*Official Benchmark Thread* - Post it here or it didn't happen :D

[Mr. Fox]

1 hour ago, electrosoft said:

Nice take on cheaper vs more expensive 4090s:

 

 

Really good video. The normalization of results is an uncanny and extremely undesirable circumstance that we find ourselves in. 4090 is the only good new generation product, and paying extra for something better generally only applies to optics. There could be a variation in PCB design and extra components attached to the PCB, but there is no real benefit in terms of performance. If you plan to put a block on it, then the cooler effectiveness and aesthetic qualities swiftly become totally irrelevant and an absolute waste of money. Cross-flashing firmware makes differences in power limits meaninglessness.

 

That leaves seller return policies, OEM warranty fulfillment policies and practices, customer service disposition and accessibility, shipping cost and price as what actually matters. Forget about paying more to get more. You probably won't get what you expect or deserve for the extra money.

 

The one thing they all have in common is that all are a poor value. Only the degree to which they are overpriced varies.

[tps3443]

6.1P/4.8E/5.1R@1.315V
 

 

[electrosoft]

1 hour ago, Mr. Fox said:

Really good video. The normalization of results is an uncanny and extremely undesirable circumstance that we find ourselves in. 4090 is the only good new generation product, and paying extra for something better generally only applies to optics. There could be a variation in PCB design and extra components attached to the PCB, but there is no real benefit in terms of performance. If you plan to put a block on it, then the cooler effectiveness and aesthetic qualities swiftly become totally irrelevant and an absolute waste of money. Cross-flashing firmware makes differences in power limits meaninglessness.

 

That leaves seller return policies, OEM warranty fulfillment policies and practices, customer service disposition and accessibility, shipping cost and price as what actually matters. Forget about paying more to get more. You probably won't get what you expect or deserve for the extra money.

 

The one thing they all have in common is that all are a poor value. Only the degree to which they are overpriced varies.

 

Yep, unless something changes drastically next go around with the 5000 series (zero desire for the TI at this point seeing as my 4090 is being choked by my 12900k atm), I will be grabbing the cheapest model I can find and hope to slap a discount code on it and call it a wrap.

 

I love my Suprim. It delivers everything I could want and is a top sample silicon for the GPU and above average for the mem and no coil whine and great temps and destroyed my 3090ti but if I could go back I would have kept the 4090 Trio I had ordered from BB and pocketed the ~$400 difference when all was said and done (10% discount, 5% best buy rewards, etc...). It could be a bad clocker and perform 1-5% less but for ~$400 in my pocket I'll be ok. 🙂

 

 

 

 

[tps3443]

@Mr. Fox

 

I’m starting to question 13900KS chips my self. I’d say buy one, and it’ll probably be good a good chip! 
 

This one is really great, but there are still better chips than this than this one out there in the wild. 
 

I may grab one retail random 13900KS my self just to see. 

[electrosoft]

I'm on the hunt potentially for a 12900k/12900ks with a monstrously low V/F 4.3ghz point to start potentially binning for the NH55 laptop adventures. If you happen to see one out in the wild let me know. Has to be better than 0.989v which I have one atm.

 

 

[Etern4l]

8 hours ago, Mr. Fox said:

On the consumer side there's no legit competition for Intel. (...) AMD brings nothing special or good to the table as far as I'm concerned

 

Leaving Nvidia aside, this is surely a biased statement. AMD is a viable alternative. In general they offer three clear advantages over Intel:

1. Reasonably uniform cores (no baby cores) 

2. AVX512

3. Larger cache

 

To be clear, Intel CPUs have advantages of their own.

 

8 hours ago, Mr. Fox said:

The flaws we see with the 13900K are little more than annoying compared to the alternative option.

 

From your point of view that might be the case, but we live in a microbubble here. 99.99% of PC builds don't have gigantic external water cooling setups that might just mask off a lot of the flaws. Additionally, most users probably wouldn't want to mess about with contact frames, never mind things like delidding in order to achieve adequate stock performance.

Pretty much every review and forum is full of statements confirming the chip overheats. I believe Intel are guilty of false advertising here too. Check this out:

 

https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/230496/intel-core-i913900k-processor-36m-cache-up-to-5-80-ghz.html

 

Processor Base Power125 W

 

Haha, running minesweeper perhaps lol

 

Maximum Turbo Power253 W

 

Another joke. 13900K would probably top 350W in CB23 on default volatages. My specimen was breaching 335W on stock ratios with -55mV dynamic UV, back when it still functioned at that level.

 

Now, you hastened to add "compared to the alternative option", but really let's not resort to a strawman AMD argument. I would expect them to deliver a well engineered product, that works to spec (looking at the ark entry, clearly it doesn't!) for years without any unreasonable cooling requirements ("delidding, custom loop and chiller required" lol) on stock settings. Sure, there should be enough OC potential for people who have extreme cooling setups to get more performance, but the chip should not require any of that on stock settings. 

 

 

8 hours ago, Mr. Fox said:

I can honestly say that every new Intel CPU I have owned has been better than the generation before it.

 

Not to generalise, but my now (not initially) problematic 13900K is indeed still performing better than 12900KS, which a bit of a lame excuse really. All I am really providing here is constructive feedback for them (for their refresh and MTL, where applicable):

 

1. Make the socket/IHS larger and more resistant to bending to improve cooling 

2. Solve the IHS/die contact such that no delidding is required unless someone wants to go direct die

3. Implement a robust ILM/mounting mechanism, to eliminate the need for any aftermarket upgrades in this area

4. Make the die/package larger to improve cooling (sounds like that's going to happen in MTL)

5. Improve fab process to reduce the currently idiotically high variance in chip quality

 

I hope we can all agree those are sensible requests. 

No more nonsense marketing gimmicks to try and show you are better than AMD, no more funding for Linus to try and mansplain to the entire YT how difficult it is for Intel to manufacture a properly functioning IHS (jk, the funding for that came from contact frame and 3rd party IHS manufacturers), just get it done.

 

BTW on the point 5. above, hilarious latest video from Linus where he is showing a 13900K score 37K in CB23 with EK direct die cooling and something like 36K with a custom loop and stock ratios. ROTFL, that must have been funded by Intel to set the expectations low. The guy is really losing credibility in my view. As posted earlier, I got 38K (on Linux!) with 51/42 ratios and heavy undervolt at 200W. Stock performance of a properly functioning 13900K on Windows 11 is around 40-41k.

 

 

 

[cylix]

Here we go again 😁

 

[tps3443]

@Etern4l

 

The 13900K scoring 40-41K is with overclocking and exceeding the stock power limits. 

[Etern4l]

1 hour ago, tps3443 said:

@Etern4l

 

The 13900K scoring 40-41K is with overclocking and exceeding the stock power limits. 

 

Ha, mine did low 40k on just stock ratios, I just didn't realize the undervolt had such an effect. 41k was with 45 on the e-Cores (and long term unstable UV, actually it might have been closer to -80 or -100mV).

What do you even mean by "stock power limits"? The CPU has no power limits. 

 

Edit: notebookcheck corroborates what you said: https://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Core-i9-13900K-Processor-Benchmarks-and-Specs.666495.0.html

 

Median 38200. I guess maybe my chip wasn't bad to begin with, and clearly UV helps. I don't know what the score on default voltages was I think I UVed straight away. 

 

Expecting great things from the delid then, the kit already shipped.

[Ashtrix]

2 hours ago, Etern4l said:

 

Leaving Nvidia aside, this is surely a biased statement. AMD is a viable alternative. In general they offer three clear advantages over Intel:

1. Reasonably uniform cores (no baby cores) 

2. AVX512

3. Larger cache

 

To be clear, Intel CPUs have advantages of their own.

 

 

4th Socket advantage too ... which is big. That is not a small one.

 

12th to 13th -> Intel added L2 Cache and increased clocks AND power and E cores to match Ryzen. And that's the end of the line. In gaming it's really not much of a big deal with 12th to 13th since you are still using 8P only on both platforms. RPL Refresh  which will be probably just cache and DLVR with optimization to clock rate at best, I doubt they are going to put more effort as they are bleeding cash flat out and lost more than 2Billion USD on AXG alone causing them to fire Raja to cut costs.

 

Zen 4 -> X3D only gaming advantage which is not that much BUT  just a fraction of power easy to cool even with  basic coolers then you have -> Zen 5 on same socket same board on a TSMC 3N node jump which will have a brand new design as Zen 4 is just higher clocked optimized Zen 3 variant in contrast to Intel, the 14th gen Arrow / Meteor Lake requires a new mobo entirely ($700 at-least if you want high quality one with 2 DIMM). And then you have Zen 5X3D. A Zen 5X3D will demolish any 13th gen processor without a doubt.

 

One more thing is AMD Zen 4 processors have high Base Clocks. Intel needs to ramp up many times vs AMD's Zen 4 as base frequency is higher, 7950X is 4.5 GHz and 13900K is 3GHz, that is 1500MHz higher speed on ALL 16Cores of 7950X vs 8P cores of 13900K this adds up with the high power utilization and heat density of Intel 7 based processors vs TSMC 5N Temp based scaling of Ryzen Zen 4 with much more better efficiency.

[electrosoft]

41 minutes ago, Etern4l said:

 

Ha, mine did low 40k on just stock ratios, I just didn't realize the undervolt had such an effect. 41k was with 45 on the e-Cores (and long term unstable UV, actually it might have been closer to -80 or -100mV).

What do you even mean by "stock power limits"? The CPU has no power limits. 

 

Edit: notebookcheck corroborates what you said: https://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Core-i9-13900K-Processor-Benchmarks-and-Specs.666495.0.html

 

Median 38200. I guess maybe my chip wasn't bad to begin with, and clearly UV helps. I don't know what the score on default voltages was I think I UVed straight away. 

 

Expecting great things from the delid then, the kit already shipped.

 

Just about every board I tested with 12900k chips fed them way too much voltage for stock performance especially MSI. The same was said for the 11900k too. I suspect it is also the same for 13900k. Once properly dialed in, the voltage requirements dropped for every single one of my chips along with package power and temps. There were such extremes as being able to shave 90-100w off the CPUs or more and have them perform just as well and sit there and churn through P95 even.

 

Most Intel motherboards have options for enforcing Intel spec'd limits. If you go in there and set it as such either with an auto selection or manually, it WILL conform to 125w or 253w. Your performance will suffer of course 🙂 but it is there. I know Asus has a clear option to select to remove all limits if you wish.

 

But therein lies the problem. Joe Consumer shouldn't have to poke and prod in the BIOS or desktop even with XTU or similar to tame their CPU. They shouldn't have to worry about silicon quality, delidding or figure out compounds or check pairing pressure and other BS we rather enjoy on these forums dialing in our CPUs.

 

AMD is not innocent either as De8auer showed, a delid and BIOS adjustments could bring down that 95c ceiling real quick to the 70s on the 7000 series and shave off a lot of that noise. They lost their initial momentum with absurdly priced CPUs and motherboards and quickly had to offer bonus memory, and  "sale prices" (that became permanent).7950X3D is a sloppy mess for Joe Consumer in many instances and you already have some tech tubers lamenting the issues and problems in their setups and testing basically saying wait for the 7800X3D.

 

But when all is said and done, AMD is most definitely a worthy competitor vs Intel on all fronts: Enterprise, Desktop and Mobile. I loathe to think of if they didn't keep Intel on their toes and we would be being fed pitiful incremental upgrades stretched out as long as possible at as high of price points as possible......like Nvidia is doing since AMD is zero threat realistically this time around and Nvidia's market share has remained at 80%+. (boo) Then again, overall Intel still retains ~70% of the x86 market so it isn't like they aren't dominant but AMD is much closer on their heels than Nvidia.

 

I feel like Intel is scrambling and bringing all they can to the table to stay competitive. Biggest surprise for me? AMD's new mobile chips. Kind of makes up for the disappointment of the 7900xtx. If Zen5 is anything like it is to be rumored, it will be Comet vs Zen3 all over again which is bad news for Intel.

 

I'm waiting for the 7800X3D for a potential buildout depending on WoW and FO76 data. Beauty of this is Zen5 will slot right in. 7900XTX sat at 100% with my 12900k 5.3/5.2 all core (while performing on the level of my 3080....*sigh*) so hopefully X3D can help even that out. 5800X3D was a monster for WoW and only a fully tuned and optimized 12900k could beat it and not by much.

 

Can you tell I had high hopes for AMD and their desktop GPUs this time around? 😒

 

I agree we are sitting in a bubble. I've alluded to that numerous times over the years from laptop expectations to CPUs, GPUs and more. 99% of users just want to flip a switch and for their systems to work as presented, period. When they encounter an issue or problem they don't know what to do and either call customer support or turn to a friend or family member that would most likely be at home in this thread. 🙂

 

1 hour ago, cylix said:

Here we go again 😁

 

 

Ampere again.....3080ti's only so far. Nothing to see here. I'm sure if these cards had run New World before they would have went KABOOM already (tongue in cheek). 🙂

 

 

 

[Raiderman]

4 hours ago, tps3443 said:

6.1P/4.8E/5.1R@1.315V
 

 

Cinebench is a weak test of stability. I found this out the other day when running Indigo Benchmark. Cinebench used to tax the cpu to the max, but it no longer does, at least not on my AMD chip. It doesnt even make it sweat compared to Indigo. So either Cinebench is not optimized to run correctly on AMD, or its just a BS benchmark now.

 

[Etern4l]

1 hour ago, Ashtrix said:

 

4th Socket advantage too ... which is big. That is not a small one.

 

Tell me about it bro. My kingdom for a proper socket lol! Yes, the contact frame helps, but it's not without expected serious pitfalls (requires careful calibration by repasting, checking fit, etc. until optimum).

 

1 hour ago, Ashtrix said:

One more thing is AMD Zen 4 processors have high Base Clocks.

 

Interesting point. I don't know why, but my undervolted 13900K periodically downclocks to... 2.2GHz under *particularly heavy* load, then bounces back to 51/41 I'm currently running....

 

 

1 hour ago, electrosoft said:

Most Intel motherboards have options for enforcing Intel spec'd limits. If you go in there and set it as such either with an auto selection or manually, it WILL conform to 125w or 253w. Your performance will suffer of course 🙂 but it is there. I know Asus has a clear option to select to remove all limits if you wish.

 

Ah, now I remember - the way this works on MSI boards is that on entry to BIOS after CMOS reset you are presented with a pictorial question about your cooler type. If you select AIO/water (the picture shows a 280 AIO...), it sets power limits to 4096W on the 13900K, which is optimistic to dangerous. MSI should have made it clear which settings exceed Intel's specs. TBH I wasn't aware of that nominal power limit until today...

 

This also raises the question: when reviewers bench, do they do so with power locked to 253W? Probably not, and at those higher powers all bets are off w.r.t. reliability as far as Intel is concerned. I don't recall seeing "Massive 253W of power inside!" on the box either lol. Nice, a self-propelling false advertising machine.

 

1 hour ago, electrosoft said:

But therein lies the problem. Joe Consumer shouldn't have to poke and prod in the BIOS or desktop even with XTU or similar to tame their CPU. They shouldn't have to worry about silicon quality, delidding or figure out compounds or check pairing pressure and other BS we rather enjoy on these forums dialing in our CPUs.

 

100%. Reliable stock performance should not require any of that. What's infuriating is that it boils down to probably the simplest aspects of CPU manufacturing. It's like spending 2h writing a beautiful homework essay, and the spilling cola on it right before handing in or something - seems like a silly schoolboy mistake, although possibly has something to do with old production lines they couldn't upgrade because of other priorities. Just guessing. As always, take great care of your core business first.

 

1 hour ago, Raiderman said:

Cinebench is a weak test of stability. I found this out the other day when running Indigo Benchmark. Cinebench used to tax the cpu to the max, but it no longer does, at least not on my AMD chip. It doesnt even make it sweat compared to Indigo. So either Cinebench is not optimized to run correctly on AMD, or its just a BS benchmark now.

 

I'm glad you have found Indigo useful. Less of a killer on the Intel side (and it's kind of short), but cross-platform and supports multi-GPU setups.

 

BTW if CB23 runs on AMD without breaking a sweat, that just means that AMD is very efficient at handling CB23 load (and yes, probably CB23 is not super-optimised for AMD, if it were it might run even faster). Your AMD also does great with Indigo (although with greater strain).

 

I am not aware of a single great tool that would reliably test stability for me. I believe that neither CB23 not Indigo are particularly taxing on the memory and its controller. 

 

However, when it comes to pure RAM testing Google GSAT comes close. They use it to test their servers:

 

https://www.overclock.net/threads/gsat-google-stressful-application-test-on-a-tiny-bootable-linux-iso.1718166/

 

 

[ryan]

Lol. <mumbles in 11k

[Papusan]

5 hours ago, tps3443 said:

@Mr. Fox

 

I’m starting to question 13900KS chips my self. I’d say buy one, and it’ll probably be good a good chip! 
 

This one is really great, but there are still better chips than this than this one out there in the wild. 
 

I may grab one retail random 13900KS my self just to see. 

Intel have probably started bin chips for the Raptor refresh🙂 

7 hours ago, Mr. Fox said:

Cross-flashing firmware makes differences in power limits meaninglessness.

Yep, as long you don't get the new silicon refresh from all AIB partners and not only from Nviida. Cross-flashing is a goner with the new chips revision. 

 

[Etern4l]

3 hours ago, Papusan said:

Intel have probably started bin chips for the Raptor refresh🙂 

 

One would hope they would offer some material design upgrades rather than bin/OC more out of the box and call it a day.

[Papusan]

11 minutes ago, Etern4l said:

 

One would hope they would some material design upgrades rather than bin/OC more out of the box and call it a day.

Thats for the Zen5 competitor next year😎

 

For now... Expect Intel have fused of back the Digital Linear Voltage Regulator (DLVR) to reduce power consumption by up to 25%. This to try squize out a bit more multi threaded perfomance. They have to show some gain over the X3D chips from AMD. So same power consumption but higher all core boost.

[Etern4l]

31 minutes ago, Papusan said:

Thats for the Zen5 competitor next year😎

 

For now... Expect Intel have fused of the Digital Linear Voltage Regulator (DLVR) to reduce power consumption by up to 25%.

 

Which is already in Raptor Lake but disabled. Great. This might be along the lines of additional AI features being physically present on some Sapphire Rapids chips but disabled by Intel, and requiring a subscription or activation <facepalm>  Was that another one of Raja's brilliant business ideas perchance?

 

Keep it up Intel, and one of these days even @Mr. Fox might throw in the towel, and emerge from Fort Fox, proudly carrying an "AMD" banner lol

 

To conclude: sadly, tech is richly saturated in (not full of, fortunately) scum whichever way you turn.

[Papusan]

1 minute ago, Etern4l said:

 

Which is already in Raptor Lake but disabled. Great. Was that another one of Raja's brilliant business ideas perchance? 

For what I remember they are fused off for today's chips. Intel know AMD come with X3D chips this spring and they had to offer a competitor. Barely good enough to compete in gaming but meant to be more powerful in everything else. The god news... You can still use your old MB.

[Etern4l]

7 minutes ago, Papusan said:

For what I remember they are fused off for today's chips. Intel know AMD come with X3D chips this spring and they had to offer a competitor. Barely good enough to compete in gaming but meant to be more powerful in everything else. The god news... You can still use your old MB.

 

Well, they could have just enabled it from the start. The overwhelming performance delta would mean nobody would buy AMD and as a consequence, their main competitor would suffer losses, ergo Intel would make more money off folks who otherwise went with AMD. Intel management team does comes across like a bunch of shifty tools in this story TBH.

 

BTW if I can run CB23 at 200W and get 38K, what benefit will I see from the DLVR feature? Is it more than just an undervolting trick?

[Papusan]

6 minutes ago, Etern4l said:

 

Well, they could have just enabled it from the start. The overwhelming performance delta would mean nobody would buy AMD and as a consequence, their main competitor would suffer losses, and in turn Intel would make more money off folks who otherwise went with AMD. Intel management team does seem like a bunch of shifty tools TBH.

Its stupid not have something so called "new" to compete with. They do it this ways to try keep up profits instead for offering huge discounts when they see AMD sell loads of X3D chips.

 

And we all know Intel and.....

 

Equal as..... See the blue box

 

[Etern4l]

16 minutes ago, Papusan said:

Its stupid not have something so called new to compete with. They do it this ways to try keep up profits instead for offering huge discounts when they see AMD sell loads of X3D chips.

 

And we all know Intel and.....

 

Well, not really if AMD would just be catching up, plus Intel would increase 13th gen unit sales, and they would have probably been able to charge more for the overwhelming performance, just as NVidia does with the 4090... They would seriously put AMD on back foot, and still actually have one more shot around Zen 5 release (provided there would be anything to actually offer lol). Think about it bro :)

 

Anyway, I look forward to seeing if DVLR is not just a gimmick which does UV for me (which I am reasonably good at by now, by necessity lol, so probably wouldn't be too interested in that feature alone). That said, my fine 13900K will probably soon die a horrible death during a delid procedure, and if not just fail later in the year, as I was running it at over 253W for quite a while :)

[Papusan]

17 minutes ago, Etern4l said:

 

Well, not really if AMD would be just catching up, plus they would keep all the money, and they would have probably been able to charge more for the overwhelming performance, just as NVdia does with the 4090... Sleep on it bro 🙂

 

Anyway, I look foward to seeing if DVLR not just a gimmick which does UV for me (which I am reasonably good at by now, by necessity lol, so wouldn't be that interested in this feature alone). 

What we will see this summer/fall... AMD will have to reduce MSRP on all their HW. AMD wasn't able to deliver what nvidia did with 4090 to keep Intel down from the Cpu performance crown. A gaming chips is just what it is in the name. Nothing more. Remember when AMD offered their first 16 core Ryzen mainstream chips. They keept the ugly MSRP sky high for a very long time. Now, not so much. That train has gone.  Nvidia do the same with their 4090 as AMD did with their 3950X. No competition so just let us sell it at awful high price. Only real competition can change greed to less greed. 

 

Intel need launch a cheaper Raptor refresh chips who offer slighly more all core perfomance than coming 7800X3D. With good 8 P-cores performance for gaming.

[Etern4l]

16 minutes ago, Papusan said:

That train has gone.

 

Well, let's hope Intel is not gone. Certainly the stock market doesn't think much of their prospects (as opposed to AMDs).

Seems to me their loyal customer base, often going back decades, is their greatest asset in the current testing conditons. I wonder if "progressive business ideas" such as disabled features, activation fees, and seriously compromised quality to shave a few bucks off a $700 CPU etc. constitute the best strategy for them to retain those customers.

[tps3443]

3 hours ago, Raiderman said:

Cinebench is a weak test of stability. I found this out the other day when running Indigo Benchmark. Cinebench used to tax the cpu to the max, but it no longer does, at least not on my AMD chip. It doesnt even make it sweat compared to Indigo. So either Cinebench is not optimized to run correctly on AMD, or its just a BS benchmark now.

 

Glad I’m not stability testing then. 😎 Just running a test for merely comparison between chips is all, nothing more nothing less.