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

Is Intel going to deliver a processor/chipset worth waiting for?

Seriously, if i didn't know that you were a hardcore intel fanboy, i'd have accused you of trolling...

There is no segment in which intel is the better choice.

There is, budget segment.
 
There is, budget segment.
Apparently that doesn't exist in many ppl's mind on tech sites like this..:rolleyes:
For what its worth the 12100F is cheaper than a R5 5500 where I live and its faster too in gaming, if I step it up to the i5 range then the 12400F and 5600 is about the same price so pick your poison basically. 'at that point mobo prices,etc comes into play'
 
There is, budget segment.

Not gonna outright deny that, but got some data on it ?

So the faster cpus on 99% of tasks doesn't matter, but what matters is whos faster with a 2000$ gpu at 720p. And AMD isn't faster even at that ANYWAYS. Both the 13 and the 14600k are faster than the 7600, faster than the 7600x, faster than the 7700x, faster than the 7900x, faster than the 7950x. Numbers from this very website...


So the 14600k is faster (sometimes substantially) than everything else in it's price range in both games, MT apps, ST apps, doesn't consume 40w sitting there idle but it's not the best choice cause of the wrong logo on the box. Kk

14600k costs 2600 dkk - 7600x costs 1800 dkk... 5% more gaming performance aint worth a more than 50% higher price.
 
Intel should launch -K and -KS at the same time, with the former having a lower clock speed and power draw. 200 MHz is a joke.

It would give the K buyer:

- More OC headroom, even if the end result is the same. I guess some of you thinks it sounds idiotic.. I get that.

- Less heat/lower power draw at stock, which would of course reflect in every review. It would make this thread half as long! :D

It would give the KS buyer:

- A CPU more distanced from K. Again, stock settings is what most reviews focuses on.

- No need to wait for the best.


I guess there aren't enough binned KS chips at start.. otherwise they wouldn't have to push the K clock speed so hard!
 
Last edited:
@Dragam1337 just keep buying AMD, you're good...

Some other people just prefer intel.
 
Not gonna outright deny that, but got some data on it ?
The 12400F and 5600 are still currently direct price competitors. Performance-wise, Intel has a small edge in most things here.

Platform-wise, I'd say LGA1700 is a bit more attractive than AM4 too. There are lots of Z690 boards at a pretty low price point that have connectivity that's hard to match.
 
@Dragam1337 just keep buying AMD, you're good...

Some other people just prefer intel.

I will buy whatever makes the most sense - for many years that was intel, but that aint the case any longer. However, if intel smarts up and makes a cpu that is actually made for gaming, and not just a scaled up mobile chip with e-waste cores, then i will deffo be interested. A cpu with 8-10 ultra fast intel cores and a large L3 cache would likely clean the floor in gaming. One can only wonder why intel aint already doing this.

But alot of people have very strong brand loyalty, and keeps buying whatever they have always bought, regardless of whether it makes sense or not.

The 12400F and 5600 are still currently direct price competitors. Performance-wise, Intel has a small edge in most things here.

Platform-wise, I'd say LGA1700 is a bit more attractive than AM4 too. There are lots of Z690 boards at a pretty low price point that have connectivity that's hard to match.

But why not just buy a 7500f, which is nearly as fast as a 7600x, and then you're on am5, which is gonna be a vastly better platform longterm. It is slightly more expensive than a 12400f, but it's also a fair bit faster.

It's quite interesting to see what are the most popular cpu's across the various tech shops that are a part of pricerunner


Unsurprisingly the 7800x3d is nr1, with 5800x3d as nr2, and 7600x as nr 3... and honestly, it's those 3 cpus that makes the most sense for gamers (7500f as nr8).
 
Last edited:
14600k costs 2600 dkk - 7600x costs 1800 dkk... 5% more gaming performance aint worth a more than 50% higher price.
5% more gaming performance, 50+% more MT performance, 10% more ST performance, ddr4 support , 40w less in idle and light loads power draw. Insane value actually.
 
And again, doesn't matter to the vast majority of users. They either need a cheap home office pc, or a gaming pc - for the first amd makes more sense with the better igpus, and for the latter amd makes more sense with vastly better value / performance in gaming.

It was just a few years ago that all the AMD fans could say in these very forums was "some people do more than game" as Zen 2 lost every gaming benchmark to Intel 9th and 10th gen.

So no you don't get to tell people what is important to them.
 
It was just a few years ago that all the AMD fans could say in these very forums was "some people do more than game" as Zen 2 lost every gaming benchmark to Intel 9th and 10th gen.

So no you don't get to tell people what is important to them.

To which i disagreed with aswell, and bought intel.

5% more gaming performance, 50+% more MT performance, 10% more ST performance, ddr4 support , 40w less in idle and light loads power draw. Insane value actually.

For 44% more money. If all you do is game, which is true for the vast majority of people buying those cpu's, then it's insanely BAD value. And cpu popularity i linked shows it aswell.
 
But why not just buy a 7500f, which is nearly as fast as a 7600x, and then you're on am5, which is gonna be a vastly better platform longterm. It is slightly more expensive than a 12400f, but it's also a fair bit faster.
7500F isn't available through regular channels. You can get loose tray units from places like Aliexpress, but surely you can understand why not everyone would want to go through that route.

There's also still the matter of B650 boards often having worse connectivity than similarly priced Z690/Z790 boards, which was one of the factors that swayed me to Intel when I built late last year.

The B650 boards at the time were the likes of these


compared to the board I actually got

Of course, the nice sales of that time aren't relevant to a person looking to build today, but the board situation is still nicer for Intel

e.g.

I'd rather have this Z690

over this B650


or this Z790

over this B650
 
I don't particulaly favour either, just that since core2duo, AMD had nothing, so i used intel for a long time, then bought a AMD 2600x then I got gifted my 12700k/z690 and stuck with it. Never really fancied AM5 as it had a few problems on release, so now i will wait and see what Intel do in late 24/25 and see what comes after AM5 CPU wise.
 
7500F isn't available through regular channels. You can get loose tray units from places like Aliexpress, but surely you can understand why not everyone would want to go through that route.

There's also still the matter of B650 boards often having worse connectivity than similarly priced Z690/Z790 boards, which was one of the factors that swayed me to Intel when I built late last year.

The B650 boards at the time were the likes of these


compared to the board I actually got

Of course, the nice sales of that time aren't relevant to a person looking to build today, but the board situation is still nicer for Intel

e.g.

I'd rather have this Z690

over this B650


or this Z790

over this B650

All the major danish shops has the 7500f.



Are you kidding with that board? Budget option, really?


You can get very decent b650 boards at less than half that price...


 
If MT performance is what is important to you, then you will obviously go for the product that does that job the best. No one who has a great need for MT performance (which in 99% of cases will be companies) is going to look at a 7600x and 14600k and say "oh wauw, the 14600k has so much better MT performance, let's get that !" - no, they are obviously going to be looking at a product tailored at MT loads.

As for the 14900k vs 7950x it varies based on application, and as a private customer the 14900k might make more sense to you in that case. But if you're a company that needs MT performance, then you aren't looking at those, you are looking at threadripper, and intel doesn't really have an answer to those - only xeon, which aint even in the same ball park price wise.
It depends of what apps you are using. After effects for exemple doesn't scale up that well, and unless you need a ton of memory, buying a threadripper will be a massive waste of money for the performance that you'll get. I can only talk about content creation, but a lot of apps benefits more from a mixed CPU that's fairly strong in ST and MT. If Dell/HP/Lenovo/Puget keep making workstation based on the consumer platforms it means that there's people using them.

You also don't have to be a "pro" to want to do stuff on your computer beyond gaming, buy buying TR for a hobby is hardly justifiable unless you are filthy rich :D
 
It depends of what apps you are using. After effects for exemple doesn't scale up that well, and unless you need a ton of memory, buying a threadripper will be a massive waste of money for the performance that you'll get. I can only talk about content creation, but a lot of apps benefits more from a mixed CPU that's fairly strong in ST and MT. If Dell/HP/Lenovo/Puget keep making workstation based on the consumer platforms it means that there's people using them.

You also don't have to be a "pro" to want to do stuff on your computer beyond gaming, buy buying TR for a hobby is hardly justifiable unless you are filthy rich :D

Which i also noted, that as a private customer, which i will have to assume you are as content creator, the 14900k might make sense in that case depending on the apps you use. But it's so few people who actually need that, and have that use case. I'd wager the vast majority of people buying the 14900k are just people who want the highest end intel consumer model, just because. Know several people like that, who then use it for nothing but playing csgo...

But if we are talking companies, then medical companies, movie bizz etc, they will all want as strong MT as possible... aka threadripper, or epyc / xeon, depending on how much they wanna splurge.
 
Cool, you have a retailer in your country that sells loose tray units. That's nice, but it's not common in some other parts of the world.


No, I'm not kidding. There was a huge plethora of nice sales and combos during latter half of last year.

Edit: The black version of my board is currently not on any specials, but you can see if it had a small sale why this kind of board might be price comparable to those B650 boards you mentioned

Those boards are $200+ on Newegg and other etailers


This Z690 board, for example, is substantially cheaper than both of them at present ($210 - $40 with coupon = $170)
 
Cool, you have a retailer in your country that sells loose tray units. That's nice, but it's not common in some other parts of the world.



No, I'm not kidding. There was a huge plethora of nice sales and combos during latter half of last year.


Those boards are $200+ on Newegg and other etailers


This Z690 board, for example, is substantially cheaper than both of them at present ($210 - $40 with coupon = $170)

We dont have A retailer offering it - they all do.

That z690 board is 50% more expensive than the b650 tuf is here.


So i guess the answer will depend alot on where you live in the world. Here intel makes close to no sense.
 
The biggest issue for intel is their margins they have went to $#!+. I was hopeful for Meteorlake but it seems to be a bust and even though I don't dislike 12-14th gen they are not really appealing for multiple reasons for me. I'm not really holding my breath that intel will make anything worth waiting for over Zen 5 coming later this year or even 14th generation already out. The last 2 intel generations I was super excited for was 8th/9th generation and I'm currently not overly confident in them releasing anything exciting. I do applaud them for continuing to compete if not we'd still have 6 core amd cpus for $299.....

On the flip side if someone told me in 2016 AMD would have exciting CPUs ever again I would have lol pretty hard so you never know. Intel is definitely in a better spot than amd was 7-8 years ago so you never know.


All that being said the cpu market is probably better than it's even been and that also somewhat contributes to my skepticism that cpus will be worth waiting for from either side unless you are gaming at 720p and need more frames or need more MT than a 14900K/7950X on a mainstream platform there really isn't anything to be overly excited about pcie gen 5 products either don't exist or provide little benefit and DDR5 is fast enough for consumer level platforms.

Maybe the intel ultra 90000 intel fanboys edition with DDR5 10000 will come out and blow me away or the R9 9950X3D 1GB cache edition.... Only time will tell I guess.
 
Last edited:
7500F isn't available through regular channels. You can get loose tray units from places like Aliexpress, but surely you can understand why not everyone would want to go through that route.
Cool, you have a retailer in your country that sells loose tray units. That's nice, but it's not common in some other parts of the world.
Just stop making things up that suits your agenda, no one buys it. :roll: If you can't find it doesn't mean it isn't available.

PIB = Processor In Box:toast:


1709775792145.png
 
The biggest issue for intel is their margins they have went to $#!+. I was hopeful for Meteorlake but it seems to be a bust and even though I don't dislike 12-14th gen they are not really appealing for multiple reasons for me. I'm not really holding my breath that intel will make anything worth waiting for over Zen 5 coming later this year or even 14th generation already out. The last 2 intel generations I was super excited for was 8th/9th generation and I'm currently not overly confident in them releasing anything exciting. I do applaud them for continuing to compete if not we'd still have 6 core amd cpus for $299.....

On the flip side if someone told me in 2016 AMD would have exciting CPUs ever again I would have lol pretty hard so you never know. Intel is definitely in a better spot than amd was 7-8 years ago so you never know.

It wouldn't take much to take intel to the top in the gaming space again, but intel seems pretty intent on forcing that mobile chip design on everyone, and those e-waste cores do nothing for gaming - worse even, they make alot of games run slower, and with alot more frametime varience, aka stuttering.

I remember helping a friend, because he was having massive stuttering in star citizen with his 13700k no matter what he did - then we turned off the e-waste cores in the bios, and the stuttering was completely gone.

I'm not against going intel again in the future, since they served me well for many years - but it won't be before they make proper chips designed for gaming, rather than that mobile chip travesty.
 
40w less in idle and light loads power draw. Insane value actually.
That idle power figure keeps geting bumped up for every post it's mentioned lol.

The 14600K uses 93 W on average in applications (TPU), and the 7600X uses 60 W, but you conveniently left out that part.
 
Last edited:
Just stop making things up that suits your agenda, no one buys it. :roll: If you can't find it doesn't mean it isn't available.

PIB = Processor In Box:toast:
If you know of any North American retailers selling boxed units, I'd love to know
 
It wouldn't take much to take intel to the top in the gaming space again, but intel seems pretty intent on forcing that mobile chip design on everyone, and those e-waste cores do nothing for gaming - worse even, they make alot of games run slower, and with alot more frametime varience, aka stuttering.

I remember helping a friend, because he was having massive stuttering in star citizen with his 13700k no matter what he did - then we turned off the e-waste cores in the bios, and the stuttering was completely gone.

I'm not against going intel again in the future, since they served me well for many years - but it won't be before they make proper chips designed for gaming, rather than that mobile chip travesty.

I've had decent hands on with
12600k/13600k/7600/7700X/7800X3D and honesty when properly configured at 1440p they are almost impossible to tell apart at least with a 4090 maybe the 5090 will change that.

Not a fan of how Meteorlake is looking through.
 
I've had decent hands on with
12600k/13600k/7600/7700X/7800X3D and honesty when properly configured at 1440p they are almost impossible to tell apart at least with a 4090 maybe the 5090 will change that.

Not a fan of how Meteorlake is looking through.

Properly configured... aka e-waste cores off ;)

Obviously it will be very game dependent aswell - star citizen is deffo one of the more extreme examples, but it made a massive difference - both in the frametime graph, and how the game actually felt.

But yeah, meteorlake - looking very uninspired.

They ought to take a page from amds playbook.
 
Back
Top