Intel was rather misleading in its comparisons between the Core i9-12900K and Ryzen 9 5950X

[Redaktion]

It seems that Intel was not telling the full story when it compared the Core i9-12900K against the Ryzen 9 5950X, currently AMD's most comparable processor. As it turns out, Intel allowed the Core i9-12900K to consume 2.4x the power of its AMD competitor and benchmarked the Ryzen 9 5950X using an older version of Windows 11 with AMD performance issues.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-was-rather-misleading-in-its-comparisons-between-the-Core-i9-12900K-and-Ryzen-9-5950X.576726.0.html

[kony]

What a surprise! Nobody expected it!

[Wren]

AMD screwing up their Windows 11 integration is shown here as intel problem.. intel is not responsible for validating which AMD SW release runs most optimally u see. They use the latest and greatest at the time of release... if there is an amd update that fixes it, there are enough AMD fan boys to come and show it.

[dsadasdsa]

amd is free to do the same...but they don't, so i don't see where the problem is.

[kelleh]

AMD screwing up their Windows 11 integration is shown here as intel problem.. intel is not responsible for validating which AMD SW release runs most optimally u see. They use the latest and greatest at the time of release... if there is an amd update that fixes it, there are enough AMD fan boys to come and show it.

Hmm. Since when did AMD own Windows?  This is on Microsofts end and they are the case.   

[William F Foster]

Use whatever logic makes you feel better. When the dust settles, Intels new architecture gets them to parody with AMD until Zen 3 3D rolls out and and is back on top. Lots of FUD coming out of intel these days

[sads]

Shocking... I wonder why no regulatory entity fine intel, or AMD. This can't be legal.

[ItsAThing]

This article is incredibly ignorant and lazy
- AMD patch came out already, there's no average difference. (toms benched it already) Maybe test the difference yourself with a fully released fix before making claims?
- Intel brought it this issue up themselves. Saying this was in some way malicious is just like saying they should delay a product release because their rival is having software issues.

[Harvard]

lol what a biased article, new intel 7 is basically the same as TSMC's shitty fake 7nm and more due to transistor count is more dense on Intel's manufacturing process. What make you think Intel's CPU is worse off than AMD's TSMC copycat CPU?

[bobby J]

www. tomshardware. com/news/amd-ryzen-windows-11-patch-testing-gaming-benchmarks-L3-cache-bug

"The Windows 11 patch undoubtedly corrected some issues with L3 cache latency and bandwidth, but the profound differences in synthetic measurements simply didn't carry over to most of our real-world gaming tests. "


"In fact, when measured as a geometric mean of all of our game tests, the patches were a wash."

Intel 12th gen is significantly faster than Zen 3. The benchmarks were legitimate, and if anything the slow fix by AMD, weeks after windows 11's launch only shows how terrible AMD is at supporting their platform. Intel CPUs didnt have any issue at all with Windows 11.

[JasonG]

What an uninformed article!

Intel clearly described that the tests were done before the patch while your article is stating they didn't tell that. Notebookcheck is lying and spreading fake news.

The new windows patch was released just a few days before the event and Intel simply didn't have enough mentioned that they didn't have enough time to redo all the comparison, and get all the information approved by their engineering team, marketing team, and most importantly legal team before the event.

Also most importantly their isn't much different before and after the patch based on Tom's hardware analysis.

www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-windows-11-patch-testing-gaming-benchmarks-L3-cache-bug

[Rob Stan]

Haha, the Intel fanboys are out in full force defending yet another corporation that doesn't give a flying turd if they live or die. To the point I'm wondering sometimes if Intel isn't astroturfing. It wouldn't be the first (or the last) time corporations do this.

Just to point out the ignorance and moral cowardice of these posts:

How convenient none of them are addressing how Intel intentionally limited the 5950X (which technically isn't even the fastest Zen3 SKU in gaming) to 105W (as they say, PL1 locked), where as they use their little bit of nonsense logic where for ADL PL1=PL2 now, so they basically run the 12900K at a almost unlocked power mode of PL1=PL2=241W.

Instead they just focus on defending the "using a broken Windows 11 for Zen" angle. As if a trillion dollar corporation such as Intel can't redo ONE SLIDE in a matter of hours if not less, considering the last updates came out ALMOST A WEEK BEFORE THOSE SLIDES WHERE PRESENTED. Intel knew very well what it was doing. And they also know many reviewers might not bench very carefully come review day.

Intel gets a custom Windows made for their CPUs and AMD gets the middle finger from Microsoft's lousy QA teams... by resurrecting issues that haven't existed for Zen since 2017-2018.

And let's not address the other elephant in the room, where basically 7 out of the 9 games in the slides are sponsored by Intel (some explicitly state they're black box optimized for Intel, such as TW: Troy, Hitman 3 and GRID 2019).

Or that they benched DDR5 vs DDR4... when they clearly also had the option to bench DDR4 vs DDR4, strongly implying that ADL relies on DDR5 quite a bit to actually shine. And also obviously misleading potential buyers who will go for DDR4 ADL build (for budget reasons or otherwise).

Or the fact that on the Rocket Lake launch slides, Intel was touting it's faster than 5900X in gaming (we know how that turned out), where as now, in the Alder Lake launch slides, 11900K is clearly slower than 5900X's slightly slower brother (strictly in gaming) 5950X (and yes, I know they're different games, but let's not kid ourselves, if anything, because these are way more Intel-favorable titles, 11900K should measure up as even faster than it's launch gaming slides insinuated, seeing as the games there where actually more varied/neutral).

Intel takes cherry picking and manipulating results to a new level with each launch.

[Benny G]

Intel have a long history of cherry picking benchmarks and other shady practices such as directly paying their developers or 3rd parties. It seems to me the only reason they are not continually pulled up on unrepresentative claims and missing disclosures because regulators seem not to have any interest any more in policing their various streams of misleading advertising. Whether it's well known ones from history or recent ones, the "principled technologies" fiasco, userbenchmark suddenly changing their algorithm to greatly benefit Intel, previous adverse regulatory findings that required disclosures on every slide purporting to be a comparison, or a couple years ago when they extrapolated data (IMO) secretly harvested without end user permission from laptops to claim that barely anybody on desktops uses tools such as cinebench (back from their "real world benchmarks" push a few years ago when they were well behind Zen in synthetics).

Simply, if you place any belief in a benchmark provided by Intel of an Intel product compared with the competition, you are an idiot. Wait for post release tests of retail products by trusted competent independent reviewers.

[Mr T]

lol what a biased article, new intel 7 is basically the same as TSMC's shitty fake 7nm and more due to transistor count is more dense on Intel's manufacturing process. What make you think Intel's CPU is worse off than AMD's TSMC copycat CPU?

News flash, they are all "fake", Intels included. TSMC isn't true 7nm, just like Intels 10nm or 14nm aren't true either, the last true process node was 90nm.... Dummy

[Jrdiver]

I'm just glad both sides are competing...but the more then double the power for minimal performance gains...tells me team red has the true lead yet.  Give that 5950x some cooling and 240 watts and I'm sure it would also perform a bit faster