Non-K 13th Gen Core i5 (such as i5-13400) Based on Older "Alder Lake" Architecture, Hints Intel Slide

[btarunr]

Remember how 12th Gen Core i5 non-K was vastly different in performance from the Core i5 K/KF on account of being 6P+0E processors in comparison to more L3 cache and a 6P+4E core-count of the i5-12600K/KF? Intel is doubling down on creating architectural confusion in the mid-range, according to a 3DCenter.org article citing a leaked slide from Intel's 13th Gen Core launch press-deck.

We had earlier thought that the 13th Gen non-K Core i5 will have a 6P+4E core-config, but still be based on "Raptor Lake" (i.e. "Raptor Cove" P-cores + "Gracemont" E-cores), in comparison to the i5-13600K/KF, which are confirmed "Raptor Lake" chips with 6P+8E configuration; but it turns out that Intel is basing the non-K 13th Gen Core i5 on the older "Alder Lake" microarchitecture. These chips will be 6P+4E (that's six "Golden Cove" P-cores + four "Gracemont" E-cores), which make them essentially identical to the i5-12600K, but without the unlocked multiplier, and a lower 65 W processor base power.



Being based on the "Alder Lake" architecture has many implications for chips such as the i5-13400, i5-13500, and i5-13600 (non-K), the biggest of which will be lower IPC of the "Golden Cove" P-cores, which according to AMD's benchmarks, are already beaten by the "Zen 4." This means that the i5-13400 will have no chance squaring off against Ryzen 5 7000-series SKUs, given that the Ryzen 5 7600X already beats the current flagship i9-12900K in gaming performance, according to AMD.

The "Gracemont" E-core clusters on "Alder Lake" come with smaller 2 MB shared L2 caches, compared to 4 MB on "Raptor Lake," and so the performance of the E-cores will be lower, too. The i5-13400 and i5-13500 will have a tough time matching the multi-threaded performance of the 7600X despite the E-core muscle, owing to their lower clock-speeds on both the P-cores and E-cores.

This also casts doubt on whether there will even be a "13th Gen Core i3" series. There was no 11th Gen Core i3 "Rocket Lake," and Intel pushed the 10th Gen Core i3 "Comet Lake" through the market cycle of "Rocket Lake." as "Comet Lake" and "Rocket Lake" shared Socket LGA1200. It's likely that the Core i3 will continue being sold under the 12th Gen branding, as it's socket-compatible with both 600-series and 700-series chipset motherboards. These are still 4P+0E processors, and unless AMD comes up with 4-core/8-thread "Zen 4" parts, we don't see Intel tinker with the Core i3 series.

View at TechPowerUp Main Site | Source

 

[Rowsol]

That's a real shame.
Keep the cores if you want but give me the IPC.

 

[shovenose]

Why. Grrr.

 

[Deleted member 185088]

Does it mean that with next gen CPUs we won't have cheap decent CPUs.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

Yeah, stupid if true better to have 6 raptor lake p cores than than this.

Does it mean that with next gen CPUs we won't have cheap decent CPUs.

Na it'll still be decent overall basically an underclocked 12600k for 200 bucks. Probably better just to grab a 12600k on a decent sale though

 

[Verpal]

I see, so Intel doesn't see the necessity of selling raptor lake core for cheap.

Welp, not like AMD are competing in low end anyway, I suppose Intel are free to do this uncontested.

 

[thestryker6]

That's a real shame.
Keep the cores if you want but give me the IPC.

Sadly this is what we get when there isn't any competition in the segment it would seem.

 

[Gica]

Nothing written there indicates that they will use Raptor on locked processors. The i5 series gets 4 extra cores (0>4; 4>8) and a surplus of L2 and L3 caches. And I don't think so, because DDR5 5600 from 4800 is called overclocking and this is not their policy.
We will see a clear signal that they will use Raptor when they make public the specifications of the blocked processors. If it's Raptor, they will support "DDR5 up to 4800".

 

[Bwaze]

That usually just leads to confusion and complications. What if (or rather when) there are vunerabilities in Comet Lake? Didn't Intel brag about new and improved security? All of a sudden a potion of your newest generation isn't entiteled?

It's more than just about performance.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

Sadly this is what we get when there isn't any competition in the segment it would seem.

I doubt that is the case even with the 11400F and the 12400F out the R5 3600/5600X seem to have sold better in the diy channel even though unless somone already has an AM4 motherboard neither have made sense for a while now. If this is true it was decided long before the 7600X was announced for 300 usd.

Ryzen still takes the majority of the top ten spots on Newegg/amazon US you'd think intel would really want to knock it out of the park with RL under 300 usd.

 

[thestryker6]

I doubt that is the case even with the 11400F and the 12400F out the R5 3600/5600X seem to have sold better in the diy channel even though unless somone already has an AM4 motherboard neither have made sense for a while now. If this is true it was decided long before the 7600X was announced for 300 usd.

Ryzen still takes the majority of the top ten spots on Newegg/amazon US you'd think intel would really want to knock it out of the park with RL under 300 usd.

The DIY channel is hardly relevant to either company overall sales wise and is certainly skewed by AM4 longevity. Intel has been the better choice sub $300 CPU for new computers since ADL launched, and there's no indication that will change after the Zen 4 launch. There's no reason for Intel to spend the extra money to put their best foot forward in a market AMD won't compete in with their new platform.

Edit: not to say it's impossible they'll still be RPL just that I'd completely understand why they might not be.

I'd expect MTL to be a top to bottom SKU reset and if everything works out for Intel with "tiles" that we shouldn't see reused cores in subsequent generations.

 

[Berfs1]

If this is the case, I don't understand why on that leaked spec sheet, the i5-13400 had [Raptor Lake] B0 die revision, the same as all the other leaked Raptor Lake chips. I get the feeling this might be a similar situation as the i5-12400 and i5-12490F, but this time they have the same die revision unless Intel is making a relatively major change in such a short timeframe.

 

[Jimmy_]

That's a real shame.
Keep the cores if you want but give me the IPC.

Compared to ADL i think there will be ~5% IPC gains - may be.

 

[john_]

Does it matter? Raptor Lake is more like a refresh with higher frequencies and those non K models probably wouldn't be able to go much higher anyway, because of their non K nature. They all do it anyway. AMD's mobile Ryzen 5000 series having both Zen 2 and Zen 3 models, Nvidia's GTX 1060 3GB/6GB models with the difference in the CUDA core count, or the much older GT 730 that had Fermi and Kepler versions.

 

[Gica]

It would be the first time and it makes no sense. Both architectures use the same fabrication node and Intel has enough methods to share non-k by k. The first seems to be the number of e cores, then the frequencies, locked vs. unlocked and PL.
I take this news with a grain of salt.

 

[mahirzukic2]

Oh shlt, we got all excited over having a very powerful and cheap i5 13500k, i3 13300 and and i3 13400 models for gamers.
Well Intel won't let us have the cake and eat it.

 

[ExcuseMeWtf]

So 13100 won't be much of an improvement over 12100 besides clocks/cache size. Got it.

 

[zlobby]

Talk about misleading naming schemes! Guys were about to crucify AMD for their one in the other article!

 

[ZetZet]

Talk about misleading naming schemes! Guys were about to crucify AMD for their one in the other article!

It's not really misleading. 13400 and 12400 will both be Adler Lake, but the first one will be 6+4 cores and different clocks. Instead of 6+0. So they are different products. This really doesn't matter or confuse the consumer.

 

[R0H1T]

Welp, not like AMD are competing in low end anyway, I suppose Intel are free to do this uncontested.

Buy AM4 then, it's a tried & tested platform & will cover 99% of most users' needs!

 

[Tsukiyomi91]

so they're saying the 13400 is basically a locked 12600K with lower TDP and overall clock speeds. Ok.... If it's still under $200 (which is likely) then it's fine I guess?

 

[docnorth]

That's a real shame.
Keep the cores if you want but give me the IPC.

A shame indeed. And unfortunately the rumor is probably true, it seems locked CPUs up to i5 at least will natively support RAM speed 4800 MT/s, not 5600 like the unlocked RL versions.

 

[SL2]

"Competition just has too much momentum, and we haven't executed well enough." - Pat Gelsinger

Yeah, no shit.

Raptor Lake is more like a refresh..

I disagree, a 28 % uplift in R23 is nothing to sneeze at, and nothing like several pointless refreshes in the past.

In case anyone forgot what a refresh looks like:

Spoiler

Yeah, that's an astonishing 7 % improvement at 4 GHz..

 

[kane nas]

...

 

[john_]

"Competition just has too much momentum, and we haven't executed well enough." - Pat Gelsinger

Yeah, no shit.


I disagree, a 28 % uplift in R23 is nothing to sneeze at, and nothing like several pointless refreshes in the past.

In case anyone forgot what a refresh looks like:

Spoiler

Yeah, that's an astonishing 7 % improvement at 4 GHz..
View attachment 261154

You are wrong here. You are comparing CPUs with different number of cores.
What I am saying is that, if Intel was coming out with CPUs that where keeping the number of cores, but just switching from Alder to Raptor Lake architecture, the performance difference would have been small, considering the non K models have a TDP ceiling and Raptor's performance advantage comes also from higher frequencies, not juster better IPC.
And no, Intel doesn't have an obligation to increase the number of cores in all new Raptor models compared to the equivalent Alder Lake models.