[Various] Intel Core i9-13900K/13600K Reviews

[Reciever]

Quote

Thanks to an unlocked multiplier, manual overclocking is easy on the 13900K. I've reached 5.6 GHz all-core stable, the E-Cores went up to 4.4 GHz. While these numbers definitely sound impressive, they are still a lot lower than the 5.8 GHz max boost of the 13900K, and this will cost you quite a bit of performance in low-threaded workloads and games, during which the CPU will regularly boost that high. With a manual all-core OC you're losing these boosts. A manual OC can still make sense for workloads like rendering or encoding, where all cores will be fully loaded all the time. When overclocked, the 13900K is able to beat the 7950X in these scenarios, too. Still, and considering the issues with power and heat, I feel like for the vast majority of users, manual overclocking makes little sense. Processor manufacturers have become really good at eking the last bits of performance out of their processors, at default settings.

Source

 

Link to multiple Review sources Here!

[Papusan]

 

REVIEW ROUNDUP - videocardz.com - Today

 2022-10-20 13:00

Intel 13th Gen Core “Raptor Lake” Desktop CPU Review Roundup

 

Intel Core i9-13900K has been overclocked to 8812.85 MHz, beats 8-year-old frequency world record
https://videocardz.com/newz/intel-core-i9-13900k-has-been-overclocked-to-8812-85-mhz-beats-8-year-old-frequency-world-record

[Reciever]

 

[jaybee83]

meh, nothing shocking really, a bit slower in multicore vs. AMD, a bit faster in single core and games. pretty much as expected.

[Papusan]

2 hours ago, jaybee83 said:

meh, nothing shocking really, a bit slower in multicore vs. AMD, a bit faster in single core and games. pretty much as expected.

Isn't longer bars the same as faster? I expect it's the eyes that see 🙂

https://www.pcworld.com/article/1357979/intel-core-i9-13900k-review.html

 

Then we have OC headroom

 

 

Intel Core i9-13900K and Core i5-13600K Review: Raptor Lake Beats Ryzen 7000. The Raptors are out of the cage! tomshardware.com | Today

 

The Raptor Lake processors provide the highest overclocking ceilings we've ever seen at 5.6 GHz. All three chips we tested reached incredible clock speeds with little effort (ceilings in the 5.5 to 5.7 GHz range with beefy ambient cooling are said to be common — I would have pushed higher if I had known earlier). Raptor's overclockability is far more useful in the Core i7 and i5 models, as most of the headroom (and more) is already exposed in the Core i9-13900K right out of the box.

[Custom90gt]

Yawn, not much of an upgrade. 

[saturnotaku]

8 minutes ago, Custom90gt said:

Yawn, not much of an upgrade. 

 

Yep. I see no reason to change from my 5950X. Now if AMD releases a 3D Vcache version of the Ryzen 7700X, then they'll have my attention.

[Reciever]

Was interesting to see the 5800X3D best both teams but obviously only in scenarios that benefit from the cache over raw clock speeds

[Papusan]

2 hours ago, Custom90gt said:

Yawn, not much of an upgrade. 

Not everyday we see a 43% performance uplift with a yearly upgrade. A lot more than going from lets say Ryzen 9 3900X up to 3900Xt.

 

There is only so much you can gain from same node (more of the small wimpy baby E-cores and no IPC uplift). And higher clock speed for gaming because most games only benefits from 6 or 8 cores. 

 

Amds chips run at 95c and Intel's chips bottom out at 100c at full load. You can't do much more on todays tech if the manufacturers prefer milk on same old tech for new releases. It's what it is.

[Sandy Bridge]

So, similar performance to AMD but at significantly higher power consumption, and without any future upgrades on the platform.  Though the prices for the processors themselves, and at least for the time being the platform as a whole, are lower to compensate for the higher power costs and lack of future upgrades.

 

In other words, AMD is the high-end premium CPU manufacturer, and Intel is the value processor manufacturer.  The 13900K is the current-gen answer to the FX-9590, pushing clock speeds and power consumption to extreme levels to technically be similar on a raw performance level to the competition, all while being on an end-of-the-line platform.  Though Intel has set the price to a more reasonable level than AMD did with the FX-9590.

 

I'll stick with my plan to go AM5 so long as they get motherboard pricing sorted out eventually.

[Ashtrix]

After reading through Anandtech & watching GN, HBU videos.

 

It's basically neck and neck both Zen 4 and RPL. They trade blows, kinda expected. But what I did not expect was Intel catching up to AMD's MT performance by those pathetic E core formula the higher clocks provided them 90% of the boost with this revision. In the SPEC scores same thing, both duke out. And both AMD / Intel pushed to frequencies more than a brand new design. And ultimately both are fast BUT AMD is faster at lower power and it's max temp while Intel needs high power to compete vs AMD Ryzen 7000.

 

Design

 

More Cache on L2.

Gracemont E cores same as Alder Lake no change, lower base clock now also higher boost clocks and more E cores.

High Clocks for P cores, Raptor Cove 600MHz faster than Golden Cove

Better IMC for DDR5.

Z790 has lanes for more I/O replacing PCIe3.0  PCIe4.0 4 lanes BUT DMI is same as Z690 PCIe4.0x8 no change.

RPL Z790         ADL Z690

20 x 4.0            12 x 4.0
8 x 3.0              16 x 3.0

OC still alive a little vs AMD as always with Intel.

AVX512 is dead on Intel vs AVX512 monster Ryzen. Intel did laser fuse off... shame since 30% of the silicon die of P core is dead and wasted in the new Intel processors.

ST and MT there's no leader, both AMD and Intel are neck to neck.

IPC gain is basically nothing from RPL, it's just sheer clockspeeds pushing all bars in SPEC, Gaming, Prosumer etc..

 

Highlights

 

12900K is now i7 class 13700K since the latter has same P and E cores but a high clock rate but do note that RPL runs at 1.3v stock at 5.4GHz all core so you have lower room.

13900K is just a tad faster than 12900K in gaming and many, it's barely even an upgrade, just to get best CPU for socket that is all.  And ofc competing vs AMD so more choice ?

Intel Thread Director is being recommended heavily to be used with Windows 11 trash. AMD on the other hand suffers badly using Windows 11 garbage.

Intel's Pricing is competitive heavily vs Zen 4 and DDR4 option allows for cheaper builds. Although Zen 4 B650 exists still DDR5 is pricey.

Intel's IMC improved and possibly more DDR5 speeds possible AMD is limited to 6000MHz EXPO. At this point Memory itself the DDR5 is very marginal vs DDR4.

Power consumption is higher on Intel as expected, 330W+ Since 10th gen Intel is over 330W with 5.4GHz OC but now mobos default vs AMD's PPT hard limit 250W.

Z790 barely has anything, not even LGA1700 ILM bending fix revision, it's just extra PCIe lanes from chipset more I/O on same socket nothing else.

Gaming is nothing major. It's just faster and not a substantial gain. And heck a 5800X3D beats both RPL and Zen 4.

 

Conclusion

 

Intel and AMD both need high end AIO coolers, maybe DH15 can handle some of AMD Zen 4 parts but the Air Cooling is not an option for Intel, the heat density is very high on Intel since 11th gen while AMD can have a bit of tuning on temp at 95C but note it doesn't thermal throttle vs the Intel chips which are not designed like Zen4 to boost directly to 95C regardless but if approached to high temps they downclock.

 

Intel's LGA1700 Socket is dead. RPL is last, there is no CPU coming to this socket anymore and with DDR5 being brand new people are locked to a platform but silver lining is better IMC on Intel vs AMD and the DMI bandwidth is better and higher than AMD as AMD locked the X670 to PCIe4 downlink, maybe to keep costs lower on PCIe5 because Redrivers and more layers etc. My own decisions - I bought a dead end socket LGA1200 because Windows 7 and DDR4 and I hate E cores philosophy plus socket bending nonsense, avoided AM4 because the IOD was flaky, has USB issues, and the CPU cannot be tuned, weak IMC.

 

AMD's AM5 will last upto Zen 5 -> 5D as well. 2025+ basically the major aspect of a purchase from my standpoint is Intel you get a hamfisted socket (bending) and stuck with this. AMD you get a longer living socket, Zen 4D will smash all the gaming to stratosphere in 2023 with 7800X3D.  My guess is AM5 will have Zen 4, Zen 4D (Mild refresh), Zen 5 (Major refresh), Zen 5D (Mild Refresh). So buying AMD means you are buying it for a long lasting product just like AM4.

 

Look at the power chart and temps from Hardware Unboxed, 13900K is having thermal wall with high core workloads. Under 30 seconds it hits 100C on Arctic Freezer II 420mil.

 

 

 

MSI 360mil AIO cooler on MSI board this is the situatio, it has a lot of thermal wall and performance scaling.

 

 

And from TPU review, this is hitting 100C on stock and thermal throttles.

 

Quote

Overclocking the Core i9-13900K is easy, thanks to its unlocked multiplier. The biggest problem is the heat though, even at stock you'll be reaching 100°C and higher. Overclocking the 13900K means setting thermal limit to 115°C up from 100°C, and then figure out what's the highest voltage you can give the CPU without hitting throttling at 115°C, depending on your cooling solution. Switching from air to our Arctic AIO helped with controlling the heat, but it wasn't a huge difference. Our maximum all-core OC is 5.6 GHz on the P-Cores, plus 4.4 GHz on the E-Cores, 100% stable. this still isn't enough to beat the stock configuration in lighter applications, because here the CPU will boost two cores up to 5.8 GHz.

 

On Gen 5 SSD it will steal lanes from main slot, although there's no 4090 with Gen 5 lol.

 

Quote

On Raptor Lake, adding Gen 5 M.2 means stealing some PCIe lanes from the graphics card, so when installing an SSD in the M.2 Gen 5 slot of your motherboard, your graphics card will run at PCIe x8 instead of PCIe x16 (without SSD in that slot, the GPU will run at full x16). This makes little real-life difference, but it feels like Intel didn't properly budget their PCIe 5.0 lanes in the CPU, unlike AMD who offers this capability and still gives you x16 on the graphics card.

 

Guru3D

 

Quote

 

We don't compare temperature data since we'd have to apply identical cooling to all platforms over and over. Furthermore, coolers (RPM) respond differently to TDP and variables set in your motherboard BIOS. As a result, we simply do a temperature stress test. We utilize a 360mm LCS cooler (Asus Ryujin II 360), and the processor operates at 80~85C under all-core stress. This is at the maximum Wattage settings on the processor.

 

HOWEVER, read this. We can see small spikes kitting 90-100 Degrees at times. This will highly depend on your motherboard configuration as mobo manufacturers can allow the highest PL2 state available. The CPU will clock down and adapt once it overheats though. 

 

LCS for the 13900K we will is recommended. Intel has set a temperature margin running towards 100 Degrees C before throttling occurs. Nothing terrible will happen at these temps with the processor. However, the sheer fact that 360 mm LCS cooling shows spikes hitting 96 Degrees C is similar to what we recently noticed with Ryzen processors. The 13600K did not have this problem btw. 

 

 

GN ASUS board stock

 

 

Steve is only mentioning about the damn wattage. Why not tell about the damn throttling and max temp hitting fast...Also his gaming suite is really pathetic.

 

 

 

That Windows 1122H2 for all the review kits.

 

 

P.s

 

@Reciever May I suggest to change the title ? I think it would be better to have Intel 13th Gen thread And same for AMD's Ryzen 7000 Review thread to Zen 4 Thread to keep track of all things about these processors / talk and general stuff and not just reviews and maybe move them to Desktop section idk..

[Reciever]

Will do, didn't have time to get more than one source up this morning 

[Papusan]

2 hours ago, Sandy Bridge said:

In other words, AMD is the high-end premium CPU manufacturer, and Intel is the value processor manufacturer.  The 13900K is the current-gen answer to the FX-9590, pushing clock speeds and power consumption to extreme levels to technically be similar on a raw performance level to the competition, all while being on an end-of-the-line platform.  Though Intel has set the price to a more reasonable level than AMD did with the FX-9590.

All is relative and maybe not what you exppected. Below from tweaktown.com - I would say they are equal bad. But Intel would get better numbers if they was on a smaller 5nm node (they are still on 10nm+++++).

 

Final Thoughts:

The biggest takeaway is how well Intel has optimized its Intel 7 process, enough that power numbers are significantly more efficient, now using 20 watts more than 7950X at the high-end, even with more cores. These improvements landed the 13900K at the top of the chart for Performance per Watt, and when we add in gaming performance, it's top 3 for best gaming CPU for the money.

Read more: https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/10222/intel-core-i9-13900k-raptor-lake-cpu/index.html

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Intel Core i5-13600K "Raptor Lake" CPU Review tweaktown.com

 

 

Final Thoughts:
Wrapping up our testing of 13th Gen Raptor Lake, the Core i5-13600K is perhaps even more amazing than the Core i9-13900K, in the sense that this entry-level option with a $319 MSRP is more of a direct competitor to AMD's recently launched Ryzen 7 7700X than the 7600X if we are looking at performance alone.

 

As we discussed above, power efficiency is a huge factor for the 13th Gen, and the 13600K benefits by becoming the best CPU in our performance-per-watt testing, with the 13900K trailing right behind, and this carries on to our Performance vs. Price with gaming and productivity, taking the top spot in our charts.

 

Read more: https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/10229/intel-core-i5-13600k-raptor-lake-cpu/index.html

[jaybee83]

6 hours ago, Papusan said:

Isn't longer bars the same as faster? I expect it's the eyes that see 🙂

https://www.pcworld.com/article/1357979/intel-core-i9-13900k-review.html

 

Then we have OC headroom

 

 

Intel Core i9-13900K and Core i5-13600K Review: Raptor Lake Beats Ryzen 7000. The Raptors are out of the cage! tomshardware.com | Today

 

The Raptor Lake processors provide the highest overclocking ceilings we've ever seen at 5.6 GHz. All three chips we tested reached incredible clock speeds with little effort (ceilings in the 5.5 to 5.7 GHz range with beefy ambient cooling are said to be common — I would have pushed higher if I had known earlier). Raptor's overclockability is far more useful in the Core i7 and i5 models, as most of the headroom (and more) is already exposed in the Core i9-13900K right out of the box.

 

sure, but have u looked at other multi core apps aside from CB? like Blender, Corona, V-Ray, Geekbench, etc...

i expect its the eyes that take a wide look around and dont just focus on a single review and a single benchmark 😄 if you take in all the reviews the 7950X beats the 13900K in most multicore benches whereas the intel chip has its nose ahead in gaming and single core hands down. 

 

2 hours ago, Ashtrix said:

After reading through Anandtech & watching GN, HBU videos.

 

It's basically neck and neck both Zen 4 and RPL. They trade blows, kinda expected. But what I did not expect was Intel catching up to AMD's MT performance by those pathetic E core formula the higher clocks provided them 90% of the boost with this revision. In the SPEC scores same thing, both duke out. And both AMD / Intel pushed to frequencies more than a brand new design. And ultimately both are fast BUT AMD is faster at lower power and it's max temp while Intel needs high power to compete vs AMD Ryzen 7000.

 

Design

 

More Cache on L2.

Gracemont E cores same as Alder Lake no change, lower base clock now also higher boost clocks and more E cores.

High Clocks for P cores, Raptor Cove 600MHz faster than Golden Cove

Better IMC for DDR5.

Z790 has lanes for more I/O replacing PCIe3.0  PCIe4.0 4 lanes BUT DMI is same as Z690 PCIe4.0x8 no change.

RPL Z790         ADL Z690

20 x 4.0            12 x 4.0
8 x 3.0              16 x 3.0

OC still alive a little vs AMD as always with Intel.

AVX512 is dead on Intel vs AVX512 monster Ryzen. Intel did laser fuse off... shame since 30% of the silicon die of P core is dead and wasted in the new Intel processors.

ST and MT there's no leader, both AMD and Intel are neck to neck.

IPC gain is basically nothing from RPL, it's just sheer clockspeeds pushing all bars in SPEC, Gaming, Prosumer etc..

 

Highlights

 

12900K is now i7 class 13700K since the latter has same P and E cores but a high clock rate but do note that RPL runs at 1.3v stock at 5.4GHz all core so you have lower room.

13900K is just a tad faster than 12900K in gaming and many, it's barely even an upgrade, just to get best CPU for socket that is all.  And ofc competing vs AMD so more choice ?

Intel Thread Director is being recommended heavily to be used with Windows 11 trash. AMD on the other hand suffers badly using Windows 11 garbage.

Intel's Pricing is competitive heavily vs Zen 4 and DDR4 option allows for cheaper builds. Although Zen 4 B650 exists still DDR5 is pricey.

Intel's IMC improved and possibly more DDR5 speeds possible AMD is limited to 6000MHz EXPO. At this point Memory itself the DDR5 is very marginal vs DDR4.

Power consumption is higher on Intel as expected, 330W+ Since 10th gen Intel is over 330W with 5.4GHz OC but now mobos default vs AMD's PPT hard limit 250W.

Z790 barely has anything, not even LGA1700 ILM bending fix revision, it's just extra PCIe lanes from chipset more I/O on same socket nothing else.

Gaming is nothing major. It's just faster and not a substantial gain. And heck a 5800X3D beats both RPL and Zen 4.

 

Conclusion

 

Intel and AMD both need high end AIO coolers, maybe DH15 can handle some of AMD Zen 4 parts but the Air Cooling is not an option for Intel, the heat density is very high on Intel since 11th gen while AMD can have a bit of tuning on temp at 95C but note it doesn't thermal throttle vs the Intel chips which are not designed like Zen4 to boost directly to 95C regardless but if approached to high temps they downclock.

 

Intel's LGA1700 Socket is dead. RPL is last, there is no CPU coming to this socket anymore and with DDR5 being brand new people are locked to a platform but silver lining is better IMC on Intel vs AMD and the DMI bandwidth is better and higher than AMD as AMD locked the X670 to PCIe4 downlink, maybe to keep costs lower on PCIe5 because Redrivers and more layers etc. My own decisions - I bought a dead end socket LGA1200 because Windows 7 and DDR4 and I hate E cores philosophy plus socket bending nonsense, avoided AM4 because the IOD was flaky, has USB issues, and the CPU cannot be tuned, weak IMC.

 

AMD's AM5 will last upto Zen 5 -> 5D as well. 2025+ basically the major aspect of a purchase from my standpoint is Intel you get a hamfisted socket (bending) and stuck with this. AMD you get a longer living socket, Zen 4D will smash all the gaming to stratosphere in 2023 with 7800X3D.  My guess is AM5 will have Zen 4, Zen 4D (Mild refresh), Zen 5 (Major refresh), Zen 5D (Mild Refresh). So buying AMD means you are buying it for a long lasting product just like AM4.

 

Look at the power chart and temps from Hardware Unboxed, 13900K is having thermal wall with high core workloads. Under 30 seconds it hits 100C on Arctic Freezer II 420mil.

 

 

 

MSI 360mil AIO cooler on MSI board this is the situatio, it has a lot of thermal wall and performance scaling.

 

 

And from TPU review, this is hitting 100C on stock and thermal throttles.

 

 

On Gen 5 SSD it will steal lanes from main slot, although there's no 4090 with Gen 5 lol.

 

 

Guru3D

 

 

GN ASUS board stock

 

 

Steve is only mentioning about the damn wattage. Why not tell about the damn throttling and max temp hitting fast...Also his gaming suite is really pathetic.

 

 

 

That Windows 1122H2 for all the review kits.

 

 

P.s

 

@Reciever May I suggest to change the title ? I think it would be better to have Intel 13th Gen thread And same for AMD's Ryzen 7000 Review thread to Zen 4 Thread to keep track of all things about these processors / talk and general stuff and not just reviews and maybe move them to Desktop section idk..

 

brilliant summary as usual, keep it up! 🙂 

 

 

3 hours ago, Sandy Bridge said:

So, similar performance to AMD but at significantly higher power consumption, and without any future upgrades on the platform.  Though the prices for the processors themselves, and at least for the time being the platform as a whole, are lower to compensate for the higher power costs and lack of future upgrades.

 

In other words, AMD is the high-end premium CPU manufacturer, and Intel is the value processor manufacturer.  The 13900K is the current-gen answer to the FX-9590, pushing clock speeds and power consumption to extreme levels to technically be similar on a raw performance level to the competition, all while being on an end-of-the-line platform.  Though Intel has set the price to a more reasonable level than AMD did with the FX-9590.

 

I'll stick with my plan to go AM5 so long as they get motherboard pricing sorted out eventually.

 

i feel ya bud. the most important take away for me this CPU round is this: 

 

there is something for everyone! i.e. true competition and actual, real options all around.

 

you want DDR4 and keep ur ADL platform? go RPL!

you want a forward-looking platform and dont want to upgrade ur whole system every year? go Zen 4!

you prefer highest power consumption, highest clocks, baby cores, highest single core perf? Intel all the way!

you prefer good perf/power ratios, no baby cores, highest end platform on the market, best multicore perf overall? Team AMD is for you!

 

and now let the flamewars commence. ill just lean back and enjoy my system and be happy for everyone who got something theyre interested in 😄 

[Papusan]

6 hours ago, jaybee83 said:

sure, but have u looked at other multi core apps aside from CB? like Blender, Corona, V-Ray, Geekbench, etc...

i expect its the eyes that take a wide look around and dont just focus on a single review and a single benchmark 😄 if you take in all the reviews the 7950X beats the 13900K in most multicore benches whereas the intel chip has its nose ahead in gaming and single core hands down. 

Be you sure. I have looked on many reviews. And the results from Techpowerup ain't a deviation from what I've seen. But both the higher end chips is very close in performance. Regardless of benchmarks. 

 

 

And Pudget test the processors as workstation chips/content creation... https://www.pugetsystems.com/all_articles.php

Intel's 13900k just made the 7950x a TERRIBLE value....

 

[cylix]

11 hours ago, jaybee83 said:

 

sure, but have u looked at other multi core apps aside from CB? like Blender, Corona, V-Ray, Geekbench, etc...

i expect its the eyes that take a wide look around and dont just focus on a single review and a single benchmark 😄 if you take in all the reviews the 7950X beats the 13900K in most multicore benches whereas the intel chip has its nose ahead in gaming and single core hands down. 

 

 

brilliant summary as usual, keep it up! 🙂 

 

 

 

i feel ya bud. the most important take away for me this CPU round is this: 

 

there is something for everyone! i.e. true competition and actual, real options all around.

 

you want DDR4 and keep ur ADL platform? go RPL!

you want a forward-looking platform and dont want to upgrade ur whole system every year? go Zen 4!

you prefer highest power consumption, highest clocks, baby cores, highest single core perf? Intel all the way!

you prefer good perf/power ratios, no baby cores, highest end platform on the market, best multicore perf overall? Team AMD is for you!

 

and now let the flamewars commence. ill just lean back and enjoy my system and be happy for everyone who got something theyre interested in 😄 

Yep, this is it.

 

For me it was a no brainer to go with AMD this time building a new Desktop after this many years. AM5 checks every box instead of Intel this time:

 

-new platform with 3 or more years of support instead of a dead end like lga1700.

-blazing fast in multi core Programs that i need.

-blazing fast in games, i mean next year i will get one of the 3dx cpus that will be enough for at least 4 5 years of gaming with a new gpu of course.

-  better efficency and power consumation, very important with the energy crysis in EU for me.

 

[jaybee83]

10 hours ago, Papusan said:

Be you sure. I have looked on many reviews. And the results from Techpowerup ain't a deviation from what I've seen. But both the higher end chips is very close in performance. Regardless of benchmarks. 

 

 

And Pudget test the processors as workstation chips/content creation... https://www.pugetsystems.com/all_articles.php

Intel's 13900k just made the 7950x a TERRIBLE value....

 

 

exactly my point, also made by Jay: this round its SO close to one another, its difficult to make a decision. u cant just go by raw performance alone anymore, so everyone should be aware of their priorities, wants and needs befors making an informed decision 🙂 dont u love it? haha

 

5 hours ago, cylix said:

Yep, this is it.

 

For me it was a no brainer to go with AMD this time building a new Desktop after this many years. AM5 checks every box instead of Intel this time:

 

-new platform with 3 or more years of support instead of a dead end like lga1700.

-blazing fast in multi core Programs that i need.

-blazing fast in games, i mean next year i will get one of the 3dx cpus that will be enough for at least 4 5 years of gaming with a new gpu of course.

-  better efficency and power consumation, very important with the energy crysis in EU for me.

 

 

welcome to the RED side of life, brother. lets keep our small but fine Zen 4 corner alive here at NBT against the seemingly overwhelming Intel RPL front 😄 (all in good friendly competition, of course)