Intel Core i7-12700KF Review: Better than Core i9?

Dimitrios

Posts: 1,058   +863
I don't understand the hate on both sides. The reason why AMD users are mad or laughing at INTEL is that we all expected better numbers and efficiency. To be honest I'm disappointed with INTEL. For a huge company with basically unlimited funds they aren't curb stomping AMD ( I'm an AMD guy). INTEL with WINDOWS 11 cuddling their new architecture and high power/ heat and issues with some old games and other oddities is just sad for the kind of company they are. With new GPU's running even hotter and drinking more watts good luck with thermal throttling and get ready to buy a new Power Supply very soon as well. I feel bad for INTEL & NVIDIA owners when summer comes.

From what I feel is that INTEL focused way more on their video cards than their CPU's. I think their cards will actually be the better product after the drivers get worked out. AMD in my opinion is stronger even with less money, AMD ran on peanuts when Lisa Su took over and look how far and quickly they succeeded.
 

Yenega

Posts: 302   +206
I don't understand the hate on both sides. The reason why AMD users are mad or laughing at INTEL is that we all expected better numbers and efficiency. To be honest I'm disappointed with INTEL. For a huge company with basically unlimited funds they aren't curb stomping AMD ( I'm an AMD guy). INTEL with WINDOWS 11 cuddling their new architecture and high power/ heat and issues with some old games and other oddities is just sad for the kind of company they are. With new GPU's running even hotter and drinking more watts good luck with thermal throttling and get ready to buy a new Power Supply very soon as well. I feel bad for INTEL & NVIDIA owners when summer comes.

From what I feel is that INTEL focused way more on their video cards than their CPU's. I think their cards will actually be the better product after the drivers get worked out. AMD in my opinion is stronger even with less money, AMD ran on peanuts when Lisa Su took over and look how far and quickly they succeeded.

i5-12600K and i7-12700K are way more efficient than i9-12900K.

i5-12600K beats 5800X in content creation and gaming;
https://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/core_i5_12600k_processor_review,21.html

But uses the same amount of power;
https://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/core_i5_12600k_processor_review,5.html

Alder Lake has better performance per watt than Ryzen 5000.

The end.

The miracle chips are not i9-12900K but i5 and i7 which 99% of consumers will be buying anyway. Who's stupid enough to pay 200 dollars more for the same performance in real world workloads? i7 is 400 dollars, i9 is 600 dollars. 50% higher price for 1% more performance.

i5-12400 looks to be 199 dollars with 5600X beating performance.

AMDs new pricing for 5600X will be 199 soon.
5800X = 299.
5900X = 399.
5950X = 499 or 599.
I expect an official statement in the coming weeks.

AMD mostly sold 5600X and 5800X ... 5900X and 5950X took forever to gain stock and I know a friend who waited almost half a year for his 5950X.

Just like Intel will mostly sell i5-12600K and i7-12700K.

Top SKUs and flagship products are often not selling well, because you pay a huge premium for almost nothing and you most often can OC the 2nd best to offer almost identical performance and save alot of money by doing so.

Most of the time these top-end products are just for show. They know they won't sell that many. Halo products.
 
Last edited:

Nintenboy01

Posts: 217   +174
I think what helped AMD was they had a lot of eager and talented engineers and leadership who had the passion to make a great product despite lacking the R&D budget of Intel and Nvidia. Meanwhile Intel became too complacent and couldn't iron out their process kinks in a timely fashion.
 

Evernessince

Posts: 5,469   +6,157
Ok, so the 12900k consumes 15w while gaming (minesweeper). So your 5600x consumes double

Technically this is not wrong and it illustrates why using gaming power consumption is not a meaningful metric for power consumption. Not only can it be greatly misleading but it doesn't inform you in regards to motherboard, CPU cooler, and PSU choice. It's also highly variable (as you demonstrate) and subject to change over time (or simply as games demand more resources).

I think it was a bad take for Steve to imply that due to the gaming power consumption, gamers don't need to consider max power consumption. Max power consumption is always the metric to use to ensure your PC will work regardless of the application being used. If you don't need this many cores and the associated power consumption, use a lower end part.
 

Strawman

Posts: 565   +290
Technically this is not wrong and it illustrates why using gaming power consumption is not a meaningful metric for power consumption. Not only can it be greatly misleading but it doesn't inform you in regards to motherboard, CPU cooler, and PSU choice. It's also highly variable (as you demonstrate) and subject to change over time (or simply as games demand more resources).
No it's neither wrong or misleading. It becomes misleading when amd fanboys are quoting their consumption on games like tetris. When ran the same games it is shown with incredible consistency that alder lake are way more efficient at gaming. Personally, I don't care, but since I chose a 12900k and nice to know that im saving power compared to if I've bought a 5900x or a 5950x.
 

HardReset

Posts: 1,665   +1,322
No it's neither wrong or misleading. It becomes misleading when amd fanboys are quoting their consumption on games like tetris. When ran the same games it is shown with incredible consistency that alder lake are way more efficient at gaming. Personally, I don't care, but since I chose a 12900k and nice to know that im saving power compared to if I've bought a 5900x or a 5950x.
Alder Lake is more efficient on gaming IF games chosen are games that do not stress CPU too much. Basically you are saying Alder Lake is more efficient because there are few Intel fanboy chosen low CPU stress games where it's more efficient. Try games that can use all available threads like Football Manager 2021 and talk about efficiency then.
 

Strawman

Posts: 565   +290
Alder Lake is more efficient on gaming IF games chosen are games that do not stress CPU too much. Basically you are saying Alder Lake is more efficient because there are few Intel fanboy chosen low CPU stress games where it's more efficient. Try games that can use all available threads like Football Manager 2021 and talk about efficiency then.
They tested it in cyberpunk and still it wipes the floor with the ryzens. The game maxed out my 10900k at 720p, so yeah..

Also, if the games chosen by "fanboys" don't stress the CPU, why do the amd ryzen's suck at them in terms of efficiency? What kind of stupid argument is that? The only fanboy here is you and don't know why, are you getting paid?
 

Nintenboy01

Posts: 217   +174
My 5800X consumes around 77-90 watts max in most games like Shadow of the Tomb Raider and Red Dead 2, not sure how Alder Lake does in comparison. This is with the games running over 100FPS most of the time
 

Evernessince

Posts: 5,469   +6,157
No it's neither wrong or misleading. It becomes misleading when amd fanboys are quoting their consumption on games like tetris. When ran the same games it is shown with incredible consistency that alder lake are way more efficient at gaming. Personally, I don't care, but since I chose a 12900k and nice to know that im saving power compared to if I've bought a 5900x or a 5950x.

Even if you used the same game every time (including the exact same version), it's still only a single game and not nearly large enough a sample size to represent gaming power consumption at large.

Mind you it does not correct the two issues this measurement has:

"It doesn't inform you in regards to motherboard, CPU cooler, and PSU choice. It's also highly variable (as you demonstrate) and subject to change over time (or simply as games demand more resources)."

If you pick a single title (as in this review) to use for gaming power consumption, as the prior poster demonstrated, power consumption can vary wildly from game to game.

FYI this review pretty clearly states that Alder lake is less efficient in CP2077, not more then Zen 3. It's just that it isn't as bad as when under full load for Alder Lake. So no, you aren't saving more power, you are using more. I'm not a fan of using total system power consumption either as it makes the difference in power consumption between the two seem smaller by including all the other system components. If you are going to include total system draw, CPU draw also needs to be included. Even in an ideal scenario for Alder lake it's still consuming 25w more.
 

Evernessince

Posts: 5,469   +6,157
Alder Lake is more efficient on gaming IF games chosen are games that do not stress CPU too much. Basically you are saying Alder Lake is more efficient because there are few Intel fanboy chosen low CPU stress games where it's more efficient. Try games that can use all available threads like Football Manager 2021 and talk about efficiency then.

Alder lake is not more efficient according to this review, even in lightly lthreaded workloads or at idle. Zen 3 is just more efficient across the board. Check the CP2077 power consumption chart. Mind you, TechSpot really need to do a more comprehensive game power consumption measurement next time if they want to include that. A single game is simply not enough to say one or the other is more efficient.
 

HardReset

Posts: 1,665   +1,322
They tested it in cyberpunk and still it wipes the floor with the ryzens. The game maxed out my 10900k at 720p, so yeah..

Also, if the games chosen by "fanboys" don't stress the CPU, why do the amd ryzen's suck at them in terms of efficiency? What kind of stupid argument is that? The only fanboy here is you and don't know why, are you getting paid?
I highly doubt it maxes out your 10900K.

Just like I explained. Low load scenarios like most games may show Alder Lake as more efficient. Like I also said, there are games that put much more stress on CPU. Efficiency on those loads would be nice to see.
Alder lake is not more efficient according to this review, even in lightly lthreaded workloads or at idle. Zen 3 is just more efficient across the board. Check the CP2077 power consumption chart. Mind you, TechSpot really need to do a more comprehensive game power consumption measurement next time if they want to include that. A single game is simply not enough to say one or the other is more efficient.
Exactly. Saying CPU A is more efficient than CPU B and data is single game is very misleading.
 

Strawman

Posts: 565   +290
Even if you used the same game every time (including the exact same version), it's still only a single game and not nearly large enough a sample size to represent gaming power consumption at large.

Mind you it does not correct the two issues this measurement has:

"It doesn't inform you in regards to motherboard, CPU cooler, and PSU choice. It's also highly variable (as you demonstrate) and subject to change over time (or simply as games demand more resources)."

If you pick a single title (as in this review) to use for gaming power consumption, as the prior poster demonstrated, power consumption can vary wildly from game to game.

FYI this review pretty clearly states that Alder lake is less efficient in CP2077, not more then Zen 3. It's just that it isn't as bad as when under full load for Alder Lake. So no, you aren't saving more power, you are using more. I'm not a fan of using total system power consumption either as it makes the difference in power consumption between the two seem smaller by including all the other system components. If you are going to include total system draw, CPU draw also needs to be included. Even in an ideal scenario for Alder lake it's still consuming 25w more.
Alder lake is not more efficient according to this review, even in lightly lthreaded workloads or at idle. Zen 3 is just more efficient across the board. Check the CP2077 power consumption chart. Mind you, TechSpot really need to do a more comprehensive game power consumption measurement next time if they want to include that. A single game is simply not enough to say one or the other is more efficient.
Wasn't talking about this review in particular. There are numerous reviews on the internet about gaming power consumption (derbauer / igor's lab for example) and they have plenty of games. Alderlake is way more efficient across the board, and at sometimes it's even up by 50% in efficiency, which is insane.
 

Dimitrios

Posts: 1,058   +863
They tested it in cyberpunk and still it wipes the floor with the ryzens. The game maxed out my 10900k at 720p, so yeah..

Also, if the games chosen by "fanboys" don't stress the CPU, why do the amd ryzen's suck at them in terms of efficiency? What kind of stupid argument is that? The only fanboy here is you and don't know why, are you getting paid?

If you know how to tune Ryzen's they can be very efficient. Changing the mode to POWER SAVE helps a lot! This is my Ryzen 3600 stays around 199-400MHZ voltage stays around 0.944 during internet and movies. temps 30c
 

Attachments

  • mode1.jpg
    mode1.jpg
    403.1 KB · Views: 1
  • Mode2.jpg
    Mode2.jpg
    554 KB · Views: 1

Evernessince

Posts: 5,469   +6,157
Wasn't talking about this review in particular. There are numerous reviews on the internet about gaming power consumption (derbauer / igor's lab for example) and they have plenty of games. Alderlake is way more efficient across the board, and at sometimes it's even up by 50% in efficiency, which is insane.

Igor's Lab still had Alder Lake behind the 5600X in 6 of the 10 games they tested. If anything Igor's Lab's tests show the variability that exist in gaming power consumption, where even among AAA games it can be anywhere from 70w to 130w on the same CPU.


That's best case scenario for Intel and it still looses. At Idle, single threaded, during gaming, and during full load Zen 3 uses less power.


I don't really get the point of focusing on Gaming power consumption either. It isn't representative of anything but power consumption in that particular game, it doesn't help you plan your build, and it isn't particularly a good metric for measuring power consumption due to variability. Other figures as demonstrated by TechPowerUp are already a good predictor of gaming power consumption plus the have the benefit of being helpful at a broad scale to the reader.
 

Strawman

Posts: 565   +290
Igor's Lab still had Alder Lake behind the 5600X in 6 of the 10 games they tested. If anything Igor's Lab's tests show the variability that exist in gaming power consumption, where even among AAA games it can be anywhere from 70w to 130w on the same CPU.


That's best case scenario for Intel and it still looses. At Idle, single threaded, during gaming, and during full load Zen 3 uses less power.


I don't really get the point of focusing on Gaming power consumption either. It isn't representative of anything but power consumption in that particular game, it doesn't help you plan your build, and it isn't particularly a good metric for measuring power consumption due to variability. Other figures as demonstrated by TechPowerUp are already a good predictor of gaming power consumption plus the have the benefit of being helpful at a broad scale to the reader.
But the 12900k isnt comparable to a 5600x. It is compared to the 5900x / 5950x and it smokes both in efficiency during gaming. Saying zen 3 wins in gaming efficiency is just blatantly lying. The very review you are quoting says thay intel slaps amd in the gaming efficiency department....

It seems that you also dont understand what efficiency is. Just because zen 3 consumes less power at lets say, single threaded workloads, that doesnt make it more efficient. So the power consumption graphs from techpoweup dont actually tell you anything. If zen has to work for double the amount of time to finish a single threaded workload then it will consume more power,therefore its less efficient.
 
Last edited: