AleksandarKthe new model leads by about 10% and 17% in single-core and multi-core tests, respectively.

ThomasKIntel is adopting AMD's old strategy of increasing core count and clock speeds to remain competitive. Performance increase looks slim.

phanbueyIn geekbench --which is not a great benchmark. According to GB my i5 is as fast as a 5950x (it's not).

The increase in cache is going to make a difference in the real world and especially in games.

ThomasKIt's not a great benchmark, but it is the one that has been posted repeatedly, so far.

Also, from what I can see, the main gains Intel is having, is by increasing core-count (which multi-core heavy workloads will benefit from - i.e. Cinebench, etc.), increased cache (which mainly games benefit from) and frequency.

The architectural IPC improvement is probably slim or non-existent, plus there's no die-shrink. I wonder what kind of a cooler is it going to take to cool the 13900K, since the 12900KS is a power hog and very difficult to cool properly without elaborate and costly solutions.

phanbueyWell even with 14nm the difference between the refined process and the OG 14nm one was huge, so if this is a 10nm++++ situation, then maybe -- also they seem to be hitting 5.8-6ghz clocks on P core boost so I think power wise, counter-intuitively, it will be no worse than the 12900k, if not a bit better.

Plus what I notice about these chips is for everyday tasks they're amazing on power:
This is after 1 day of work, gaming, and running random benchies on a 12600K @ 5.2Ghz 1.25v


Yeah it will light up and pull 180W at full tilt on Cinebench or prime, but IRL it's ridiculously cool and efficient.

Also 12900k has a large efficiency curve to work with all core load - it loses about 2% between 240W and 190W, there's potential for them to make the 13700/13900 very efficient chips.

HervonIf Geekbench 5 scores are confirmed, it would mean a 50 % ST / 90% MT from my still performing 9900KS. Might be a good reason to upgrade and give the old one to the son. Won't make a move before AMD performances are known though!

BatailleuseExcept that if heating is the same as 12900k, then you can expect your cpu to never perform as advertised because it will overheat without a BEEFY cooling solution.

in performance mode even with an NHD15 it will overheat and throttle, 240/280mm rad aren't enough, so are several 360 that... so unless you want to run a pretty much mandatory 360/420, or be in throttle... yeah sure go intel.

even the beefiest AMD CPU does not overheat like intel CPU. it's getting silly

fancuckerHonestly very promising. The IPC improvements already make those presented by AMD for Zen 4 obsolete. Plus it doesn't suffer from the notorious framerate inconsistency issues that AMD has, doesn't require fiddling with AGESA versions for stability, and is architecturally the way forward in terms of consumer value. Its looking bleak for AMD.

TiggerRead the two posts above your nonsense, you might learn something, but I doubt it as it's the usual crap about ADL over heating.

I'm guessing you are another AMD user that has never had hands on with ADL.

TiggerMy 12700k is the same, great, runs cool for everyday use, but sucks it and runs hot running R23 or prime, both of which i have run once, so mean nothing to me. Problem is, that is all the AMD crowd can focus on. Not the fact they run great and cool for gaming or everyday tasks, while not using much power or getting very hot.

Dirt ChipProbably my next CPU, minus the K.
i5-2400 to i7-13700 will see a nice bump

usinameSo you say that the normal way to use Alder Lake is for light tasks and no serious load that will melt your socket. Why you get 12700k instead 12600k? The difference in the fps is 1%, when you get a high end processor you do it to use it, not to talk nonsense about how it was a very cool and efficient when you can't even load it because you are using 30-40% of its potential

usinameSo you say that the normal way to use Alder Lake is for light tasks and no serious load that will melt your socket. Why you get 12700k instead 12600k? The difference in the fps is 1%, when you get a high end processor you do it to use it, not to talk nonsense about how it was a very cool and efficient when you can't even load it because you are using 30-40% of its potential

usinameSo you say that the normal way to use Alder Lake is for light tasks and no serious load that will melt your socket. Why you get 12700k instead 12600k? The difference in the fps is 1%, when you get a high end processor you do it to use it, not to talk nonsense about how it was a very cool and efficient when you can't even load it because you are using 30-40% of its potential

Musselsbut instead he focuses on that one situation of "If you use an old GPU with this CPU, it runs cold!"

MusselsI've tried that discussion with Tigger and got nowhere

Why_MeTigger was given that cpu as in it didn't cost him anything.

TiggerWhy get any high end CPU then?

Do you think i sit there running R23 or prime all day. i did not say the normal way to use it, i said if you use it for normal tasks, there is a difference. What really heavy tasks are going to push any CPU like prime or R23 do?

usinamethis CPU is made for?