Intel unveils 13th-gen Core desktop CPUs with more cores, higher frequencies

Tudor Cibean

Posts: 160   +10
Staff
Something to look forward to: After months of leaks, Intel has finally announced its first "Raptor Lake" 13th-gen Core desktop processors alongside the new Z790 chipset. The new CPUs will compete against AMD's Ryzen 7000 series. Stay tuned for our reviews coming next month.

On Tuesday, Intel launched its Raptor Lake processors with double the amount of E-cores compared to their Alder Lake (AL) counterparts, and each cluster of four E-cores now has access to 4MB of L2 cache (vs. 2MB on AL). The P-core count remains the same across the lineup, although they use the new Raptor Cove architecture. Intel didn't go into much detail on the new arch but mentioned it comes with improved speed paths and 2MB L2 cache per core, compared to 1.25MB in the previous gen.

Raptor Lake CPUs have a larger shared L3 cache pool, up to 36MB, while the ring bus can now boost up to 900 MHz higher. The IMC also got an update, as all models include DDR5-5600 (up from DDR5-4800 on AL) and DDR4-3200 memory support.

Intel initially launched three models, each available with and without built-in graphics. The Core i9-13900K(F) features 8 P-cores and 16 E-cores for 24 CPU cores and 32 threads (E-cores miss out on hyperthreading). Clock speeds are equally impressive, with the E-cores boosting up to 4.3 GHz and the P-cores reaching 5.8 GHz if you have sufficient cooling. It has a maximum turbo power rating of 253W compared to 240W on the i9-12900K.

The Core i7-13700K(F) packs 8 P-cores and 8 E-cores for 16 cores and 24 threads. Frequencies range from 5.4 GHz on the P-cores and 4.2 GHz on the E-cores. Power limits are the same as on the Core i9.

Lastly, the Core i5-13600K(F) comes with 14 cores (6P + 8E) and 20 threads. It can boost up to 5.1 GHz on its performance cores and 3.9 GHz on the efficient cores while only requiring 181W for max turbo.

Pricing is surprisingly reasonable, with the Core i9 and Core i7 models costing the same as their Alder Lake counterparts, while the Core i5 variants got a $30 price hike.

Intel has provided several graphs highlighting that the new 13th-gen processors are faster in gaming and content creation than Zen 3 and Alder Lake chips. However, the real question is how these CPUs will stack up against AMD's Ryzen 7000 lineup.

Team Blue also unveiled its new Z790 chipset yesterday. Existing 600-series motherboards will support 13th-gen CPUs, but the new Z790 motherboards come with eight additional PCIe 4.0 lanes and one extra 20 Gbps USB connector.

Intel's 13th-gen unlocked desktop processors will start shipping on October 20, the same day Z790 motherboards go on sale. The company has also teased a pre-binned SKU boosting up to 6 GHz for early next year, likely a successor to the Core i9-12900KS.

Permalink to story.

 

CapNemo72

Posts: 11   +24
What times do we live?

Intel is outpricing AMD!

Love it.

Just wait & see. No rush to buy. Usually, the first batch comes with small issues that are rectified with future revisions (both AMD and Intel), so I will probably look to buy end of next year or 2024.

Even if you need to buy now, I would wait one month to see what actually Intel brings, and maybe AMD will react to (with adjusted prices, I am sure they were planning that)
 

Vulcanproject

Posts: 1,576   +2,916
I have trawled a lot of 7600X reviews now, and found it certainly edges the 12600k overall, but not by a lot especially if you're looking at mixed use. It's $299. One must suspect the 13600K/KF variants are going to be faster at that comparable $300 price point. Intel will surely find at the very least 10 percent boost generation on generation but probably a tad more.

So I would hope the prices of these big volume midrange chips from AMD drop quite quickly if that proves to be the case. Not by much but it should boost value if you can find a 7600X for $280.
 

ThrakazogZ

Posts: 77   +107
I love how they made the 5800X3D a tiny horizontal bar on the gaming performance chart, to make it tougher to see that it beat their best Raptor Lake chip in at least 3 of the games listed.....lol.
EDIT: Seems they used the fastest, highest quality ram for their Intel chips.....while using slow, gimped ram for the AMD chips, as well. I imagine the 5800X3D might have taken the top spot in all the games on the chart (or close) if they had also used fast ram for the AMD measurements.
 
Last edited:

AlaskaGuy

Posts: 678   +539
Congrats Intel, you have managed to outperform an AMD CPU from 2020, compared to Intel CPU's from 2022!
Intel Core i5 13400F + B660 / B670 board + DDR4 3600


zen43.gif
 

NeoMorpheus

Posts: 1,393   +2,958
Intel is outpricing AMD!
Thats one of the main reasons why I hate Intel and still refuse to give them any money, because they are doing that now and once we all abandon AMD, they will go back to r@pe us without lube as they did during the 4 core hell decade.

They need to lose a lot more market share before they get a penny from me.
That said, you can count that AMD will make cuts, since those are simply MSRP and we know that retailers offered Zen 3 cpus bellow MSRP.
 

AlaskaGuy

Posts: 678   +539
Thats one of the main reasons why I hate Intel and still refuse to give them any money, because they are doing that now and once we all abandon AMD, they will go back to r@pe us without lube.

They need to lose a lot more market share before they get a penny from me.
That said, you can count that AMD will make cuts, since those are simply MSRP and we know that retailers offered Zen 3 cpus bellow MSRP.
Spend more for less. That will show them!
 

CowsGotMilk

Posts: 105   +229
At least on paper. I like the prices though. Better than Zen4 prices.
It's just the irony. Both 12900K and 13900K are released in 2022 and Intel is telling "Hey, we beat you AMD". Open your eyes guys, Ryzen 5000 series was released in 2020. So Intel is comparing it's new CPU's to 2 years old technology!

The competitor now is not Ryzen 5000 series, but the Ryzen 7000 series!

And also, today Linus Tech Tips released a video "Play fair, Intel", revealing that Intel's released benchmarks are misleading.
 
Last edited:

AlaskaGuy

Posts: 678   +539
It's just the irony. Both 12900K and 13900K are released in 2022 and Intel is telling "Hey, we beat you AMD". Open your eyes guys, Ryzen 5000 series was released in 2020. So Intel is comparing it's new CPU's to 2 years old technology!

The competitor now is not Ryzen 5000 series, but the Ryzen 7000 series!
My guess is those graphs were made before there were any official reviews of Zen 4.
 

KaitouX

Posts: 25   +31
EDIT: Seems they used the fastest, highest quality ram for their Intel chips.....while using slow, gimped ram for the AMD chips, as well. I imagine the 5800X3D might have taken the top spot in all the games on the chart (or close) if they had also used fast ram for the AMD measurements.
I don't really see them gimping AMD. The 5800X3D was tested with "DDR4 CL 14-14-14-34, 2X 16GB DDR4-3200", you could argue that DDR4-3600 should've been used, but Zen 3 official support is up to 3200, so I would say going for the highest on the official support is fine, particularly when they also used the highest officially supported DDR5 for their own, and not DDR5 6400 or something like that.
 

DSirius

Posts: 366   +759
TechSpot Elite
What times do we live?

Intel is outpricing AMD!

Love it.

Just wait & see. No rush to buy. Usually, the first batch comes with small issues that are rectified with future revisions (both AMD and Intel), so I will probably look to buy end of next year or 2024.

Even if you need to buy now, I would wait one month to see what actually Intel brings, and maybe AMD will react to (with adjusted prices, I am sure they were planning that)

The Hunger games after buyer's money began!
 

Arbie

Posts: 427   +751
Sadly, I no longer believe anything Intel says. Regardless, I won't spend one cent on their products. If it weren't for AMD we'd still be paying $300 for quad-cores and $1100 for 10-cores. And would be doing so forever.

I certainly don't care if AMD charges more for equivalent products because that means we have and will have those products! Which we didn't, and won't, if they fail.

In fact I'll pay extra for AMD if they can even come close! They can't win every round against Intel. The crucial thing is that they stay in business to keep moving the bar up.

Only someone with no grasp of or care for the big picture, or in some arcane business case, would give Intel money now or in the foreseeable future. All the CPU progress in all the years ahead is far more important than a few FPS in some game today. Intel has proven that without AMD there will be no progress.

Which I only realized in 2017, and in hindsight. That's the year our butts got saved. What a miracle that was!

When and if AMD even begins to threaten Intel's existence in CPUs, I'll switch back, for the same reasons.
 

NeoMorpheus

Posts: 1,393   +2,958
Sadly, I no longer believe anything Intel says. Regardless, I won't spend one cent on their products. If it weren't for AMD we'd still be paying $300 for quad-cores and $1100 for 10-cores. And would be doing so forever.

I certainly don't care if AMD charges more for equivalent products because that means we have and will have those products! Which we didn't, and won't, if they fail.

In fact I'll pay extra for AMD if they can even come close! They can't win every round against Intel. The crucial thing is that they stay in business to keep moving the bar up.

Only someone with no grasp of or care for the big picture, or in some arcane business case, would give Intel money now or in the foreseeable future. All the CPU progress in all the years ahead is far more important than a few FPS in some game today. Intel has proven that without AMD there will be no progress.

Which I only realized in 2017, and in hindsight. That's the year our butts got saved. What a miracle that was!

When and if AMD even begins to threaten Intel's existence in CPUs, I'll switch back, for the same reasons.
Thank you!
There is hope for us after all, because reading the previous posts from the others, I thought I was alone in that boat.
 

DSirius

Posts: 366   +759
TechSpot Elite
Sadly, I no longer believe anything Intel says. Regardless, I won't spend one cent on their products. If it weren't for AMD we'd still be paying $300 for quad-cores and $1100 for 10-cores. And would be doing so forever.

I certainly don't care if AMD charges more for equivalent products because that means we have and will have those products! Which we didn't, and won't, if they fail.

In fact I'll pay extra for AMD if they can even come close! They can't win every round against Intel. The crucial thing is that they stay in business to keep moving the bar up.

Only someone with no grasp of or care for the big picture, or in some arcane business case, would give Intel money now or in the foreseeable future. All the CPU progress in all the years ahead is far more important than a few FPS in some game today. Intel has proven that without AMD there will be no progress.

Which I only realized in 2017, and in hindsight. That's the year our butts got saved. What a miracle that was!

When and if AMD even begins to threaten Intel's existence in CPUs, I'll switch back, for the same reasons.
I agree.
Adding to all of these, for the same performance between AMD and Intel processors, AMD has a better offer overall due to the longevity and better options of AM5 platform. Thus, I choose to buy a Zen4 processor for my next productivity computer. As for the MB, I decided to wait more days, and buy after the prices will be reasonable and not so inflated as nowadays.
I think that the prices will become quite soon more reasonable, thanks to Intel, for their great move to launch 13th gen processors with better prices than Zen4.
As for the gaming computer, I decided to wait for Ryzen 7800X3D and compare which one between Intel and AMD will offer best price/performance then.
Though I must say that, because I prefer longevity for the platform, Intel is really driving me away as a customer with their switch to a new MB (or socket) every 2 years.
 

AlaskaGuy

Posts: 678   +539
I agree.
Adding to all of these, for the same performance between AMD and Intel processors, AMD has a better offer overall due to the longevity and better options of AM5 platform. Thus, I choose to buy a Zen4 processor for my next productivity computer. As for the MB, I decided to wait more days, and buy after the prices will be reasonable and not so inflated as nowadays.
I think that the prices will become quite soon more reasonable, thanks to Intel, for their great move to launch 13th gen processors with better prices than Zen4.
As for the gaming computer, I decided to wait for Ryzen 7800X3D and compare which one between Intel and AMD will offer best price/performance then.
Though I must say that, because I prefer longevity for the platform, Intel is really driving me away as a customer with their switch to a new MB (or socket) every 2 years.
What options? Unlike AMD, Intel offers both DDR4 and DDR5 support.
 

NeoMorpheus

Posts: 1,393   +2,958
What options? Unlike AMD, Intel offers both DDR4 and DDR5 support.
And?

Why would you want to use DDR4 when the industry is moving to DDR5?
Fine, you have DDR4 now and perhaps can use it for a little bit longer, if thats the case, upgrading the CPU to either camp is not really worth it for you.
For the rest, if you are moving on, move all the way, CPU. mobo and ddr5.
 

AlaskaGuy

Posts: 678   +539
And?

Why would you want to use DDR4 when the industry is moving to DDR5?
Fine, you have DDR4 now and perhaps can use it for a little bit longer, if thats the case, upgrading the CPU to either camp is not really worth it for you.
For the rest, if you are moving on, move all the way, CPU. mobo and ddr5.
You should probably get out more. There's lots of people in lots of countries who want a new build yet can't afford DDR5 along with AMD's hose job prices.

i5 13400 / 13400F + B660 / B670 board + cheap DDR4 is going to be the big seller for gamers imo.

 

McMurdeR

Posts: 603   +804
If you dont understand the main point of my post, then there is no hope for us.

And reading post like yours, anyone would think that those CPU are at least 80% faster than AMD's.

Anyways, yeah, we are doomed.

It was funny though!

Folks buying inferior products for the money is precisely what allowed Intel to do what it did.

In any case, I'm in the market for a new CPU, and like everyone with a brain, I'll wait for the reviews to come in and take the promotional material with a pile of salt. That 7600x sure looks good, but it looks like it dissipates a lot of heat. I'm really not keen on the approach to temperature that AMD have taken with this family of CPUs. In fairnes Intel isn't much better. But hey, let's see when the reviews come in..
 

DSirius

Posts: 366   +759
TechSpot Elite
You should probably get out more. There's lots of people in lots of countries who want a new build yet can't afford DDR5 along with AMD's hose job prices.

i5 13400 / 13400F + B660 / B670 board + cheap DDR4 is going to be the big seller for gamers imo.

I think that this very good, future offer (now only on paper) can be easily contested by 5800X3D, and by future Ryzen 7000-3D variants. What is great is that finally we have options, and more than 2. I like this posture to ask myself should we go for DDR4 or DDR5, Intel or AMD? This is great because nowadays, both Intel and AMD offer us almost equal performance, so we can choose not just by necessity, we can choose for what we like and prefer most.