Raptor Lake Leaks + Intel 4 developments

[Ayahuasca]

Intel is never going to really give you upgradeability on the same platform. So if that's a major factor in your decision then you're stuck with AMD.

It's there with z690 of course but it's a pointless upgrade for many unless they're going from say a low-end 12 series to a high-end 13 series.

 

[Deleted member 258511]

Intel is never going to really give you upgradeability on the same platform. So if that's a major factor in your decision then you're stuck with AMD.

It's there with z690 of course but it's a pointless upgrade for many unless they're going from say a low-end 12 series to a high-end 13 series.

It’s the same with AMD’s 5 series and 7 series though. Pointless upgrade.

I think especially when a new high end GPU comes out, people want to pair it with the best on offer at that time. They don’t want to wait months just incase the next 3d CPU is a bit faster. If you are on a 9900k for example going to 13 gen is a decent upgrade with a 4090. There are no guarantees that the next CPU’s from either Intel or AMD are going to change things massively.

 

[House]

My primary use is gaming I ain't in any rush to upgrade would waiting for zen4 3d be wise ? Also will get another 2 upgrades on that platform and hoping b650e , ddr5 prices drop or go raptor lake but will be no more upgrade on that platform

Based on your sig, i wouldnt even consider a CPU upgrade unless it was a work thing.
My old rule was every other gen for GPU and every 4 for CPU, with the way the world went over the last few years I am now going from a 6700k to a 13700k and a 1080 to a 4090.
I would have done it during lockdown but held off and gamed on a series X i was lucky enough to have since launch.

All these petty arguments about fractions of a % on each individual games benchmarks are meaningless to me, if going to be seeing huge gains across the board. I spent my money where i figured it was best, and yes jumped the gun on the Raptorlake before reviews but that was 90% down to the fact i could get a good Z690 board for a much cheaper price.

In a years time will there be something better probably, could be in 6 months or less if RDNA3 turns out to be a amazing but I'm happy with what ive got coming in the post.

 

[uscool]

Based on your sig, i wouldnt even consider a CPU upgrade unless it was a work thing.
My old rule was every other gen for GPU and every 4 for CPU, with the way the world went over the last few years I am now going from a 6700k to a 13700k and a 1080 to a 4090.
I would have done it during lockdown but held off and gamed on a series X i was lucky enough to have since launch.

All these petty arguments about fractions of a % on each individual games benchmarks are meaningless to me, if going to be seeing huge gains across the board. I spent my money where i figured it was best, and yes jumped the gun on the Raptorlake before reviews but that was 90% down to the fact i could get a good Z690 board for a much cheaper price.

In a years time will there be something better probably, could be in 6 months or less if RDNA3 turns out to be a amazing but I'm happy with what ive got coming in the post.

Just get the upgrade itch after few years but I know it's not worth it for me when FPS on most stuff I play is 100fps+ at 1440p and won't notice unless I look at the frame counter so ain't getting any less experience my use case

Its just that time when we get new CPU and GPU releases together and the itch starts

 

[Dave2150]

Intel is never going to really give you upgradeability on the same platform. So if that's a major factor in your decision then you're stuck with AMD.

It's there with z690 of course but it's a pointless upgrade for many unless they're going from say a low-end 12 series to a high-end 13 series.

I'm removing the 12900k from my Z690 Hero that's it's been in for a year, and will insert a 13900k. That counts as "upgradeability" to me

 

[Mike 702]

I'm removing the 12900k from my Z690 Hero that's it's been in for a year, and will insert a 13900k. That counts as "upgradeability" to me

Have you noticed much difference between the two?

 

[LePhuronn]

Calling E cores a temporary crutch by Intel and saying they're not good enough to do 16 full cores is fairly nonsensical considering Apple and ARM also are fans of that kind of design. Are they incompetent too and can't do full cores? Suddenly only AMD in the CPU space is good enough?

No, Intel are not good enough to do 16 full cores on desktop. Yes, the hybrid design is a crutch. No, there's nothing "sudden" about AMD's technical superiority over Intel.

Funny how you bring up big.LITTLE but fail to see how big.LITTLE operates in the real world 100% supports the argument that Intel's hybrid design is a crutch; every benefit big.LITTLE brings to ARM literally does not exist on Alder/Raptor Lake.

 

[Dave2150]

Have you noticed much difference between the two?

Will let you know in a few days

 

[Nutty667]

Why can they not do a desktop chip with 12 or 16 P-cores, given they release Xeon chips with upto 40 cores ?

 

[Armageus]

Why can they not do a desktop chip with 12 or 16 P-cores, given they release Xeon chips with upto 40 cores ?

Because they are both TDP and die space limited.

40 Core Xeons cost too much (in terms of manufacturing such a large monolithic die), and are only clocked at 2.3Ghz (with 3.4Ghz turbo) in order to keep TDP at something manageable (270W!).

 

[malachi]

Why can they not do a desktop chip with 12 or 16 P-cores, given they release Xeon chips with upto 40 cores ?

Cooling and Im sure Xeon chips have lower base clock speeds compared to their desktop counter parts.

 

[humbug]

That's AMD's tdp, which is different to power consumption - that's not a power limit, you already know that. Techpowerup tested it, and in the same workload the 7950x consumed DOUBLE of what the 5950x does.

https://tpucdn.com/review/amd-ryzen-9-7950x/images/power-multithread.png

And its still less than the 12900K.

 

[cliffy]

Will let you know in a few days

You not plugging it in today?

 

[cliffy]

Ιntels pl is an absolute limit. The 12900k has it at 240, the 13900k at 250. The cpus cant draw more than that at stock settings

An absolute Limit you say? Why are GN reporting in their review that under an all core load it draws 300W?

 

[Journey]

Looks like very mixed feedback really, for the 13900K at least, horrible on power and thermals to quote HUB.

 

[uscool]

Efficiency is a secondary or maybe 3rd concern

Gotta get to a point where can't just keep throwing more power at it

 

[Deleted member 258511]

Looks like very mixed feedback really, for the 13900K at least, horrible on power and thermals to quote HUB.

It also has positives. Intel is the clear winner and has been since 12th gen. It will change when the next 3d chip comes out, then again later in the year when Intel release the next.

 

[Ayahuasca]

Well, the 13900k is definitely the fastest gaming CPU overall. A pretty crazy uptick when paired with a 4090.

 

[Journey]

Crazy to see just how much more efficient the 7950x is vs the 13900K when doing full-core work loads.

 

[RavenXXX2]

offff, 40% more power v 7950x and slower in the benchmark.