• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Intel Core i5-13600K

Joined
Feb 20, 2019
Messages
7,002 (3.83/day)
System Name Bragging Rights
Processor Atom Z3735F 1.33GHz
Motherboard It has no markings but it's green
Cooling No, it's a 2.2W processor
Memory 2GB DDR3L-1333
Video Card(s) Gen7 Intel HD (4EU @ 311MHz)
Storage 32GB eMMC and 128GB Sandisk Extreme U3
Display(s) 10" IPS 1280x800 60Hz
Case Veddha T2
Audio Device(s) Apparently, yes
Power Supply Samsung 18W 5V fast-charger
Mouse MX Anywhere 2
Keyboard Logitech MX Keys (not Cherry MX at all)
VR HMD Samsung Oddyssey, not that I'd plug it into this though....
Software W10 21H1, barely
Benchmark Scores I once clocked a Celeron-300A to 564MHz on an Abit BE6 and it scored over 9000.
When Zen 4 released, excepting the 7950X, all I saw was parity with Alder Lake but at a higher price.

I think a lot of folks intuitively knew this was coming. AMD needed to do a 2-gen type leapfrog of Intel, since AL was already demonstrably superior to Zen 3. They didn't do that, so naturally now they are clearly behind.

With AMD's 2 year release cycle, this is likely to just get worse. This time next year we'll have Meteor Lake, and AMD will still be on Zen 4. In 2024 Intel will release Arrow Lake, and that will be what Zen 5 goes up against.

I find it highly unlikely, that AMD would be competitive against an Intel part 2 generations in the future with Zen 5 using the same socket and so on, when they are effectively most of a generation behind right now. It's a total repeat of the late 2000s and early 2010s.
I can't guarantee any future predictions, but Intel have surged back to parity with AMD because their troubled 10nm process finally ironed out enough kinks to make a viable product, and that product is only viable because they've found a way to make it eat 300W+ without catching fire. Performance/Watt matters immensely in every single segment except the high-end, liquid-cooled, DIY-enthusiast segment, which is an absolutely miniscule segment in terms of units sold. What matters for efficiency is process node, since I believe Intel's chip design engineers to be of a high calibre. From a process node perspective, Intel's last 3 years have been a complete shit-show:

1666377853166.png


Their 10nm first failed to launch at 8th-Gen, with only some completely defective mobile i3's actually making it out of the foundry. It took until Alder Lake to be viable for desktop and server, and rebranding it intel 7 isn't progress, it's just a new marketing name. I am taking a look at that roadmap above and seeing that right now, Intel are transitioning to 4nm, EUV, and a new Foveros packaging ALL AT ONCE. Just bear in mind they've spend FOUR GENERATIONS floundering around trying to get a single jump from 14nm to 10nm 7nm to work viably, and the result is only "good" if you pump insane amounts of power through it. I definitely do not have the confidence you do that Intel are just going to return to form as the leading global semiconductor foundry. Their foundry execution record over the last 5-6 years has been abysmal and they are so far behind TSMC now that I doubt they will truly catch up before the end of this decade.

Additionally, Intel aren't ahead of AMD in IPC, it's just that they clock their CPUs to the moon at 2.5x the power consumption. Intel are playing catch-up with AMD in terms of cache, interconnect, IMC latency, chiplet technology, MCM scaling from Ryzen 5 to 8-die EPYC server CPUs. 14th Gen will have many of the things (for the first time) that AMD have had for nearly five years now. That's five years of field-tested experience AMD have that Intel don't, and a lot of that is down to manufacturing process, not design. Again, I don't think I need to iterate how poor Intel's manufacturing and process node track record has been for the last half-decade, and I don't have any real reason to expect a massive reversal of competence out of the blue...

Going back to Ryzen 7000, sure - it may only be as good as Alder Lake, but it's coolable, efficient, and you know that a PCIe 5.0, DDR5 AM5 motherboard will be good for Ryzen 8000, 9000, 10000 and possibly beyond. Socket 1700 is already a dead end, to be replaced next generation.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 9, 2016
Messages
10 (0.00/day)
MSFS seems like literally the only scenario where that upgrade would make any sense (a 17% uplift at 1080p according to Eurogamer, but crucially starting from pretty low fps to begin with), though I hope you can get a good price when selling your 12700K, as it's not exactly a cost-effective move.
Thanks both with my 240mm aio unless I change that I'm going to be limited with what I could overclock the 13th series with heat.

I'd be interested in how to overclock per core I'll have to have a mess in the bios settings I've got the current running stable I've tried 5.1ghz but over 1.32v on the core it gets too hot stress testing.
 
Joined
Oct 12, 2022
Messages
15 (0.03/day)
Watch that power draw. :roll:
Nope, nopity NOPE.

What a clown world we live in.

I am so glad I upgraded to my current system, I was worried that I would be done in by both this generation from Intel and AMD's, but this platform will last a good while yet and I have options to make my power draw even more friendly while keeping my performance and temps in check. :)
This CPU has a very high potential for undervolting. Stock 1.35V, UV 1.1V. Power draw minus 100W, temperatures down from 80-100 to ~60-67 degrees.
 
Joined
May 6, 2017
Messages
10 (0.00/day)
One of the best review formats there is. Thanks for this. Instead of the constant flood of DOOM videos on youtube about 90c CPU's... you at least point out gaming temps and power consumption under gaming loads. Where the vast majority use these. Wonderful graphs too. Always recommend your reviews!
 
Joined
Jan 20, 2019
Messages
1,218 (0.65/day)
Location
London, UK
System Name ❶ Oooh (2023) ❷ Aaaah (2021) ❸ Ahemm (2017)
Processor ❶ (TBC) 5800X3D ❷ i7-9700K ❸ i7-7700K
Motherboard ❶ ASUS X570-F ❷ ASUS Z390-E ❸ ASUS Z270-E
Cooling ❶ (TBC) ❷ X62 + X72 (GPU mod) ❸ AS500-P
Memory ❶ 32-3600/16 ❷ 32-3200/16 ❸ 16-3200/16
Video Card(s) ❶ 3080 X Trio ❷ 2080TI (AIOmod) ❸ 1080TI
Storage ❶ NVME/SATA/HDD ❷ <SAME ❸ SSD/HDD
Display(s) ❶ 1440/165/IPS ❷ 1440/144/IPS ❸ 1080/144/IPS
Case ❶ (TBC) King 95 ❷ Cors 465X ❸ Fractal Mesh C
Audio Device(s) ❶ HyperX C2 ❷ HyperX C2 ❸ Logi G432
Power Supply ❶ HX1200 Plat ❷ RM750X ❸ EVGA 650W G2
Mouse ❶ Logi G Pro ❷ Razer Bas V3 ❸ Logi G502
Keyboard ❶ Logi G915 LS ❷ Anne P2 ❸ Logi G610
Looks like poor W1zz has been putting in the OT with all these reviews!!


3.1% relative diff at 4k over the 5600 I just bit the bullet on............hard to go wrong with a $170 CAD sale price ($125 USD)

Probably wait until black Friday to pick up a mobo, then upgraded for another 6 years (on the cheap) :)

Media encoding is nice though. Like most modern CPUs it looks like OC'ing scores lower for most thing vs auto/stock.

wasn't long ago 1440p saw smaller margins at the top of the table too with 4k sitting at ~1% difference... now with RPL/Zen 4 vs 5600/my 9700K we're seeing a 15% shift at 1440p. 15% at this level is more than acceptable... but in my experience the single core 9700K is limiting performance or diminishing consistent visual eye candy in pacier select titles. I like my heavier multiplayer titles to run silky smooth hence compelled to upgrade.

Now we're hearing 40-series/potentially RDNA3 is transfering the bottleneck to the CPU... hope thats just a smelly-wallet-pinch-4090/4K-thing with mid-segment cards at 1440p delivering a finer balance :p
 
Last edited:
Joined
Sep 10, 2007
Messages
243 (0.04/day)
Location
Zagreb, Croatia
System Name My main PC - C2D
Processor Intel Core 2 Duo E4400 @ 320x10 (3200MHz) w/ Scythe Ninja rev.B + 120mm fan
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-P35-DS3R (Intel P35 + ICH9R chipset, socket 775)
Cooling Scythe Ninja rev.B + 120mm fan | 250mm case fan on side | 120mm PSU fan
Memory 4x 1GB Kingmax MARS DDR2 800 CL5
Video Card(s) Sapphire ATi Radeon HD4890
Storage Seagate Barracuda 7200.11 250GB SATAII, 16MB cache, 7200 rpm
Display(s) Samsung SyncMaster 757DFX, 17“ CRT, max: 1920x1440 @64Hz
Case Aplus CS-188AF case with 250mm side fan
Audio Device(s) Realtek ALC889A onboard 7.1, with Logitech X-540 5.1 speakers
Power Supply Chieftec 450W (GPS450AA-101A) /w 120mm fan
Software Windows XP Professional SP3 32bit / Windows 7 Beta1 64bit (dual boot)
Benchmark Scores none
Joined
Oct 23, 2007
Messages
14 (0.00/day)
Going back to Ryzen 7000, sure - it may only be as good as Alder Lake, but it's coolable, efficient, and you know that a PCIe 5.0, DDR5 AM5 motherboard will be good for Ryzen 8000, 9000, 10000 and possibly beyond. Socket 1700 is already a dead end, to be replaced next generation.

This is why I've just built my very first AMD system ever. Been building PCs since the 8088 and never felt the desire to assemble an AMD rig, not even in the early 2000s. My 7700X with a -30 undervolt boosts to 5.5GHz and runs in the high 30s / low 50s C whilst gaming at 26-28 ambient. It's also pulling barely 50W doing so. Sure, it's not as fast as the new 13th Gen Intel parts but it makes virtually no difference to me at 4K/120 with my 4090 (which I have also, coincidentally, undervolted since my monitor won't go over 120fps. This gives me a power draw of around 270W on the 4090 and it utterly demolishes my 3090's frame rates with that card pulling 350-400W).

Makes for a whisper silent system that runs cool and super efficient at a total system gaming power draw well under 350W and pretty much maxing out my 4K/120 screen! Looking forward to getting a PCIe Gen 5 SSD when those launch and then this rig will be next to perfect for my needs!

Edit: Just checked, CPU runs at 39-53C at 26C ambient and draws 51W in gaming loads! AMD could easily have made this default behaviour, they knew they were gonna lose outright performance to 13th gen!
 
Last edited:
Joined
May 2, 2017
Messages
7,762 (3.12/day)
Location
Back in Norway
System Name Hotbox
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5800X, 110/95/110, PBO +150Mhz, CO -7,-7,-20(x6),
Motherboard ASRock Phantom Gaming B550 ITX/ax
Cooling LOBO + Laing DDC 1T Plus PWM + Corsair XR5 280mm + 2x Arctic P14
Memory 32GB G.Skill FlareX 3200c14 @3800c15
Video Card(s) PowerColor Radeon 6900XT Liquid Devil Ultimate, UC@2250MHz max @~200W
Storage 2TB Adata SX8200 Pro
Display(s) Dell U2711 main, AOC 24P2C secondary
Case SSUPD Meshlicious
Audio Device(s) Optoma Nuforce μDAC 3
Power Supply Corsair SF750 Platinum
Mouse Logitech G603
Keyboard Keychron K3/Cooler Master MasterKeys Pro M w/DSA profile caps
Software Windows 10 Pro
This is why I've just built my very first AMD system ever. Been building PCs since the 8088 and never felt the desire to assemble an AMD rig, not even in the early 2000s. My 7700X with a -30 undervolt boosts to 5.5GHz and runs in the high 50s / low 60s C whilst gaming at 26-28 ambient. It's also pulling barely 56-60W doing so. Sure, it's not as fast as the new 13th Gen Intel parts but it makes virtually no difference to me at 4K/120 with my 4090 (which I have also, coincidentally, undervolted since my monitor won't go over 120fps. This gives me a power draw of around 270W on the 4090 and it utterly demolishes my 3090's frame rates with that card pulling 350-400W).

Makes for a whisper silent system that runs cool and super efficient at a total gaming power draw under 350W and pretty much maxing out my 4K/120 screen! Looking forward to getting a PCIe Gen 5 SSD when those launch and then this rig will be next to perfect for my needs!
Sounds like a sweet - and well tuned - setup! I personally wouldn't bother with that PCIe 5.0 SSD though - even when DirectStorage becomes a thing, you won't see any meaningful performance increase compared to a 4.0 drive (and likely even a 3.0 drive). Outside of massive sequential operations the bottleneck is the NAND, not the controller or bus, and NAND isn't getting much faster with time outside of pure sequential loads either. I would much rather have twice the capacity on a nominally slower drive, as real world performance (assuming you pick a good drive) won't be noticeably different.
 
Joined
Dec 26, 2006
Messages
3,368 (0.54/day)
Location
Northern Ontario Canada
Processor Ryzen 5700x
Motherboard Gigabyte X570S Aero G R1.1 BiosF5g
Cooling Noctua NH-C12P SE14 w/ NF-A15 HS-PWM Fan 1500rpm
Memory Micron DDR4-3200 2x32GB D.S. D.R. (CT2K32G4DFD832A)
Video Card(s) AMD RX 6800 - Asus Tuf
Storage Kingston KC3000 1TB & 2TB & 4TB Corsair LPX
Display(s) LG 27UL550-W (27" 4k)
Case Be Quiet Pure Base 600 (no window)
Audio Device(s) Realtek ALC1220-VB
Power Supply SuperFlower Leadex V Gold Pro 850W ATX Ver2.52
Mouse Mionix Naos Pro
Keyboard Corsair Strafe with browns
Software W10 22H2 Pro x64
wasn't long ago 1440p saw smaller margins at the top of the table too with 4k sitting at ~1% difference... now with RPL/Zen 4 vs 5600/my 9700K we're seeing a 15% shift at 1440p. 15% at this level is more than acceptable... but in my experience the single core 9700K is limiting performance or diminishing consistent visual eye candy in pacier select titles. I like my heavier multiplayer titles to run silky smooth hence compelled to upgrade.

Now we're hearing 40-series/potentially RDNA3 is transfering the bottleneck to the CPU... hope thats just a smelly-wallet-pinch-4090/4K-thing with mid-segment cards at 1440p delivering a finer balance :p
Ya, end result is how much you are satisfied/expectations and how much budget you have. My current 1700 and old rx480 was still meeting my wants & needs, so not point burning cash for no perceivable gains for my requirements. For anyone else.............it's your money, do whatever you want with it.
 
Joined
Oct 23, 2007
Messages
14 (0.00/day)
I would much rather have twice the capacity on a nominally slower drive, as real world performance (assuming you pick a good drive) won't be noticeably different.
I couldn't agree more, which is why my boot drive is a Firecuda 530 2TB Gen 4 drive (which, by the way, is noticeably quicker than my previous 2TB Samsung 970 Evo Plus drive in system start-up and game load times) and my data drive is a 8TB Corsair MP400 Gen 3 unit. I do find the 2TB drive slightly on the small side, so I guess I'll hang-on to this setup until decent 4TB Gen 5 drives are out and then I'll hock this one and be done!

I did consider waiting for the 13700K reviews to come in before I made this rig but I didn't like the notion that 13th gen was on a dead platform that would require a whole new system if I wanted to upgrade in 3-4 years' time! All I can say is I'm glad AMD pushed Intel as hard as they have in the past 2-3 years because the products from the 2600K to the 8086K were marginal improvements, year-on-year, at best!

Good time to be a PC gamer, honestly, you can't really lose whichever way you go!
 
Joined
May 3, 2018
Messages
2,109 (0.99/day)
i'll still stick with AMD, i don't do "e-cores" at all, i don't want them, i never wanted them and i won't overpay for unused silicon that i'll end up disabling on 1st power up.

IF intel had released a 8-core P-core only cpu, then my new PC would probably be that, as it is? i don't give a toss if it's more expensive, the software i use runs better on normal cores
Well come Zen 5 you will get E cores, but they will be Zen 5c cores and far more powerful than Gracemont+++ and SMT enabled. Come Arrow Lake i9 will have 48 cores, 8P + 40E!
 

Space Lynx

Astronaut
Joined
Oct 17, 2014
Messages
15,424 (4.52/day)
Location
Kepler-186f
Should I bother with Intel Optane? I am pretty sure my B660 board supports it, but it seems like I never hear anything about Optane. From what I understand it is relatively cheap for a 16gb stick of it, you plug it in a m.2 slot, install the drivers, reboot, and done... it just makes everything snappier and faster or something over time automatically after that?

(i just bought a 13600k, is why I am asking)
 

juraj

New Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2022
Messages
1 (0.00/day)
Why is the performance of the overclocked CPU so much worse in "Web Browsing" and "Microsoft Office"?
Those should be a single core workloads so 5.1GHz VS 5.6GHz should give it a nice boost in both.
Especially in the "Speedometer 2" it's 30% slower when overclocked.... why?
 
Joined
Oct 27, 2020
Messages
787 (0.65/day)
AMD Ryzen 7 7700 non-X CPU allegedly features 8 cores and 65W TDP

I wonder at what price it make sense with the kind of performance that 13600K/KF brings...

Should I bother with Intel Optane? I am pretty sure my B660 board supports it, but it seems like I never hear anything about Optane. From what I understand it is relatively cheap for a 16gb stick of it, you plug it in a m.2 slot, install the drivers, reboot, and done... it just makes everything snappier and faster or something over time automatically after that?

(i just bought a 13600k, is why I am asking)
Don't bother.
It has good random QD1-8 performance regarding 4K random read but no essential advantage in write and it is just a rebadged 5 year-old tech.
I don't know how much you can find it, $30? Just use them to buy a better SSD imo or something else
 
Last edited:
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
32 (0.01/day)
Location
Spain
System Name Zero RGB PC
Processor Intel Core-i7 12700KF
Motherboard Gigabyte Z690 AORUS PRO
Cooling Noctua NH-D15S chromax.black
Memory Kingston Fury Renegade DDR5-6400 CL32 2x16GB
Video Card(s) PNY GeForce RTX 4090 24GB XLR8 Gaming VERTO
Storage Kingston KC3000 2TB + Samsung 860 EVO 4TB
Display(s) Asus ROG Swift PG32UQ + LG 38GN950-B
Case Phanteks Eclipse P600S + Be Quiet! SILENT WINGS 3 140mm PWM + 3x Noctua NF-A12x25 chromax.black.swap
Audio Device(s) Drop PC38X / Corsair HS80 MAX
Power Supply FSP Hydro Ti PRO 1000W 80 Plus Titanium
Mouse Logitech G303 Shroud Edition
Keyboard Razer Huntsman V2 TKL / Logitech G413 TKL SE
Software Windows 11 Pro
Incredible price/performance ratio. I think it will be the winner of this generation, waiting for the 13400F.
 
Joined
Apr 14, 2022
Messages
626 (0.92/day)
Location
London, UK
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D
Motherboard ASUS B550M-Plus WiFi II
Cooling Noctua U12A chromax.black
Memory Corsair Vengeance 32GB 3600Mhz
Video Card(s) Palit RTX 4080 GameRock OC
Storage Samsung 970 Evo Plus 1TB + 980 Pro 2TB
Display(s) Asus XG35VQ
Case Asus Prime AP201
Audio Device(s) Creative Gigaworks - Razer Blackshark V2 Pro
Power Supply Corsair SF750
Mouse Razer Viper
Software Windows 11 64bit
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
2,159 (0.75/day)
This just shows how close these CPU's can be..

TPU: The 13600K is a bit faster than the 7700X at 1080 & 1440 with a RTX 3080.

HUB: The 13700K is just as fast as the 7700X at1080 & 1440 with a RTX 4090:
View attachment 266620

$120's for 2P cores and small frequency boost to unlocked chips that already have a lot of thermal cooling requirements along with over indulgent power draw out of the box. Keep in mind a Alder Lake Pentium is $75's for the same 2P cores. You could probably even buy that and MB for about the same or maybe less as the additional price of the 13700K.
 
Joined
Oct 15, 2010
Messages
951 (0.19/day)
System Name Little Boy / New Guy
Processor AMD Ryzen 9 5900X / Intel Core I5 10400F
Motherboard Asrock X470 Taichi Ultimate / Asus H410M Prime
Cooling ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II 280 A-RGB / ARCTIC Freezer 34 eSports DUO
Memory TeamGroup Zeus 2x16GB 3200Mhz CL16 / Teamgroup 1x16GB 3000Mhz CL18
Video Card(s) Asrock Phantom RX 6800 XT 16GB / Asus RTX 3060 Ti 8GB DUAL Mini V2
Storage Patriot Viper VPN100 Nvme 1TB / OCZ Vertex 4 256GB Sata / Ultrastar 2TB / IronWolf 4TB / WD Red 8TB
Display(s) Compumax MF32C 144Hz QHD / ViewSonic OMNI 27 144Hz QHD
Case Phanteks Eclipse P400A / Montech X3 Mesh
Power Supply Aresgame 850W 80+ Gold / Aerocool 850W Plus bronze
Mouse Gigabyte Force M7 Thor
Keyboard Gigabyte Aivia K8100
Software Windows 10 Pro 64 Bits
Holy shit it gives even the 7700X a run for its money!!
Time to lower prices AMD.....
And the 3D versions won't solve the applications deficit of the 7700X, only a price decrease would be acceptable.

AMD should think very hard about increasing core count of the 8 core to at least 10 core. And the 6 to 8.
 
Joined
Mar 4, 2011
Messages
165 (0.03/day)
Location
Israel
System Name Negra5
Processor i5 6500
Motherboard ASUS Z170M-Plus
Cooling Cooler Master Hyper TX3
Memory Kingston HyperX 16GB DDR4
Video Card(s) PNY GTX-1070, XFX RX480
Storage Gigabyte 256GB SSD, WD 1TB HDD, WD 4TB HDD.
Display(s) SAMSUNG 32" FullHD
Case GAMING EAGLE WARRIOR CG-06R1
Audio Device(s) nVidia HD Audio
Power Supply Corsair GS800W 80 Plus Bronze
Mouse Cooler Master Devastator MS2k
Keyboard Cooler Master Devastator MB24
Software Windows 10 20H2
Benchmark Scores Pfft
I just watched Hardware Unboxed review for the 13600k against the 7600X after reading this review. Not sure what is going on, could but their results showed the 7600X being overall faster in gaming, even in the same games tested by both reviews results are completely opposite.
 
Joined
Oct 15, 2010
Messages
951 (0.19/day)
System Name Little Boy / New Guy
Processor AMD Ryzen 9 5900X / Intel Core I5 10400F
Motherboard Asrock X470 Taichi Ultimate / Asus H410M Prime
Cooling ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II 280 A-RGB / ARCTIC Freezer 34 eSports DUO
Memory TeamGroup Zeus 2x16GB 3200Mhz CL16 / Teamgroup 1x16GB 3000Mhz CL18
Video Card(s) Asrock Phantom RX 6800 XT 16GB / Asus RTX 3060 Ti 8GB DUAL Mini V2
Storage Patriot Viper VPN100 Nvme 1TB / OCZ Vertex 4 256GB Sata / Ultrastar 2TB / IronWolf 4TB / WD Red 8TB
Display(s) Compumax MF32C 144Hz QHD / ViewSonic OMNI 27 144Hz QHD
Case Phanteks Eclipse P400A / Montech X3 Mesh
Power Supply Aresgame 850W 80+ Gold / Aerocool 850W Plus bronze
Mouse Gigabyte Force M7 Thor
Keyboard Gigabyte Aivia K8100
Software Windows 10 Pro 64 Bits
I just watched Hardware Unboxed review for the 13600k against the 7600X after reading this review. Not sure what is going on, could but their results showed the 7600X being overall faster in gaming, even in the same games tested by both reviews results are completely opposite.
This is interesting, because either site, whichever cpu wins, you won't notice it in real life, these reviews are more of an academic excercise, specially when the results are so close to each other.
A "win" at least for me has to be a difference noticeable by the user, like 20% - 30% minimum.
 
Joined
Jan 27, 2015
Messages
1,621 (0.49/day)
System Name Legion
Processor i7-12700KF
Motherboard Asus Z690-Plus TUF Gaming WiFi D5
Cooling Arctic Liquid Freezer 2 240mm AIO
Memory PNY MAKO DDR5-6000 C36-36-36-76
Video Card(s) PowerColor Hellhound 6700 XT 12GB
Storage WD SN770 512GB m.2, Samsung 980 Pro m.2 2TB
Display(s) Acer K272HUL 1440p / 34" MSI MAG341CQ 3440x1440
Case Montech Air X
Power Supply Corsair CX750M
Mouse Logitech MX Anywhere 25
Keyboard Logitech MX Keys
Software Lots
I just watched Hardware Unboxed review for the 13600k against the 7600X after reading this review. Not sure what is going on, could but their results showed the 7600X being overall faster in gaming, even in the same games tested by both reviews results are completely opposite.

Has to do with game selection and platform setup. Look at the three motherboards he is using. He's probably not equalizing them at all. When you just pop a CPU into a motherboard and set XMP, you have no idea what it is going to do.

The difference between what a MEG ACE motherboard (Zen 4) defaults to and what a Tomahawk (DDR4 Intel) or Carbon (DDR5 Intel) defaults to is likely significant. These 3 boards are all at entirely different tiers.
 
Joined
Feb 8, 2017
Messages
196 (0.08/day)
I like this CPU, competitively priced, fairly decent power consumption in games, amazing performance in games and crushes the 7600x in multithreaded applications! AMD's 7600x need to cost something like $200 in order to make sense at this point and their 7700x need to cost $350 in order to make sense! I don't see AMD doing well with their lower end parts if prices stay the same!

Intel definitely has an advantage at the mid range in terms of performance and value! Sure power consumption and temperatures are quite bad overall and in powerful applications this cpu turns into a heater as well, but for games and normal application work its a solid CPU.
 
Joined
Jan 20, 2019
Messages
1,218 (0.65/day)
Location
London, UK
System Name ❶ Oooh (2023) ❷ Aaaah (2021) ❸ Ahemm (2017)
Processor ❶ (TBC) 5800X3D ❷ i7-9700K ❸ i7-7700K
Motherboard ❶ ASUS X570-F ❷ ASUS Z390-E ❸ ASUS Z270-E
Cooling ❶ (TBC) ❷ X62 + X72 (GPU mod) ❸ AS500-P
Memory ❶ 32-3600/16 ❷ 32-3200/16 ❸ 16-3200/16
Video Card(s) ❶ 3080 X Trio ❷ 2080TI (AIOmod) ❸ 1080TI
Storage ❶ NVME/SATA/HDD ❷ <SAME ❸ SSD/HDD
Display(s) ❶ 1440/165/IPS ❷ 1440/144/IPS ❸ 1080/144/IPS
Case ❶ (TBC) King 95 ❷ Cors 465X ❸ Fractal Mesh C
Audio Device(s) ❶ HyperX C2 ❷ HyperX C2 ❸ Logi G432
Power Supply ❶ HX1200 Plat ❷ RM750X ❸ EVGA 650W G2
Mouse ❶ Logi G Pro ❷ Razer Bas V3 ❸ Logi G502
Keyboard ❶ Logi G915 LS ❷ Anne P2 ❸ Logi G610
I just watched Hardware Unboxed review for the 13600k against the 7600X after reading this review. Not sure what is going on, could but their results showed the 7600X being overall faster in gaming, even in the same games tested by both reviews results are completely opposite.

Looking at multiple 13600K vs 7600X reviews, it seems there is an emerging pattern which "possibly" explains why some reviews are showing the 13600K coming out ahead whilst other reviews are backing the 7600X.

It looks like its down to the test bench choice of graphics card. Based on several 10+ game averages, it appears:
  • where the high-end RTX 30-series card is used the 13600K takes the win with a nice 8% lead (taken from TPU 12-game bench shown below/others).
  • Where the RTX 4090 is used the 7600X takes the win with a 6% lead (taken from Jarrods 25-game bench shown below). Other 4090 reviews with 8-12 game averages are showing a 1-4% lead.
If this is correct, i'd appreciate if the know-howsers/experts can explain why the two generation of cards are showing variable results with RPL and Zen 4? I totally get it, some of these results will vary based on memory configurations, game type, etc... but for some reason i'm strongly suspecting the primary offender is the GPU(s)

TPU: 1080p / RTX 3090 / DDR5 / 13600K v 7600X

Share 1.jpg

Individual 12-game performance: https://www.techpowerup.com/review/intel-core-i5-13600k/18.html


JARRODS: 1080P / RTX 4090 / DDR5 / 13600K v 7600X

Share 2.jpg
 
Top