Intel has officially unveiled its highly anticipated family of 12th Gen Intel Core “Alder Lake-S” processors with new hybrid performance architecture leveraging Performance-cores (P-cores) and Efficient-cores (E-cores). At the top of the stack is the Intel Core i9-12900K, a flagship CPU that boasts 16 cores, 24 threads, and a max turbo boost of up to 5.2 GHz. Pricing starts at $264 to $589, with availability beginning November 4.

From Intel:

Available with up to 16 cores and 24 threads, the new 12th Gen Intel Core processor family includes the world’s best gaming processor, the Core i9-12900K, unleashing gaming experiences across top titles. The Core i9-12900K provides amazing gen-over-gen performance increases, including up to 25% more FPS on Troy: A Total War Saga, up to 28% more FPS on Hitman 3, and up to 23% more FPS on Far Cry 6. Enhanced by Intel Killer Wi-Fi 6E for up to 75% less latency while gaming when multitasking, high-frequency P-cores paired with E-cores for offloading parallel tasks enable up to 84% more frames per second for simultaneous gaming, streaming, and recording.

Unlocked 12th Gen Intel Core Desktop Processor SKUs

Image: Intel

Key platform advancements:

  • The first processors in the industry to offer DDR5 memory for up to 4800 MT/s.
  • The first processors in the industry to offer PCIe 5.0 (up to 16 lanes), which offers up to 2X I/O throughput over PCIe 4.0, with up to an additional four lanes of PCIe 4.0 support.
  • Up to 30 MB Intel Smart Cache (L3) and 14 MB L2 cache for increased memory capacity with reduced latency.
  • Integrated high-speed wireless with Intel Killer Wi-Fi 6E, which combines industry-leading Wi-Fi 6E connectivity with powerful gaming network technology to minimize lag, latency, and packet loss.
  • Discrete Thunderbolt 4 universal cable connectivity for external device expansion.

“The performance hybrid architecture of 12th Gen Intel Core processors is an architectural shift made possible by close co-engineering of software and hardware that will deliver new levels of leadership performance for generations,” said Gregory Bryant, Intel executive vice president and general manager of the Client Computing Group. “This begins with the arrival of our flagship Core i9-12900K – the world’s best gaming processor – and you will see even more incredible experiences as we ship the rest of the 12th Gen family and beyond.”

Source: Intel

Don’t Miss Out on More FPS Review Content!

Our weekly newsletter includes a recap of our reviews and a run down of the most popular tech news that we published.

Join the Conversation

23 Comments

  1. I see them listed at 649€ for the 12900K and 699€ for an Asus Maximus Hero Z690 they seriously gone up in price since my Z390 board

  2. I just built 3 Ryzen rigs in the past year, so I’m not in a hurry to upgrade anything for a change. That said, even if I were, i’d still be taking a wait and see approach this… this is Intel’s first big change in a long time, and they have a long hanging on it. I hope it does as well as it seems, honestly.

  3. [QUOTE=”Brent_Justice, post: 43064, member: 3″]
    The back-and-forth competition has finally begun, again, and that’s really nice to see. Each one trying to up the other is only good for us.
    [/QUOTE]
    in performance I would agree, but they seem to be going for the most expensive :p

  4. [QUOTE=”Denpepe, post: 43065, member: 284″]
    in performance I would agree, but they seem to be going for the most expensive :p
    [/QUOTE]
    Agreed. The whole competition brings down prices only works when people actually forgo buying. Disrupted supply chains unfortunately give everyone a legit reason to raise prices, but as we saw before Covid, the increase in prices started long ago and will not abate until people say, “You know Intel, AMD, nVidia, Apple, etc.? I’m good with what I’ve got. Thanks but no thanks.”

  5. It’s going to be a decent, if not great performer. It’ll also be one of the most power-hungry processors we’ve seen in a long, long while too.. That’s my guess on it..

  6. I find it interesting the top of the line cpu from Intel is less than a grand. Thsts a change from before. I fully expected Intel to have the top of the line cpu be about 1k.

    I guess that’s old school intel.

  7. [QUOTE=”Grimlakin, post: 43082, member: 215″]
    I find it interesting the top of the line cpu from Intel is less than a grand. Thsts a change from before. I fully expected Intel to have the top of the line cpu be about 1k.

    I guess that’s old school intel.
    [/QUOTE]
    This is mainstream, not HEDT, wait till they announce those.

  8. I usually get the upgrade itch, but I’m waiting to see how these perform. I’m especially interested in the difference between DDR4 and DDR5 boards.

  9. Regardless how it performs, I’m sure it would perform better than my current i7-3930K. I’ve been wanting to upgrade for a couple years now, but you know … covid, no supply, scalpers, miners, [insert other excuse] …

  10. [QUOTE=”Snowy, post: 43076, member: 234″]
    241 Watt for turbo speeds seems like a lot, no?
    [/QUOTE]
    Only if you are……..snowy……

  11. [QUOTE=”Snowy, post: 43076, member: 234″]
    241 Watt for turbo speeds seems like a lot, no?
    [/QUOTE]
    That’s in the ballpark of a 12 or 16 core AMD chip running with PBO on…

  12. [QUOTE=”David_Schroth, post: 43117, member: 1″]
    That’s in the ballpark of a 12 or 16 core AMD chip running with PBO on…
    [/QUOTE]
    And that’s also 12/16 Full Performance cores, not 8+8.

  13. Stumbled across this – dunno how accurate it is. I’m waiting for trusted reviews before I draw any conclusions.

    [URL unfurl=”true”]https://news.google.com/articles/CAIiEIlQO9ixuyKeB9XNirrU1VEqGQgEKhAIACoHCAowxt2fCzDT57cDMPGM8wY?hl=en-US&gl=US&ceid=US%3Aen[/URL]

  14. I’m putting this out there. If the target market is gamers or workstation class PC’s nobody and I mean NOBODY gives a shit about power efficiency. Performance is what matters.

    These inefficient CPU’s for power use and heat creation are going to be an issue for laptop and NUC type devices, and the Xeon’s better not have that same problem either. (Or whatever the professional class CPU’s are) Because THOSE are the consumers that care about power consumption on the CPU. We may have 6000 watt power supplies but nobody really WANTS to need those.

  15. [QUOTE=”Grimlakin, post: 43123, member: 215″]
    I’m putting this out there. If the target market is gamers or workstation class PC’s nobody and I mean NOBODY gives a **** about power efficiency. Performance is what matters.
    [/QUOTE]
    I don’t know. Seems like time and again the company that focuses on efficiency ends up winning the long game. They may not have “the champ” but they usually end up with the overall better product line, and probably more importantly, legs for the next generation

  16. [QUOTE=”Brian_B, post: 43134, member: 96″]
    I don’t know. Seems like time and again the company that focuses on efficiency ends up winning the long game. They may not have “the champ” but they usually end up with the overall better product line, and probably more importantly, legs for the next generation
    [/QUOTE]
    Tell that to IBM. 😉 sure they have exited the consumer space. But they are super efficient cpu makers.

  17. [QUOTE=”Grimlakin, post: 43135, member: 215″]
    But they are super efficient cpu makers.
    [/QUOTE]
    PowerPC wasn’t all that efficient when they got knocked out of the consumer space. And once you’re out, it’s pretty hard to get back in, even if your IBM.

    ARM took up their place as “efficient” CPU maker, and, well, we can see how that has gone for them. They won the mobile market, and are about to take over the rest of the consumer market — at least if nVidia doesn’t screw it up.

    Intel was on the right track with Core, all the way until they got stuck at 14nm. Maybe this gets them back on track, or maybe our current manufacturing processes and technology mean we are hitting a dead end, I don’t know.

  18. [QUOTE=”Brian_B, post: 43137, member: 96″]
    PowerPC wasn’t all that efficient when they got knocked out of the consumer space. And once you’re out, it’s pretty hard to get back in, even if your IBM.

    ARM took up their place as “efficient” CPU maker, and, well, we can see how that has gone for them. They won the mobile market, and are about to take over the rest of the consumer market — at least if nVidia doesn’t screw it up.

    Intel was on the right track with Core, all the way until they got stuck at 14nm. Maybe this gets them back on track, or maybe our current manufacturing processes and technology mean we are hitting a dead end, I don’t know.
    [/QUOTE]

    Going off memory here power PC chips of that era were pretty powerful/efficient for the time. I’d have to do some google fu to validate that opinion though.

    Honestly what I was thinking of are RS/6000 chips and their other mid tier and mainframe setups.

    Really those are more glorified crazy high bandwidth I/O controllers though.

  19. [QUOTE=”Grimlakin, post: 43141, member: 215″]
    Going off memory here power PC chips of that era were pretty powerful/efficient for the time. I’d have to do some google fu to validate that opinion though.

    Honestly what I was thinking of are RS/6000 chips and their other mid tier and mainframe setups.

    Really those are more glorified crazy high bandwidth I/O controllers though.
    [/QUOTE]
    Yeah the first couple of iterations were pretty good. But they plateaued early on and had trouble scaling past about 2Ghz without really sucking down power. By the time Core came out it beat them handily in efficiency and traded blows with speed. AltiVec was a monster when it was used.

    Core was what convinced Apple to jump ship, and that was the beginning of the end for PPC.

Leave a comment