Wednesday, September 29th 2021

Another Day, Another Intel Core i9-12900K Benchmark Leak

Remember that Core i9-12900K CPU-Z leak from last week? It had the multi-threaded score blurred out and now we know why. A new CPU-Z screenshot has shown up on Twitter and although the single threaded score is still beating the AMD Ryzen 5950X baseline single core score by a comfortable margin, it's behind when we're switching to the multi-threaded score.

It shouldn't really come as a surprise that eight big and eight small CPU cores doesn't beat AMD's 16 big cores, but this was apparently expected by some. This is not saying that Intel doesn't get close as you can see, but it's also worth keeping in mind that Intel runs on 24 threads vs. AMD's 32 threads. The Core i9-12900K is said to be running on stock clocks, but no other information was provided. Once again, take this for what it is while we wait for the actual launch date and proper benchmarks.
Source: @9550pro
Add your own comment

35 Comments on Another Day, Another Intel Core i9-12900K Benchmark Leak

#1
ExcuseMeWtf
So at this point it's pretty safe to expect better single-thread than Ryzens, though multithreaded one is up in the air, I suppose it will depend on OS scheduling (much fuss is made about W11 scheduler being aware of big.little)
Posted on Reply
#2
Richards
Intel 10nm superfin is bringing 15% performance as they claimed... alder lake is a revolution
Posted on Reply
#3
RidiculousOwO
It's known that this performance comes at the cost of huge power consumption and thermal output, according to multi sources, and this is recently confirmed by what's just posted by Toppc.
I wonder what's got into Intel's mind. Why can't they bring the power consumption down, even though they have used 10 nm process node... no... Intel 7 process node...
Posted on Reply
#4
ThaiTaffy
As swede keeps repeating until actual retail benchmarks are out I'm not inclined to believe anything leaked about intel chips. It wasn't long ago rocket lake leaks were telling us how good that generation was.
Posted on Reply
#5
lesovers
Single core scores in CPU-Z benchmark;

5950X 648
11900K 695
12900K 803

Single core scores in CineBench R20 benchmark (from Hardware Unboxed review of the 11900K) and scaling the 12900K from the CPU-Z results;

5950X 641
11900K 625
12900K 722

The 12900K is only 12.7% faster compared to the 5950X in the single core CineBench R20 benchmark!
This assumes the 12900K is not overclocked in the CPU-Z benchmark and is at stock speeds as this would make the results much worst for the 12900K.
Posted on Reply
#6
Crackong
Another Day, another hype
Posted on Reply
#7
yeeeeman
in any case, it looks miles better than their ... miserable 11900k effort.
Posted on Reply
#8
las
lesoversSingle core scores in CPU-Z benchmark;

5950X 648
11900K 695
12900K 803

Single core scores in CineBench R20 benchmark (from Hardware Unboxed review of the 11900K) and scaling the 12900K from the CPU-Z results;

5950X 641
11900K 625
12900K 722

The 12900K is only 12.7% faster compared to the 5950X in the single core CineBench R20 benchmark!
This assumes the 12900K is not overclocked in the CPU-Z benchmark and is at stock speeds as this would make the results much worst for the 12900K.
Not overclocked? It boosts to 5.3 on single thread from velocity boost IIRC so stock or OC won't matter much in terms of single thread scores unless they really do hit 5.4+ all-core on some chips like some peeps claim, won't change much in the end i guess

12th gen looks great compared to 11th gen which was a mistake. Still not enought to justify an upgrade tho. As i have said in other threads I can gladly wait till DDR5 has matured before building a next gen platform

I can't wait to see Meteor Lake on Intel 4 tho, 15-20% on top of Alder Lake and by then DDR5 hopefully improved in terms of clockspeeds and timings - Windows 11 too (I guess these chips needs W11 to perform their best)
Posted on Reply
#10
lynx29
yay more cpu's for people to stare at while they wait for gpu's in 2023. neat.
Posted on Reply
#11
Vayra86
RichardsIntel 10nm superfin is bringing 15% performance as they claimed... alder lake is a revolution
15% is a revolution now? I guess your life isn't very exciting :D Double core counts across the stack wasn't even a revolution, let's face it. The product stacks just became a lot wider and you don't need to grab HEDT quite so easily. But a bit more IPC has never really changed things radically. It doesn't really improve heavy workloads, they just take less time. And realtime ones were already fast enough.
ThaiTaffyAs swede keeps repeating until actual retail benchmarks are out I'm not inclined to believe anything leaked about intel chips. It wasn't long ago rocket lake leaks were telling us how good that generation was.
Exactly. But I fully expect Intel to make a move on single thread performance by now. I mean... they've been pushing frequency and efficiency since Skylake-errr Sandy Bridge at the expense of everything else. Its about damn time. Will it make a better CPU in real world? I'm so not going by CPU Z to get an idea of that...
lasNot overclocked? It boosts to 5.3 on single thread from velocity boost IIRC so stock or OC won't matter much in terms of single thread scores unless they really do hit 5.4+ all-core on some chips like some peeps claim, won't change much in the end i guess

12th gen looks great compared to 11th gen which was a mistake. Still not enought to justify an upgrade tho. As i have said in other threads I can gladly wait till DDR5 has matured before building a next gen platform

I can't wait to see Meteor Lake on Intel 4 tho, 15-20% on top of Alder Lake and by then DDR5 hopefully improved in terms of clockspeeds and timings - Windows 11 too (I guess these chips needs W11 to perform their best)
Well I think CPU upgrades, especially in gaming & consumer rigs are not in need of revisions any faster than 5-7 years time. Especially if you're already on the top of the stack. You just barely notice it... And like you say, DDR5 early days are not going to be good either.
Posted on Reply
#12
ThaiTaffy
Going to upgrade my board to b550 and maybe my processor to a 5000 series if the prices crash other than that 5 years or so will be my next upgrade . Building systems for people in the meantime will give me a chance to see what's going on in the market but I can't see ddr5 or any hardware associated to be refined enough for a long while yet.

That being said all these tech news outlets quoting these leaks and comparing them to Ryzen is crazy to me considering the past few years worth of intel releases.
I'm no fanboy just AMD got it right with Ryzen I remember all the rubbish they were spouting when bulldozer and pile-driver was due to release and we all know how that turned out.
Posted on Reply
#13
Richards
Vayra8615% is a revolution now? I guess your life isn't very exciting :D Double core counts across the stack wasn't even a revolution, let's face it. The product stacks just became a lot wider and you don't need to grab HEDT quite so easily. But a bit more IPC has never really changed things radically. It doesn't really improve heavy workloads, they just take less time. And realtime ones were already fast enough.



Exactly. But I fully expect Intel to make a move on single thread performance by now. I mean... they've been pushing frequency and efficiency since Skylake-errr Sandy Bridge at the expense of everything else. Its about damn time. Will it make a better CPU in real world? I'm so not going by CPU Z to get an idea of that...



Well I think CPU upgrades, especially in gaming & consumer rigs are not in need of revisions any faster than 5-7 years time. Especially if you're already on the top of the stack. You just barely notice it... And like you say, DDR5 early days are not going to be good either.
Intel has already won the more cores battle customers are gonna pick the cheaper but more cores
Posted on Reply
#14
ThaiTaffy
RichardsIntel has already won the more cores battle customers are gonna pick the cheaper but more cores
Since when?
Posted on Reply
#15
Vayra86
RichardsIntel has already won the more cores battle customers are gonna pick the cheaper but more cores
Customers are not a homogenous group, I think Ryzen pointed that out quite well.

We're in the most flexible part of the customer base. When we see great chips, we jump on them regardless of brand - despite all the fanboyism people express in words, the wallet and quality perception is what truly matters.

Right now Intel is suffering from bad mindshare, with hotter and higher TDP chips, hardware with security flaws, shaky motherboards that come with excessive stock settings and a lot of other odd crap you could accuse AMD of not too long ago.

It remains a question if Alder Lake can turn that around on its own ;) We'll see what customers will pick, but right now the idea that Zen is great is somewhat cemented into even the less informed minds. And rightly so, I'd say.
Posted on Reply
#16
las
ThaiTaffyGoing to upgrade my board to b550 and maybe my processor to a 5000 series if the prices crash other than that 5 years or so will be my next upgrade . Building systems for people in the meantime will give me a chance to see what's going on in the market but I can't see ddr5 or any hardware associated to be refined enough for a long while yet.

That being said all these tech news outlets quoting these leaks and comparing them to Ryzen is crazy to me considering the past few years worth of intel releases.
I'm no fanboy just AMD got it right with Ryzen I remember all the rubbish they were spouting when bulldozer and pile-driver was due to release and we all know how that turned out.
"AMD" did not really get it right before 5000 series. Only partly with 3000 series and TSMC is the reason "they" got it right. 12nm GloFo was a terrible node and back when I bought my 9900K, AMDs answer was 2700X. I'm very glad I went with the 9900K which have been running 5.2 GHz since week 2, it did 5 GHz on all cores on day one, pretty much on stock voltage and I spent a few hours to get 5.2 stable and it have been running it ever since with no degradation at all.

I have played around with a 5800X @ 4.8 and in most stuff the performance is on par with my 9900K with OC. Some 9900K won, some 5800X won. However my CPU is 3 years old at this point and I'm in no rush to upgrade before we see some truly next gen leaps and this probably won't happen before 2023+

I do alot of emulation of this rig and AMD hardware is really not the greatest for this. Playing Zelda using CEMU the 5800X was nowhere near my 9900K for example. I am playing Zelda BOTW at 100+ fps at all times on this chip, mostly 140-180 fps range. 5800X had some weird drops and stutter at times and barely did 80 fps average in comparison with way lower 0.1% fps. Alot of emulation software is still optimized for Intel/Nvidia and this is not something you fix fast. Alot of the games are single thread or very few threads too, which is why Ryzen 1000, 2000 and partly 3000 series have pretty bad perf here.

If 5800X was out back when I upgraded, I would have picked that, no doubt - that said my 9900K have been awesome and still is, it's within all the top chips in gaming and emulation still ESPECIALLY when paired with 4000/CL15 memory so I have no regrets at all. Probably one of my best CPUs of all time, my old 2600K at 5 GHz might come close tho... Hitting 5 GHz was crazy back in 2011ish - It performed like a top chip for 5-6 years
Posted on Reply
#17
ThaiTaffy
I knew there was alot of issues with the original zen and zen+ but I thought the majority of that was due to manufacturers support and them not really having the confidence to pile resources into a product when the previous generations did so badly.
Posted on Reply
#18
ZoneDymo
lets not forget its also suppose to be 100 dollars cheaper so seems like a pretty solid competitive product tbh, and that is the halo product, the 12700k should be a much better purchase and probably a very good one unless amd has something new/drops prices a bit.
Posted on Reply
#19
Richards
Vayra86Customers are not a homogenous group, I think Ryzen pointed that out quite well.

We're in the most flexible part of the customer base. When we see great chips, we jump on them regardless of brand - despite all the fanboyism people express in words, the wallet and quality perception is what truly matters.

Right now Intel is suffering from bad mindshare, with hotter and higher TDP chips, hardware with security flaws, shaky motherboards that come with excessive stock settings and a lot of other odd crap you could accuse AMD of not too long ago.

It remains a question if Alder Lake can turn that around on its own ;) We'll see what customers will pick, but right now the idea that Zen is great is somewhat cemented into even the less informed minds. And rightly so, I'd say.
Lol intel has 90% of the market they not worried
ThaiTaffySince when?
When they release alder lake thats when
Posted on Reply
#20
ThaiTaffy
77% in x84 but let's see what happens when these leaks are verified if they turn out to be false then maybe that will drop again
RichardsWhen they release alder lake thats when
Alder lake i9's have the same amount of cores as Ryzen 9
Posted on Reply
#21
mb194dc
Yawn, just wait for proper reviews under controlled conditions.
Posted on Reply
#22
TheLostSwede
mb194dcYawn, just wait for proper reviews under controlled conditions.
This was just to balance the previous CPU-Z "leak" since it didn't include the multi-threaded test numbers.
Posted on Reply
#23
ZoneDymo
ThaiTaffy77% in x84 but let's see what happens when these leaks are verified if they turn out to be false then maybe that will drop again


Alder lake i9's have the same amount of cores as Ryzen 9
I mean if we just start acting like its all the same...sure. but its not.

Alderlake top end has 8 performance cores with hyperthreading plus 8 eco cores making it 24 THREADS
Ryzen 9 has 12 performance cores with SMT making it 24 THREADS

saying they have the same amount of cores here is just a tad off
Posted on Reply
#24
ThaiTaffy
ZoneDymoI mean if we just start acting like its all the same...sure. but its not.

Alderlake top end has 8 performance cores with hyperthreading plus 8 eco cores making it 24 THREADS
Ryzen 9 has 12 performance cores with SMT making it 24 THREADS

saying they have the same amount of cores here is just a tad off
I was trying to just point out that alder lake doesn't have more cores not only that a 5950x has 16 cores so 32 threads so far more. Until I see cinibench scores I'm not making any judgements but these leaks of cpu-z are in no way a reflection of real load on all cores.
Posted on Reply
#25
Fouquin
ThaiTaffyUntil I see cinibench scores I'm not making any judgements but these leaks of cpu-z are in no way a reflection of real load on all cores.
The Cinebench score leak was last week.

In case you missed it:



And since the finger-marker blocking the specs can be easily reversed by changing the contrast on the image it's running on a Gigabyte Z690 AORUS ULTRA.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment