Dec 19th, 2024 18:56 EST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts

Tuesday, October 26th 2021

Intel Core i5-12600K CPU-Z Scores Show 50% Higher Multi-Threaded Results Than i5-11600K

Intel's upcoming Alder Lake-S lineup of processors is shaping up to be a rather good generational improvement. With wonders of the Intel 7 process, previously called 10 nm Enhanced SuperFin (10ESF), the processor lineup will deliver new hybrid technology, mixing new big and small cores into one package. Today, some new CPU-Z validation tests have shown up for the Intel Core i5-12600K CPU, which directly replaces the previous Core i5-11600K Rocket Lake model. With six high-performance Golden Cove and four efficient Gracemont cores, the Core i5-12600K CPU is a ten-core design with 16 threads. And compared to the 6C/12T i5-12600K CPU, the performance is much higher.

According to CPU-Z scores, the new Alder Lake processor scored 7220 and 7156 points for a multi-threaded benchmark in two tests. Compare this to the previous-generation model, which scores 4731 points, and the new chip is almost 50% faster. According to CPU-Z, the new CPU achieved this while running at a boost frequency of 4.5 GHz to 4.7 GHz.
Sources: CPU-Z Validation, TUM_APISAK, via VideoCardz
Add your own comment

58 Comments on Intel Core i5-12600K CPU-Z Scores Show 50% Higher Multi-Threaded Results Than i5-11600K

#26
RandallFlagg
Metroid125w for a 12600, I guess that all the chips that dont make into a 12900 and a 12700 then end up being a 12600. Also need to pay attention here that 125w intel is 300w real, for instance my ryzen 5900x, AMD states 195w for it and the truth is a little bit more than that, 115w at wall, all default.
What would be really cool is if people wouldn't be such obvious brand puppets. The 125W is the average over 27 seconds ok K-series CPUs. Even my 10850K if left at stock power limits will run just fine on a small 150W air cooler like a Gammix. It can spike to beyond that for a very, very short time.

You already know this so you are just trolling.
Posted on Reply
#27
Operandi
RandallFlaggCPU-Z is just confirming some of what we saw with geekbench.
Yes but what the CPU-Z benchmark itself is. I really hate synthetic benchmarks that run an aggregate different compute tasks and distill them down a single metric as those can pushed and skewed in certain direction to make a particular arch look better than another. I'm not saything thats what CPU-Z is doing as its not even meant to be a benchmark utility but without context its just a number and if people are going to loose their minds over these CPU-Z numbers it would be nice to know.
Posted on Reply
#28
RandallFlagg
OperandiYes but what the CPU-Z benchmark itself is. I really hate synthetic benchmarks that run an aggregate different compute tasks and distill them down a single metric as those can pushed and skewed in certain direction to make a particular arch look better than another. I'm not saything thats what CPU-Z is doing as its not even meant to be a benchmark utility but without context its just a number and if people are going to loose their minds over these CPU-Z numbers it would be nice to know.
Geekbench gives you the sub-scores. The link below is to one of the 12900K runs.

browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/compare/9510991?baseline=9510991
Posted on Reply
#29
Operandi
RandallFlaggGeekbench gives you the sub-scores. The link below is to one of the 12900K runs.

browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/compare/9510991?baseline=9510991
I don't care about Geekbench and am talking about what the CPU-Z benchmark is. Something about a "a 2-dimensional noise function, that could typically be used in a game to generate a procedural map." from the CPUID page. Not really sure what that is or if its still accurate last updated in 2017.
Posted on Reply
#30
RandallFlagg
OperandiI don't care about Geekbench and am talking about what the CPU-Z benchmark is. Something about a "a 2-dimensional noise function, that could typically be used in a game to generate a procedural map." from the CPUID page. Not really sure what that is or if its still accurate last updated in 2017.
CPU-Z benchmark is one of the weakest ones as a bench and you'll find plenty of ways to criticize it. Nevertheless, CPU-Z results on past CPUs have been a good indicator which implies they'll be a good indicator in the future. The results on Geekbench are an even better indicator, and you can learn a lot by looking at the sub-scores. A win on the aggregate score does not mean that a chip will perform better, or worse, on any particular task.

For example, I took at top 10% scoring 5950X and compared it to the 12900K geekbench. From that, I can tell that the 5950X is better at text compression and certain physics like n-body and rigid body physics. 5950X is losing in things like AES, pdf rendering, html5, navigation, and ray tracing.

How that will affect real-world apps right now is anyone's guess, but I'll bet that the 12900K is going to be king of the web browser benchmarks. Good chance it will win on things like Blender and Cinebench as well. Because of those physics scores, It will probably lose on physics benchmarks like in Firestrike CPU and such, and may not be a lot faster in games as well. OFC, unless you're packing a 3090 and running at 1080p, you probably won't see any difference in games anyway.

I'll also say, vs my mildly tweaked and power unlocked 10850K build, the 12900K score posted beat my best scores in every single sub-category of single and multi-thread - in a few categories it was solidly twice as fast.
Posted on Reply
#31
pexxie
Quad channel from 2 DIMMs is a nice treat. Cue the marketing. The timings are depressing though, as expected.
EDIT: oops, it’s actually fake quad. Well it’ll look great in the marketing material regardless.
Posted on Reply
#32
KarymidoN
something is really wrong with all those intel performance leaks...
Posted on Reply
#34
TheoneandonlyMrK
AleksandarKThreads are 14 vs 12, which is not a 50% increase on its own. This shows us just how much the cores have improved.

And yeah while CPU-Z does not show much, it is something to think about before our official benchmarks arrive.
6C/12T old big core's verses 6/12 new and 4 e core's,
+50%

= Less impressive than you imply.
Posted on Reply
#35
Bones
docnorthThese are not leaks anymore, the chip is everywhere now and the scalping starts tomorrow.
Fixed that for you because it's probrably what will be.

I don't care either way, as long as what I've got continues to be useful (To me) I'm not gonna worry about it.
Posted on Reply
#36
freeagent
These CPU's are going to rip. AMD has been handing it to Intel for a couple of years now.. Old Intel blood is back in the system.. we might not see it with ADL, but after ADL things are going to get intense I think. AMD came out with s754 and 939 and just destroyed Intel, but when Intel came back they made sure AMD couldn't get out for at least a decade lol.. quite the mudhole they got stomped into. I would imagine something similar again, but not as drastic or as long lasting.

To me the big question is how are they doing with their GPU's? They have some new and old blood mixed into that division.. should be interesting what they can come up with.

I'm not a fanboy of either, but I do enjoy a good fight like any other red blooded male. I look forward to purchasing a new Intel, or AMD rig when the time is right..
Posted on Reply
#37
Jism
And none of these leakers could even post a avg CPU power consumption. Its all hype. It proberly needs 240W to archieve 9% faster performance compared to a 110 ~ 140W 5800x.
Posted on Reply
#38
tabascosauz
freeagentThese CPU's are going to rip. AMD has been handing it to Intel for a couple of years now.. Old Intel blood is back in the system.. we might not see it with ADL, but after ADL things are going to get intense I think. AMD came out with s754 and 939 and just destroyed Intel, but when Intel came back they made sure AMD couldn't get out for at least a decade lol.. quite the mudhole they got stomped into. I would imagine something similar again, but not as drastic or as long lasting.

To me the big question is how are they doing with their GPU's? They have some new and old blood mixed into that division.. should be interesting what they can come up with.

I'm not a fanboy of either, but I do enjoy a good fight like any other red blooded male. I look forward to purchasing a new Intel, or AMD rig when the time is right..
I'm mostly confident Intel will deliver the product I'm thinking of.........but will MS? It's essentially entrusted all its perf improvements to Microsoft. The company that:
  • got rid of its entire testing department - WE are the testing department and are already reaping the rewards many times over
  • helped keep Bulldozer down on its luck in Win 7 (yes, not great, but it certainly had a bit more potential in it)
  • had questionable compatibility with Ryzen 1000 + Win 10 scheduler (AMD said it was just fine, but it was Ryan Shrout (lol), and half-truth damage control is not new from AMD)
  • had godawful compatibility with Ryzen 3000 until Q1 2020+ on Win 10 scheduler (yes, half of it was on AMD, but just look in HWInfo for Windows' own core hierarchy)
  • 'fixed' what ain't broke with Ryzen 5000 + Win 11, then didn't actually fix it (even after L3 and CPPC2 fixes, still benches side-by-side slower than 10, and L3 variance is still all over the map)
Aside from Ryzen 3000, closest we've got was Lakefield. No one cared so no one bothered to investigate Lakefield - just plain bad, or Win 10 scheduler strikes again? Performance was appalling, Win 10 scheduler deliberately kept the P-core out of action...........which is the exact same philosophy Intel confirms for Alder Lake, albeit with better cores...........
Posted on Reply
#39
RandallFlagg
tabascosauzAside from Ryzen 3000, closest we've got was Lakefield. No one cared so no one bothered to investigate Lakefield - just plain bad, or Win 10 scheduler strikes again? Performance was appalling, Win 10 scheduler deliberately kept the P-core out of action...........which is the exact same philosophy Intel confirms for Alder Lake, albeit with better cores...........
Yep I'm leery of MS getting it right. I bet we have some odd spotty performance here and there, situations that confuse the new scheduler. Lakefield actually did get a huge boost under Win 11 though. But it has to happen, even AMD is planning to go to big.LITTLE now.
Posted on Reply
#40
freeagent
tabascosauzI'm mostly confident Intel will deliver the product I'm thinking of.........but will MS? It's essentially entrusted all its perf improvements to Microsoft. The company that:
  • got rid of its entire testing department - WE are the testing department and are already reaping the rewards many times over
  • helped keep Bulldozer down on its luck in Win 7 (yes, not great, but it certainly had a bit more potential in it)
  • had questionable compatibility with Ryzen 1000 + Win 10 scheduler (AMD said it was just fine, but it was Ryan Shrout (lol), and half-truth damage control is not new from AMD)
  • had godawful compatibility with Ryzen 3000 until Q1 2020+ on Win 10 scheduler (yes, half of it was on AMD, but just look in HWInfo for Windows' own core hierarchy)
  • 'fixed' what ain't broke with Ryzen 5000 + Win 11, then didn't actually fix it (even after L3 and CPPC2 fixes, still benches side-by-side slower than 10, and L3 variance is still all over the map)
Aside from Ryzen 3000, closest we've got was Lakefield. No one cared so no one bothered to investigate Lakefield - just plain bad, or Win 10 scheduler strikes again? Performance was appalling, Win 10 scheduler deliberately kept the P-core out of action...........which is the exact same philosophy Intel confirms for Alder Lake, albeit with better cores...........
You bring up a lot of good points, unfortunately this is my first Ryzen experience.. and it was shortly after Conroe launched I have just stuck with Intel. But you know they are boring too because everything "just works" most of the time :D In other words I lived in a bubble. Its interesting to see how the deck has been stacked against them for a long time. I thought it was just " AMD being AMD"

I wanted some adventure, and you know what? for the most part it is just like running an Intel lol.. unfortunately not everyone is so lucky. And this whole 11 debacle is just sad. It just goes to show it doesn't matter how much money you have, or have much of the market you own.. you can still be a poor sport lol. Maybe one day I will be a Linux user.. but not today.
Posted on Reply
#42
Crackong
I thought there won't be any "Intel Leaks" on 26th
I was wrong.
They made it in the last minute.

Another day another Intel PR Leak
Posted on Reply
#43
comtek
some are mad over cpu score it seems to me
Posted on Reply
#44
xenocide
tabascosauzI'm mostly confident Intel will deliver the product I'm thinking of.........but will MS? It's essentially entrusted all its perf improvements to Microsoft. The company that:
  • got rid of its entire testing department - WE are the testing department and are already reaping the rewards many times over
  • helped keep Bulldozer down on its luck in Win 7 (yes, not great, but it certainly had a bit more potential in it)
  • had questionable compatibility with Ryzen 1000 + Win 10 scheduler (AMD said it was just fine, but it was Ryan Shrout (lol), and half-truth damage control is not new from AMD)
  • had godawful compatibility with Ryzen 3000 until Q1 2020+ on Win 10 scheduler (yes, half of it was on AMD, but just look in HWInfo for Windows' own core hierarchy)
  • 'fixed' what ain't broke with Ryzen 5000 + Win 11, then didn't actually fix it (even after L3 and CPPC2 fixes, still benches side-by-side slower than 10, and L3 variance is still all over the map)
Aside from Ryzen 3000, closest we've got was Lakefield. No one cared so no one bothered to investigate Lakefield - just plain bad, or Win 10 scheduler strikes again? Performance was appalling, Win 10 scheduler deliberately kept the P-core out of action...........which is the exact same philosophy Intel confirms for Alder Lake, albeit with better cores...........
AMD has a long history of providing poor software support for their products. I'm compelled to believe if AMD owns up to several of these, it's more likely AMD dropped the ball consistently than some bizarre scheme by Microsoft to keep them down. I'd also add, Windows 10 scheduler isn't an issue currently, since Microsoft has shifted focus to Windows 11, which has had issues with AMD CPU's, so you're kind of right there, but if I read correctly AMD acknowledged (yet again) that they were the ones developing a fix for it. What seems most likely is Microsoft reliably gives AMD a heads up on changes, AMD fails to properly prepare for them, then when the negative impact pops up they pretend to be shocked and rush out a fix they had on the back burner.
CrackongI thought there won't be any "Intel Leaks" on 26th
I was wrong.
They made it in the last minute.

Another day another Intel PR Leak
Almost like Intel products are launching in the immediate future. Crazy that we'd get more information about them after they've arrived at retailers, reviewers, and industry insiders. Must be a subversive PR campaign!
Posted on Reply
#45
tabascosauz
xenocideAMD has a long history of providing poor software support for their products. I'm compelled to believe if AMD owns up to several of these, it's more likely AMD dropped the ball consistently than some bizarre scheme by Microsoft to keep them down. I'd also add, Windows 10 scheduler isn't an issue currently, since Microsoft has shifted focus to Windows 11, which has had issues with AMD CPU's, so you're kind of right there, but if I read correctly AMD acknowledged (yet again) that they were the ones developing a fix for it. What seems most likely is Microsoft reliably gives AMD a heads up on changes, AMD fails to properly prepare for them, then when the negative impact pops up they pretend to be shocked and rush out a fix they had on the back burner.

Almost like Intel products are launching in the immediate future. Crazy that we'd get more information about them after they've arrived at retailers, reviewers, and industry insiders. Must be a subversive PR campaign!
AMD made the patch for CPPC preferred cores, packaged as part of new chipset drivers, and it works as intended. In respect to that issue, I'm inclined to believe that either Windows forgot about preferred cores (plausible since Windows maintains its own hierarchy separate from CPPC, hence its stubborn universal insistence on Core 0 for no reason), or AMD forgot to keep CPPC up with 11 (also plausible and not surprising).

MS made the L3 cache fix as part of 282, and it failed miserably (despite non-ryzen owners and outlets reporting it 'fixed'). No, AIDA is no hero (far from it the pos software it is), but compared to performance on 10, the L3 variations on 11 are ridiculous. Run-to-run I still regularly see anywhere from 100-800GB/s and up to 15ns. On 10, it's a consistent 700-800 and 10.4ns every run, back to back, dozens and dozens of runs. I dual boot 21H1 and 282, and this "fixed" L3 perf is far worse than when the APUs were bugged on L3 earlier 2021.

And so the performance regressions persist. I still haven't been able to match Win 10 results on ST perf yet, and some games bizarrely clock much lower than 10 with no visible effects.

You are right, I'm not making excuses for AMD's pathetic firmware-writing and bugfixing abilities. But the way MS conducts themselves these days (remember their neverending struggle with Print Spooler?) affects hardware performance now, and the whole Ryzen 5000 + 11 debacle (where literally it works 100% fine on 10) doesn't bode well for the future. Part of me wants to believe that Intel's close relationship with MS should be able to avoid major issues, but Intel wasn't 100% ready with microcode for the RKL launch, either. Nevertheless the stakes are high for ADL since there is no other OS to fall back on, so fingers crossed both the scheduler and Thread Director hit the ground running.
Posted on Reply
#47
Arc1t3ct
ViperXTR
WOW!! $589 for the 12900K???? This is AWESOME!!
Posted on Reply
#49
ratirt
Arc1t3ctWOW!! $589 for the 12900K???? This is AWESOME!!
Is it? It is a RCP price for a retailer not MSRP. It is not that awesome though.
Posted on Reply
#50
yeeeeman
AleksandarKThreads are 14 vs 12, which is not a 50% increase on its own. This shows us just how much the cores have improved.

And yeah while CPU-Z does not show much, it is something to think about before our official benchmarks arrive.
threads are actually 12 + 4 cause it has 4 small cores, hence 16 threads
The KingIt seems that in CPU related tests Alder Lake has no competition.

Lets see if gaming is Alder Lakes Achilles heel. I wonder if the smaller cores can be disabled
to limit gaming compatibility issues with the like's of Denuvo drm etc. That would be bad
if it needs to be disabled in order for older games to run properly.

The main reason Windows 11 was launched to get max performance from Intels new CPU +/-15% apparently.
nope, a slide with gaming has been leaked, it is quite a bit better in gaming even, vs zen 3.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Dec 19th, 2024 18:56 EST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts