Intel Core i9-12900KS launches April 5; Maingear announces PCs packing "the world's fastest...

midian182

midian182

Posts: 9,752   +121
Staff member
What just happened? Intel has confirmed that its new Alder Lake flagship chip, the Core i9-12900KS, officially launches on April 5, and boutique computer manufacturers are already announcing its integration into their systems. Maingear will be adding the processor to three of its PCs, offering enthusiasts some very appealing prebuilt options.

Intel writes that the Core i9-12900KS, which it refers to as the world's fastest desktop processor, will be available on April 5 with a recommended price of $739. The company will be showing off the chip and talking about its features in a Talking Tech livestream on the same day from 12pm PT / 3pm ET. The event will cover the building of four PCs with industry experts, so it could be pretty interesting.

The Core i9-12900KS shares many similarities with the standard Core i9-12900K model, including the 16 cores made up of eight Performance-cores and eight Efficient-cores, 24 threads, and 30MB of L3 cache memory. But the unlocked chip's base power is pushed from 125W to 150W, allowing it to reach up to 5.5GHz on two cores and an all-core turbo frequency of 5.2GHz.

Earlier Cinebench R23 scores put the Core i9-12900KS ahead of the Ryzen 9 5950X. And while it's only slightly faster than the standard K variant in single-core and multi-threaded Geekbench 5 results, these figures should improve with BIOS optimization.

The Core i9-12900KS' $739 price, however, is a big step over the Core i9-12900K's $599 MSRP, and retailers could be selling it for even more, given that Newegg briefly listed the CPU for $799.99.

Soon after Intel's announcement, Maingear revealed (via Tom's Hardware) some of its systems that will carry the Core i9-12900KS. There's the mid-tower Vybe, the company's cheapest pre-build, which comes with air, AIO liquid, and custom loop cooling options alongside an RTX 3050. It starts at $1,599 without the new chip, so expect to pay at least $2,339.

Razer fans will likely love the R1 Razer Edition. It's covered in the gaming giant's distinctive logo and traditional green color. There's plenty of RGB, and the base model has an RTX 3060 Ti but no custom loop option. It starts at $1,699 without the 12900KS, which means it'll likely be around $2,440.

Finally, there's the Rush desktop. It uses a Lian Li O11 Dynamic XL E-ATX Full Tower chassis covered in tempered glass, and you can add even more fans if you wish. All three cooling options are available—the custom loop comes with a huge distribution plate at the front. It starts at $2,299 with an RTX 3050 but sans Intel's new CPU, so expect to pay at least $3,000 for the privilege of owning one of these monsters.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/93961-intel-core-i9-12900ks-launches-april-5-maingear.html

 
I am sure it will be the fastest overall, however if the extra performance over a 12900K or even 12700K is worth the noticeable additional cost is another question altogether.

If the higher boost clocks are due to thermal velocity boost, this will mean you only get there with the necessary high end cooling set-up and power delivery.
 
Irata said:
I am sure it will be the fastest overall, however if the extra performance over a 12900K or even 12700K is worth the noticeable additional cost is another question altogether.

If the higher boost clocks are due to thermal velocity boost, this will mean you only get there with the necessary high end cooling set-up and power delivery.
Click to expand...
I wonder if this will be similar to the old Quad Core models... Q9400, Q9500, Q9600.... You could pay extra for the "privilege" of owning the 9600... but if you were going to overclock, the 9400 could reach the exact same speeds (or better)...

Wonder if OCing the 12700/12900 will give you the same performance as the 12900KS...
 
Honestly, I doubt it will be able to beat M1 Ultra: it might match it or take a symbolic win on *some* of the benchmarks sure, but you really gotta think that's the point if at the bare minimum the KS is doing it at 500% the power but if you want sustained performance and need exotic cooling solutions, probably up to 1000% or 2000% more power.

And even then if you're one of those people that truly and honestly would benefit for any gains on certain workloads, learning something like Final Cut instead of trying to run a part that truly and honestly should be reserved for a data center with massive, super noisy cooling systems would be a better prospect.

If you truly want the fastest performance for your video production or something, just get an M1 Max or Ultra instead. If you cannot leave without the versatility, it won't kill you to be maybe 10 or 15% slower with a 5950x instead.
 
Dimitriid said:
Honestly, I doubt it will be able to beat M1 Ultra: it might match it or take a symbolic win on *some* of the benchmarks sure, but you really gotta think that's the point if at the bare minimum the KS is doing it at 500% the power but if you want sustained performance and need exotic cooling solutions, probably up to 1000% or 2000% more power.

And even then if you're one of those people that truly and honestly would benefit for any gains on certain workloads, learning something like Final Cut instead of trying to run a part that truly and honestly should be reserved for a data center with massive, super noisy cooling systems would be a better prospect.

If you truly want the fastest performance for your video production or something, just get an M1 Max or Ultra instead. If you cannot leave without the versatility, it won't kill you to be maybe 10 or 15% slower with a 5950x instead.
Click to expand...
This really doesn't compete with the M1... while it certainly is a beast, the M1 is solely for the Apple infrastructure, so those who will purchase it are already "locked in"...

The Threadripper 3960 is $1400 I believe... and this comes pretty close to it in terms of performance - for just over half the price.... I believe that should be what Intel targets...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sausagemeat
Dimitriid said:
Honestly, I doubt it will be able to beat M1 Ultra: it might match it or take a symbolic win on *some* of the benchmarks sure, but you really gotta think that's the point if at the bare minimum the KS is doing it at 500% the power but if you want sustained performance and need exotic cooling solutions, probably up to 1000% or 2000% more power.

And even then if you're one of those people that truly and honestly would benefit for any gains on certain workloads, learning something like Final Cut instead of trying to run a part that truly and honestly should be reserved for a data center with massive, super noisy cooling systems would be a better prospect.

If you truly want the fastest performance for your video production or something, just get an M1 Max or Ultra instead. If you cannot leave without the versatility, it won't kill you to be maybe 10 or 15% slower with a 5950x instead.
Click to expand...
Comparing a maxed out desktop i7 to the M1 is bizarre. One is designed for max X86 performance in “enthusiast” level desktops and the other is a mobile based ARM part for low power mobile parts like laptops. They don’t even run the same software but if you could you would expect the 12900K to be faster.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MSIGamer
Yawn. Boring incremental increases since Bloomfield 2008. What is really needed is for Mucroshaft to actually make their operating system fully use multiple cores
 
loki1944 said:
Yawn. Boring incremental increases since Bloomfield 2008. What is really needed is for Mucroshaft to actually make their operating system fully use multiple cores
Click to expand...
Thanks so much for trolling... but the increases have actually been quite substantial since then...
 
Intel i9-12900KS $739
Ryzen 7 5800X3D $449

$290 difference in price what is it about this chip that intel thinks its worth that msrp?
 
Lionvibez said:
Intel i9-12900KS $739
Ryzen 7 5800X3D $449

$290 difference in price what is it about this chip that intel thinks its worth that msrp?
Click to expand...
Well, since it hasn't been released yet, and since the 12900 smoked the "original" 5900 (and 5800), I'm guessing that Intel is banking on more of the same...

If the 5800X3D actually DOES outperform the Alder Lake lineup (and not just in a few cherry-picked benchmarks), then I'd expect the price to drop....

Remember, the "regular" 12700 only costs $409 - and most likely will perform better than the 5800X3D - or at least be very close...
 
Squid Surprise said:
Well, since it hasn't been released yet, and since the 12900 smoked the "original" 5900 (and 5800), I'm guessing that Intel is banking on more of the same...

If the 5800X3D actually DOES outperform the Alder Lake lineup (and not just in a few cherry-picked benchmarks), then I'd expect the price to drop....

Remember, the "regular" 12700 only costs $409 - and most likely will perform better than the 5800X3D - or at least be very close...
Click to expand...
The 5800X3D will only come close or outperform the 12900k in games and proabably at 1440p and lower resolutions I don't see the cache helping that much for standard desktop workloads.
 
If it the faster desktop processor, why is it slower than the M1 Ultra? also, there are Ryzens out there. Or does it depend on what your definition of desktop is?
 
GregonMaui said:
Did you just make that up? Benchmarks I just searched for do not agree with you. Maybe you could send links?
Click to expand...
Well, it doesn't exist yet... it's being released on April 5... tell me you read the article... it's PROJECTED to be faster... obviously, we will have to wait and see...

wccftech.com

Intel Core i9-12900KS Up To 15% Faster Than Core i9-12900K In 3DMark CPU Benchmarks

The latest performance results of Intel's Core i9-12900KS 5.5 GHz Alder Lake CPU have leaked out within the 3DMark CPU benchmark tests.
wccftech.com wccftech.com

Here's the benchmark of it being faster than the 5950.... that's believable since the "regular" 12900 already was faster...
 
Sausagemeat said:
Comparing a maxed out desktop i7 to the M1 is bizarre. One is designed for max X86 performance in “enthusiast” level desktops and the other is a mobile based ARM part for low power mobile parts like laptops. They don’t even run the same software but if you could you would expect the 12900K to be faster.
Click to expand...
Sausagemeat said:
Comparing a maxed out desktop i7 to the M1 is bizarre. One is designed for max X86 performance in “enthusiast” level desktops and the other is a mobile based ARM part for low power mobile parts like laptops. They don’t even run the same software but if you could you would expect the 12900K to be faster.
Click to expand...
What is bizarre is to say you are fastest when you are not. And it’s the M1 ultra, not M1. It is faster than the M1 released 2 years ago. I’m sure gamers would be happy with Intel (not going to waste my time). Work is work, as long as the software performs the job, doesn’t matter what it is
 
GregonMaui said:
What is bizarre is to say you are fastest when you are not. And it’s the M1 ultra, not M1. It is faster than the M1 released 2 years ago. I’m sure gamers would be happy with Intel (not going to waste my time). Work is work, as long as the software performs the job, doesn’t matter what it is
Click to expand...
You've got some evidence to provide that states it isn't?
 
Squid Surprise said:
Well, it doesn't exist yet... it's being released on April 5... tell me you read the article... it's PROJECTED to be faster... obviously, we will have to wait and see...

wccftech.com

Intel Core i9-12900KS Up To 15% Faster Than Core i9-12900K In 3DMark CPU Benchmarks

The latest performance results of Intel's Core i9-12900KS 5.5 GHz Alder Lake CPU have leaked out within the 3DMark CPU benchmark tests.
wccftech.com wccftech.com

Here's the benchmark of it being faster than the 5950.... that's believable since the "regular" 12900 already was faster...
Click to expand...
“Well, it doesn't exist yet... it's being released on April 5... tell me you read the article... it's PROJECTED to be faster... obviously, we will have to wait and see.” If it didnt exist yet, couldn’t release it next week. There are test machines and review machines out there and lots of manufactured chips (or they couldn’t sell them cause they don’t exist yet, LOL). And in those reviews the preliminary scores are around 19000. These pre- release scores have been widely accurate - you simply couldn’t sell untested chips
 
GregonMaui said:
“Well, it doesn't exist yet... it's being released on April 5... tell me you read the article... it's PROJECTED to be faster... obviously, we will have to wait and see.” If it didnt exist yet, couldn’t release it next week. There are test machines and review machines out there and lots of manufactured chips (or they couldn’t sell them cause they don’t exist yet, LOL). And in those reviews the preliminary scores are around 19000. These pre- release scores have been widely accurate - you simply couldn’t sell untested chips
Click to expand...
The M1 Ultra isn't in competition with this chip... it's for MAC workstations.... this is for PC Desktops....

You do understand this, right?

One could argue that the Threadripper lineup is faster.... I'm sure Intel would point out that single core performance is faster on the 12900... not to mention it's a fraction of Threadripper prices...

Once the CPU is actually in reviewer hands (and embargos are lifted), we can actually get some apples to apples comparisons...
 
Squid Surprise said:
The M1 Ultra isn't in competition with this chip... it's for MAC workstations.... this is for PC Desktops....

You do understand this, right?

One could argue that the Threadripper lineup is faster.... I'm sure Intel would point out that single core performance is faster on the 12900... not to mention it's a fraction of Threadripper prices...

Once the CPU is actually in reviewer hands (and embargos are lifted), we can actually get some apples to apples comparisons...
Click to expand...
I do understand when someone is being impolite, yes. Faster is faster, if you want to split up the market than just say fastest Intel chip
 
GregonMaui said:
I do understand when someone is being impolite, yes. Faster is faster, if you want to split up the market than just say fastest Intel chip
Click to expand...
But the M1 Ultra ISN'T faster... it may score higher on a synthetic benchmark... but will it run anything that you would buy an Intel CPU for faster than the 12900?

It also beats the fastest Ryzen desktop CPUs... I've noticed you've backed away from your original statement on that one...

We won't know for sure until April 5th (or later)...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lionvibez
GregonMaui said:
I do understand when someone is being impolite, yes. Faster is faster, if you want to split up the market than just say fastest Intel chip
Click to expand...
You will need a range of benchmarks over many workloads to determine what is faster not Geekbench one synthetic benchmark.

Apple also said the M1 Ultra was faster than the 3090..
 
  • Like
Reactions: Squid Surprise
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Scorpus
  • Locked
Intel is relaunching the Core i9-14900K... wait, it's the 6.2GHz Core i9-14900KS
2 3
Replies
55
Views
1K
erickmendes
erickmendes
Shawn Knight
Maingear launches Zero Series gaming desktops with hidden motherboard connectors
Replies
3
Views
170
hahahanoobs
hahahanoobs
Daniel Sims
Indie developers say the Game Pass and Epic Games Store gravy train is over
Replies
16
Views
295
ZedRM
ZedRM

Latest posts

Back