These new AMD’s are lining up nicely to be easily leapfrogged by Raptor Lake here soon…
I’ll def be considering an i5 13400
Leapfrogged? Not quite. At best, competitive.
These new AMD’s are lining up nicely to be easily leapfrogged by Raptor Lake here soon…
I’ll def be considering an i5 13400
Great for productivity, but for gaming the 3D chips is what people will want to wait for. The 5800x3D still looks amazing.
I have an Aorus 360 already. Yes, I heard that RL can be hottie too. Really, increasing the performance by increasing the wattage and the speed is not very good engineering on my book. Heat emission is insane.I have an old Threaripper 1950x (180W TDP), so higher than both 3950x and 7950x:
And I am cooling that with air cpu cooler (Arctic 33 TR). When I use it at 100%, it almost never goes over 80C. This was 35 bucks cooler. The price jumped to 50. If you have money for 7950x, you probably have money for a good cooler.
A very good 360 AIO water cooler goes for 130 bucks. Not that expensive ( relative to the CPU in case).
Intel is already using more power, do you think their next one will use less?
Please, compare actually usage not their official tdp as they calculate those differently.
Only good old measure at the power cable is relative and truthful.
Not sure what‘s so hard to understand - the 13400 is literally the 12600k with a new name and a noticeably lower boost frequency (4.5 Ghz vs 4.9 Ghz).Excuse me, I should have prefaced gaming and the 7600x specifically.
Also, contrary to what you say, the 13400 gets 4 e cores, a 200mhz boost along with more cache vs 12400. Thats quite the re-badge…
The youtubers that did test 1440p and 4k seemed to show a gpu bottle neck and we may need to see these ( even top Intel 12900k ) retested after the new cards come out from both Team Red and Team Green before we can see a definite difference!So I'm no PC guru and maybe I'm off here but from a gaming standpoint these benchmarks are only relevant at 1080p I guess? Would seem to me that at higher resolutions there would be almost zero difference between this CPU and more mid ranged CPUs?
Thats another way of looking at it yes but I think the word you should then be using is basically, not literally.Not sure what‘s so hard to understand - the 13400 is literally the 12600k with a new name and a noticeably lower boost frequency (4.5 Ghz vs 4.9 Ghz).
It does not have the new Raptor Cove cores that the 13600K and up do but it‘s literally the unchanged (albeit gimped) Alder Lake die. The definition of rebadging.
And if you think it will be offered for the same price as the 12400…
Indeed, but wait until the v-cache Zen 4 models drop. The results will be incredible.Great for productivity, but for gaming the 3D chips is what people will want to wait for. The 5800x3D still looks amazing.
Yeah fair point, and commercially it makes sense. But it's lazy, inefficient, and in most cases unnecessary. 22% better performance (than Eco mode) for nearly 3x the power is just the stupid way of doing it. It's the approach that make Rocket Lake (and many other Intel generations) crap for building cool quiet systems.In some way true. But, AMD CPU is still using less power than the comparable Intel CPU.
If Intel can, why AMD could not go for higher power?
I don‘t disagree that going for a 7600x for gaming with current board prices isn‘t a good option unless you go for a top of the line graphics card. Bang for buck wise, a 5600(x) or 12400 are far better.Thats another way of looking at it yes but I think the word you should then be using is basically, not literally.
I’ll still be going for it, cheaper board prices, no care for overclocking.
Price we will have to see, I believe the 12400 is $179 rn but was down to 159 at one time. I would guess you are correct that it will probably hover closer to the $200 range. Still worth it to me vs a $300 7600x and such expensive companion board
Is it disappointing to have the option to set various power limits with eco modes and get 90% of the performance at half or less power consumption, or, have the option to reap all the power it can have, at your fingertips?True. Anandtech have more details on this. But it's disappointing that AMD have chosen to chase the performance headlines to squeeze the performance to the max at the cost of going well beyond efficient power levels. IMO anyway.
Because by default 90%+ of people won't. It's wastefulIs it disappointing to have the option to set various power limits with eco modes and get 90% of the performance at half or less power consumption, or, have the option to reap all the power it can have, at your fingertips?
I'm thinking that is way better than just offering a lower performing chip without those options.
It seems like a much better approach to me ... not sure why anyone would be disappointed in having all the options easily available to them.
Because it's wasteful. 90%+ of users will just go with the defaults, blissfully unaware they're p*ssing energy up the wall. Maybe it's just me, but I hate this trend to spraffing energy like it's harmlessIn some way true. But, AMD CPU is still using less power than the comparable Intel CPU.
If Intel can, why AMD could not go for higher power?
I wanted to replace my 3950 with this new CPU but temps don't convince me. To have 95ºC in my case is just insane. I will wait for Raptor Lake.
Wow ! That‘s a pretty sweet deal.I share your sentiment in holding out for Raptor Lake and then seeing all the cards on the table. But just today I received a special sales notice from Micro Center giving away FREE 32GB DDR5 with any purchase of a Ryzen 7000 series CPU. I was wondering if AMD is sponsoring such a sales push and this early in the game? Why? Giving away a $190 value and as advertised is a big deal in the trying times of today! This said I wonder how many potential AMD buyers will jump and grab a 7000 series CPU even before all of the reviews are on record and have been regurgitated by the tech channels.
In all likeliness the performance of Zen4+cache will be much higher than regular Zen4 in games.For gamers that want performance per dollar, I think it’s going to be 7800x3d vs 13700kf. If the performance increase over a 5800x3d is minimal I’ll just buy one of those to tide me over
Because by default 90%+ of people won't. It's wasteful
I would, Ive had a 9600k for years…on a water cooler for aestheticsBy that logic, overclocking a CPU or GPU is 'wasteful' or 'disappointing' because most people don't 'use' it.
Not sure that anyone would agree with that line of thinking.
Eh? If you overclock then by definition you're electing to do it so even if you don't "need" it you want it.By that logic, overclocking a CPU or GPU is 'wasteful' or 'disappointing' because most people don't 'use' it.
Not sure that anyone would agree with that line of thinking.