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

Intel Prepares Pre-Binned Core i9-12900KS Processors Clocked at 5.2 GHz

AleksandarK

Staff member
Joined
Aug 19, 2017
Messages
1,501 (0.86/day)
According to the latest round of rumors coming from tech media VideoCardz, Intel could be preparing an answer to AMD's 3D V-cache in the form of... pre-binned Core i9-12900KS? As per the report, Intel could be making a pre-binned, pre-overclocked Core i9-12900KS processor with an all-core turbo boost frequency of 5.2 GHz. This alleged clock speed will push the processor to some fantastic heights and increase the overall performance of the regular Core i9-12900K processor. With AMD's Ryzen processors with 3D V-cache incoming, Intel has prepared this solution to keep up with the increasing pressure from AMD.

So far, we don't know the specific requirements for Core i9-12900KS to reach 5.2 GHz. However, we assume that Voltage needs a big boost, making cooling and power supply requirements increase. This special edition Alder Lake design should launch around the same time frame that AMD reveals its 3D V-cache enabled Ryzen processors, so Intel doesn't let AMD steal the performance crown.


View at TechPowerUp Main Site
 
Joined
Dec 23, 2012
Messages
1,662 (0.48/day)
Location
Somewhere Over There!
System Name ArchRyze
Processor Ryzen R9 3900XT 4.5 Ghz @ 1.275V
Motherboard Asus ROG Crosshair Viii Hero Wifi
Cooling Lian Li 360 Galahad
Memory G.Skill Trident Z Neo 32gb OC @ 3733 mhz CL14-13-13-21 1T @ 1.43V
Video Card(s) Sapphire RX 6900 XT Nitro+
Storage Seagate 520 1TB + Samsung 970 Evo Plus 1TB + lots of HDD's
Display(s) Samsung Odyssey G7
Case Lian Li PC-O11D XL White
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply Super Flower Leadex SE Platinum 1000W
Mouse Xenics Titan GX Air Wireless
Keyboard Kemove Snowfox 61
Software Main: Arch Linux KDE ; Windows 10 Pro (for games as benchmark)
Benchmark Scores Have tried but can't beat the leaders :)
recommended PSU would be minimum 1kw?
 
Last edited:
Joined
Dec 28, 2012
Messages
2,199 (0.64/day)
I'd rather see them bring back thermal velocity boost for a single core to hit 5.3-5.4 GHz. In multicore the standard 12700k and 12900k are incredible already, but to date the best out of box experience for single threaded games is the 10900k.
 
Joined
Feb 20, 2019
Messages
4,126 (3.48/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.
This is entirely pointless for the overwhelming majority of even high-end enthusiasts with money to burn, right?

Even if Intel bin one that's stable at 5.2GHz it's going to need 400W from the socket minimum. Most reviews and forum posts seem to suggest that 1.45V is kind of mandatory for anything over 5GHz all-core, and @W1zzard hit 404W (full system) with his sample at just 5.0GHz and 1.4V. Binning can only get you so far and 5.2 all-core could very well require 500W+ from the socket, limiting it to those absolutely retarded $1000 motherboards given to all the streamers and vloggers in the desperate hope that they can provide enough exposure to snag some sales to the 0.01% for their 9000% profit, ultra-flagship motherboards.

Maybe I'm becoming cynical in my old age but when a 5950X Zen3 is boosting at 142W and the stock 12700K pulling ~200W from the socket is basically matching a heavily-overclocked 12900K in performance for the majority of workloads, you realise that these chips are just vanity objects to massage the fragile ego of the show-offs. The 12900KS' time in the spotlight before something better comes along is likely to be too short to justify the purchase on anything other than "I MUST HAVE THIS SHINY NEW BAUBLE".

If someone gave me a 12900KS for free, I'd sell it and buy a 12700K so that I could get 95% of the same result in a $200 motherboard with some DDR4. It only has any value whilst it's the king of the hill and that might even be under threat right now with Vermeer S (5950X with 3D vCache) already in mass production and expected within the next couple of months. Intel may have the clockspeed advantage and competitive IPC but they only go to 24 threads in the i9 and only 8 of the cores are P-cores. The older Zen3 tech will likely brute force the win with 16 "P-cores" and 32 threads, so long as the IPC gains from the vCache are even half of what was promised.
 
Joined
Jan 31, 2019
Messages
504 (0.42/day)
This is entirely pointless for the overwhelming majority of even high-end enthusiasts with money to burn, right?

Even if Intel bin one that's stable at 5.2GHz it's going to need 400W from the socket minimum. Most reviews and forum posts seem to suggest that 1.45V is kind of mandatory for anything over 5GHz all-core, and @W1zzard hit 404W (full system) with his sample at just 5.0GHz and 1.4V. Binning can only get you so far and 5.2 all-core could very well require 500W+ from the socket, limiting it to those absolutely retarded $1000 motherboards given to all the streamers and vloggers in the desperate hope that they can provide enough exposure to snag some sales to the 0.01% for their 9000% profit, ultra-flagship motherboards.

Maybe I'm becoming cynical in my old age but when a 5950X Zen3 is boosting at 142W and the stock 12700K pulling ~200W from the socket is basically matching a heavily-overclocked 12900K in performance for the majority of workloads, you realise that these chips are just vanity objects to massage the fragile ego of the show-offs. The 12900KS' time in the spotlight before something better comes along is likely to be too short to justify the purchase on anything other than "I MUST HAVE THIS SHINY NEW BAUBLE".

If someone gave me a 12900KS for free, I'd sell it and buy a 12700K so that I could get 95% of the same result in a $200 motherboard with some DDR4. It only has any value whilst it's the king of the hill and that might even be under threat right now with Vermeer S (5950X with 3D vCache) already in mass production and expected within the next couple of months. Intel may have the clockspeed advantage and competitive IPC but they only go to 24 threads in the i9 and only 8 of the cores are P-cores. The older Zen3 tech will likely brute force the win with 16 "P-cores" and 32 threads, so long as the IPC gains from the vCache are even half of what was promised.
It is pointless because (for gaming at least) the GPU is by far the most important component.
 

W1zzard

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
May 14, 2004
Messages
24,057 (3.65/day)
Processor Core i7-8700K
Memory 32 GB
Video Card(s) RTX 3080
Display(s) 30" 2560x1600 + 19" 1280x1024
Software Windows 10 64-bit
thermal velocity boost
Yeah I wonder why they removed it in the first place, I tried to get an answer out of Intel but that part of the question was ignored ;)
 
Joined
Dec 25, 2020
Messages
317 (0.62/day)
Location
São Paulo, Brazil
System Name Unova
Processor AMD Ryzen 9 5950X 16-Core Processor (B0)
Motherboard ASUS ROG STRIX B550-E
Cooling id-cooling Frostflow X 360 + Gelid GC-Extreme
Memory 64 GB (4x 16) Dominator Platinum B-die @ DDR4-3600 16-17-16-34-1 1.375V
Video Card(s) ASUS TUF Gaming OC GeForce RTX 3090 24 GB
Storage WD Green SN350 480 GB (x 2), Samsung 840 Pro 128 GB, Intel SSD 320 160 GB, Lexar NS100 256 GB
Display(s) LG 29UM67-P (2560x1080 @ 75 Hz, saving up for an LG G Series OLED)
Case Lian Li PC-O11 Air
Audio Device(s) EVGA Nu Audio (classic)
Power Supply EVGA SuperNOVA 1300 G2 1300W 80+ Gold
Mouse HyperX Pulsefire Haste
Keyboard Logitech G213 Prodigy
Software Windows 11 Pro for Workstations
Benchmark Scores pls release the 7900 XT love u tyvm
This is entirely pointless for the overwhelming majority of even high-end enthusiasts with money to burn, right?

Even if Intel bin one that's stable at 5.2GHz it's going to need 400W from the socket minimum. Most reviews and forum posts seem to suggest that 1.45V is kind of mandatory for anything over 5GHz all-core, and @W1zzard hit 404W (full system) with his sample at just 5.0GHz and 1.4V. Binning can only get you so far and 5.2 all-core could very well require 500W+ from the socket, limiting it to those absolutely retarded $1000 motherboards given to all the streamers and vloggers in the desperate hope that they can provide enough exposure to snag some sales to the 0.01% for their 9000% profit, ultra-flagship motherboards.

Maybe I'm becoming cynical in my old age but when a 5950X Zen3 is boosting at 142W and the stock 12700K pulling ~200W from the socket is basically matching a heavily-overclocked 12900K in performance for the majority of workloads, you realise that these chips are just vanity objects to massage the fragile ego of the show-offs. The 12900KS' time in the spotlight before something better comes along is likely to be too short to justify the purchase on anything other than "I MUST HAVE THIS SHINY NEW BAUBLE".

If someone gave me a 12900KS for free, I'd sell it and buy a 12700K so that I could get 95% of the same result in a $200 motherboard with some DDR4. It only has any value whilst it's the king of the hill and that might even be under threat right now with Vermeer S (5950X with 3D vCache) already in mass production and expected within the next couple of months. Intel may have the clockspeed advantage and competitive IPC but they only go to 24 threads in the i9 and only 8 of the cores are P-cores. The older Zen3 tech will likely brute force the win with 16 "P-cores" and 32 threads, so long as the IPC gains from the vCache are even half of what was promised.

Yeah, that is how I feel as well. Maybe we have gotten old. I will be quite content to flip my 5950X for its S version, but only because it is so hassle-free. There is equally little reason to and not to, truth be told if I wasn't about to give this processor to my brother for an upgrade, I probably would not bother.

Alder Lake's performance is solid, but the extreme power consumption and heat dissipation requirements quickly make it unviable for the climate I live in.
 
Joined
Sep 4, 2008
Messages
484 (0.10/day)
Location
USA
More or less even if you get a pre-binned 5.2 All-Core, it is going to take at least 1.35v and that is 350+ watts under Prime95. Good luck cooling it. My limit is 300~ with a waterblock. of course I could delid and go LM, but still can't absorb much more heat.
 
Joined
Oct 23, 2020
Messages
671 (1.16/day)
Location
Austria
System Name nope
Processor I3 10100F
Motherboard ATM Gigabyte h410
Cooling Arctic 12 passive
Memory ATM Gskill 1x 8GB NT Series (No Heatspreader bling bling garbage, just Black DIMMS)
Video Card(s) Sapphire HD7770 and EVGA GTX 470 and Zotac GTX 960
Storage 120GB OS SSD, 240GB M2 Sata, 240GB M2 NVME, 300GB HDD, 500GB HDD
Display(s) Nec EA 241 WM
Case Coolermaster whatever
Audio Device(s) Onkyo on TV and Mi Bluetooth on Screen
Power Supply Super Flower Leadx 550W
Mouse Steelseries Rival Fnatic
Keyboard Logitech K270 Wireless
Software Deepin, BSD and 10 LTSC
5 GHz looks like the limit why i should buy a xyz Z Board for a K CPU to oc it for about 2, 3, 400 MHz.

Yeah kinda of trolling i buy a non K CPU on a B Board set the Turboclock to 5.2 GHz and thats it.



Or i go in the past may 10 years ago and u could OC a CPU via FSB/BCLK to its limit without K Cpu or Z chiptset,
and the oc was imrepssive like 45% higher performace via OC.

If there no news about new designs about semiconductor, x86 will be dead in the future.


Let me say one Thing:
2011 a dualcore with HT did go up to 5.4 GHz via Air Cooling
2021 a xyz Core hit it marks via Watercooling with 5.6 GHz

We are at the End :wtf: :oops:
 
Last edited:
Joined
Sep 17, 2014
Messages
16,469 (5.87/day)
Location
The Washing Machine
Processor i7 8700k 4.6Ghz @ 1.24V
Motherboard AsRock Fatal1ty K6 Z370
Cooling beQuiet! Dark Rock Pro 3
Memory 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX 3200/C16
Video Card(s) MSI GTX 1080 Gaming X @ 2100/5500
Storage Samsung 850 EVO 1TB + Samsung 830 256GB + Crucial BX100 250GB + Toshiba 1TB HDD
Display(s) Gigabyte G34QWC (3440x1440)
Case Fractal Design Define C TG
Audio Device(s) Situational :)
Power Supply EVGA G2 750W
Mouse XTRFY M42
Keyboard Lenovo Thinkpad Trackpoint II
Software W10 x64
It is pointless because (for gaming at least) the GPU is by far the most important component.

It is pointless for MSDT.

ADL is a nice PoC for Intel, but realistically they still have overburdened Core at its heart, still trying to keep it from being EOL, which it has been since Skylake.

For mobile, sure. Maximize perf within limited power budget, and high versatility are key. But for MSDT its entirely pointless. Its marketing trying to kill Ryzen, which it really cant.

5 GHz looks like the limit why i should buy a xyz Z Board for a K CPU to oc it for about 2, 3, 400 MHz.

Yeah kinda of trolling i buy a non K CPU on a B Board set the Turboclock to 5.2 GHz and thats it.



Or i go in the past may 10 years ago and u could OC a CPU via FSB/BCLK to its limit without K Cpu or Z chiptset,
and the oc was imrepssive like 45% higher performace via OC.

If there no news about new designs about semiconductor, x86 will be dead in the future.


Let me say one Thing:
2011 a dualcore with HT did go up to 5.4 GHz via Air Cooling
2021 a xyz Core hit it marks via Watercooling with 5.6 GHz

We are at the End :wtf: :oops:

ARM is going to hit the same walls. The node and the metal are the same things, and if ARM is going to have featureset parity, it will be the same thing. Its like inventing a wheel, good luck making it not a circle.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Nov 13, 2007
Messages
8,953 (1.69/day)
Location
Austin Texas
System Name Espresso Machine
Processor 12600K @ 5.2Ghz
Motherboard MSI 690-I PRO
Cooling 280MM push pull water Loop
Memory 32 GB DDR5 6200 MHZ 32-35-35-67
Video Card(s) MSI Ventus RTX 3080 UC @1810mhz 775mv
Storage 3x1TB SSDs, 2TB SSD
Display(s) LG CX OLED 48"
Case SLIGER S610
Audio Device(s) Bose Solo
Power Supply Corsair SF750
Mouse Superlight wireless
Keyboard 65% mini hyperspeed wireless
Software Windows 11
More or less even if you get a pre-binned 5.2 All-Core, it is going to take at least 1.35v and that is 350+ watts under Prime95. Good luck cooling it. My limit is 300~ with a waterblock. of course I could delid and go LM, but still can't absorb much more heat.

There are 12900K chips that hit 5.3 with ease under 1.3v - my 12600k does that as well. A binned chip won't need that much voltage to hit that clock.

I really wish they would move away from single core boost though. Almost all games now days use all your cores, so it would be nice if they boosted based on watts, not on core load.
 
Joined
Sep 23, 2021
Messages
6 (0.02/day)
I really wish they would move away from single core boost though. Almost all games now days use all your cores, so it would be nice if they boosted based on watts, not on core load.
This is absolutely not true. Games are still overwhelmingly dominated by single core performance, and will be for the foreseeable future. Programming for multithreading is already hard enough, and on top of that, the gains from going multithreaded are almost never worth the massively increased expense and time spent programming it.

Multithreading *exists*, yes, and it is put to good use by putting lower priority operations on other cores to free up compute time on the primary core. But you are essentially never limited by the performance of the secondary cores - the core where the main game engine is running, is the limiting factor.
 
Joined
Nov 13, 2007
Messages
8,953 (1.69/day)
Location
Austin Texas
System Name Espresso Machine
Processor 12600K @ 5.2Ghz
Motherboard MSI 690-I PRO
Cooling 280MM push pull water Loop
Memory 32 GB DDR5 6200 MHZ 32-35-35-67
Video Card(s) MSI Ventus RTX 3080 UC @1810mhz 775mv
Storage 3x1TB SSDs, 2TB SSD
Display(s) LG CX OLED 48"
Case SLIGER S610
Audio Device(s) Bose Solo
Power Supply Corsair SF750
Mouse Superlight wireless
Keyboard 65% mini hyperspeed wireless
Software Windows 11
This is absolutely not true. Games are still overwhelmingly dominated by single core performance, and will be for the foreseeable future. Programming for multithreading is already hard enough, and on top of that, the gains from going multithreaded are almost never worth the massively increased expense and time spent programming it.

Multithreading *exists*, yes, and it is put to good use by putting lower priority operations on other cores to free up compute time on the primary core. But you are essentially never limited by the performance of the secondary cores - the core where the main game engine is running, is the limiting factor.

Correct... but what I am saying is your BOOST is dictated by how MANY cores are loaded. If the secondary cores are loaded with less important crap, then your boost isn't going to 5.1 or 5.2.

If you look at the clock graphs for a 12900k when running modern games, it sits at all core boost, even though those secondary threads aren't intensive loads (at all), and the chip could realistically be running at 5.3 - 5.4 without breaking thermal or wattage limits due to the low load of those ancillary threads.

So your main thread of the game is running at 100% and could definitely use more clock, but because the game spawns 4-16 threads your chip won't boost past however many simultaneous threads are in flight.
 
Joined
Sep 23, 2021
Messages
6 (0.02/day)
Correct... but what I am saying is your BOOST is dictated by how MANY cores are loaded. If the secondary cores are loaded with less important crap, then your boost isn't going to 5.1 or 5.2.

If you look at the clock graphs for a 12900k when running modern games, it sits at all core boost, even though those secondary threads aren't intensive loads (at all), and the chip could realistically be running at 5.3 - 5.4 without breaking thermal or wattage limits due to the low load of those ancillary threads.

So your main thread of the game is running at 100% and could definitely use more clock, but because the game spawns 4-16 threads your chip won't boost past however many simultaneous threads are in flight.
Oh gotcha gotcha, I see what you're saying. True for Ryzen CPUs too, and really annoying. Current boost algorithms make the quoted single core max boost basically never actually happen in real life.
 
Joined
Dec 25, 2020
Messages
317 (0.62/day)
Location
São Paulo, Brazil
System Name Unova
Processor AMD Ryzen 9 5950X 16-Core Processor (B0)
Motherboard ASUS ROG STRIX B550-E
Cooling id-cooling Frostflow X 360 + Gelid GC-Extreme
Memory 64 GB (4x 16) Dominator Platinum B-die @ DDR4-3600 16-17-16-34-1 1.375V
Video Card(s) ASUS TUF Gaming OC GeForce RTX 3090 24 GB
Storage WD Green SN350 480 GB (x 2), Samsung 840 Pro 128 GB, Intel SSD 320 160 GB, Lexar NS100 256 GB
Display(s) LG 29UM67-P (2560x1080 @ 75 Hz, saving up for an LG G Series OLED)
Case Lian Li PC-O11 Air
Audio Device(s) EVGA Nu Audio (classic)
Power Supply EVGA SuperNOVA 1300 G2 1300W 80+ Gold
Mouse HyperX Pulsefire Haste
Keyboard Logitech G213 Prodigy
Software Windows 11 Pro for Workstations
Benchmark Scores pls release the 7900 XT love u tyvm
This is absolutely not true. Games are still overwhelmingly dominated by single core performance, and will be for the foreseeable future. Programming for multithreading is already hard enough, and on top of that, the gains from going multithreaded are almost never worth the massively increased expense and time spent programming it.

Multithreading *exists*, yes, and it is put to good use by putting lower priority operations on other cores to free up compute time on the primary core. But you are essentially never limited by the performance of the secondary cores - the core where the main game engine is running, is the limiting factor.

ADL-S may dominate raw IPC, but thus far the practical outcome of it vs. Zen 3 has been negligible at best with RTX 3090 hardware. I would place a safe wager on Vermeer-S closing this gap again and with relative finesse so to speak (aka won't be guzzling 400 watts of power to do so). Besides, if you want to have the strongest single-core performance, you don't buy a processor like the 5950X or the 12900K to begin with.

The high core count comes at a cost, the power budget per-core diminishes with every core added, even though binning keeps that from some extent, you won't be getting even the best 5950Xs doing 4.8 all-core like a 5600X will on most motherboards unless you're running an Aorus Xtreme or a C8DH/C8E with heavy-duty cooling anyway... my personal sample does ~4450MHz 32T on my B550-E Strix with a 360mm AIO (160A TDC/190A EDC cap) and it's a chip that refuses to go below -2 all-core CO, from all I can tell, it's a god tier bin chip.
 
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
1,431 (0.64/day)
I'd think the 5950x /129000K could get better single core performance, but you'd need to tweak it more to do so.
 
Joined
Jan 27, 2015
Messages
935 (0.35/day)
System Name loon v4.0
Processor i7-11700K
Motherboard asus Z590TUF+wifi
Cooling Custom Loop
Memory ballistix 3600 cl16
Video Card(s) eVga 3060 xc
Storage WD sn570 1tb(nvme) SanDisk ultra 2tb(sata)
Display(s) cheap 1080&4K 60hz screens
Case Roswell Stryker
Power Supply eVGA supernova 750 G6
Mouse eats cheese
Keyboard warrior!
Benchmark Scores https://www.3dmark.com/spy/21765182 https://www.3dmark.com/pr/1114767
wonder what the price premium will be.

i suspect intel thinks there's money left on the table since silicon lottery closed up shop.
 
Joined
Jan 27, 2015
Messages
1,174 (0.44/day)
System Name Legion
Processor i9-10850K
Motherboard Asus Prime Z490M Plus
Cooling Arctic Liquid Freezer 2 240mm AIO
Memory G.Skill Ripjaws V 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR4-3200 F4-3200C16D-32GVK
Video Card(s) EVGA GeForce RTX 2060 KO Ultra
Storage Team Group MP33 Pro 2TB M.2 2280 PCIe NVMe 3.0 x4 + WD Blue 1TB SATA SSD
Display(s) Acer K272HUL 1440p / 34" MSI MAG341CQ 3440x1440
Case Lian Li 205M
Power Supply PowerSpec 650W 80+ Bronze Semi-Modular PS 650BSM
Mouse Logitech MX Anywhere 25
Keyboard Logitech MX Keys
Software Lots
Oh gotcha gotcha, I see what you're saying. True for Ryzen CPUs too, and really annoying. Current boost algorithms make the quoted single core max boost basically never actually happen in real life.

So have you guys ever tried setting an all core turbo speed high, and power limits low? Like a 10900K at 5.4Ghz all core with a 180W max turbo power limit.

I've been thinking about this problem of only having one or two cores loaded, while preventing sudden spike overheating in the occasional all core load, is why I ask. I see what you're describing all the time not just in games but daily use, 12 vCores at 10% and 4 at 80-100%.
 

Lenne

S.T.A.R.S.
Joined
Dec 16, 2012
Messages
8,179 (2.37/day)
Location
Jyväskylä, Finland
System Name mATX gamebox
Processor AMD Ryzen 5 3600 @ 4.4GHz
Motherboard Gigabyte B550M Aorus Elite
Cooling Arctic Freezer 50
Memory 32GB HyperX Fury @ 3466MHz 16-18-18-36-1T
Video Card(s) Gigabyte GeForce GTX 1080 Ti @ +100/625
Storage ~2TB of SSDs + 2TB USB HDD
Display(s) Dell P2412H + Viewsonic VA2465S
Case Fractal Design Define Mini C
Audio Device(s) Onboard audio, Corsair HS35 Stereo Carbon
Power Supply Fractal Ion Gold 550W
Mouse Logitech MX518 Legendary
Keyboard NOS C450 Mini Pro RGB (Outemu red)
VR HMD Oculus Rift CV1
Software Windows 11 Pro English
Benchmark Scores 24164 on Fire Strike, 9808 on Time Spy
And what's the real world performance difference? With clocks that high, a few hundred MHz difference is something you'll see only with synthetic benchmarks.
 
Joined
Jul 18, 2017
Messages
575 (0.33/day)
Weak! The competition does single core 5Ghz for a few seconds using 1.5v and superior TSMC 7nm process!
 
Joined
Nov 6, 2016
Messages
939 (0.46/day)
Location
NH, USA
System Name Lightbringer
Processor Ryzen 7 2700X
Motherboard Asus ROG Strix X470-F Gaming
Cooling Enermax Liqmax Iii 360mm AIO
Memory G.Skill Trident Z RGB 32GB (8GBx4) 3200Mhz CL 14
Video Card(s) Sapphire RX 5700XT Nitro+
Storage Hp EX950 2TB NVMe M.2, HP EX950 1TB NVMe M.2, Samsung 860 EVO 2TB
Display(s) LG 34BK95U-W 34" 5120 x 2160
Case Lian Li PC-O11 Dynamic (White)
Power Supply BeQuiet Straight Power 11 850w Gold Rated PSU
Mouse Glorious Model O (Matte White)
Keyboard Royal Kludge RK71
Software Windows 10
And what's the real world performance difference? With clocks that high, a few hundred MHz difference is something you'll see only with synthetic benchmarks.

Agreed, I've been demanding it for years, but SOMEBODY has to do some research into how large a framerate difference has to be before a typical human being can actually distinguish the difference, e.g. At 142 FPS, a 5% increase would mean 149 FPS, and I highly doubt very many human beings can distinguish that difference, if at all....so it'd be nice to have an actual experiment prove it, so that when a new CPU comes out, we can say with confidence that unless it outperforms another CPU in framerates by at least 15%, it's pointless. It'd be nice to know that people bragging over a 6% average difference in framerates are just wasting their time....conclusively.
 

Lenne

S.T.A.R.S.
Joined
Dec 16, 2012
Messages
8,179 (2.37/day)
Location
Jyväskylä, Finland
System Name mATX gamebox
Processor AMD Ryzen 5 3600 @ 4.4GHz
Motherboard Gigabyte B550M Aorus Elite
Cooling Arctic Freezer 50
Memory 32GB HyperX Fury @ 3466MHz 16-18-18-36-1T
Video Card(s) Gigabyte GeForce GTX 1080 Ti @ +100/625
Storage ~2TB of SSDs + 2TB USB HDD
Display(s) Dell P2412H + Viewsonic VA2465S
Case Fractal Design Define Mini C
Audio Device(s) Onboard audio, Corsair HS35 Stereo Carbon
Power Supply Fractal Ion Gold 550W
Mouse Logitech MX518 Legendary
Keyboard NOS C450 Mini Pro RGB (Outemu red)
VR HMD Oculus Rift CV1
Software Windows 11 Pro English
Benchmark Scores 24164 on Fire Strike, 9808 on Time Spy
Agreed, I've been demanding it for years, but SOMEBODY has to do some research into how large a framerate difference has to be before a typical human being can actually distinguish the difference, e.g. At 142 FPS, a 5% increase would mean 149 FPS, and I highly doubt very many human beings can distinguish that difference, if at all....so it'd be nice to have an actual experiment prove it, so that when a new CPU comes out, we can say with confidence that unless it outperforms another CPU in framerates by at least 15%, it's pointless. It'd be nice to know that people bragging over a 6% average difference in framerates are just wasting their time....conclusively.
My opinion is basically that if you put a high end Intel and AMD systems next to each other with a same GPU, nobody would know the differences without an OSD/FPS counter.
 
Top