Question Raptor Lake - Official Thread

Page 68 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Hulk

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
4,524
2,515
136
Since we already have the first Raptor Lake leak I'm thinking it should have it's own thread.
What do we know so far?
From Anandtech's Intel Process Roadmap articles from July:

Built on Intel 7 with upgraded FinFET
10-15% PPW (performance-per-watt)
Last non-tiled consumer CPU as Meteor Lake will be tiled

I'm guessing this will be a minor update to ADL with just a few microarchitecture changes to the cores. The larger change will be the new process refinement allowing 8+16 at the top of the stack.

Will it work with current z690 motherboards? If yes then that could be a major selling point for people to move to ADL rather than wait.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vstar

Just Benching

Banned
Sep 3, 2022
307
156
76
Cinebench R23 is just one benchmark and the 7600X will land between 15,000 and 15,000 on MT, but how many hours you game on Cinebench?

When the 7600X Gaming performance are shown the 12600K will become an afterthought.



Geekbench is a better all around benchmark for ST and MT

7600X Geekbench ST and MT

I don't know, have people been playing a lot of it the last few years that amd was winning and now that intel is winning they finally moved away to other games? :)
 

Rigg

Senior member
May 6, 2020
540
1,273
136
Doesn't the12900k, 5800X3D and possibly the 7600X all perform within 5% average difference in games, making them equal (or very close to) in all real life situations?
In this test the 5800x3D is faster by 1% avg in 40 games at 1080p, 1440p, and 4k. The 12900k is using 6400 Mt/s DDR5.


1080p.png
1440p.png
4K.png
 
Last edited:

FangBLade

Senior member
Apr 13, 2022
201
395
106
Wait what? Amd is the one that basically almost doubles the power consumption of their CPU's, intel kept it steady. So what the heck are you talking about man?

The R5 went from 65 to 105w TDP to be able to compete with intel's i5, yet it will end up losing to last gen's i5, and not by a small margin. This years13600k is not even in the same ballpark.

So wtf, what am I missing?
Are you Bencher from forums.overclockers.co.uk??
 

MarkPost

Senior member
Mar 1, 2017
322
616
136
TLDR: If you set a 12900k to 241w, TAU unlimited, and adequate cooling, it'll win most multithreaded benchmarks against a stock-boosting 5950x. Let's not act like that's what's happening in all these reviews. It's certainly not the case for computerbase.

I've run more than a hundred of MT tests (both CPUs oced, 5950X @4.5; 12900K @5.0/4.0) and 5950X is faster in double figures average.

edit: and that, consuming clearly less power
 

maddie

Diamond Member
Jul 18, 2010
4,881
4,951
136
Wait what? Amd is the one that basically almost doubles the power consumption of their CPU's, intel kept it steady. So what the heck are you talking about man?

The R5 went from 65 to 105w TDP to be able to compete with intel's i5, yet it will end up losing to last gen's i5, and not by a small margin. This years13600k is not even in the same ballpark.

So wtf, what am I missing?
Are you really sure you want an answer to your question?
 

Just Benching

Banned
Sep 3, 2022
307
156
76
Are you really sure you want an answer to your question?
YES. Cause maybe I misunderstood something, so please tell, if Im wrong I wanna know and correct myself. I thought amd increased power consumption across the board to compete with Intel, while intel kept the consumption steady while adding more cores. Is that wrong?
 

UsandThem

Elite Member
May 4, 2000
16,068
7,380
146
This thread is about Raptor Lake.

Discussing anything else will result in infractions. If you don't like a particular poster, put them on ignore.

If you think the post violates forum posting rules, simply report it and the moderators will review it.

AT Mod Usandthem
 

Just Benching

Banned
Sep 3, 2022
307
156
76
With regards to power, Intel countered with increased power then AMD partially returned the favor. To be honest, they (AMD) probably did design for higher clocks and power before ADL emerged, as the circuitry changes needed would have to a fundamental part of the design and not a sudden reaction.
Intel has kept the power relatively steady (high, but steady) for at least what, 4 years now. The 9900k was already boosting to 180w, the ks a little bit higher, the 10900k was already at 240w. Regardless, it wasn't you that made the claim, but eek literally said "intel is pushing these chips to the limit in power consumption to compete with amd", when the reality is the exact opposite, amd is pushing their chips to the limit in order to compete with intel, upping the power consumption by as much as 60%.
 

maddie

Diamond Member
Jul 18, 2010
4,881
4,951
136
Intel has kept the power relatively steady (high, but steady) for at least what, 4 years now. The 9900k was already boosting to 180w, the ks a little bit higher, the 10900k was already at 240w. Regardless, it wasn't you that made the claim, but eek literally said "intel is pushing these chips to the limit in power consumption to compete with amd", when the reality is the exact opposite, amd is pushing their chips to the limit in order to compete with intel, upping the power consumption by as much as 60%.
Can I now believe, based on this, that Intel is struggling to advance and needs to use ever increasing power consumption to improve CPU performance?
 

Just Benching

Banned
Sep 3, 2022
307
156
76
Can I now believe, based on this, that Intel is struggling to advance and needs to use ever increasing power consumption to improve CPU performance?
But they are not using ever increasing power. It remained steady for more than 2 years (10900k) and relatively steady for 5, while the performance increase those 5 years has been nothing short of massive. If im not mistaken the 12700k is almost twice as fast compared to the 9900k, at same wattage and lower price. The 13700k will certainly be over twice as fast.

If you HAVE to conclude that someone is struggling to advance without using increasing power consumption, that's amd, since literally they are the ones that increased the power consumption. Intel didn't, they just increased the core counts. Keep in mind, amd has kept core counts steady for the R5 and R7 models for what, 7 years now. Reminds you of someone?
 

Zucker2k

Golden Member
Feb 15, 2006
1,810
1,159
136
But they are not using ever increasing power. It remained steady for more than 2 years (10900k) and relatively steady for 5, while the performance increase those 5 years has been nothing short of massive. If im not mistaken the 12700k is almost twice as fast compared to the 9900k, at same wattage and lower price. The 13700k will certainly be over twice as fast.

If you HAVE to conclude that someone is struggling to advance without using increasing power consumption, that's amd, since literally they are the ones that increased the power consumption. Intel didn't, they just increased the core counts. Keep in mind, amd has kept core counts steady for the R5 and R7 models for what, 7 years now. Reminds you of someone?
11900k, moreso.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Just Benching

UsandThem

Elite Member
May 4, 2000
16,068
7,380
146
Recent thread cleaned up, and many posts deleted.

Any further issues will result in time off.

Moderators do not want to keep having to come to this thread, and dealing with multiple reports. If it doesn't concern Raptor Lake CPUs, don't post in this thread.

AT Mod Usandthem
 

AtenRa

Lifer
Feb 2, 2009
14,003
3,361
136
If those specs are legit, then 13400 will be wayyyy slower in gaming even with DDR5 vs Ryzen 7600X and 13700 will be very close even using DDR4 3600 cl16.

Intel-13th-Generation-Raptor-Lake-CPU-Lineup-and-Specifications-1200x808.jpg
 

Asterox

Golden Member
May 15, 2012
1,039
1,823
136
If those specs are legit, then 13400 will be wayyyy slower in gaming even with DDR5 vs Ryzen 7600X and 13700 will be very close even using DDR4 3600 cl16.

Intel-13th-Generation-Raptor-Lake-CPU-Lineup-and-Specifications-1200x808.jpg

Yes it is legit, or expected if you add 4 E cores and fit all that under 65W TDP.

- 6 P Cores all core turbo only 4.1hgz vs i5 K CPU-s with 5.1ghz boost on all 6 P cores

 

nicalandia

Diamond Member
Jan 10, 2019
3,331
5,282
136
Ugh no thank you. Cinebench has its limitations, but . . . bleh.

Dr. Ian Cutress who I hold respect, has said that Geekbench and SPEC are the best source of IPC benchmarks.

Yes neither SPEC nor GB stress the entire CPU and System(that is why there are more benchmarks included on Reviews), but it's the closest we have to test IPC gains.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lodix

Just Benching

Banned
Sep 3, 2022
307
156
76
Hi! Welcome new reg who is (apparently) maybe biased in the same fashion as a number of other new regs we've had over the last few months who totally doesn't seem to be part of a guerilla marketing campaign
What gave it away, me [redacted] on rocket lake? Ill talk to HQ, ill tell them we should change tactics, you are onto us

Anyways, lets wait for official reviews, the leaks right now are all over the place, for both sides.


Profanity (even abbreviated profanity) is not allowed in the technical forums.

AT Mod Usandthem
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
22,065
11,693
136
What gave it away, me [redacted] on rocket lake?

Yes. Absolutely yes.

And finally yes, "let's wait for some official reviews". Glad to see you and Mark can agree on some things.

Dr. Ian Cutress who I hold respect, has said that Geekbench and SPEC are the best source of IPC benchmarks.

Don't agree. At all. The only reason why people keep using them is that they can be compiled to run on just about anything - even phone SoCs. Fortunately some sites still run CPU benchmarks and give us a larger suite of data to consider than just those two benchmarks. So hurray for that!
 
Last edited:

Thunder 57

Platinum Member
Aug 19, 2007
2,991
4,568
136
Hi! Welcome new reg who is (apparently) maybe biased in the same fashion as a number of other new regs we've had over the last few months who totally doesn't seem to be part of a guerilla marketing campaign. In general it's not a good idea for anyone to cherrypick numbers, including you. But people keep trying to do so anyway. So um, take your own advice and have a nice day!



I was actually expecting e-core speeds to go down by necessity, to bring them back to their efficiency range. There are twice as many. Anything else throws too large a power share at the e-cores, possibly at the expense of the Raptor Cove power budget.



Ugh no thank you. Cinebench has its limitations, but . . . bleh.

The e core frequency decrease would make sanse, but it seems Intel has gone the other way seeing how P cores have a lower base clock then Alder Lake. Not by much, but it is lower.

Dr. Ian Cutress who I hold respect, has said that Geekbench and SPEC are the best source of IPC benchmarks.

Yes neither SPEC nor GB stress the entire CPU and System(that is why there are more benchmarks included on Reviews), but it's the closest we have to test IPC gains.

I don't really care for Geekbench. Cinebench is OK for testing the cores but generally leaves out memory since it seems everything fits in cache nicely. I also remember an article on Anandtech pretty much blasting SPEC, but maybe that wasn't Ian. Maybe Andrei or someone else. However, I find SPEC to be more useful than the other two.

Ideally though, as you said, a nice set of benchmarks is really the best, if not only, way to properly review a CPU. Also checking multiple sites to limit bias any one might have.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ZGR

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
22,065
11,693
136
The e core frequency decrease would make sanse, but it seems Intel has gone the other way seeing how P cores have a lower base clock then Alder Lake. Not by much, but it is lower.

It may also be that everything clocks to insane levels thanks to the new 350W Insanity Mode (tm) that will probably be default on review-day motherboards.
 

nicalandia

Diamond Member
Jan 10, 2019
3,331
5,282
136
It may also be that everything clocks to insane levels thanks to the new 350W Insanity Mode (tm) that will probably be default on review-day motherboards.
AMD for sure will send their review kits with beefy Water Coolers. But I have seen many reports that even high end cooling can't keep pace with Unrestrained/No Limits 13900k. I wonder what kit is Intel going to send.

Also this bracket is said to drop temps by 10 degrees. I wonder how many reviewers will us it.

1662238206269.png

1662238305670.png
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: lightmanek

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
22,065
11,693
136
AMD for sure will send their review kits with beefy Water Coolers. But I have seen many reports that even high end cooling can't keep pace with Unrestrained/No Limits 13900k. I wonder what kit is Intel going to send.

Did they send out coolers for Alder Lake?

Also this bracket is said to drop temps by 10 degrees. I wonder how many reviewers will us it.

One wonders why Intel wouldn't start bugging OEMs to add something like that to their own motherboards.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ZGR

Just Benching

Banned
Sep 3, 2022
307
156
76
AMD for sure will send their review kits with beefy Water Coolers. But I have seen many reports that even high end cooling can't keep pace with Unrestrained/No Limits 13900k. I wonder what kit is Intel going to send.

Also this bracket is said to drop temps by 10 degrees. I wonder how many reviewers will us it.

View attachment 67112

View attachment 67113
13900k should be easier to cool than the 12900k at same wattage (240w).

The kit only works with flat coolers, if you have a convex cooler doesn't do much.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mikk

Kosusko

Member
Nov 10, 2019
178
147
116
If those specs are legit, then 13400 will be wayyyy slower in gaming even with DDR5 vs Ryzen 7600X and 13700 will be very close even using DDR4 3600 cl16.

Intel-13th-Generation-Raptor-Lake-CPU-Lineup-and-Specifications-1200x808.jpg

Core i9 13900k with 5.5GHz for eight Raptor Cove P-cores (of which two at 5.8GHz) and L2 cache 2MB per core + sixteen 4.3GHz for atomic Gracemont E-cores with 4MB L2 cache per quad core cluster is a very decent increase over the Alder Lake core i9 12900k.
The paradigm shift in Intel Raptor Lake processors continues.
Awesome.
weg.gif