Intel Core i5-12600K 47% Faster Than Ryzen 5 5600X in Leaked CPU-Z Benchmark

[windwhirl]

Insane.. amd will need to have the whole like 15k wafers 7nm production to them selfs im order to compete with intel in terms of scale

We don't know yet what the yields are on their Intel 7 fabrication process. Though being a different fab, some supply issues might be mitigated, starting with having the whole fab for themselves.

I don't recall if we ever knew what share of TSMC's 7nm process is allocated to AMD (probably a very substantial one, and I'd personally guess around 50% of the entire 7nm capacity at the very least), but we do know AMD splits their allocation between their CPUs, GPUs and the SoCs for the Xbox and the PS5, so yeah, they have a lot of product to push out and not enough allocation or 7nm fabs.

 

[cst1992]

REQUIRES windows 11

You're kidding me. What?!

 

[windwhirl]

You're kidding me. What?!

Yes. Proper utilization of the big and small cores requires the new scheduler that is shipping with Windows 11. I don't think it's available on Windows 10, and I'm not sure if it will be.

 

[RandallFlagg]

We don't know yet what the yields are on their Intel 7 fabrication process. Though being a different fab, some supply issues might be mitigated, starting with having the whole fab for themselves.

I don't recall if we ever knew what share of TSMC's 7nm process is allocated to AMD (probably a very substantial one, and I'd personally guess around 50% of the entire 7nm capacity at the very least), but we do know AMD splits their allocation between their CPUs, GPUs and the SoCs for the Xbox and the PS5, so yeah, they have a lot of product to push out and not enough allocation or 7nm fabs.

Part of the issue measuring these things is the big disparity in the die sizes of their products. The Zen 3 chiplet (4 cores) is 81mm2, so if we say the average 'chip' is two chiplets then it's 162mm2 per shipping CPU.

By comparison, Navi 21 (they reportedly shipped around 300K of these) is 521mm2. The PS5 APU is 308mm2 and Xbox X is 360mm2. In other words, for every Xbox/PS5 they made they could have made at least two Zen 3. And for every Navi 21 (300K of them) they could have made about 6 Zen 3 chips.

They shipped about 7 million console chips in Q4 2020, so in theory they could have shipped 2x that in Zen 3 + the 1M they did ship, which would have been about 15M Zen 3 if they had not had to supply the console market. On the Navi side, they shipped ~300K but they are 6x larger, so another 2M Zen 3 could have been made. Total is 17M potential - this would be a minimum number though, because these larger dies are going to have lower yield (bigger chance of a chip killing defect with a die 6x larger). Then there's Renoir (zen 2) that they made about 1M of as well. So now we are at 18M+. Also I don't have numbers for TR and such.

But my point really is, desktop Zen 3 only had a token shipment in Q4 2020. IMO it would have been more honest to either delay Zen 3, or delay Navi 21. And yes Intel did these kinds of antics back in the Gen 5 days, they got ripped up for it and haven't done it since.

 

[GreiverBlade]

and another "XXX beat XXX from previous gen, WOOHOO!" this is getting more and more worthless ...

aka: stating the obvious is ... obvious... who knew...

boring.

 

[Richards]

We don't know yet what the yields are on their Intel 7 fabrication process. Though being a different fab, some supply issues might be mitigated, starting with having the whole fab for themselves.

I don't recall if we ever knew what share of TSMC's 7nm process is allocated to AMD (probably a very substantial one, and I'd personally guess around 50% of the entire 7nm capacity at the very least), but we do know AMD splits their allocation between their CPUs, GPUs and the SoCs for the Xbox and the PS5, so yeah, they have a lot of product to push out and not enough allocation or 7nm fabs.

They would need to buy up the whole process node like apple does with 5nm... in order to scale to 100 million cpu's a year.. because intel ships 400 million

 

[Tomgang]

So a 10 core/16 thread cpu beat a older 6/12 thread cpu. It better do, else it's rather disappointing.

But if 12600K comes by to bully my 5600X. Then my 5950X will teach it a lesson or to not to bully the weaker.

But I am mostly interested in how 12 vs 12 threads stand. Specially at the same clock frequency.

 

[Why_Me]

and another "XXX beat XXX from previous gen, WOOHOO!" this is getting more and more worthless ...

aka: stating the obvious is ... obvious... who knew...

boring.

What line of AMD cpu's should they have compared them with?

 

[Condelio]

And what might the power draw and thermals be, I wonder? Intel, man...always inflating the PR to vomit levels.

in my very limited and humble home testings of intel and ryzen chips in my own small itx cases with air cooling, i´ve had better results cooling intel i5s & i7s than ryzen 5000, lower temps and noise from intel builds and less agressive fan curves, where in amd opening chrome many times leads to the fans ramping up like crazy for a few seconds, totally distracting imo

 

[AnarchoPrimitiv]

These numbers aren't just faster, they absolutely demolish the 5600x, pal (which was the first AMD chip that matched the at the time already 3 years old 8700k and I heard no complaining that it took AMD that long - talk about double standards!)

Double standards? Intel's R&D budget is 6.5x larger than AMD's, and Intel's annual revenue is 8x greater than AMD's...Intel SHOULD be winning, and it makes it all that more amazing that AMD has been able to do so well considering the completely unlevel playing field between the two

 

[Mussels]

Intel Core i5 K was always and will always be under 300$ & non-K i5 XX400 under 200$

How to spot a young kid in one sentence
Never, ever assume price ranges will stay static.

Look at graphics cards.
i5 'always was, always will be' Dual core, no hyperthreading...

in my very limited and humble home testings of intel and ryzen chips in my own small itx cases with air cooling, i´ve had better results cooling intel i5s & i7s than ryzen 5000, lower temps and noise from intel builds and less agressive fan curves, where in amd opening chrome many times leads to the fans ramping up like crazy for a few seconds, totally distracting imo

That's because intel are easier to cool, and report lower temperatures on top of that.

You needed to adjust your fan curves

 

[Minus Infinity]

Well amazing how people get impressed by synthetic benchmarks. Look at the scores those PCI-E 4 NVME SSD's achieve, yet in the real world they barely make a difference to user experience, unmless you do large sequential transfers all day long.

I'll will be impressed when I see Alder Lake vs Zen3/3+ running intense FP64 heavy simulations, PS, Matlab, 8K video rendering, etc. I couldn't care less if it crushes Zen in 1080p, because at higher res it matters not.

I have no reservations that Alder Lake is a huge leap for Intel, but let's see at what power usage. However, for me Raptor Lake is well worth waiting for as it will bring 25% IPC uplifts over Golden cove cores alone, and hopefully on refined node will lower power usage. Zen4 also will be huge uplift and will be the biggest architectural change for AMD. Intel may well win bragging rights this year, but I couldn't care less. We need strong competition, and I wouldn't reward Intel at this stage. My next update will be replacing my 1700X in Q1 2023. Will it be Zen 4 or Raptor Lake, only time will tell.

 

[Chrispy_]

Yes. Proper utilization of the big and small cores requires the new scheduler that is shipping with Windows 11. I don't think it's available on Windows 10, and I'm not sure if it will be.

I doubt it will be backported to W10. Microsoft have typically used new hardware as an excuse to force people onto their latest OS and they have no incentive to help people avoid Windows 11.

 

[cst1992]

Yeah man, what happened to drivers?!

"I scratch your back, you scratch mine."

Disgusting.

 

[ratirt]

I doubt it will be backported to W10. Microsoft have typically used new hardware as an excuse to force people onto their latest OS and they have no incentive to help people avoid Windows 11.

I doubt there will be a backport. Win11 is something entirely different the way it will operate and use those small big cores.
I see people so excited about something that is not out. They are so sure they would bet their homes for it and for now it is just a pie in the sky. I'd suggest people to tone down their expectations a notch. Since when those benchmarks ever made sense from either Intel or AMD? It wouldn't be the first time for companies, showing the audience what they want to see and then come different results than expected and arguing and reasoning to justify the outcome by people in the forums.
For me, Intel may turn out to get a 50% improvement in both single and multi thread over previous gen. Realistically speaking, the chance for that is slim. I'd be happy if I see 25% improvement in general performance from Intel. And of course you cant neglect the new platform, new OS, new Ram etc. Which means, you introduce flaws in the equation that may turn out to be the black sheep in the herd which is more likely, than the 50% performance uplift you see in the CPU-z as a general performance improvement over next gen CPUs.

 

[Melvis]

The red boys didn't seem to mind when it was 1800x vs 7700k...

Then put a 8 core 16 thread CPU into the 7th Gen board, or even the 8th Gen board.......oh wait!

 

[GreiverBlade]

What line of AMD cpu's should they have compared them with?

aherm ... missing the point but that's okay ...

next line once they are here ... because it is obvious that Intel next gen beat amd current gen, it would really be disappointing if not ...
but once the next gen from AMD is here then we can talk, well early adopter will always early adopt, i, on the other hand, will wait and see.

Then put a 8 core 16 thread CPU into the 7th Gen board, or even the 8th Gen board.......oh wait!

actually, back at the 1800x comparison with the 7700K it was something logical, since AMD made a huge comeback with Ryzen introduction ...



as for a 5600X beating a 3yrs old 8800K ... (i know it's not from you, but that one made me laugh) ... it just meant that the R5 5600X would also beat the i5 counterpart of the "same" gen as his.
(well even a R5 3600 can give a i5 10600K/11600K a run for the money, situational, i know but still ... )

i am not specifically a "red" or "blue" fan but Intel strangely disgust me recently ... (not that AMD never did disgust me ... *cough*bulldozer*cough* ah wait no ... it's more disappointment than disgust ... although my FX6300 was not so bad at the time ) i had a fair equal share of Intel/AMD/ATI/Nvidia product over the 11 previous years.

 

[windwhirl]

Yeah man, what happened to drivers?!

"I scratch your back, you scratch mine."

Disgusting.

It's not a driver thing, it's code that must be written for Windows 10's Kernel (or backported from 11's)

 

[cst1992]

Executive?

 

[windwhirl]

Executive?

Kernel. I don't know why I wrote Executive...

 

[cst1992]

At first I thought you meant executable. If so then it'd have made those "efficiency cores" unavailable for all older applications. It may even be the case for them if run on W11.

 

[badger2k]

What's the comparison? Those were the top two from each brand available at the time

This ones a bit different, mostly because the new hybrid cores messes with comparing.

It's about comparing CPUs in the same price bracket..

the new hybrid cores messes with comparing

No they don't mess anything lol. It's still an i5 that is now objectively better and more value than the r5.

 

[RandallFlagg]

aherm ... missing the point but that's okay ...

next line once they are here ... because it is obvious that Intel next gen beat amd current gen, it would really be disappointing if not ...
but once the next gen from AMD is here then we can talk, well early adopter will always early adopt, i, on the other hand, will wait and see.


actually, back at the 1800x comparison with the 7700K it was something logical, since AMD made a huge comeback with Ryzen introduction ...



as for a 5600X beating a 3yrs old 8800K ... (i know it's not from you, but that one made me laugh) ... it just meant that the R5 5600X would also beat the i5 counterpart of the "same" gen as his.
(well even a R5 3600 can give a i5 10600K/11600K a run for the money, situational, i know but still ... )

i am not specifically a "red" or "blue" fan but Intel strangely disgust me recently ... (not that AMD never did disgust me ... *cough*bulldozer*cough* ah wait no ... it's more disappointment than disgust ... although my FX6300 was not so bad at the time ) i had a fair equal share of Intel/AMD/ATI/Nvidia product over the 11 previous years.

Ahem.. No you are a red fan.
The first problem Intel had was that Zen 2 beat them in various productivity tasks largely due to Zen 2 having more cores.
Then Zen 3 beat them in IPC so badly that even with Gen 10 and higher clocks, Intel couldn't compete and had to lower prices.
Then RKL made Intel competitive on desktop in single thread, but consumed too much power due to 14nm and didn't do anything for the problem they had with Zen 2/3 having more cores.

Alder Lake right now appears to be a clean sweep. We will see when the benchmarks come out and prices are known, but every indication is that AL will defeat comparable Zen 3 SKUs in every category (I'm sure there will be a few outliers). Intel has not been able to say that since 7/2019 when Zen 2 came out.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

The red boys didn't seem to mind when it was 1800x vs 7700k...

Were comparing to Intel's own architecture it's replacing and comparing performance.

I would say most are fine with tier v same tier evolved with more core's.

But some, me included are saying 50% is that it.
It's got four extra spare cores and each big core is a IPC king (allegedly), doesn't add up right to me.

Shit there's so many f£#@£ AL threads I got baffled What we were comparing, last point stands though.

 

[RandallFlagg]

Were comparing to Intel's own architecture it's replacing and comparing performance.

I would say most are fine with tier v same tier evolved with more core's.

But some, me included are saying 50% is that it.
It's got four extra spare cores and each big core is a IPC king (allegedly), doesn't add up right to me.

Shit there's so many f£#@£ AL threads I got baffled What we were comparing, last point stands though.

You can't legitimately do core to core comparisons between big.LITTLE and what went before. That type comparison will make it easy to come up with red herring arguments I'm sure, but in the end the only thing that matters or has ever really mattered is a combination of cost / performance / efficiency.

Ultimately the comparison will and should be based on price points. Based on what little has leaked on price and assuming it is accurate, AL should force all of the AMD Zen 3 chips down $50-$100 from current prices. If comparisons are done at MSRP as they usually do, AMD will suffer badly until they adjust their MSRPs. Regardless of which brand you prefer, I don't see any of that as a bad thing.