Thursday, September 17th 2026

Intel Reportedly Preparing 8P+8E ''Raptor Lake Next" Chip to Replace Core i5-14600K

Intel is reportedly preparing to retire the Core i5-14600K in favor of a new "Raptor Lake Next" chip with eight P-cores and eight E-cores. According to leaker Jaykihn on X (spotted by VideoCardz), the successor will have two more Performance cores than the current 14600K, putting it on par with the Core i7-14700K in P-core count, though not necessarily in cache or clocks. Raptor Lake Next is the codename for Intel's plan to extend the LGA 1700 platform with fresh silicon based on the original Raptor Lake design rather than the newer Raptor Lake Refresh. The chips are expected to launch alongside new LGA 1700 motherboards from Intel's partners in early 2027.

Intel seems to be using the lineup to fill gaps in the 14th Gen stack instead of replacing it outright, and it's reportedly also working on more 125W and 65W desktop SKUs alongside mobile variants. DDR4 support is apparently part of the pitch, which would help buyers sidestep today's DDR5 pricing crisis. More P-cores should help in games that lean on core count, and it looks like this could put the chip ahead of the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus, since the current 14600K already trades blows with Arrow Lake Refresh in several titles. That said, this is a single-source claim for now, so treat the exact configuration and timing as rumor until Intel or its partners confirm anything.
Sources: Jaykihn on X, via Videocardz
Add your own comment

54 Comments on Intel Reportedly Preparing 8P+8E ''Raptor Lake Next" Chip to Replace Core i5-14600K

#1
Wirko
The Core i5-14666K is here, who doesn't want one?
Posted on Reply
#2
kondamin
I wonder if there is much difference between early raptor lake and late when looking at the silicon.
Did they gain better control over pitches etc
Posted on Reply
#3
Prima.Vera
I'm still running a 13700K CPU, but this is not at all appealing for an upgrade. I want something better than my current one, but it seems, from price/performance pov, there is nothing better out there worth paying the big bucks.
Posted on Reply
#4
N/A
In theory, this is an i7-13700K at a lower tier, but given the series of three 10% price hikes (totaling 33%), it is essentially a rebrand after four years: the i7-13700K becomes the Core 5 250K but retains the 13700K's price point. Which is great, as it reminds me of the Sandy Bridge 2500K.
Posted on Reply
#5
lemonadesoda
The "portfolio" of products and its complexity provides an opportunity to window dress and reprice but I struggle to see the long term benefit. Not unless Intel says "poor you the customer we have a new strategy which is to create a six-year consistent platform for upgrading" where sockets stay the same but CPU power can be easily upgraded and memory can be added to by having more slots etc. i miss the 90/00s platforms that had more scope for "doubling performance".
Posted on Reply
#7
Wirko
lemonadesodai miss the 1990s platform.
Oh, I had a soldered Intel 80286 and then a soldered AMD Am386, then a Pentium 90 that I don't even remember the shape of. My last one from the '90s was a Pentium III-450 in Slot 1 which could theoretically be upgraded to a slightly faster one (550 or 600?) on the same slow memory but those were too expensive to even think about upgrading. The long-lived LGA 775 wasn't there yet. Which part of '90s do you miss?
Posted on Reply
#8
lemonadesoda
WirkoThe long-lived LGA 775 wasn't there yet. Which part of '90s do you miss?
I guess im referring to 771/775 and Powerleap socket 7 and 478 adapters. Got the years wrong.
Posted on Reply
#9
kazuviking
Just release microcode update for bartlett lake to work in consumer mobos. The 10 and 12 pcore variant would sell like hotcakes.
Posted on Reply
#10
_roman_
that is the issue wiht intel.

solder a bit on the socket or hack the firmware to add cpu support which was basically possible in the first place.
Posted on Reply
#11
Arctucas
kazuvikingJust release microcode update for bartlett lake to work in consumer mobos. The 10 and 12 pcore variant would sell like hotcakes.
^THIS^
Posted on Reply
#12
BoggledBeagle
What if the games ran on average only 3% better on 12P BL than on 8+16 RL? Other than this, MT performance worse than 14700K, ST comparable etc.?

I fail to understand the enthusiasm...

I do not think Intel would sell 12P BL cheaply anyway.

EDIT:
I tried to find the 273PQE for sale and except an extremely overpriced offer for 788 Euro at Mouser I found nothing. That is concerning.
Posted on Reply
#13
Chrispy_
I mean, I kind of get where Intel is coming from. They've poured so much money into their disastrous 10nm++++ Intel 7 that they don't want to wind it down and retire it just yet.

Remember Cannon Lake? Yeah, that was the start of Intel's Troubled 10nm life, back 11 years ago. It was delayed, delayed, delayed again, soaking up billions of dollars of investment and eventually churning out a completely broken i3-8121U three years late with half the cores disabled, all of the IGP disabled, and horrible yields, even with that low bar to clear.

Here we are in 2026, 11 years later and with class-actions over degrading, faulty 13th/14th gen silicon still fresh in peoples' minds, Intel continue to flog this dead horse. Miraculously, after tens of billions of dollars of flogging this dead horse, there is a glimmer of life still.
Posted on Reply
#14
BoggledBeagle
Chrispy_faulty 13th/14th gen silicon still fresh in peoples' minds,
There is nothing wrong with Raptor lake, it is 5 GHz silicon pushed to 6 - and that has consequences. It is as simple as that.
Chrispy_Intel continue to flog this dead horse.
People paying HALF for DDR4 RAM that for DDR5 (saving hundreds of dollars) is a huge advantage and value for consumers. I have no idea why would you say this.

LGA 1700 platform is also better than AM4.
Posted on Reply
#15
chrcoluk
The only chip that might have been worth looking at they seem to have abandoned for consumer, that bartlett P core only chip.
Chrispy_I mean, I kind of get where Intel is coming from. They've poured so much money into their disastrous 10nm++++ Intel 7 that they don't want to wind it down and retire it just yet.

Remember Cannon Lake? Yeah, that was the start of Intel's Troubled 10nm life, back 11 years ago. It was delayed, delayed, delayed again, soaking up billions of dollars of investment and eventually churning out a completely broken i3-8121U three years late with half the cores disabled, all of the IGP disabled, and horrible yields, even with that low bar to clear.

Here we are in 2026, 11 years later and with class-actions over degrading, faulty 13th/14th gen silicon still fresh in peoples' minds, Intel continue to flog this dead horse. Miraculously, after tens of billions of dollars of flogging this dead horse, there is a glimmer of life still.
Probably more to do with that the next chipset has been a commercial failure (and requires DDR5, which is a big problem if you on a DDR4 LGA1700), there is I expect more lga1700 owners to sell CPU's to.
This normally should be considered a good thing, AMD get heavily praised for longer lasting chipsets. However of course this new chip is no meaningful upgrade.
Posted on Reply
#16
kazuviking
_roman_solder a bit on the socket or hack the firmware to add cpu support which was basically possible in the first place.
I mean chinese madlads already figured out that laptop cpus based on intel 7 is compatible with desktop mobos on an interposer.
BoggledBeagleWhat if the games ran on average only 3% better on 12P BL than on 8+16 RL? Other than this, MT performance worse than 14700K, ST comparable etc.?
Its around 5% faster on average than the 14900K in gaming and 10% slower than the 14700K in multicore.
Chrispy_Intel continue to flog this dead horse.
Yet when amd releases another trash silicon for AM4 its somehow a blessing.
Posted on Reply
#17
Chrispy_
kazuvikingYet when amd releases another trash silicon for AM4 its somehow a blessing.
I didn't mention AMD. Intel's foundry is competing against TSMC, not AMD.

Not everything has to be a misguided fanboy flame war; There is no such thing as brand loyalty if you remember that all of the major brands just see you as a little more than a walking bank account they can tap into. AMD + Intel + Nvidia all make both good and bad products, AMD + Intel + Nvidia all make good and bad marketing decisions. If you were going to try and take a side, then you cannot ever base that on a single good or bad product without coming across as a fanboy, so the general advice is "dont" and to keep an open (but skeptical) mind.
Posted on Reply
#18
Space Dynamics
Chrispy_Here we are in 2026, 11 years later and with class-actions over degrading, faulty 13th/14th gen silicon still fresh in peoples' minds,
Yeahh i still tell my friends to steer away from those generations for that reason. Yeeeesh!
Posted on Reply
#20
wNotyarD
So... only really an upgrade for users who have at most Alder Lake i3's and i5's (and I include in this the 13th and 14th gen non-K i5's)?
I hope it doesn't suffer from any of the issues that plagued Raptor Lake. More quality options can hurt no buyer, LGA1700 is still a solid platform and while catering to DDR4 seems a desperate move, desperate times require such moves.
Posted on Reply
#21
Wirko
lemonadesodaI guess im referring to 771/775 and Powerleap socket 7 and 478 adapters. Got the years wrong.
I thought you would mention Socket 370. I never had it but as far as I know, there was a lengthy upgrade path from the lowly Celeron 300 to the top Pentium 1400. Not sure if you could stay on the same chipset all along. On top of that, overclocking ability of (at least) the slowest CPUs was incredible.
Posted on Reply
#22
XeonsNOpterons
kondaminI wonder if there is much difference between early raptor lake and late when looking at the silicon.
Did they gain better control over pitches etc
I am guessing they are still going to be using Intel 7 for these refreshed refreshes. It would be better if they are least used Intel 3 which has much better power performance. An Intel 3 based Raptor Lake Next would mean about 40% lower power draw, which would make these quite competitive. At the very least, if they are still using Intel 7, it means much better yield control and even more ridiculous overclocking performance than Raptor Lake.
Posted on Reply
#23
Chrispy_
Space DynamicsYeahh i still tell my friends to steer away from those generations for that reason. Yeeeesh!
I would happily buy them for the right price. Just nothing much faster than 5GHz, as per @BoggledBeagle here.

It was the K-series and i9s that suffered from the highest defect rate. I've personally handled maybe 50+ 12/13/14th gen Intel systems and never dealt with any unstable i5-13500 or 12400F models. Those are all comfortably sub-5GHz parts....

I've had Zen2 parts fail with just as much regularity (that doesn't mean equally because I buy 5-10x more AMD systems than Intel systems) but most of those were 6+ years of 24/7 by the time they started to show WHEA errors. AMD chips definitely degrade in time too - but a much smaller percentage of them and after quadruple the working lifespan.
Posted on Reply
#24
XeonsNOpterons
BoggledBeagleThere is nothing wrong with Raptor lake, it is 5 GHz silicon pushed to 6 - and that has consequences. It is as simple as that.
6GHz is not the issue, neither is the 1.4V required to do that. It apparently is a clock driving circuit inside the die which was made exceptionally prone to degradation at any voltages higher than a certain range, and that was driven at, from what I know, even higher voltages than the cores themselves.
Posted on Reply
#25
wNotyarD
Chrispy_I've personally never dealt with any unstable i5-13500 or 12400F models. Those are all comforably sub-5GHz parts....
More importantly, these are still Alder Lake-based.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Nov 12th, 2026 07:34 PST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

TPU on YouTube

Controversial News Posts