nguyenwoohoo, adhering to Intel specs and lose up to 30% of MT perf / 10% ST perf, basically making i9 perform the same as i7

Intel should just reduce the prices of their CPU by 100usd, making i9 cost the same as current i7

azraelSo now it''s a feature to adhere to the official specs?

_Under2World_So basically the whole instability drama was just because MB manufacturers were overclocking the CPU’s on their own.

napataI think you fell for clickbait because the difference is less than 10% MT and no change in ST perf in the original article with the QS sample. Even at the 125W spec there's still no change in ST performance so I'm not sure where you're getting your 10% from. PL1=PL2=253W is still the advertised Intel spec for a 13900K.

_Under2World_So basically the whole instability drama was just because MB manufacturers were overclocking the CPU’s on their own.

nguyenYou didn't read the article, the Intel Baseline Spec is 125W PL1 and 188W PL2, not PL1=PL2=253W

"Processor Base Power" is a vague "typical" power draw value at an undisclosed Intel workload that's definitely "optimized" to return the desired 125 W value. It's interesting that the i9-12900K, i7-12700K and i5-12600K all run at the same 125 W value in this special workload despite their completely different performance characteristics. "Maximum Turbo Power" is the real limit, the maximum amount of power the processor can draw at stock settings for an indefinite duration of time.

For the i9-12900K, this is 241 W. Unlike past generations of processors that were constrained by the Tau time value to hold maximum power draw, or PL2, Alder Lake processors now run at maximum power draw indefinitely if the load demands it and as long as the processor doesn't hit the thermal limit of 105°C. This is done without inventing a new system; Intel simply tweaked the PL1 and PL2 values and set them both to 241 W, which effectively means the processor can run at 241 W all the time as long as it doesn't overheat. The "125 W" limit now only exists on paper and in marketing documents.

_Flarenah, it may be just a hype, why would anyone first ignore even the intel "Perf" spec to damage consumer CPUs and than offer the "Base" spec to care for the involved CPUs aferwards?
totally insane, right?
btw the picture is from 2021 ... but Intel let the board makers just ignore all specs ... and "tada" surprise it did hurt some CPUs

persiziThe problem with those specs are the massively high AC LL values which if have to be applied along with the other spec will kill the performance very badly.

RexterYou know, in a normal world, you would think that if a CPU is rated for 125w, then by god it should never ever use no more than that out of the box (emphasis "out of the box", no tweaking).
Guess we cant have something so simple.

Oh and another thing, think of the first time pc builder, "oh this cpu is rated at 125w, then I should get a cpu cooler rated at 150w tdp, that should do it :) ".

DavenThis is why specs need to be accurate especially if review sites like TPU know to use cooling for 250W and higher. A customer could buy a cooler based on the 125W but think they are getting TPU performance numbers.

In this case its even worse. You buy a cooler for the 250W or more but come to find out the CPU cannot stably run at those high powers in the long run even with adequate cooling.

W1zzardAll my CPU reviews have been done at Intel stock settings, for the last 15 years or so.

Each Intel review has a second full run "Power Limits Removed", which is probably what you expected the default to be

DavenWhat's particularly frustrating about this fiasco, is that Intel's main claim over the competition is the 'stability' of its platforms presumably due to the perceived higher quality engineering of its products. I'm still dumb struck that Intel is still in business but market perceptions and emotions have the tendency to keep brands alive that otherwise should be defunct.

The very fact that Intel would risk the operation of its customer's PCs in order to beat the competition in benchmarks is so not the kind of company anyone should be buying from.

UpgrayeddDefunct? Care to explain that reasoning?

DavenIntel makes more money than they should at the quality level of their products due to brand awareness alone. In a perfect world, such a company should not exist.

In other words, we should live in a world where IT buying managers pick the best tech irregardless of fear of not buying the ‘top’ brand name.