• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Raptor Lake Leaks + Intel 4 developments

Really? You think a 4090 and a 13900k will draw 1k watts. In a game? LOL ok buddy.

On topic, the MT results are very underwhelming. For gaming, yeah it's really really fast, can't see the 3d holding a candle to this - especially with the fast ddr5 adies.
Well i think most people should be able to see that :)
 
If the cost (CPU + higher end DDR5), power draw and cooling it is of no concern, yeah. Otherwise, there are far better options if you aren't graph watching while gaming.

Best options are cheap DDR4, cheap Z690 board and i5 or i7 13th gen. Much cheaper any higher performance than anything AMD can offer currently.
 
Really? You think a 4090 and a 13900k will draw 1k watts. In a game? LOL ok buddy.

On topic, the MT results are very underwhelming. For gaming, yeah it's really really fast, can't see the 3d holding a candle to this - especially with the fast ddr5 adies.

Gaming seems all over the place depending on the review, driver version and GPU used.

Will wait for the techspot / hub 50 game review they usually do with a 4090.
 
100c with an 360 aio btw

Oh okay.... hotter than the 7950X, so are Intel the new king of heat now then? have they taken that heat crown from AMD?

No, while tech journalists made a big thing of 95c on the 7950X with infantile Youtube thumbnails no one cares the Intel CPU is even hotter.

So i'm confused, is 95C a huge problem or not??????

Hypocrisy as usual then....
 
Last edited:
Oh okay.... hotter than the 7950X, so are Intel the new king of heat now then? have they taken that heat crown from AMD?

No, while tech journalists made a big thing of 95c on the 7950X with infantile Youtube thumbnails no one cares the Intel CPU is even hotter.

So i'm confused, is 95C a huge problem or not??????
Yes, it is, they should have done a better job to keep it cool, But intel have just done worse, so if I was buying one now I would probably inch toward AMD especially since it now being a dead platform. ( The intel platform )
 
Last edited:
Oh okay.... hotter than the 7950X, so are Intel the new king of heat now then? have they taken that heat crown from AMD?

No, while tech journalists made a big thing of 95c on the 7950X with infantile Youtube thumbnails no one cares the Intel CPU is even hotter.

So i'm confused, is 95C a huge problem or not??????

Techspot / hub made a big deal about it because the 13900K was throttling.


When Zen 4 CPUs arrived we saw quite a few comments along the lines of, "Why did Intel get so much flack for high temperatures? Because when AMD does it, it's just okay whatever 95c is fine."

The reason for this was simple, Zen 4 CPUs didn't suffer from thermal throttling and power consumption wasn't insane and this should really be the focus, not operating temperatures.

Illustrating this point is this comparison between the 13900K and 7950X, both using the Arctic Liquid Freezer II 120mm AIO liquid cooler. Now, you wouldn't pair either of these CPUs with a 120mm AIO, but with the 7950X you could and still receive performance that's comparable to what's been shown in this review.

Using the very best cooling, the 7950X maintains an all-core frequency of 5.1 GHz, with the 120mm AIO installed that frequency dropped by a mere 2% to 5.0 GHz. The 13900K on the other hand dropped from 5.2 GHz to 4.8 GHz, a more significant 8% decline in operating frequency, while also running 5c hotter.
 
Yes, it is, they should have done a better job to keep it cool, But intel have just done worse, so if I was buying one now I would probably inch toward AMD especially since it now being a dead platform. ( The intel platform )
Techspot / hub made a big deal about it because the 13900K was throttling.


Good on tech spot, (AKA Hardware Unboxed) but what happened to all the childish thumbnails and the hyperbole about it being really really bad and killing your CPU in 6 months.....
 
Last edited:
but hang on guys, several Intel users in this thread were adamant that 13th gen was super efficient, achieved better MT performance for free and would not exceed its 240w PL

What gives guys, why is the 13900k pulling 350w out of the box!?? And why does it run 15c hotter than the 12900k and thermal throttle at 100c on a 360mm AIO??
 
Last edited:
but hang on guys, several Intel users in this thread were adamant that 13th gen was super efficient, achieved better MT performance for free and would not exceed its 240w PL

What gives guys, why is the 13900k pulling 350w out of the box!??

Some people would tell you that the blue chip doing that is not the same as the team red chip, and the blue chip is cooler. Because the box is blue.
 
Last edited:
I mean clearly the 7950x got lonely at being 95c, intel has to beat them in a few more things.

It's so much worse for the Intel. The 7950x able to hold its MT performance without throttling. The 13900k quickly thermal throttles on liquid cooling and continues to lose performance the longer you use it for
 
Last edited:
Gamers Nexus on point. Intel are trying to keep the crown of the performance charts by running the chip with more power and in turn more heat.

What I find pretty mental is that temps on a 360 AIO a few years ago would have seen you hitting 50C max, now it's 100C.

Still not sure if its worth upgrading my 12700k to a 13700k tbh, there's barely anything out.

Do you need a space heater because it'll be a little bit faster but a lot hotter. I won't be upgrading from a 12900k for the same reasons.
 
Last edited:
but hang on guys, several Intel users in this thread were adamant that 13th gen was super efficient, achieved better MT performance for free and would not exceed its 240w PL

What gives guys, why is the 13900k pulling 350w out of the box!??

That was never going to be, honestly i don't get it, one or two, and it is just one or two people here tried really hard to make Alderlake more power efficient than Zen 3, against all the evidence, the same people tried to say Raptorlake was going to be 40% faster with just 10 watts more power.

Intel history is a linear evolution of constantly cranking up the power consumption as they push a (once in a decade architectural design) harder and harder with each refresh, knowing that it was easy to predict how much power Raptorlake was going to consume, getting that prediction right had an inevitability about it.
 
Last edited:
but hang on guys, several Intel users in this thread were adamant that 13th gen was super efficient, achieved better MT performance for free and would not exceed its 240w PL

What gives guys, why is the 13900k pulling 350w out of the box!?? And why does it run 15c hotter than the 12900k and thermal throttle at 100c on a 360mm AIO??

it was always gonna use more power , they added more clock speed with more E cores and its a refresh but good performance uplift for being one but going forward they cant just keep throwing power at it , same for both just Intel uses more
 
Last edited:
It's so much worse for the Intel. The 7950x able to hold its MT performance without throttling. The 13900k quickly thermal throttles on liquid cooling and continues to lose performance the longer you use it for
unknown.png


4% difference when the 7950x and 13900k are limited to 90w, Not sure I follow?
 
It's so much worse for the Intel. The 7950x able to hold its MT performance without throttling. The 13900k quickly thermal throttles on liquid cooling and continues to lose performance the longer you use it for
I don't blame reviewers but 10 mins stress test is not really showing what a person who is using it for those purposes will see, very interested now in X3D my 12900k can wait until then.
 
Back
Top Bottom