Intel's Core i9-13900K tops the single thread performance charts

Jimmy2x

Posts: 141   +11
Staff
Forward-looking: Performance information continues to flow as we close in on Intel and AMD's next-generation release dates. Both platforms are expected to significantly improve clock speed and instructions per cycle (IPC) over their predecessors. PassMark's latest single thread CPU benchmark seems to support those expectations, with Intel's 13900K sitting at the top of the charts.

The recently published single-thread benchmark score of 4,883 leaves little doubt regarding the new Intel flagship's capabilities. The 24-core i9 processor's eight performance and 16 efficiency cores can reach as high as 5.8GHz thanks to Intel's Thermal Velocity Boost (TVB) technology. The new architecture, combined with the i9's TVB technology, resulted in a more than 400-point increase over the previous single thread champion, the i9-12900KS.

Thermal Velocity Boost allows select Intel processors to unlock further performance when enough thermal headroom and additional power are available. The technology debuted several years ago and can drive more than 240W to the 13900K, boosting the two highest performance cores north of 5.8GHz.

The published information confirms previously reported rumors regarding the 13900K's performance. Earlier this year, i9-13900K engineering samples were reported to feature 5.5GHz all P-core turbo clock speeds, with boosts up to 5.8GHz across two loaded cores. The increase represents a significant improvement over the previous generation's flagship 12900K CPU.

Leaked information from ECSM and OneRaichu, discussed changes to Raptor Lake, including a new ring bus design, larger L2 and L3 cache, and improvements to latency and bandwidth. The changes resulted in 13% higher single-core performance and 42% multi-core performance in Cinebench's R23 benchmark.

With Raptor Lake launching later in October, fans have less than one month before Intel lifts information embargos. Then we can provide you with access to accurate product and performance information rather than unverifiable leaks and speculation.

The 7000 series launch is just around the corner on September 27th, which means AMD will have almost an entire month to establish a foothold with their new line of CPUs. Can Raptor Lake maintain enough buzz and momentum to persuade customers to wait for their release, or is Team Blue at risk of losing more of the desktop CPU market share based on its deployment window? Only time and customer activity will tell.

Permalink to story.

 

passwordistaco

Posts: 411   +948
That's still <10% improvement, in that benchmark, with no mention of comparative power use. More than half of that improvement comes from 300Hz (~5.5% higher clocks than the 12900KS) higher TVB clocks, leaving IPC gains at <5%. At least with only 1 or 2 cores boosted, it should still be in a reasonable range for watts.
 
Last edited:

Nanochip

Posts: 109   +153
Only a month wait for raptor lake to launch after zen 4 is better than years of delays. A month won’t mean much at least intel has a competitive part coming.

With zen 3, amd decimated comet lake, and rocket lake launched several months later and was no match for zen 3, and its not until alder lake 6 months after that that intel was able to temporarily stop the rapid ascent of ryzen in terms of market share.

The question I have is when will meteor lake and arrow lake launch, will they come before or after zen 5, and what features will z890/z990 bring to consumers in terms of pcie5.0 m2 slots thunderbolt 5 or usb 4v2 etc.

I’m glad to see intel and amd competing well with each other, it was sad to see a one sided fight with intel dominating with quad cores for years, and then amd dominating after intel couldn’t volume ramp 10 nm.
 

Avro Arrow

Posts: 3,082   +3,979
TechSpot Elite
Only a month wait for raptor lake to launch after zen 4 is better than years of delays. A month won’t mean much at least intel has a competitive part coming.
The question is, will it be competitive with Zen 4?
With zen 3, amd decimated comet lake, and rocket lake launched several months later and was no match for zen 3, and its not until alder lake 6 months after that that intel was able to temporarily stop the rapid ascent of ryzen in terms of market share.
That's not a good thing because AMD still hasn't hit parity with Intel AFAIK.
I’m glad to see intel and amd competing well with each other, it was sad to see a one sided fight with intel dominating with quad cores for years, and then amd dominating after intel couldn’t volume ramp 10 nm.
I didn't think it was sad. When Intel dominated with quad-cores for a decade, it was because they were involved in shady practices. That didn't make me sad, it pissed me right off and I swore that I'd never buy Intel again.

When AMD made that huge comeback with Ryzen, it wasn't sad because it meant that AMD wasn't going to die as was previously feared. Also, Intel was getting what it deserved after what they pulled. There was nothing sad about that, in fact, I found it remarkably satisfying.

Even though most people couldn't see the bigger picture (the danger of a REAL Intel monopoly) and bought Intel anyway, I stuck by my guns. In the last 14 years, I've used a Phenom II X4 940, a Phenom II X4 965, an FX-8350, an R7-1700 and an R5-3600X. My next CPU will be an R7-5800X3D and by the time that needs replaced, I'll be into Zen4+ or Zen5 territory. As I expected, I've been perfectly happy not buying Intel and I've saved a crap-tonne of money in the process.
 

Nanochip

Posts: 109   +153
The question is, will it be competitive with Zen 4?

That's not a good thing because AMD still hasn't hit parity with Intel AFAIK.

I didn't think it was sad. When Intel dominated with quad-cores for a decade, it was because they were involved in shady practices. That didn't make me sad, it pissed me right off and I swore that I'd never buy Intel again.

When AMD made that huge comeback with Ryzen, it wasn't sad because it meant that AMD wasn't going to die as was previously feared. Also, Intel was getting what it deserved after what they pulled. There was nothing sad about that, in fact, I found it remarkably satisfying.

Even though most people couldn't see the bigger picture (the danger of a REAL Intel monopoly) and bought Intel anyway, I stuck by my guns. In the last 14 years, I've used a Phenom II X4 940, a Phenom II X4 965, an FX-8350, an R7-1700 and an R5-3600X. My next CPU will be an R7-5800X3D and by the time that needs replaced, I'll be into Zen4+ or Zen5 territory. As I expected, I've been perfectly happy not buying Intel and I've saved a crap-tonne of money in the process.
When amd was on top with zen3, it raised prices compared to zen2. It’s not until the 12th gen came out with aggressive pricing and the 12900k toppled the mighty 5950x in many tasks that zen3 prices began to decline. Micro center used to sell the 5950x at $799… and within a few months after the 12900k came out, the 5950x declined to $549 then to $499. That would never have happened if intel 12th gen wasn’t so strong.

Amd is a for profit corporation and naturally wants to maximize profit. They are not your friend. If intel is weak, amd will raise prices as much as possible, as they already have shown with zen3. Strong competition between the two x86 vendors will not only keep pricing in check, but they will push each other to innovate and release even better tech.

I lean on the side of strong competition between the two brands. It will be a much more vibrant market.
 

lripplinger

Posts: 377   +169
Power hungry, and hot. Things that Intel seems to have reverted too. Reminds of the Pentium 4 days, when they sucked down the power. I am more interested in the upcoming AMD AM5 platform, quite frankly.
 

Nanochip

Posts: 109   +153
Power hungry, and hot. Things that Intel seems to have reverted too. Reminds of the Pentium 4 days, when they sucked down the power. I am more interested in the upcoming AMD AM5 platform, quite frankly.
Zen 4 will literally consume more power than zen3. Socket power 230 under full load, and probably even more when overlocked. And to be fair to intel and amd, both chips don’t consume the full tdp at idle or even during gaming. It’s only when you’re using all cores at once at full load is when you’ll see higher power. And one can always undervolt their cpu and limit its all core turbo ratio to keep thermals and power consumption in check.
 
Last edited:

Puiu

Posts: 5,875   +4,885
TechSpot Elite
Zen 4 will literally consume more power than zen3. Socket power 230 under full load, and probably even more when overlocked. And to be fair to intel and amd, both chips don’t consume the full tdp at idle or even during gaming. It’s only when you’re using all cores at once at full load is when you’ll see higher power. And one can always undervolt their cpu and limit its all core turbo ratio to keep thermals and power consumption in check.
I'm more worried about how different boards will handle power limits for the 13900K since we know that without limits the power usage goes up by about 100W.

I'm also very sad that I can't undervolt the 12700H in my laptop :(