Key Slides from Intel 13th Gen "Raptor Lake" Launch Presentation Leak

[watzupken]

Based on TPU's previous E-core only benchmark, power consumption of 8 e-core full loading is around 65W

Now

They added 8 more e cores to the 13900k (and runs at higher MAX frequency) , just 12W added to the MTP ?

How ?

We will know if it is really just a 12W increase when the product gets tested. Nowadays, I don't really bother about the TDP values they provide. I do recall that one of the things Intel did with Raptor Lake was to lower the E-core clockspeed. This may contribute to some power savings. I also feel that the chip may not be running at maximum potential as it is likely being held back by the power limit.

 

[AnarchoPrimitiv]

Does anyone need more US;3.2x2 20Gbps ports? Should just skip to USB4, 20Gbps is like a forgetten child at this point,, sitting next to SATAExpress at the bus station.

That 13600k will be real disruptive to the mid-range segment. This is where intel will hurt AMD the most. If it matches gaming performance of the 8 core 7700X and beats MT, it's gonna be massively popular. Imo AMD should have bumped core count of Ryzen 5 to 8 cores (7600X) and Ryzen 7 to 10 cores (7700X) to better position them vs Raptor Lake. The pricing of the 7600X will probably drop at day 0 after Intel's launch.

There are whispers that AMD will use the Zen4c cores in Bergamo (the 128 core Eypc) to do something like this, so they'd take a Zen4 Chiplet with 8 cores and a Zen4c chiplet with 16 cores and put them in the same 7950x package, so you'd have a 24 core/48 thread AM5 chip.

 

[ratirt]

I tried disabling ecores yesterday on spiderman. Minimum fps went from 120 with ecores on to 103 with ecores off. Nough said I think

That is weird indeed

That 13600k will be real disruptive to the mid-range segment. This is where intel will hurt AMD the most. If it matches gaming performance of the 8 core 7700X and beats MT, it's gonna be massively popular. Imo AMD should have bumped core count of Ryzen 5 to 8 cores (7600X) and Ryzen 7 to 10 cores (7700X) to better position them vs Raptor Lake. The pricing of the 7600X will probably drop at day 0 after Intel's launch.

Why should AMD bump the core count? If the 7600x is around the 13600K's performance why does it have to have more cores? Ecores are not pcores and Intel only added these. half cores to boost MT performance to stay competitive. If AMD's 7600x is in the ball park of 13600k performance why would they add more cores?

Video games are not going to scale beyond 8 highly-performant cores. This is also why buying anything beyond an 8-core Ryzen is pointless for gaming (with any performance increase on higher-end models being marginal and attributable to the cache and clock speeds)

Really? Cause you have literally a post above you @fevgatos claiming, switching off ecores have lowered FPS in New spiderman which means Spiderman scales with more cores and that includes pcores as well.

 

[AnarchoPrimitiv]

That 13600k will be real disruptive to the mid-range segment. This is where intel will hurt AMD the most. If it matches gaming performance of the 8 core 7700X and beats MT, it's gonna be massively popular. Imo AMD should have bumped core count of Ryzen 5 to 8 cores (7600X) and Ryzen 7 to 10 cores (7700X) to better position them vs Raptor Lake. The pricing of the 7600X will probably drop at day 0 after Intel's launch.

If the 7700x can game as fast as it claims, I'm not sure you'll be 100% correct, plus from what we've seen here, I think AM5 is definitely the stronger platform, and longevity should in AMD's favor, no question. All that said, I'm assuming consumers make rational choices when that couldn't be anything further from the truth....they'll probably just end up buying from whichever company they've created a parasocial bond with previously and defend the decision after the fact with rational arguments they never used to arrive at that decision in the first place. Haha.

 

[JustBenching]

That is weird indeed

Why should AMD bump the core count? If the 7600x is around the 13600K's performance why does it have to have more cores? Ecores are not pcores and Intel only added these. half cores to boost MT performance to stay competitive. If AMD's 7600x is in the ball park of 13600k performance why would they add more cores?

Really? Cause you have literally a post above you @fevgatos claiming, switching off ecores have lowered FPS in New spiderman which means Spiderman scales with more cores and that includes pcores as well.

Im pretty certain the 7600x will be hitting very high cpu utilization on all ps5 ports. My 12900k with HT off hits 85%+ in spidey

Thats with 16 cores....

 

[konga]

Really? Cause you have literally a post above you @fevgatos claiming, switching off ecores have lowered FPS in New spiderman which means Spiderman scales with more cores and that includes pcores as well.

Yes really. Fevgatos only mentioned minimum FPS, not average FPS, and Alder Lake is prone to weird scheduling issues when you mess with e-cores. The kinds of issues that can result in lower minimums. Meanwhile, the 5950X is only ~8% faster than the 5800X in Spider-Man according to Hardware Unboxed's testing, so I think it's safe to assume that the performance drop discussed here wasn't simply due to fewer cores but, as I said, bad scheduling. Unless more cores are only beneficial to Intel and not AMD for some reason.

 

[Leshy]

Video games

depends on optimalization.. but i would state, that past 6 cores it doesnt scale .. maybe like 1% (6vs8c)

 

[ratirt]

Yes really. Fevgatos only mentioned minimum FPS, not average FPS, and Alder Lake is prone to weird scheduling issues when you mess with e-cores. The kinds of issues that can result in lower minimums. Meanwhile, the 5950X is only ~8% faster than the 5800X in Spider-Man according to Hardware Unboxed's testing, so I think it's safe to assume that the performance drop discussed here wasn't simply due to fewer cores but, as I said, bad scheduling. Unless more cores are only beneficial to Intel and not AMD for some reason.

Could be bad scheduling but that has to be checked. I hope HWUB will check that phenomenon and give more insight.
The fact of the matter is, 5950x is still faster by 8% and normally these two 5900x and 5950x would have had the same performance. 8% is quite significant here.
Maybe this Spiderman requires some optimization. That's also plausible.

 

[JustBenching]

Yes really. Fevgatos only mentioned minimum FPS, not average FPS, and Alder Lake is prone to weird scheduling issues when you mess with e-cores. The kinds of issues that can result in lower minimums. Meanwhile, the 5950X is only ~8% faster than the 5800X in Spider-Man according to Hardware Unboxed's testing, so I think it's safe to assume that the performance drop discussed here wasn't simply due to fewer cores but, as I said, bad scheduling. Unless more cores are only beneficial to Intel and not AMD for some reason.

Average are also way higher. You dont see any performance increase between zen 3 cause they are both bandwidth starved with ddr4, alderlake isnt with ddr5.

 

[Leshy]

Really? Cause you have literally a post above you @fevgatos claiming, switching off ecores have lowered FPS in New spiderman which means Spiderman scales with more cores and that includes pcores as well.

LOL its internet everyone can claim what wants without providing facts

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

lol. why i have to read this stupid comment all the time ? for what kind of workload do you need more P cores?

One you clearly don't use, so his point is STILL as valid as yours.
If you're just gaming and surfing and are in a thread about the latest performance CPU from Intel.

Your likely wasting your time and money IMHO since a 3/5 year old mainstream PC with at least 4/8 core's can still do 100% of what 98% of the public want.

 

[watzupken]

Im pretty certain the 7600x will be hitting very high cpu utilization on all ps5 ports. My 12900k with HT off hits 85%+ in spidey

Thats with 16 cores....

I don't know if there's been any changes to the thread director in Windows 11, but ideally, games only utilizes the P-cores as I last recall. I don't believe Spider Man game will require that much CPU processing power when you consider the original version was designed for the PS4 with the 8 core Jaguar SOC. They may have remastered it for PS5 and then for PC, but it should not drastically change the fact that this should be fairly light on the CPU.

 

[Leshy]

One you clearly don't use, so his point is STILL as valid as yours.
If you're just gaming and surfing and are in a thread about the latest performance CPU from Intel.

Your likely wasting your time and money IMHO since a 3/5 year old mainstream PC with at least 4/8 core's can still do 100% of what 98% of the public want.

nope .. his point is not valid .. not at all he wants more P cores for more FPS, as i stated before. it doesnt scale for gaming .. so there is no point of adding more P cores. For MT task are E cores ideal.

 

[watzupken]

That is weird indeed

Why should AMD bump the core count? If the 7600x is around the 13600K's performance why does it have to have more cores? Ecores are not pcores and Intel only added these. half cores to boost MT performance to stay competitive. If AMD's 7600x is in the ball park of 13600k performance why would they add more cores?

Really? Cause you have literally a post above you @fevgatos claiming, switching off ecores have lowered FPS in New spiderman which means Spiderman scales with more cores and that includes pcores as well.

I think there are articles out there that document performance regressions with the E-cores disabled. These tests were done to see if disabling the E-cores will leave more cache for the P-cores and therefore, improve performance. Having said that, the other reason which I can think of is that the E-cores are running the background tasks, while the P-cores for games. When you disabled the E-cores, the P-cores have to pick up the slack. So it is now managing both the game and the background tasks. Performance hit is possible.

 

[Dimitriman]

That is weird indeed

Why should AMD bump the core count? If the 7600x is around the 13600K's performance why does it have to have more cores? Ecores are not pcores and Intel only added these. half cores to boost MT performance to stay competitive. If AMD's 7600x is in the ball park of 13600k performance why would they add more cores?

Really? Cause you have literally a post above you @fevgatos claiming, switching off ecores have lowered FPS in New spiderman which means Spiderman scales with more cores and that includes pcores as well.

Well because assuming the Rpl P-core = Zen 4 in gaming perf. You are getting additional 8 threads on top of that, and if priced the same, the 7600X will look very underwhelming by comparison.

If the 7700x can game as fast as it claims, I'm not sure you'll be 100% correct, plus from what we've seen here, I think AM5 is definitely the stronger platform, and longevity should in AMD's favor, no question. All that said, I'm assuming consumers make rational choices when that couldn't be anything further from the truth....they'll probably just end up buying from whichever company they've created a parasocial bond with previously and defend the decision after the fact with rational arguments they never used to arrive at that decision in the first place. Haha.

Assuming gaming sweetspot is 8 cores, then probably the 7700X can game faster. But I also expect it to cost more and probably still not match MT performance of the 13600K. The key thing will be how Intel prices the 13600K, if they price it max $350, then it will be very well positioned vs. 7600X and 7700X. I am definitely a person who chooses with my pocket rather than my bond with either company, so I am eyeing both the 13600K and 7700X for my next ITX build.

 

[JustBenching]

I don't know if there's been any changes to the thread director in Windows 11, but ideally, games only utilizes the P-cores as I last recall. I don't believe Spider Man game will require that much CPU processing power when you consider the original version was designed for the PS4 with the 8 core Jaguar SOC. They may have remastered it for PS5 and then for PC, but it should not drastically change the fact that this should be fairly light on the CPU.

The ps4 has special hardware that does decompression, your pc doesnt. Thats why spidey needs tons of memory bandwidth and, if you have the bandwidth, then it needs cores.

 

[ratirt]

I think there are articles out there that document performance regressions with the E-cores disabled. These tests were done to see if disabling the E-cores will leave more cache for the P-cores and therefore, improve performance. Having said that, the other reason which I can think of is that the E-cores are running the background tasks, while the P-cores for games. When you disabled the E-cores, the P-cores have to pick up the slack. So it is now managing both the game and the background tasks. Performance hit is possible.

What I think @fevgatos says about the FPS drop when ecores are disabled, is that the pcores have to do the background work (whatever is being done there). Normally ecores are useless for gaming anyway. Games use only pcores for that.

Well because assuming the Rpl P-core = Zen 4 in gaming perf. You are getting additional 8 threads on top of that, and if priced the same, the 7600X will look very underwhelming by comparison.

I would rather look at the performance in general not how many threads it has because one thread is not equal to the other. Same with cores.

 

[JustBenching]

What I think @fevgatos says about the FPS drop when ecores are disabled, is that the pcores have to do the background work (whatever is being done there). Normally ecores are useless for gaming anyway. Games use only pcores for that.


I would rather look at the performance in general not how many threads it has because one thread is not equal to the other. Same with cores.

No, i think in the case of spiderman and hitman ecores do asset decompression on the fly.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

nope .. his point is not valid .. not at all he wants more P cores for more FPS, as i stated before. it doesnt scale for gaming .. so there is no point of adding more P cores. For MT task are E cores ideal.

Nope, shit being spouted, my task is not your task, and I am not responsible for educating you on others use of computers.

And still a 8-core flagship? They should put more real cores instead of doubling those Atom joke cores.

lol. why i have to read this stupid comment all the time ? for what kind of workload do you need more P cores?

He at that point had not mentioned games or FPS and you piped up who needs more.

Me, always, I am not alone and Not for game's or web surfing.

 

[AM4isGOD]

lol. why i have to read this stupid comment all the time ? for what kind of workload do you need more P cores?

It's the same dumb regurgitated comment from AMD users.

 

[thelawnet]

When does the 13400 come out? That's the biggest upgrade, the rest of this stuff is very incremental and boring.

 

[bug]

All we need now are same clocks, same configured TDPs benchmarks

 

[docnorth]

Based on TPU's previous E-core only benchmark, power consumption of 8 e-core full loading is around 65W

Now

They added 8 more e cores to the 13900k (and runs at higher MAX frequency) , just 12W added to the MTP ?

How ?

Raptor Lake is supposedly more efficient and leaked benchmarks show that Intel's claims this time might be true.

 

[Leshy]

Nope, shit being spouted, my task is not your task, and I am not responsible for educating you on others use of computers.

please educate me ..

I asked him. he did not reply.. someone mentioned gaming .. so whats ur problem ?

if u need more cores intel/amd have a platform called HEDT (high-end desktop) and they have all the cores u wish or if u need some more cores for ur mysterious task, there is other segment called server ..

i series is for users, that doesnt need more cores

It's the same dumb regurgitated comment from AMD users.

exactly .. new buzzword is "platform longevity" .. normies are just marketing repeaters

 

[bug]

Based on TPU's previous E-core only benchmark, power consumption of 8 e-core full loading is around 65W

Now

They added 8 more e cores to the 13900k (and runs at higher MAX frequency) , just 12W added to the MTP ?

How ?

This works the other way around with modern CPUs: TDP dictates frequencies, it's not a result of them anymore. Cores will use as much as they are allowed to, it's highly unlikely to max out every one of them at the same time for more than seconds. This is the main reason TDP has becoming such a complicated issue of its own.