHz respectively. These cores can boost to 4.9 GHz and 3.6 GHz with Turbo Max Boost 3.0 however we don't expect much more speed can be extracted out of them using overclocking so default performance with sufficient cooling should be close to max. We have recently seen some CPU-Z test scores for the processor from prominent leakers which show the chip scoring 746 and 7058 points in the single-threaded and multi-threaded tests when running stock on Windows 11. The processor was also tested with an unknown overclock on Windows 10 where it scored 79X and 72XX points respectively.
These scores are extremely competitive with them easily beating the Ryzen 5 5600X by 19.5% and 46.7% in single-threaded and multi-threaded tests. We still don't know where Intel will position the Core i5-12600K in the market so any judgment on the value of these processors will need to wait until release. While we don't currently know the expected MSRP for the Core i5-12600K we have seen pricing for the Core i7-12700K and Core i9-12900K at 469.99 USD and 669.99 USD respectively. Intel is expected to announce these Alder Lake desktop processors during an event on October 27th with general availability expected November 4th.
Sources:
@9550pro, @TUM_APISAK
These scores are extremely competitive with them easily beating the Ryzen 5 5600X by 19.5% and 46.7% in single-threaded and multi-threaded tests. We still don't know where Intel will position the Core i5-12600K in the market so any judgment on the value of these processors will need to wait until release. While we don't currently know the expected MSRP for the Core i5-12600K we have seen pricing for the Core i7-12700K and Core i9-12900K at 469.99 USD and 669.99 USD respectively. Intel is expected to announce these Alder Lake desktop processors during an event on October 27th with general availability expected November 4th.
90 Comments on Intel Core i5-12600K 47% Faster Than Ryzen 5 5600X in Leaked CPU-Z Benchmark
Clearly you can compare new to old, this thread lives.
I am happy to let the review and markets decide which to buy but my point was, 50% extra performance with those big core's and four extra, it's not enough.
IMHO.
5600X has the advantage over the 11600K since you don't need to fork out for a Z590 chipset to use RAM of a decent speed. So it's either cheaper or faster depending on whether you buy a Z590 board.
Both the 5600X and 11600K are being largely ignored by the consumer market though, because the 10400F and 11500F offer enough performance and vastly better performance/$ even when using a locked B560 chipset and 2933MHz DDR4. If anything, AMD's refusal to sell a vanilla R55 5600 is hurting them because the vanilla R5 3600 was their best selling CPU last generation thanks to its strong performance and affordable selection of motherboards.
If Alder Lake is good and the leaked performance is valid across more benchmarks and real-world scenarios, the real decider will be what price Intel charge for it, followed by availabiliy and what price that ends up being at retail for a paying customer. i5-12600K may well beat 5600X but if the premium pushes it into the price territory of a B550 board and 5800X or even 5900X, it's going to fare poorly. We will simply have to wait and see how the dust settles after launch and after reviews.
It's interesting to note, the #1 selling CPU on Amazon is the 5800X followed by 5950X. Neither of these are low end. However, the #1 selling PC is a 11600K @$1500, #2 is an AIO with a 3050U and that is the only AMD CPU in the top 10 selling OEM / prebuilt desktop list - the entire rig costs less than a 5900X. #4, #6, and #7 are all 10400's. At the moment you don't see another AMD until #15 and that's another AIO 3150U.
But AMD seems to dominate in the DIY space. Looking at Microcenter I see the same thing for individual chips as at Amazon, Intel has a few chips in the top 10 but AMD always seems to have #1/#2.
It'll be interesting to see if the DIY rankings change with AL.
MSI MAG B560M BAZOOKA $139.99
www.msi.com/Motherboard/MAG-B560M-BAZOOKA
DDR4 MEMORY: 5066(OC)/ 5000(OC)/ 4800(OC)/ 4600(OC)/ 4533(OC)/ 4400(OC)/ 4300(OC)/ 4266(OC)/ 4200(OC)/ 4133(OC)/ 4000(OC)/ 3866(OC)/ 3733(OC)/ 3600(OC)/ 3466(OC)/ 3400(OC)/ 3333(OC)/ 3300(OC)/ 3200(OC)/ 3000(OC)/ 2933(JEDEC)/ 2666(JEDEC)/ 2400(JEDEC)/ 2133(JEDEC) MHz
www.newegg.com/gigabyte-b560m-aorus-pro/p/N82E16813145332
GIGABYTE AORUS B560M $139.99
www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/B560M-AORUS-ELITE-rev-10#kf
DDR4 MEMORY: DDR4 5333(O.C.)/ DDR4 5133(O.C.)/DDR4 5000(O.C.)/4933(O.C.)/4800(O.C.)/ 4700(O.C.)/ 4600(O.C.)/ 4500(O.C.)/ 4400(O.C.)/ 4300(O.C.)/4266(O.C.) / 4133(O.C.) / 4000(O.C.) / 3866(O.C.) / 3800(O.C.) / 3733(O.C.) / 3666(O.C.) / 3600(O.C.) / 3466(O.C.) / 3400(O.C.) / 3333(O.C.) / 3300(O.C.) / 3200 / 3000 / 2933 / 2800 / 2666 / 2400 / 2133 MHz memory modules
Not sure what you linked the board temperature chart for though.... ?
Either way, you can drop a 5600X into almost any B450/A520 board starting from about $60 which is $30-40 less than the cheapest B560 boards, and almost perfectly cancels out the price difference between an 11600K and 5600X. I guess if you need PCIe 4.0 storage, 11600K+B560 is cheaper than 5600X+B550 but if you need PCIe 4.0 storage you shouldn't be looking at 6-core CPUs in the first place.
Either way, I'm not here to argue minutae as that's getting off-topic: Read the reviews and buy whatever makes sense for you doing whatever you want to do.
As a gamer, a stock 5600X in a cheap board is better than even an overclocked 11600K on Z590.
As a non-gamer, it's a wash with minor advantage going to the OC'd 11600K on Z590 vs a stock 5600X.
www.techpowerup.com/review/intel-core-i5-11600k/24.html
You leave a tiny bit of performance on the table but both Rocket Lake and Zen3 are very easy to thermally manage if you don't OC either (and that includes disabling PBO on Ryzen). The normal stock "boost" algorithms are pretty damn decent whether you use blue team or red team.
Those three points are PB2 disabled, PBO disabled (so "stock" PB2 operation), and PBO defaults. Sure, you can tune PBO to have lower power use but even regular PB is good enough to get you like 95% of the performance you're going to realistically get in normal workloads, and it doesn't require an expensive motherboard, expensive cooling, or an understanding of how to successfully tweak PBO. No matter how much you tune PBO you're unlikely to go very much faster than the default PB2 boost on any single thread and you might get an all-core best-case of 10% more performance for only 50% more power (instead of 100% more power that default PBO will get you on a high-end board)
I akshually use custom PBO settings to underclock my 3600XT - it's in a restrictive case and must run inaudibly so I let it boost but only up to 100W as I want to keep temperatures in check and the CPU fan spinning slowly. 100W PPT translates to something like an effective 75W TDP.
Tuned PBO is absolutely the way to go - just did it to my 3700xt (I never checked and the x370 board its on did get PBO2 support) and now its doing 4.0 all core, 4.3 single and under 60c from a measly 120mm air cooler