Intel Core i9-12900KS Review: Clocking in at 5.5 GHz

QuantumPhysics

Posts: 6,308   +7,248
"My CPU's got the clocks that rocks but it was obsolete before I opened the box".

I wonder if intel will get to 6GHz by the time I build my next machine?
 

Usukosej

Posts: 183   +82
5.5 on two cores is impressive and the watt usage in gaming is not really much more than Ryzen 5800X with OC too, but gaming performance is.. Really much more in truly CPU bound gaming (high fps gamers will care)

Alder Lake is 1st gen tech so I will not touch it but Raptor Lake.. maybe.. Can't wait to see Ryzen 7000 vs Intel 13th gen later this year
 

Neatfeatguy

Posts: 886   +1,524
Could have saved yourself all this time testing and benching if you just simply went:

12900KS boost clock is 5.5 and 12900K boost clock is 5.2

5.5/5.2 = 5.76%

The 12900KS is up to 6% faster than the 12900K. Nothing else had really changed, power draw is pretty much the same and the heat output is pretty much same.....

In the end, this CPU is about as impressive as the 3800XT was when compared to the 3800X.
 

Irata

Posts: 2,173   +3,755
Nice review, thanks. Tbh, I am somewhat surprised that for the most part, there is no real difference in gaming between the K and KS. That‘s probably due to having purged the memory of 3600/3800 XT and 9900KS reviews from my memory, as looking back at them results were similar.

Oh, and speaking of test samples that were not provided: Are you going to review the 5700X ?
 

sreams

Posts: 308   +437
Who buys a 12900KS and a 3090 Ti and then games at 1080p?

All of those performances advantages (compared to both Ryzen and to the 12900K) become much smaller when using the system how it will actually be used.
 

umbala

Posts: 653   +1,156
240watts... yikes! I remember when Intel used to brag about their CPUs having a 95watt TDP. Can't wait to see what they'll do after AMD releases their next CPU and pull ahead slightly. Maybe Intel can push their TDP to 600watts, you know because power usage no longer matters.
 

wiyosaya

Posts: 7,845   +6,829
sIntel playing the "mo clock cycles is betta and heps us pwn AMD" again. I guess that they have not heard the Einstein saying "Insanity is doing the same things over and over and expecting different results". 🤣
 

WhiteLeaff

Posts: 12   +7
WD.png


It seems that something is wrong, should the 2080ti perform so close to the 3090ti?
 

PCNP543

Posts: 15   +22
"If it's going to be 30 or 50 percent more expensive"

Why on earth would you say 50%? I mean, if you're just making stuff up to make Intel look bad, why didn't you question if wasn't going to cost 4500% more? Or maybe you could have suggested it might cost 12 billion dollars. That would have given people even more ammunition to call Intel crazy and stupid. I mean 12 billion dollars for a desktop processor, who does Intel think they are??!?!!

Seriously, Newegg mistakenly put up the page last week. $799. A solid 30% more. Today it was confirmed. Yea, a bit of a money grab, but to suggest it was going to be $1200???? Come on, your bias is showing and your credibility is toast.
 

AKBrian

Posts: 8   +18
"If it's going to be 30 or 50 percent more expensive"

Why on earth would you say 50%? I mean, if you're just making stuff up to make Intel look bad, why didn't you question if wasn't going to cost 4500% more? Or maybe you could have suggested it might cost 12 billion dollars. That would have given people even more ammunition to call Intel crazy and stupid. I mean 12 billion dollars for a desktop processor, who does Intel think they are??!?!!

Seriously, Newegg mistakenly put up the page last week. $799. A solid 30% more. Today it was confirmed. Yea, a bit of a money grab, but to suggest it was going to be $1200???? Come on, your bias is showing and your credibility is toast.

His exact wording was: "In other markets such as Australia it's closer to 50%, with finalized pricing still pending at the time of publishing this review."

Checking on MWave, the 12900K goes for $829 AUD, while the 12900KS is listed at $1,199 AUD - a difference of 45%.

Pretty spot on.
 

Sausagemeat

Posts: 1,597   +1,422
This thing will sell ridiculously well. It will be to entrepreneurs, bankers, skilled contractors, stockbrokers etc. Basically successful people who don’t mind spending a bit more time to have the best.

And the lowest common denominators of this forum will have the nerve to call those people “dumb”.
 

Puiu

Posts: 5,647   +4,608
TechSpot Elite
Could have saved yourself all this time testing and benching if you just simply went:

12900KS boost clock is 5.5 and 12900K boost clock is 5.2

5.5/5.2 = 5.76%

The 12900KS is up to 6% faster than the 12900K. Nothing else had really changed, power draw is pretty much the same and the heat output is pretty much same.....

In the end, this CPU is about as impressive as the 3800XT was when compared to the 3800X.
Power draw and heat went up :)
 

Strawman

Posts: 577   +294
A 12900KS & 3090Ti....An Epeen knobs wet dream Double Hyper Combo Finish!

Hmmm, I wonder who on this forum, for whom these two parts were made for.....Let me think.
I would definitely buy them if I didn't already have a 3090 and a 12900k.
 

Strawman

Posts: 577   +294
Who buys a 12900KS and a 3090 Ti and then games at 1080p?

The same person that kept his 8700k for 4 years because he could upgrade his card and not have a massive bottleneck like he would have if he went for a ryzen 7 1700.

What I mean is, you can put a 4090 or even a 5090 on 12900k and be fine. You can't do that with any zen 3 CPU.
 

sreams

Posts: 308   +437
The same person that kept his 8700k for 4 years because he could upgrade his card and not have a massive bottleneck like he would have if he went for a ryzen 7 1700.

What I mean is, you can put a 4090 or even a 5090 on 12900k and be fine. You can't do that with any zen 3 CPU.

?

Nobody will run a 3090 Ti at 1080p. The "massive bottleneck" you describe begins to disappear as resolution increases and the GPU becomes the limiting factor.

People who are running games at 1080p aren't buying bleeding edge video cards. On the other hand, people who are buying a 3090 Ti are running games at a high enough resolution that the difference between a 5900x and a 12900KS will be minimal.
 

Strawman

Posts: 577   +294
?

Nobody will run a 3090 Ti at 1080p. The "massive bottleneck" you describe begins to disappear as resolution increases and the GPU becomes the limiting factor.

People who are running games at 1080p aren't buying bleeding edge video cards. On the other hand, people who are buying a 3090 Ti are running games at a high enough resolution that the difference between a 5900x and a 12900KS will be minimal.
Yes, and these people will eventually buy a 4090 and a 5090, and that point theyd need to upgrade their 5900x, while on the other hand, they can keep their 12900k
 

sreams

Posts: 308   +437
Yes, and these people will eventually buy a 4090 and a 5090, and that point theyd need to upgrade their 5900x, while on the other hand, they can keep their 12900k

You've described an uncommon, cherry picked scenario. One could have said the same about 5900x vs Comet Lake not all that long ago. The number of people such a scenario applies to is minimal compared to the market. People buying a 5090 are, for the most part, going to be looking at whatever CPUs are available at that time.