It's not that bad really, I was expecting the same architecture and fabrication technology. This is basically what we got, but the i9s appear to be using improved silicon to reach upto 6ghz (just 1 core) for the top SKU. Also optimization to the ring cache / E-core config. There seems to be (upto) 1% IPC improvement too, which apparently, Intel did not wish to advertise on their slides .All in all, not much of a gaming CPU given the price + power consumption. Pretty pathetic effort from Intel tbh, but I guess it was expected since it always looked like a tweaked ADL.
So, there is some benefit for premium CPUs, but for the i7s and i5s, I don't think there will be much in it, except if you care about the extra E-cores. The locked 13700 ought to provide the best value overall. It seems I was correct in thinking that another Golden Cove based generation was a largely unplanned move, that came about as a result of delays to Intel's 7nm CPUs (which is now known as 'Intel 4').
The main problem is that 13th gen unlocked CPUs will undoubtedly use more power than than their 12th gen i7 and i9 counterparts (which already ran very hot if overclocked). When comparing unlocked i9s (with board power unlocked, turbo boost enabled), the 13th gen 13900K uses significantly more power than the 12900K, as shown here:
Last edited: