That's a less than 5% gain. It will be negated by pretty much any increase in price.

350W CPU faster than 300W CPU. :p

That's in line with a 6.2 GHz single core turbo. If true, that's impressive, but hardly worthy of being a new generation.

This post is rubbish. It's a sample size of one. Anyone can overclock their i9-13900K, run this and get the same score.



www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i9-14900KF&id=5684

AnotherReaderThat's in line with a 6.2 GHz single core turbo. If true, that's impressive, but hardly worthy of being a new generation.

This singular sample was - obviously and unsurprisingly - overclocked.

www.passmark.com/baselines/V11/display.php?id=190877351015

Dr. DroThis post is rubbish. It's a sample size of one. Anyone can overclock their i9-13900K, run this and get the same score.



www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i9-14900KF&id=5684



This singular sample was - obviously and unsurprisingly - overclocked.

I suspect you're right, but we'll see in a few weeks.

AnotherReaderI suspect you're right, but we'll see in a few weeks.

The 5.7 GHz weighted average indicates that at least the clocks on the P-cores are intentionally jacked up and the power limit is disabled. But I mean, the specs are well known by now. The spreadsheet that was posted some time ago by Yuuki seems to have the exact details from all "leaks" we've seen thus far.



Both the Core i5 and Core i9 segments are at 1:1 with their 13th Gen counterparts (with the i9 having a very mild clock speed bump to match the 13900KS but with a lower default PL, expect it to lose a tiny bit in a 1:1 by the books stock configuration), aka no changes, no improvements, expect nothing from these, not even the base frequencies have been increased, maybe a 100 MHz lower or higher there, but effectively they are identical - Intel will likely simply retire the 13th Gen branding and begin shipping the chips as 14th Gen instead. Same product, same capabilities, same performance, new name. The supposedly increased, native DDR5-6400 support fluked and Intel isn't claiming that, it's still 5600 official and the CPUs will probably hit the exact same clock frequency ranges of the 13th gen on the same motherboards.

This leaves only and exclusively the Core i7 to keep an eye on, as it's getting the extra E-core cluster and associated cache. It's a tremendously disappointing "generation", if anything, the brainiacs at Intel's marketing should have released these as 13605K/13905K and for the i7, perhaps exclusively, i7-13750K - that's what they are. It's so bad that anyone who has a 13900K can't even feel any sort of FOMO, there's literally nothing new, DLVR is also nowhere to be seen in any leaks thus far.

This "generation"/refresh is every bit as insignificant as Comet Lake Refresh was, and they released that only to the Core i3 segment (eg. i3-10105). We'll see more in the coming weeks but, I suspect low profile/low key launch with next to no fanfare and quiet, but straight replacements in retailers soon to follow.

Dr. DroThe 5.7 GHz weighted average indicates that at least the clocks on the P-cores are intentionally jacked up and the power limit is disabled. But I mean, the specs are well known by now. The spreadsheet that was posted some time ago by Yuuki seems to have the exact details from all "leaks" we've seen thus far.



Both the Core i5 and Core i9 segments are at 1:1 with their 13th Gen counterparts (with the i9 having a very mild clock speed bump to match the 13900KS but with a lower default PL, expect it to lose a tiny bit in a 1:1 by the books stock configuration), aka no changes, no improvements, expect nothing from these, not even the base frequencies have been increased, maybe a 100 MHz lower or higher there, but effectively they are identical - Intel will likely simply retire the 13th Gen branding and begin shipping the chips as 14th Gen instead. Same product, same capabilities, same performance, new name. The supposedly increased, native DDR5-6400 support fluked and Intel isn't claiming that, it's still 5600 official and the CPUs will probably hit the exact same clock frequency ranges of the 13th gen on the same motherboards.

This leaves only and exclusively the Core i7 to keep an eye on, as it's getting the extra E-core cluster and associated cache. It's a tremendously disappointing "generation", if anything, the brainiacs at Intel's marketing should have released these as 13605K/13905K and for the i7, perhaps exclusively, i7-13750K - that's what they are. It's so bad that anyone who has a 13900K can't even feel any sort of FOMO, there's literally nothing new, DLVR is also nowhere to be seen in any leaks thus far.

This "generation"/refresh is every bit as insignificant as Comet Lake Refresh was, and they released that only to the Core i3 segment (eg. i3-10105). We'll see more in the coming weeks but, I suspect low profile/low key launch with next to no fanfare and quiet, but straight replacements in retailers soon to follow.

Yeah this shouldn't have been a new generation. At least, with Comet Lake refresh, they didn't change the generation number. DLVR makes more sense for mobile SKUs and with Alder Lake and its descendants pushed to ever more stupid power levels, a DLVR wouldn't help with bragging rights.

AnotherReaderYeah this shouldn't have been a new generation. At least, with Comet Lake refresh, they didn't change the generation number. DLVR makes more sense for mobile SKUs and with Alder Lake and its descendants pushed to ever more stupid power levels, a DLVR wouldn't help with bragging rights.

This is what happens when their new architecture is a bust for Desktop.... They have to have something to sell.

IMO they do it because of tetraphobia. They want to have 15th gen branding for a next product

oxrufiioxoThis is what happens when their new architecture is a bust for Desktop.... They have to have something to sell.

I don't think anyone except the most optimistic of Intel fanboys expected Meteor Lake to clock as high as mature Intel 7 products. Ever since laptops have become popular, Intel has used new processes for mobile processors first. Even as far back as 2001, Anand of AnandTech explained this:

Historically, Intel has initially introduced new CPU technologies and manufacturing processes in very low volume markets, and then later, after perfecting the technologies, adapted them to more mass production segments. This translates into most new technology being introduced first in mobile or server segments and later filtering down to the desktop market. Case in point would be Intel’s 0.13-micron process which made its debut in the lowest volume market segment that Intel could possibly produce a x86 CPU for: the mobile Pentium III market.

AnotherReaderI don't think anyone except the most optimistic of Intel fanboys expected Meteor Lake to clock as high as mature Intel 7 products. Ever since laptops have become popular, Intel has used new processes for mobile processors first. Even as far back as 2001, Anand of AnandTech explained this:

I was hoping they where somewhat back on track I think meteorlake is at least 6-12 months late by their original estimates and that's been the biggest problem with intel when is stuff actually going to release as of the last 4-5 years.

oxrufiioxoI was hoping they where somewhat back on track I think meteorlake is at least 6-12 months late by their original estimates and that's been the biggest problem with intel when is stuff actually going to release as of the last 4-5 years.

At least it looks like it's in better shape than Intel 7's early days. Even the third iteration of that process, Tiger Lake, wasn't good enough to bring it to the desktop. Let's hope it's a harbinger of better things to come. With IBM dropping out of semiconductor manufacturing, Intel is the last Western company still in the running for the leading edge.

M440IMO they do it because of tetraphobia. They want to have 15th gen branding for a next product

Weird a tetraphobic company that only offered quad cores for a decade or more

I'd rather have the added multi-thread on a 13900KS than the minor bit of single-thread on 14900KF. These chips are geared for towards heavy multi-thread. I don't see the point of this trade off emphasis from Intel on the refresh myself looks questionable honestly.

I'm stoked! I am about to get a new rig...and by waiting a bit, I get a better one than I would have...and better than any of you complaining 'early adapters' got! :roll:

This is like 11th gen is so similar to 10th gen in performance most people waited till 12th gen

LeavenfishI'm stoked! I am about to get a new rig...and by waiting a bit, I get a better one than I would have...and better than any of you complaining 'early adapters' got! :roll:

the opposite - its rebranded 13th gen and 'early adapters' are using it for months longer than you,

i'm not even commenting on a sense of investment in lga1700 considering alternatives

How much cooling does it require, seems these Intel's high-end CPUs are mostly for academic purposes.

LeavenfishI'm stoked! I am about to get a new rig...and by waiting a bit, I get a better one than I would have...and better than any of you complaining 'early adapters' got! :roll:

and in the meantime you have been dealing with older hardware while others have enjoyed fast up to date stuff.....what a weird comment man.
Also you will be investing in a dead platform because the next will be a new socket.....

I really wonder if Meteor lake will offer a new priority towards energy efficiency.

Intel with CPU like 13700KF still manage very correct consumption in idle and most games, which is impressive, but I really feel that they went berserk on the wattage in order to rival Ryzen in high-stress loads and heavy gaming.

Very curious to see if it will be the case for meteor lake, it's a brand new architecture and node.

If I had a 12th+ I would never upgrade to 14th gen but wait for that whole new architecture right around the corner.

Dr. DroThe 5.7 GHz weighted average indicates that at least the clocks on the P-cores are intentionally jacked up and the power limit is disabled. But I mean, the specs are well known by now. The spreadsheet that was posted some time ago by Yuuki seems to have the exact details from all "leaks" we've seen thus far.



Both the Core i5 and Core i9 segments are at 1:1 with their 13th Gen counterparts (with the i9 having a very mild clock speed bump to match the 13900KS but with a lower default PL, expect it to lose a tiny bit in a 1:1 by the books stock configuration), aka no changes, no improvements, expect nothing from these, not even the base frequencies have been increased, maybe a 100 MHz lower or higher there, but effectively they are identical - Intel will likely simply retire the 13th Gen branding and begin shipping the chips as 14th Gen instead. Same product, same capabilities, same performance, new name. The supposedly increased, native DDR5-6400 support fluked and Intel isn't claiming that, it's still 5600 official and the CPUs will probably hit the exact same clock frequency ranges of the 13th gen on the same motherboards.

This leaves only and exclusively the Core i7 to keep an eye on, as it's getting the extra E-core cluster and associated cache. It's a tremendously disappointing "generation", if anything, the brainiacs at Intel's marketing should have released these as 13605K/13905K and for the i7, perhaps exclusively, i7-13750K - that's what they are. It's so bad that anyone who has a 13900K can't even feel any sort of FOMO, there's literally nothing new, DLVR is also nowhere to be seen in any leaks thus far.

This "generation"/refresh is every bit as insignificant as Comet Lake Refresh was, and they released that only to the Core i3 segment (eg. i3-10105). We'll see more in the coming weeks but, I suspect low profile/low key launch with next to no fanfare and quiet, but straight replacements in retailers soon to follow.

I am still hoping the 14900k is as much of an improvement as the 13900ks is to the 13900k. Cause the difference in efficiency between these two is pretty big actually, sadly reviewers didn't test at similar wattage but just balls to the wall.

fevgatosI am still hoping the 14900k is as much of an improvement as the 13900ks is to the 13900k. Cause the difference in efficiency between these two is pretty big actually, sadly reviewers didn't test at similar wattage but just balls to the wall.

They're identical chips, 14900K just has a tighter power limit. Same ST and likely slightly lower MT because of the PL, uncap it and they should be identical

ZoneDymoand in the meantime you have been dealing with older hardware while others have enjoyed fast up to date stuff.....what a weird comment man.
Also you will be investing in a dead platform because the next will be a new socket.....

We all jump in sometime...through need or choice. The fact remains: I'll have a (slightly) superior CPU to those who have the current top of the line...and all because I waited a wee bit.

LeavenfishI'm stoked! I am about to get a new rig...and by waiting a bit, I get a better one than I would have...and better than any of you complaining 'early adapters' got! :roll:

I jumped 7 CPU generations when I upgraded this year, and I'm already almost 3 generations behind now. Enjoy the moment for the moment it lasts.

Dr. DroThey're identical chips, 14900K just has a tighter power limit. Same ST and likely slightly lower MT because of the PL, uncap it and they should be identical

Ιf this is the case, that is sad. Should have bought a 13900ks, damn.