Intel Core i9-13900K

[R0H1T]

Ιm not an apologist, the results in MT are underwhelming. In gaming ofc it literally dumbs on everything out there.

About the wattage, I don't care what mobos do, I care about Intel specs. You can have it pull 900 watts for all I care, doesn't really matter

And I can show you dozens of benches where Intel chips don't enforce PL1/2 strictly, like AMD does with their PPT. And this from a company which patched non Z OCing loopholes a year after mobos were released, you think everyone's a fool here?

Roughly 10% (wrt 7950x) is what now

Yes you do seem to have a love/hate relationship with facts, like you hate facts!

 

[TheinsanegamerN]

but for someone like me who has a 1600x no matter what I choose it's a huge upgrade. It's not always about the people that want / can afford to upgrade every gen.

in your case none of the new stuff makes sense when the 5800x3d exists.

 

[AdmiralThrawn]

Looks like intel takes the crown again, Now lets see AMDs card.

 

[Ayhamb99]

Yikes that power consumption is too much, I do not understand why AMD and Intel think using brute force to overtake in performance while suffering high temperatures and power usage is a good idea . I'm now curious to see how the 13700k will perform and hope it's not as inefficient as this monstrosity.

 

[ModEl4]

Around 2% slower in gaming and 10% slower in MT of what i was expecting at stock, but still good, (power limits removed mode is undesirable for probably the most 13900K users i would imagine) but regarding MT it's nowhere near the +40% at 251W vs 12900K that Intel claimed.

 

[Chaitanya]

Just remembered Intel is rumoured to launch HEDT CPU this time around and these desktop class dont inspire confidence in that platform neither does it regarding their upcoming glued together Server CPUs.

 

[JustBenching]

but regarding MT it's nowhere near the +40% at 251W vs 12900K that Intel claimed.

Ιt is - if you check other reviews, eg. guru 3d. At this point im not sure what's going on and who to trust, but guru3d has it at 38k cbr23 stock.

 

[Dirt Chip]

A glory example of "Pyrrhic victory".
I hope that after tuning that ~300W all-core-load will be closer to 200W with -5% pref and -20c degrees. Then I'm fine.

 

[Solid State Brain]

Ιt is - if you check other reviews, eg. guru 3d. At this point im not sure what's going on and who to trust, but guru3d has it at 38k cbr23 stock.

In this regard, Computerbase.de mentions (Google Translation):

Core i9-13900K, i7-13700K & i5-13600K: Gaming-Könige im Test: Leistungsaufnahme und Effizienz

Intel Raptor Lake im Test: Leistungsaufnahme und Effizienz / Leistungsaufnahme in Anwendungen ab Werk / Der Verbrauch steigt

www-computerbase-de.translate.goog

 

[JustBenching]

Actually lot's of reviews have the 13900k at 38k CBR23 at stock 250w. Something is off again with techpowerup...

In this regard, Computerbase.de mentions (Google Translation):

Core i9-13900K, i7-13700K & i5-13600K: Gaming-Könige im Test: Leistungsaufnahme und Effizienz

Intel Raptor Lake im Test: Leistungsaufnahme und Effizienz / Leistungsaufnahme in Anwendungen ab Werk / Der Verbrauch steigt

www-computerbase-de.translate.goog

View attachment 266312

So it's more than 50% faster at similar wattage. So I was right all along, right
@usiname @R0H1T

 

[oxrufiioxo]

117 celsius on load? holy shit. i didn't even know that was possible.

117 is the new 60 bruh.

 

[Arco]

When will we get 7nm ++++++++++++++++

Also why intel? This is stupid.

 

[ModEl4]

Ιt is - if you check other reviews, eg. guru 3d. At this point im not sure what's going on and who to trust, but guru3d has it at 38k cbr23 stock.

I will check and reply, it seems odd, also computerbase according to @Solid State Brain

 

[Dirt Chip]

When will we get 7nm ++++++++++++++++

Also why intel? This is stupid.

As long as it can keep up, and outperform AMD`s 5nm, Why not?

 

[P4-630]

Where is the review of the i7 13700K?

 

[Deleted member 185088]

Seems both high-end Zen4 and 13th are a no buy, one with stupid high entry price, the other dead platform with no cooler capable to handle them.
For gaming probably the 5800X3D is still the best especially at high resolutions.
One correction, 590$ is not the MSRP, that's Intel's customers (buying 1000+).

 

[spnidel]

but for someone like me who has a 1600x no matter what I choose it's a huge upgrade. It's not always about the people that want / can afford to upgrade every gen.

like another user said, if you upgrade to a 5800x3d you'll get nearly the same performance, but you won't have to buy a new mobo (provided there's a bios that supports it) + ram, so it'll be far cheaper

 

[JustBenching]

I will check and reply, it seems odd, also computerbase according to @Solid State Brain

Techpowerup has a history of poor results with intel CPUs. Happened with the 12900k as well, their power limited numbers were as much as 70% slower compared to the actual score it should be getting

 

[Arco]

 

[spnidel]

Fastest cpu overall, much faster in games and can be had for barely more than 7900x on a (potentially, if you so choose) much cheaper platform to boot! What's not to like, except of course, if you're a hardcore red team fanboy, then there will always be a pea under the mattress...

you sure you're not dicktracy's alt account? I wouldn't call 10% higher perf in games to be "much faster" lol
I swear the wording you use is almost completely identical to that shill, with goalposts being moved every time
speaking of shills... how much are you paid per post? do you do it for free?

 

[ModEl4]

Ιt is - if you check other reviews, eg. guru 3d. At this point im not sure what's going on and who to trust, but guru3d has it at 38k cbr23 stock.

I had a glance but must have missed it, does guru3d says anywhere explicitly that CBr23 was running at 251W PL2?
But i saw the below in the last page:

It has to be stated that today you'll see very different reviews on performance throughout a lot of media. See, the motherboard manufacturers get to decide how the CPU is configured concerning PL1/PL2 states (the maximum allowed energy consumption during a set timeframe, and these values will differ everywhere. We also noticed that when you run a benchmark, often the score is never 100% the same.

We tested on a Z790 motherboard that allows the multi-core configuration to be set at reference specification, and we did that. So you're seeing as close to reference performance as possible

 

[Dirt Chip]

View attachment 266316

It's funny cus it`s an old AMD FX CPU

 

[Fleurious]

Wow, those temps are something else. Performance is too good to call it a modern Netburst but literally… hot damn.

 

[Arco]

It's funny cus it`s an old AMD FX CPU

Man with Michigan's weather doing things I'm going to be happy to have a very strong space heater.

 

[R0H1T]

Actually lot's of reviews have the 13900k at 38k CBR23 at stock 250w. Something is off again with techpowerup...


So it's more than 50% faster at similar wattage. So I was right all along, right
@usiname @R0H1T

No you weren't, those are power limits not actual power consumption! Besides your math is wrong ~
(96/71)x100 or (111/81)x100 or (126/93)x100

Might wanna get a scientific calculator for the results.