My new Intel 11900K @5500Mhz vs. old Intel 8700K @5300Mhz CPU performance test

[torwak]

3D Mark Time Spy CPU comparison [email protected] vs. 8700K@5.3GHz -> ~58% faster.

CPUZ - 11900K@5500Mhz Single/Multithread

CPUZ - 8700K@5300Mhz Single/Multithread

Aida64 Memory latency test: (Gear1 / 1:1 / 3733Mhz with budget RAM sticks)

Cinebench 20 test:

Geekbench 5 test:

CoreTemp:

 

[torwak]

Thats a big boost, and single thread hammers my last gen, multi thread not so due to two less cores?
@5.2ghz

11900K has 8 cores and 10850K has 10 cores. If 11900K had 10 cores it would hit 9062 points in this scenario.

Moreover my 8700K@5300Mhz also surpasses your 10850K@5200Mhz at single core score which indicates there was no IPC increase from 8 gen to 10gen from Intel basically.

 

[torwak]

Aye, fast chip

Thanks!

Also it's ridiculous to see no IPC gain from Intel 8th gen to 10th gen. If there would be no AMD probably we would have the same scores today from Intel. Competition is the best!

 

[torwak]

What about temps in Cinebench, must be crazy @ 5.5ghz ??

Not at all. I have custom loop. The temperatures were around 80-85C at CB20. The power draw was a lot. I hit almost 290W.

 

[torwak]

I'd be interested to see his R23 scores without turning off the full 10 minutes default setting.

I would do that only if I take my radiators to balcony at winter night. Otherwise any torture test will may cause degradation at the silicon quality becasue of the inefficient cooling.

I have bought this CPU for gaming especially for the low memory latency that AMD can't achieve. Not for rendering farm.

 

[torwak]

That's mad ... whats 5800X, like 120w??

I think you should watch this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aSK9ZaJfkLQ

 

[torwak]

Which games benefit from the "low memory latency"?

Basically all games. Latency directly affects frame times for any game with a core data set larger than the CPU's cache system can hold - any object that needs to be checked for render calls and any object affected by player actions, physics or AI needs to be loaded from RAM with every single frame drawn, and every single of these actions will have the CPU waiting on the RAM for the duration.

 

[torwak]

BTW its not the memory latency that's the thing with that, its actually the intercore latency, and with that AMD on Zen 3 at least is better. Despite Intel's "Ring Bus" Its old hat now, AMD are using physical signal accelerators.

I have never referred to the intercore latency. It's a complete disaster for AMD either.

 

[torwak]

You're talking about how "Latency" affects AMD in gaming, that's true, for Zen 2 (Ryzen 3000 Series) AMD fixed that for Zen 3 (Ryzen 5000)

Yes, definetely AMD did fantastic job at ZEN3 arch comparing to ZEN2. However, they are still behind Intel in this perspective. Below 5950x with 3800Mhz Ram 16-18-18-38 "CR1". My score is even at CR2.

 

[torwak]

I believe you are mixing the terms like optimized architecture for software and CPU computing power. RAM speed has nothing to do with L1-L2-L3 cache. Memory is the external fast storage to store data for CPU. Our subject is also has nothing to do with inter-core communication. I even didn't talk about mesh memory or ring bus arch, but somehow you got there. I am totaly lost in the translation.

If you like AMD stay with it and use it, but please don't give a speech about things you really don't know. Check the below, but don't get a heart attack ok?

 

[torwak]

This is quite remarkable, sucha low score, it is actually the first time I've seen such low numbers generated on this series, this was said to be one of the weak points in the lower chips in the 11 series, as they couldn't match the 10 series in latency, but you've done well.

Out of interest, does this config show any actual improvement over say a gear 1 3600 speed when it comes to gaming, I always recall Steve Burke saying you need to test it in an application or game to see that it is having real world effect rather thna just seeing better figures reported which perf might actually become retrograde due to other factors?
I'd love to see a comparative run with some game demos.

41.0ns latency is not from my system. CAPFRAMEX achieved it using PATRIOT VIPER GAMING DDR4-4800 C20 unlinked (1:2) at 11900K with APEX XIII. My own system score (43.1ns - Gear1 - Linked 1:1 for gaming) is lower below becasue I have budget GSKILL 3866 18-18-18-36 memory kit using it with 11900K and APEX XIII. I don't want to invest 500USD to DDR4 peformance kits to have additional 4-5FPS at games. Also Alder Lake / DDR5 will be available soon.

https://twitter.com/CapFrameX/status/1383784384403107849?s=20
https://twitter.com/CapFrameX/status/1383506937182969862?s=20

 

[torwak]

How did you get such strong chips?

I did nothing special. I have ordered it from the competitor the day it released.

Asus APEX XIII BIOS shows me "83" for the silicon prediction (SP). 83 is somewhere golden sample for 11900K.

 

[torwak]

If the numbers are real and not photoshopped then his gaming performance should be 10-15% higher than any 11900k has reviewed

Which game are you referring? Maybe I can test it for you and show the results spesifically for CPU performance excluding graphic card.

 

[torwak]

Yes,but that is a very specific and indeed very odd set of testing criteria.
no one buys a chip, disables hyperthread and then plays games.
Also the results showed the new processor sucking dick.
I would prefer our poster shows what he has managed, as it seems spectacular.

Well actually I do disable HT for gaming. Because it's required for the competitive FPS games. I need a constant stable FPS. HT causes FPS fluctation because of poor thread managament at some games. Btw I don't disable HT at BIOS, but doing it via Windows Affinity option via script before launching the game.

Guys if you need me to test any game just let me know. However it should be centric to CPU and should inform the CPU / graphic card score seperately.

 

[torwak]

Any chance you could show us some of the improvements in games from the 8700k, not just benchmarks, since you bought it for games not as a benchmarking system, right? Found any where you get more than a 10% improvement across the 1% low, and the average rates?

I can't do that. I have already removed the old board and the CPU also installed my custom loop. However, I can share my 3DMark results to compare below.

Time Spy test with 11900K@5500Mhz vs. 8700K@5300Mhz. You can compare the CPU scores.
https://www.3dmark.com/compare/spy/20006203/spy/14885742

 

[torwak]

I'd like to see CSGO results for that very high gear 2 memory rate you are running, versus a gear 1 at 3600 same timings. Be interesting to see how it stretches its legs.

I don't have fancy DDR4 kit to achieve 4000+ Mhz. So I did the test only in sync mode - Gear 1 - 3733Mhz. 4 Cores - 5500Mhz, 2 x Cores - 5400Mhz, 2 x Cores, 5300Mhz.

I am not a CS: GO player so I assume 491.10 FPS is something good.

 

[torwak]

Sorry @torwak I've got mixed up, very mixed up, I went back and see you are running at 3733 in gear 1.
The above bit you posted was what confused me, what is the source for that AIDA thingy?
I thought you had it with your own ram doing 4800 in gear2.
The comparison I asked for isn't valid if you don't have that ram, sorry, i got mixed up.

No worrries. The screenshot I shared above belongs to another user. 41ns is not my score. This person is using Patriot Viper 4800Mhz 2 x 16 DDR4 kit Gear2 / not sync.

My score is 43.1ns with Gskill 2x16 DDR4 - 3866Mhz 18-18-18-36 kit in Gear1 mode. I have set it to 15-15-15-32 3733 Mhz to achieve the 43.1ns score.