14th Gen "Raptor Lake Refresh"

[Bencher]

I feel like you ignored all context. The point was the 7950x3D. We don't have all the data so used performance data for the 7950x vs 13900k. Which as pointed out in the stuff it was wining it was 7-8% performance. Since the 7950x3D is within reason similar peformance to the non x3D but at a significant lower power usage then it would be the ideal out the box user case.

But that's my point exactly. The 3d isn't any better than the normal 7950x in efficiency. The only difference comes from the stock power limits. The same way, the 13900k isn't much different to any zen 4 cpu in terms of efficiency. All of the difference lies in the stock configuration. The site club386 tested both at 125w power limits, and at most the difference in efficiency was 19% in vray, and 10 to 15% in other multithreaded workloads. So best case scenario, zen 4 is 19% more efficient in heavy MT workloads than the 13900k. It's not a small difference, but it's not a leap or a gap either.

Now check what the difference is in content creation between the 2. Not only is the 13900k MUCH faster in premiere pro, photoshop, lightroom etc, it also does it while being 50% or more efficient. That difference is actually - if you think about it - bonkers. If you do this test performance normalized, the 7950x will be consuming twice the wattage of the 13900k for the same performance. For added context, the youtuber im linking was suggesting zen 3 cpus non stop for content creations, he isn't just an intel fanboy or what have you

INTEL & AMD both lied! REAL WORLD power consumption is MESSED UP

Intel & AMD have both 'lied' about their real world power consumption. Here's the Truth:Sponsored Message:Whokeys 25% discount code : TN20 Windows 10 Pro O...

www.youtube.com

 

[Dave2150]

And you just did exactly what I claimed you were going to. Posted mt workloads with unlimited power... What professional runs 10 hour renders at unlimited power dude? Nobody.

Anyways, this is a lost cause, people have abandoned reason for clickbaits, whateva.

That graph is stock, so not unlimited power.

There are multiple independent reviews that all show the 12900k, 13900k to have massive power draw in productivity benchmarks. Zen4 is much more efficient. You're completely deluded if you can't see this.

With Zen4X3D, we now also see Intel using 3 times as much power in games.

 

[LtMatt]

That graph is stock, so not unlimited power.

There are multiple independent reviews that all show the 12900k, 13900k to have massive power draw in productivity benchmarks. Zen4 is much more efficient. You're completely deluded if you can't see this.

With Zen4X3D, we now also see Intel using 3 times as much power in games.

I’m not following this, but the last part is true and incredibly impressive no matter where you personal preferences reside (Intel/AMD). Equally impressive, IMO, is that X3D does not require the fastest RAM (we’ll ignore pricing as it fluctuates) to get to the top of the overall gaming charts.

 

[Deleted member 258511]

I’m not following this, but the last part is true and incredibly impressive no matter where you personal preferences reside (Intel/AMD). Equally impressive, IMO, is that X3D does not require the fastest RAM (we’ll ignore pricing as it fluctuates) to get to the top of the overall gaming charts.

Even with the fastest it’s capable of 6000mhz the 7950x 3d is not the fastest in gaming charts. It’s faster in some games and slower in others.

 

[LtMatt]

Even with the fastest it’s capable of 6000mhz the 7950x 3d is not the fastest in gaming charts. It’s faster in some games and slower in others.

I’ve had mine running at 6200mhz and currently testing 6400Mhz without issue, so looks like 6000Mhz limit is a thing of the past tbh. 6000Mhz is still the sweet spot, However, even at 6000Mhz at this speed it is clearly the fastest when looking overall at a range of tech reviews.

 

[Perfect_Chaos]

Tired of the nonsense and flip-flopping, all of a sudden power draw matters to some, what happened to outright performance being everything no matter how much power it uses? I thought trolling was against the rules?

I went back to Intel on a 13700k which I'm putting together soon, more into video editing and I've barely gamed at all the past few years. I'll wait for the next big thing, Arrow Lake or whatever the next leap is the AMD 3D chips are decent for pure gaming, but they are hit & miss even there in performance. Intel holds strong 1% lows as they pretty much always have.

Happy to give a little money to Intel to help them out. Don't want AMD dominating and having a 1 horse race and stagnation, though to be honest i can't see stagnation happening again for quite a while now at least, if at all.

 

[Deleted member 258511]

I’ve had mine running at 6200mhz and currently testing 6400Mhz without issue, so looks like 6000Mhz limit is a thing of the past tbh. 6000Mhz is still the sweet spot, However, even at 6000Mhz at this speed it is clearly the fastest when looking overall at a range of tech reviews.

I’ve looked at a range of reviews and the main ones I’ve seen have the 13900k ahead in some games and others the 7950x 3d. It’s by no means clearly the fastest.

 

[LtMatt]

I’ve looked at a range of reviews and the main ones I’ve seen have the 13900k ahead in some games and others the 7950x 3d. It’s by no means clearly the fastest.

Which reviews have the 13900 K winning overall?

 

[Grim5]

I’ve had mine running at 6200mhz and currently testing 6400Mhz without issue, so looks like 6000Mhz limit is a thing of the past tbh. 6000Mhz is still the sweet spot, However, even at 6000Mhz at this speed it is clearly the fastest when looking overall at a range of tech reviews.

Was 6000 a limit before I thought it was always 6400. I've had my launch day 7950x stable at 6200 for ages now, haven't tried 6400 but I heard very few people can make it run at 6400

 

[Deleted member 258511]

Tired of the nonsense and flip-flopping, all of a sudden power draw matters to some, what happened to outright performance being everything no matter how much power it uses? I thought trolling was against the rules?

I went back to Intel on a 13700k which I'm putting together soon, more into video editing and I've barely gamed at all the past few years. I'll wait for the next big thing, Arrow Lake or whatever the next leap is the AMD 3D chips are decent for pure gaming, but they are hit & miss even there in performance. Intel holds strong 1% lows as they pretty much always have.

Happy to give a little money to Intel to help them out. Don't want AMD dominating and having a 1 horse race and stagnation, though to be honest i can't see stagnation happening again for quite a while now at least, if at all.

I can’t understand this either to be honest. I’ve heard a few things that people seem to go back on. What happened to price all of a sudden? “Price to performance”. That’s all forgotten about.

 

[Deleted member 258511]

Which reviews have the 13900 K winning overall?

Overall? Neither are the outright winner. That’s just fact. I’ve bought one, but it isn’t going to be the fastest compared to the 13900k in everything. Yes SOTTR it is way ahead that’s a clear win, but it’s not all one sided.

 

[Bencher]

That graph is stock, so not unlimited power.

There are multiple independent reviews that all show the 12900k, 13900k to have massive power draw in productivity benchmarks. Zen4 is much more efficient. You're completely deluded if you can't see this.

With Zen4X3D, we now also see Intel using 3 times as much power in games.

Those numbers are with unlimited power.

Efficiency is measured at iso power. Period. Everything else is just silly. Else you HAVE to admit that the 13900t is much more efficient than the 7950x. Because out of the box, it is, a LOT more efficient. So if you want to be honest and pretend you only care about out of the box efficiency, the rank goes 13900t > 13700t >12900t> 13900 > 13700> 7950x3d > 12900 > 7950x.

As you can see, almost a complete Intel domination in out of the box efficiency.

 

[LtMatt]

Overall? Neither are the outright winner. That’s just fact. I’ve bought one, but it isn’t going to be the fastest compared to the 13900k in everything. Yes SOTTR it is way ahead that’s a clear win, but it’s not all one sided.

I’m looking at tech reviews where they test multiple games and compare average performance over those games, and the X3D is faster. Perhaps we are looking at different data.

 

[Deleted member 258511]

I’m looking at tech reviews where they test multiple games and compare average performance over those games, and the X3D is faster. Perhaps we are looking at different data.

AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D CPU Review & Benchmarks: $700 Gaming Flagship

Sponsor: Lian Li O11 Dynamic EVO on Amazon - https://geni.us/ovS0F9The AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D is launching alongside the R9 7900X3D, with the R7 7800X3D launchi...

m.youtube.com

This for example. Even in Cyberpunk the 1% lows that have always been very important to mention regarding AMD CPU’s, are better on the 13900k. Some are better on one, some on the other. I don’t see Spider-Man in this either. There is no clear winner or loser.

I could cherry pick a few games that favour Intel, does that mean Intel is the fastest? No.

 

[LtMatt]

AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D CPU Review & Benchmarks: $700 Gaming Flagship

Sponsor: Lian Li O11 Dynamic EVO on Amazon - https://geni.us/ovS0F9The AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D is launching alongside the R9 7900X3D, with the R7 7800X3D launchi...

m.youtube.com

This for example. Even in Cyberpunk the 1% lows that have always been very important to mention regarding AMD CPU’s, are better on the 13900k. Some are better on one, some on the other. I don’t see Spider-Man in this either. There is no clear winner or loser.

I could cherry pick a few games that favour Intel, does that mean Intel is the fastest? No.

I’m looking at the overall averages, not a single game, with a single metric. Sites like Toms Hardware, TPU, HUB, Igors lab, Computerbase, tech radar, hardware luxe etc, the list is endless If you scan through the review thread Cat posted. The majority show the same thing, the X3D is faster in games overall. Now, you can argue they are wrong for reason X, but unless you are incapable of looking at the overall averages, then that is the only way you can claim they perform the same overall.

 

[Curlyriff]

As always say look at the games you generally play and from studios games you play come from as normally it is dependant on the game engine which one does better and pick either one to suit. However if you flitter about with dozens of different games the data shows on average AMD 7950x3D is the better chip with about a 7% aggregrate performance increase over the 13900k taking all data into account.

It also happens to get that performance whilst being more power efficient which is an added bonus. The only problem at min with all this is that Price to Performance Intel is much better even with the 13900k compared to AMD offerings and you took the £583 13900k and the £699 of the 7950x3D figures. AMD needs to drop £100 off the CPU list prices to get to a similar price to performance so wait 6 months realistically.

If you compare the MSRP and such then it actually comparietively has done well but that is acedemic so not really something that should be used beyond the basic principles of how are CPU costs flucuating at release prices.

 

[LtMatt]

As always say look at the games you generally play and from studios games you play come from as normally it is dependant on the game engine which one does better and pick either one to suit. However if you flitter about with dozens of different games the data shows on average AMD 7950x3D is the better chip with about a 7% aggregrate performance increase over the 13900k taking all data into account.

It also happens to get that performance whilst being more power efficient which is an added bonus. The only problem at min with all this is that Price to Performance Intel is much better even with the 13900k compared to AMD offerings and you took the £583 13900k and the £699 of the 7950x3D figures. AMD needs to drop £100 off the CPU list prices to get to a similar price to performance so wait 6 months realistically.

If you compare the MSRP and such then it actually comparietively has done well but that is acedemic so not really something that should be used beyond the basic principles of how are CPU costs flucuating at release prices.

Well summarised and agreed.

 

[Bencher]

As always say look at the games you generally play and from studios games you play come from as normally it is dependant on the game engine which one does better and pick either one to suit. However if you flitter about with dozens of different games the data shows on average AMD 7950x3D is the better chip with about a 7% aggregrate performance increase over the 13900k taking all data into account.

It also happens to get that performance whilst being more power efficient which is an added bonus. The only problem at min with all this is that Price to Performance Intel is much better even with the 13900k compared to AMD offerings and you took the £583 13900k and the £699 of the 7950x3D figures. AMD needs to drop £100 off the CPU list prices to get to a similar price to performance so wait 6 months realistically.

If you compare the MSRP and such then it actually comparietively has done well but that is acedemic so not really something that should be used beyond the basic principles of how are CPU costs flucuating at release prices.

Prices when you go that high are kind of meaningless though. Building either a 13900k or a 7950x 3d computer means high end gpu ram and mobo, you are probably exceeding 2k in total just for those components alone. The extra 100 for the 3d is nothing, I'd give them in a heartbeat.

 

[Curlyriff]

Prices when you go that high are kind of meaningless though. Building either a 13900k or a 7950x 3d computer means high end gpu ram and mobo, you are probably exceeding 2k in total just for those components alone. The extra 100 for the 3d is nothing, I'd give them in a heartbeat.

Fair enough, my last build was like £4.5k watercooled setup but I still wanted value for money on the parts I could get and with the performance difference and I could put that £100 into something else be that PC or just another hobby like 3D printing stuffs. It of course gets more complicated when you then consider well I would also have to purchase a new Mobo for the next Intel chip and I could just drop in the next x3D chip by AMD so is that £100 additional investment to go for that platform worth it as a new mobo is likely to be more than £100 to switch to a new processor others be it Intel or AMD next gen.

 

[Deleted member 258511]

I’m looking at the overall averages, not a single game, with a single metric. Sites like Toms Hardware, TPU, HUB, Igors lab, Computerbase, tech radar, hardware luxe etc, the list is endless If you scan through the review thread Cat posted. The majority show the same thing, the X3D is faster in games overall. Now, you can argue they are wrong for reason X, but unless you are incapable of looking at the overall averages, then that is the only way you can claim they perform the same overall.

I took the first review (the most popular) and at 1080p you can clearly see the 7950x 3d is not the fastest in all games. Depending on the games you choose yes AMD win overall, but not in everything, and not in the 1% lows which as AMD fans know fine well is a big deal, or it was.

To simplify it, the 7950x 3d is not the fastest in enough of the games I’ve seen tested to be the outright winner. And certainly not by as large a gap as people in here try to make out.

Power efficiency under load yes 100%. But not at idle