Question Raptor Lake - Official Thread

Page 120 - 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
4,191
1,975
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

Carfax83

Diamond Member
Nov 1, 2010
6,841
1,536
136
So many things wrong there. I did not see anything about settings, wattage. I did not see a 7700x or a 7600x which quite often are faster at gaming. For the blender test, the 13900k (the top dog) goes against the 7900x which is 4 fast cores short or the equal, the 7950x. This review is so slanted, I discount it entirely.

Are you serious?! They have time stamped categories that go over everything you mentioned. The reviewer also definitely referred to the 13900K's high power draw.

It's clear you never watched the entire thing. But basically, it's just as I said above to @inf64. When the 13900K isn't being GPU limited, it will run away from Zen 4.

This reviewer used less GPU bound settings compared to HWU, and not to mention, had more games tested.
 

Markfw

Moderator Emeritus, Elite Member
May 16, 2002
25,483
14,434
136
In gaming we know all with the test done on rtx4090...
you can only hope some 79003DX make it more edgy for gamers

for heavy load and productivity sure there looks like there is balance 79xx vs 13xxx but for gaming intel is defo again king
MANY reviews say they trade blows evenly. The only thing that every review agrees on is that Raptor lake uses WAY more power to do the job.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tlh97 and OneEng2

Markfw

Moderator Emeritus, Elite Member
May 16, 2002
25,483
14,434
136
Are you serious?! They have time stamped categories that go over everything you mentioned. The reviewer also definitely referred to the 13900K's high power draw.

It's clear you never watched the entire thing. But basically, it's just as I said above to @inf64. When the 13900K isn't being GPU limited, it will run away from Zen 4.

This reviewer used less GPU bound settings compared to HWU, and not to mention, had more games tested.
How in the world can you defend this ? They review ONE Raptor lake, ONE Alderlake (both the top models), and ONE Zen 4 (one down from the top model). How can that possibly show anything ? And where are the hardware setups specified ?

Edit: Also, the 7600x and the 7700x are quite often gaming winners,more so than the 7900x or 7950x. But not included in gaming benchmarks here. The 7950x is quite often the productivity champion, but its not reviewed here. The one chip that they review only wins in its class,, the 7900x, and NOT any competing chip from Intel. This is so skewed its crap, PERIOD.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Mopetar

reb0rn

Senior member
Dec 31, 2009
221
58
101
MANY reviews say they trade blows evenly. The only thing that every review agrees on is that Raptor lake uses WAY more power to do the job.
Are you serious in GPU bound games where many reviews are paid shills or do not care to redo all test with RTX4090 in GPU bound situation what is the point of gaming test for CPU???? let them use Geforce I 256 then they can say for games all CPU are same with that logic

When any new CPU is reviewed for gaming there is zero point doing it so in GPU limited games/setup!
 

ondma

Platinum Member
Mar 18, 2018
2,718
1,278
136
Well, after reading all the reviews it appears that 13900K is Intel's triumphant return to its Pentium 4 Extreme Edition roots... :p

Trips down the memory lane aside, pretty much same performance as 7950x give or take depending on game/application, cheaper than 7950x, especially if you take motherboard/memory prices into account, but also runs much much hotter. It is funny how tables have turned compared to 4 years ago. Back then Intel had the halo product while AMD was the budget choice - almost as good as Intel, but much cheaper. Now the 7950x is the productivity/halo choice commanding appropriate premium, however Intel provides better value at midrange aka 12600k/13600k.
In gaming, power use is lower and temps are not a problem. For productivity, simply set PL` and PL2 to factory specs instead of unlimited and the temps are manageable, although power use is still higher than AMD.
 

deathBOB

Senior member
Dec 2, 2007
566
228
116
How in the world can you defend this ? They review ONE Raptor lake, ONE Alderlake (both the top models), and ONE Zen 4 (one down from the top model). How can that possibly show anything ? And where are the hardware setups specified ?

Edit: Also, the 7600x and the 7700x are quite often gaming winners,more so than the 7900x or 7950x. But not included in gaming benchmarks here. The 7950x is quite often the productivity champion, but its not reviewed here. The one chip that they review only wins in its class,, the 7900x, and NOT any competing chip from Intel. This is so skewed its crap, PERIOD.

Why wouldn't you compare 7900x? and 13900x? They cost about the same.
 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
21,583
10,785
136
Now I totally believe Kocicak's burning smell post :eek:

Yeah was probably a socket burn issue or maybe the VRMs.

Intel is more impressive on the same node.. meteor lake will be even bigger jump 😁

Not sure how you came to that conclusion. Meteor Lake still has a lot of unknowns associated with it, such as: will there be anything larger than 6+8e on the desktop? And how bad will be the clock regressions?

AT has gone to the Dogs ever since Dr. Ian Cutress left the place.

He isn't the only one of import that left. It's going to take time to replace that talent, and if Future isn't really paying anything for written articles anymore then it'll limit what they can do in the future.

there is nothing wrong testing 13900k vs 7900x as price is more aligned... but from test with 4090 we now see Intel againdominate gaming is HUGE % there is nothing AMD can do there at all for now
13600K is ultimate gaming cpu

Um

except release an X3D part?

Plus depending on where you get your reviews, the 13900k is only ~4% faster in games than the 12900k. Not really much of an improvement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tlh97

reb0rn

Senior member
Dec 31, 2009
221
58
101
yeah 4% in GPU limited setup using Geforce 256...... are you for real!?

you have few test done with RTX4090 and it far more then 4% more like 10-30%
 

Hulk

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
4,191
1,975
136
So many things wrong there. I did not see anything about settings, wattage. I did not see a 7700x or a 7600x which quite often are faster at gaming. For the blender test, the 13900k (the top dog) goes against the 7900x which is 4 fast cores short or the equal, the 7950x. This review is so slanted, I discount it entirely.

I have to concur here. This is a pretty superficial review.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mopetar

ZGR

Platinum Member
Oct 26, 2012
2,052
656
136
yeah 4% in GPU limited setup using Geforce 256...... are you for real!?

you have few test done with RTX4090 and it far more then 4% more like 10-30%

I haven't see any benchmarks showing a 30% gain in games that would be awesome to see. Source?
 

Hitman928

Diamond Member
Apr 15, 2012
5,182
7,633
136
its posted in 2 last page

I just don't trust this "Tech Testers" channel. They don't have the best reputation and it's pretty easy to see why:

From their 7900x review:

1666308614273.png

From their 13900K review:

1666308645776.png

The 7900x mysteriously tanks in performance in the same game a couple of months later?

Edit: I also have no problem with der8auer's testing, but he only tested a handful of games. If you look at a much wider group of games, you'll see some games where Zen4 takes a commanding lead. Overall they are about neck and neck with the same memory speeds used. Raptorlake can probably scale to higher memory though, at least for now, we'll see what happens as AMD's platform matures.
 
Last edited:

deathBOB

Senior member
Dec 2, 2007
566
228
116
I just don't trust this "Tech Testers" channel. They don't have the best reputation and it's pretty easy to see why:

From their 7900x review:

View attachment 69565

From their 13900K review:

View attachment 69566

The 7900x mysteriously tanks in performance in the same game a couple of months later?

Edit: I also have no problem with der8auer's testing, but he only tested a handful of games. If you look at a much wider group of games, you'll see some games where Zen4 takes a commanding lead. Overall they are about neck and neck with the same memory speeds used. Raptorlake can probably scale to higher memory though, at least for now, we'll see what happens as AMD's platform matures.

There's literally an entire section of the video discussing this. It's 3090 vs 4090 and whatever particular driver overhead issue is going on.
 

reb0rn

Senior member
Dec 31, 2009
221
58
101
If you listened the review, you would see it was said for Spiderman there could be a bug as the game is new and really hammer CPU... but you have how many 23 games?????? (there could be some settings shifting some ray trace load to CPU or GPU issue or not as its new game and i guess lots bugs), but it can also mean game is optimized for intel or that bottleneck bag just work in it

but yes try to paint issue with one buggy game to discredit it as none of eview sites had time or wanted to do test with RTX 4090 which only point of what pile of %%#%$## they are
 

Carfax83

Diamond Member
Nov 1, 2010
6,841
1,536
136
I just don't trust this "Tech Testers" channel. They don't have the best reputation and it's pretty easy to see why:

From their 7900x review:

View attachment 69565

From their 13900K review:

View attachment 69566

The 7900x mysteriously tanks in performance in the same game a couple of months later?

Obviously they are using different GPUs (the one that I posted uses an RTX 4090 which is much less GPU limited) and probably a different section of the game and different drivers.
 

Markfw

Moderator Emeritus, Elite Member
May 16, 2002
25,483
14,434
136
If you listened the review, you would see it was said for Spiderman there could be a bug as the game is new and really hammer CPU... but you have how many 23 games??????

but yes try to paint issue with one buggy game to discredit it as none of review sites had time or wanted to do test with RTX 4090 which only point of what pile of %%#%$## they are
23 games for 2 of Intels best in 2 generations vs ONE Zen 4 chip thats NOT their best. That alone is crap.
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: deathBOB

Carfax83

Diamond Member
Nov 1, 2010
6,841
1,536
136
How in the world can you defend this ? They review ONE Raptor lake, ONE Alderlake (both the top models), and ONE Zen 4 (one down from the top model). How can that possibly show anything ? And where are the hardware setups specified ?

The 7900x is the 13900K's price competitor so it's a valid comparison.

Edit: Also, the 7600x and the 7700x are quite often gaming winners,more so than the 7900x or 7950x. But not included in gaming benchmarks here. The 7950x is quite often the productivity champion, but its not reviewed here. The one chip that they review only wins in its class,, the 7900x, and NOT any competing chip from Intel. This is so skewed its crap, PERIOD.

I do agree that they should have included the 7700x, but given how many games they tested (way more than anyone else I've seen), they were probably time restrained.
 
  • Like
Reactions: reb0rn

Markfw

Moderator Emeritus, Elite Member
May 16, 2002
25,483
14,434
136
The 7900x is the 13900K's price competitor so it's a valid comparison.



I do agree that they should have included the 7700x, but given how many games they tested (way more than anyone else I've seen), they were probably the restrained.
So, since the 7950x is CURRENTLY a little more expensive, don't include it in your review and declare Intel the winner ? That is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard of.

Its obvious that you and reborn like Intel and will defend them to the death, regardless of facts, so go ahead, live in your fantasy world. Buy them And hope your house does not burn down. (see Kociaks testing)
 

ZGR

Platinum Member
Oct 26, 2012
2,052
656
136
I am kinda confused by the prices now. I see the 13900k selling for ~$650 and that is on a few websites. But on Anandtech.com's review, they list it as $550. The 7900x and 7950x are $550 and $700 respectively. With Holiday season fast approaching, we might hopefully see some price changes.

If you listened the review, you would see it was said for Spiderman there could be a bug as the game is new and really hammer CPU... but you have how many 23 games?????? (there could be some settings shifting some ray trace load to CPU or GPU issue or not as its new game and i guess lots bugs), but it can also mean game is optimized for intel or that bottleneck bag just work in it

but yes try to paint issue with one buggy game to discredit it as none of eview sites had time or wanted to do test with RTX 4090 which only point of what pile of %%#%$## they are

Well I did ask about this 30%. You got me excited! GN used a 4090 on a few games as well. Spiderman is one of the few games that can leverage the e-cores for texture decompression which is pretty interesting.