Intel Core i9-13900K

[siluro818]

The pascal era (like the 1080ti) was released 6 -7 years after the 2700k. And even then, I doubt it was a bottleneck at 4k. Actually, there is a very popular video on youtube testing exactly that, a 1080ti on a 2700k vs an 8700k or something similar, don't remember exactly. No difference at all in 4k


No one suggested you should play in that resolution. Literally no one. The only people that brought this up are people that can't argue the actual point so they are strawmaning

It is you who is trying to argue anything else but the "actual point".
And that point is there is NO POINT for anyone sitting low on AM4 to switch platforms for this or any other current CPU when they can still go high on the AM4.
The full cost will NEVER be justified.

 

[InVasMani]

Kind of sounds a bit more like you're strawmaning a little yourself when your counter argument self admittedly is useless and no one should play at that resolution. You must really like DSR downsample on that 720p display with that 3090 a lot. Jensen pimp my 720p display!

 

[fevgatos]

Kind of sounds a bit more like you're strawmaning a little yourself when your counter argument self admittedly is useless and no one should play at that resolution. You must really like DSR downsample on that 720p display with that 3090 a lot. Jensen pimp my 720p display!

No one suggested you should play at 720p but you. It must feel horrible not being able to argue the point, so instead you have to resort to these kind of tactics. That's sad, I feel sorry man.

 

[Dirt Chip]

The difference isn't 22%, your math are just wrong. 78% means that for every 100fps the 13600k gets, the 5700x gets 78. So for the 78 to become 100, you need a 30% increase (78 + 78*30/100). So the difference IS 30%.


It's not academic knowledge, it tells you how long you can keep your CPU. The 5700x WILL eventually bottleneck a graphics card at 1440p or even 4k that the 13600k won't, cause it's 30% faster. So, you can keep it longer. If you see for example a 4k benchmark with a 4090 between a ryzen 1700 and an 8700k, you will realize that the 1700 severely bottlenecks the 4090 while the 8700k does not. So you can keep it, while the 1700 needs an upgrade


No you won't, but youll keep your CPU until a future GPU can turn those 720p numbers into 4k numbers. So let's say the 5700x can get an average of 80 fps at 720p while the 13600k gets 110, you can pair the 5700x with a GPU that gets 80fps at 4k (let's call it a 5080) while you can pair the 13600k with a GPU that gets 110fps at 4k (let's call it a 6080). So the 13600k will last you longer without needing an upgrade. It's logic 101 man

If your baseline (100%) is 13600k, than it is 22% bigger (faster) than 5700x. 100%*(1-0.78)=22%
If your baseline is 5700x, than it is 28.2% smaller (slower) than 13600k. (100/78)*100%=128.2%. 100%-128.2%=28.2%
If 13600k was 30% faster than 5700x need to be at 70%. 100%*(1-0.7)=70%
Thats how we do precentage in my side of the globe or I just need to re-do math agine.

I dont see 32K res even in 10 years from now, but maybe by then 4K will be the new FHD

 

[R0H1T]

The computational costs will be exorbitantly high at that point, this is part of the reason why I said sitting on a PCIe 5.0 board today is wise, yes even for Intel users. "Moore's law" is truly dead & when Intel moves to tiles you will see a clock speed regression, anyone under the impression that clock speeds will not reduce going forward, whether it be with Intel or AMD, is smoking some good stuff. This is possibly the last gen of high/insane clocks on MSDT ~ it will be only downhill from here.

Unless there's some major computational breakthrough or new materials developed to replace Si we'll just see PC hardware kind of skyrocket in prices, especially for high end stuff. As they say the last 1% is the hardest to achieve, the same goes for nm race as well.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

Elnor has finally beaten the FX world record by 90 MHz with one of these at 8.8Ghz.

So they clearly do have a use case, benchmarks.

 

[Dirt Chip]

Elnor has finally beaten the FX world record by 90 MHz with one of these at 8.8Ghz.

So they clearly do have a use case, benchmarks.

I'm going 13900k.
Adobe suite use case, It is also common at least as uber-extrem OC.

 

[Shatun_Bear]

@fevgatos getting desperate and doing his best Intel marketing...give it a rest fella, these CPUs are good, if you don't care about their massive power draw, heat and thermal throttling (13900K, 13700K power draw is still horrible).

 

[fevgatos]

If your baseline (100%) is 13600k, than it is 22% bigger (faster) than 5700x. 100%*(1-0.78)=22%
If your baseline is 5700x, than it is 28.2% smaller (slower) than 13600k. (100/78)*100%=128.2%. 100%-128.2%=28.2%
If 13600k was 30% faster than 5700x need to be at 70%. 100%*(1-0.7)=70%
Thats how we do precentage in my side of the globe or I just need to re-do math agine.

Yes, you definitely need to redo math again.

One CPU gets 100 fps, and the other 78. How much faster is CPU 1 compared to CPU 2? It's 30%. That's how math have worked the last 30 years ive been alive.

CPU 2 is not 28.2% slower, it's actually 22% slower.

You have percentages completely mixed up

 

[siluro818]

Yes, you definitely need to redo math again.

One CPU gets 100 fps, and the other 78. How much faster is CPU 1 compared to CPU 2? It's 30%. That's how math have worked the last 30 years ive been alive.

CPU 2 is not 28.2% slower, it's actually 22% slower.

You have percentages completely mixed up

Lol you both gotta go to that class tho xD
According to TPU 13600K is 28.2% faster than 5700X in 720p, which also means 5700X is 28.2% slower. There is no 30% or 22% anywhere in this comparison.
But it still doesn't matter because you ain't gonna play anything using 720p, which DOES matter because you ain't gonna see any of that performance this year or the next.
And no these results don't translate directly to the 6 or 10 or however many years in the future, because by the time said potential might be realized:
A) you have no idea how games are gonna utilize the CPU at the time, because they are likely to be VERY different than the games these benchmarks were done with;
B) several CPU generations down the line you will be able to get another PC config at a lower price than the upgrade you're proposing even with the 5700X upgrade now included in the total cost;
C) you can simply pick the 5800X3D now, minimize the difference with 13600K and STILL save money off the whole deal.

 

[fevgatos]

Lol you both gotta go to that class tho xD
According to TPU 13600K is 28.2% faster than 5700X in 720p, which also means 5700X is 28.2% slower. There is no 30% or 22% anywhere in this comparison.

Nope. You are factually wrong. If CPU A gets 80 points and CPU B gets 100 points, CPU B is 25% faster, while CPU A is 20% slower. That's like math 101.

 

[siluro818]

Nope. You are factually wrong. If CPU A gets 80 points and CPU B gets 100 points, CPU B is 25% faster, while CPU A is 20% slower. That's like math 101.

True lol
But again - it doesn't matter one bit because of the 720p ^^

 

[fevgatos]

True lol
But again - it doesn't matter one bit because of the 720p ^^

Past evidence shows that it is always the case. The CPU that get's more frames at a low resolution gets more frames at normal resolutions 5 years down the line.

 

[Dirt Chip]

Yes, you definitely need to redo math again.

One CPU gets 100 fps, and the other 78. How much faster is CPU 1 compared to CPU 2? It's 30%. That's how math have worked the last 30 years ive been alive.

CPU 2 is not 28.2% slower, it's actually 22% slower.

You have percentages completely mixed up

Yep, you are right about the math. back to school than...

 

[CrAsHnBuRnXp]

What is the performance difference when running a gen 5 ssd and the GPU running at x8 compared to a gen 4 SSD and the GPU running at x16? Is this mentioned and I miss it? All I saw was something along the lines of it making little difference but I'd like to know actual numbers

 

[siluro818]

Past evidence shows that it is always the case. The CPU that get's more frames at a low resolution gets more frames at normal resolutions 5 years down the line.

My man, no one is arguing whether 13600K gets more frames or not - it obviously does.
But not nearly enough to justify switching platforms. You get the 5700X for 240EUR and the jump from 2700X is already huge. To get the presumed extra 28% 5 years down the track, you need to spend exactly 4 times as much to get the 13600K, the Z790 mobo, and the same 32GB DDR5 mem kit.
You can't make that look like a good deal even if you add free math classes on the side lol

 

[fevgatos]

My man, no one is arguing whether 13600K gets more frames or not - it obviously does.
But not nearly enough to justify switching platforms. You get the 5700X for 240EUR and the jump from 2700X is already huge. To get the presumed extra 28% 5 years down the track, you need to spend exactly 4 times as much to get the 13600K, the Z790 mobo, and the same 32GB DDR5 mem kit.
You can't make that look like a good deal even if you add free math classes on the side lol

And im saying that the 2 cpus arent comparable at all. Nothing beats keeping your 2700x in terms of value either, now does it?

 

[Mussels]

Exactly my point. And what do you need a new CPU for in your existing mobo? A 4% IPC uplift?

Zen 1 vs Zen3 is a lot more than 4%

That's the amount of increase intel gave, AMD did things different



You could get an x370 from 2017 (~5 years old) and slap in a 5800x3D, and apart from PCI-E 3.0 x16 you'd have no performance loss. My x370 happily runs 3200 on the RAM, and i've managed 3600 with SoC voltage increases.


The Ultimate Upgrade Bait - From 1800X to 5800X3D | Hardware Canucks

Including direct comparisons with x370 vs x570 showing the difference is genuinely small

4%? More like 50% to 200% (and the 0.1, 200% plus)

My man, no one is arguing whether 13600K gets more frames or not - it obviously does.
But not nearly enough to justify switching platforms. You get the 5700X for 240EUR and the jump from 2700X is already huge. To get the presumed extra 28% 5 years down the track, you need to spend exactly 4 times as much to get the 13600K, the Z790 mobo, and the same 32GB DDR5 mem kit.
You can't make that look like a good deal even if you add free math classes on the side lol

That's my view on this
Very few people (4090 owners, really) can justify the extra cost right now.

Anyone else should wait a gen, because both AMD and intel seem to have rushed their products this time around

 

[Dirt Chip]

Anyone else should wait a gen, because both AMD and intel seem to have rushed their products this time around

Yep, zen4 is in a though spot from zen3 in the low budget side for AM4 owners and the preformance side from RL.
For someone on the budget with ddr4 kit and to carry over and\or old system RL is also a good option.

 

[siluro818]

And im saying that the 2 cpus arent comparable at all. Nothing beats keeping your 2700x in terms of value either, now does it?

OK. 5800X3D is comparable. Same math. Still no point in switching platforms.

 

[fevgatos]

OK. 5800X3D is comparable. Same math. Still no point in switching platforms.

Actually, they aren't. The 13600k is more than 50% faster in MT workloads and more than 20% in ST workloads.. The 3d is more comparable to a 12600kf, which alongside a brand new b660 motherboard would cost you around the same price a 5800x 3d costs on it's own. Which is my point all along, you don't really gain anything by mobo upgradability.

 

[FeelinFroggy]

What games are choking your 8700K? I'm curious as I have yet to find one, though of course I'm on an 'ancient' GPU.

When did I say my 8700k was chocking games? I run an 8700k and a 3080 at 1440p and it's been great. The 8700k is very comparable to the 3600 and the new intel CPU gets about 20% better fps at 1440p.

For the past several generations of CPUs by both AMD and Intel have not been work upgrading. There would be no real world difference that I would see in a game.

But 20% bump in fps is noticeable. I'd also like to get a PCIe 4.0 NVME drive, they have been out for a while now any my board does not support it.

While I love my 8700k and it has been a great CPU, I have had it for 5 or 6 years and I dont see it as being irresponsible if I wanted to upgrade my platform to get some new features and better performance.

But I'll probably wait till the 78003dx comes out and check out Wizzard's review before I pull the trigger.

 

[Vayra86]

When did I say my 8700k was chocking games? I run an 8700k and a 3080 at 1440p and it's been great. The 8700k is very comparable to the 3600 and the new intel CPU gets about 20% better fps at 1440p.

For the past several generations of CPUs by both AMD and Intel have not been work upgrading. There would be no real world difference that I would see in a game.

But 20% bump in fps is noticeable. I'd also like to get a PCIe 4.0 NVME drive, they have been out for a while now any my board does not support it.

While I love my 8700k and it has been a great CPU, I have had it for 5 or 6 years and I dont see it as being irresponsible if I wanted to upgrade my platform to get some new features and better performance.

But I'll probably wait till the 78003dx comes out and check out Wizzard's review before I pull the trigger.

Oh no don't get me wrong, she certainly has matured by now, and I get it, we all like a young new lass; I just prefer the more experienced bed partner over those young hotties I like 'em when they're no longer in a hurry these days.



Still though, I'm also looking at those X3D's and midrange Intels... the rack of cache on those

 

[AusWolf]

Oh know don't get me wrong, she certainly has matured by now, and I get it, we all like a young new lass; I just prefer the more experienced bed partner over those young hotties I like 'em when they're no longer in a hurry these days.



Still though, I'm also looking at those X3D's and midrange Intels... the rack of cache on those

I've just started playing Stray on my bedroom HTPC with the i7-4765T. The wonders that decade-old 4-core 35 W CPU can do with the last GeForce GT card in existence are amazing! Solid gameplay at 1080p low graphics... why am I thinking about upgrading my main rig again?

 

[Steevo]

Τhe same benchmarks at 720p show different results though.


720p gaming the difference is around 30%.

And at 480 I bet it’s so fast it would grow wings and take off so no one would ever catch it. I have a 480 monitor somewhere if you would like it!!!!