Wow, gaming performance is really impressive.
But I am actually surprised at the productivity performance. In the 13600K, E-cores basically have 50% of the P-cores performance at slightly less than 50% power. Does that not confirm that it would be better to have 2 extra P-cores instead of 8 E-cores?
6 P-cores consume 118 W, so 8 would consume about 157 W, and the stock 13600K hybrid consumes 149 W in their testing. What is the point?
This really is a gimmick on desktop, where they do not care about efficiency anyway. Applications that can utilize 20+ threads will get slightly more performance at slightly less power, but that really seems irrelevant.
I don't think I have ever seen any reviewer who is talking about power control for the many factors that influence power consumption results. It isn't just a simple matter of swapping out the CPU.
Unfortunately, most of these sites and tubers justify unequal platforms by saying something about 'out of the box' experience. The problem with that logic is they have just switched from analyzing the power characteristics of a *CPU* to evaluating a *motherboards default settings*.
Even if you use the same motherboard, do we know what it's default power limits and VF curve looks like with different CPUs
? My Asus TUF for example, came out of the box completely power unlocked.
I mean, without knowing all those details, you really don't know anything about what you just saw or what the reviewer did. This is especially true when testing between different CPUs and different vendors (AMD/Intel).
To give an example of what I'm talking about, study these two charts - yes that's 116W difference for negative performance, even the MSI MAG B660 Tomahawk is drawing 67W more for about 1.2% performance loss in CB MC :