News:

Willkommen im Notebookcheck.com Forum! Hier können sie über alle unsere Artikel und allgemein über Notebook relevante Dinge disuktieren. Viel Spass!

Main Menu

Intel Core i9-13900K demolishes the Ryzen 9 5950X with an up to 67% lead in multi-core Cinebench test but there is a huge power cost

Started by Redaktion, August 09, 2022, 20:37:44

Previous topic - Next topic

Redaktion

According to a slew of leaked benchmarks, Intel's 13th gen "Raptor Lake" processors are shaping up to be worthy upgrades over their predecessors. Now, we have a new set of Cinebench R23 test runs showing the performance of the Core i9-13900K in the absence of any power constraints.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Core-i9-13900K-demolishes-the-Ryzen-9-5950X-with-an-up-to-67-lead-in-multi-core-Cinebench-test-but-there-is-a-huge-power-cost.639516.0.html

cmvrgr

Excellent results but with a great handicap. It draws almost 350w. If it had that performance with 150w it would be amazing and I would be impressed.

Intel makes power hogs thats for sure.

BrendaEM



Gonzalez

If this is the way to get more performance then it is better to rent servers or data centers.

Truly only Apple is the one, who is making things for consumers use.

Peto

U crazy?? why only scrapple??? I don't need these gimmick marketing racing pointless cpus who is better who is slower.. It is purely for naive ppl or who don't know what with money...

I have normal end user i7 11800H which consuming 35W at idle and 45-50 W when in load.. So completely consumable..
Battery 5-8 hours.. depending on work completely enough and acceptable

This endless racing jus to gain money is obsolete nowadays


rs

It's actually more like +56% because a Ryzen 5950X scores ~26k at stock (142W PPT). Which is a really poor result for 13900K at almost 2.5x the power consumption. 5950X with 16 instead of 24 cores is still >50% more power efficient than Intel's two year newer gen. Only shows how desperate Intel is with their inferior tech. They can only increase power consumption, not efficiency. Not worth to buy.

Johhny

Why write such articles, its like comparing apples with oranges. Power consumption is main difference, lets lock them at the same Wattage and then compare.

Florin

Yes, it is 70% better, costs 10 times more, and needs an arc reactor from Tony Stark to power it and a helium based industrial cooler the size of a car to run for more than 10 minutes.

Jeremy



Anonymousgg

Quote from: BrendaEM on August 10, 2022, 05:32:30Why did you compare an expensive 24 core processor against a 16 core one?
Did Intel pay you?

The 13900K is going to be compared to a 16-core either way, because the 16-core 7950X is its direct competition.

If you know how good of an uplift is possible over the 5950X, you can have an educated guess as to how well it will perform against the 7950X. Although this power consumption will not be typical of most 13900K users.

nokite

It's not about the electricity bill, with Intel. It's about having a pizza oven where my PC should be.
For anyone who lives where an actual summer happens, a processor above around 120W doesn't make sense. Even with the best and quietest cooler, there's no escaping the heat without AC.

Soso

Quote
"An AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX 64-core/128-thread workstation processor was overclocked to 5.15 GHz all-core by Taiwanese overclocker TSAIK, under extreme cooling, and it [predictably] crushed the Cinebench R23 world-record. The chip scored a godlike 116142 points in the multi-threaded benchmark, ahead of the previous record-holder—105170 points scored on a Threadripper 3990X, by Splave. "
End of quote....

Quick Reply

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.

Name:
Email:
Verification:
Please leave this box empty:

Shortcuts: ALT+S post or ALT+P preview