Gaming Performance
Now we come to the interesting testing we are sure you all can’t wait for, we were also anxious to get to this part and see how it all ends up for gaming performance. In order to test this properly, really get a good feel for it, and cover all the bases for the big picture, we decided to test 1080p, 1440p, and 4K resolutions, all three resolutions to see from top to bottom how these CPUs affect performance games. For testing, we are using an NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti Founders Edition video card. Since we are testing all 3 resolutions, it’ll be a good mix to see where the CPU matters and where it doesn’t.
All the graphs below are not sorted, they are not sorted from fastest to slowest as in previous graphs, instead, they are simply labeled in groups by platform, from fastest CPU to least fastest CPU. As you look at performance, try to look down the column of the resolution, to see which one is faster than the other, to help your eyes see which one is faster.
F1 2022
In F2 2022 we do not see any major changes at 4K, and only very slight differences at 1440p. If you want to get nitpicky at 1440p, the Ryzen 7 5800X3D and Intel Core i9-13900K have the same performance, which is higher than that of the Ryzen 7000 series CPUs. At 1080p there is a larger difference, and again we see the Intel Core i9-13900K on top in performance, and this time beating the Ryzen 7 5800X3D by 1 FPS.
Dying Light 2
We do see some bigger differences start to show in Dying Light 2. First, at 4K there isn’t any difference, or hardly anyway, maybe an FPS at most. However, at 1440p there is as much as a few FPS difference between the Intel Core i9-13900K and Ryzen 7000 series CPUs and even the 5800X3D. We see larger differences at 1080p though. Take note that the Ryzen 7 5800X3D is outperformed by the new Intel Core i9-13900K at 1080p here. The 13900K is also faster than all of the Ryzen 7000 CPUs at 1080p. The 13900K is the same performance as the 12900K.
Far Cry 6
Out of all the games so far, Far Cry 6 is showing the most drastic differences, and we have seen this time and time again with this game. It is sensitive to CPU performance, even at 4K. At 4K the slowest CPUs are all of the Ryzen 7000 series CPUs, they actually sit at the lowest performance, under 90FPS. The Ryzen 7 5800X3D improved upon this, and apparently, the new Intel Core i9-13900K can also match the Ryzen 7 5800X3D in performance at 4K. This difference is even more drastic at 1440p, where the Ryzen 7000 series CPUs are about 8-9 FPS behind the Ryzen 7 5800X3D, but the new Intel Core i9-13900K can actually beat the Ryzen 7 5800X3D in performance at 1440p. This makes the Core i9-13900K about 11% faster than the Ryzen 9 7950X at 1440p, which is a resolution that is real-world even for a 3090. At 1080p the difference is exaggerated, the 13900K is 17% faster than the Ryzen 9 7950X, which is significant. It’s also 10% faster than the Ryzen 7 5800X3D, which is an amazing feat. The 13900K is also 7% faster than the 12900K.
Watch Dogs Legion
In Watch Dogs Legion, see a similar pattern with this game that we saw with Far Cry 6. Even at 4K, the Intel Core i9-1300K is slightly faster, a few FPS, compared to the Ryzen 7000 series CPUs. It’s enough to even push past the Ryzen 7 5800X3D. At 1440p the difference grows and Core i9-13900K is 8% faster than the Ryzen 9 7950X and 3% faster than the Ryzen 7 5800X3D. At 1080p the i9-13900K is 7% faster than the Ryzen 9 7950X and 5% faster than the Ryzen 7 5800X3D. The 13900K is the same performance as the 12900K is.
Discussion (16 replies)
Join Discussion →Brent, very well done with the review! This thing is a power monger (both in terms of performance and consumption!).
I'm torn though and not liking the current "Trend" from AMD and Intel with their strategy on becoming the performance king. Throwing more power a the device shouldn't be the way to achieve this.
I'm inclined to make my next CPU decision based on Performance per watt. I can deal with slower performance if it means I'm not going to be spending an arm and a leg with the Electric Company.
Nice review enjoyed reading it. Would have loved to have seen some 5900x and 5950x cpu comparisons since you had the previous gen intel ones. But chart space is a thing. :) Gotta make it so eyeballs can read it!
Looks like I'm keeping the 12700k a while longer, this thing runs hot enough as it is, don't need a bigger heater.
If the AMD GPU's don't make for a good upgrade I might just upgrade my AMD machine with a 5800X3D and leave it at that.
That's the most cost effective upgrade you can do strictly for gaming. Obviously not a slow CPU in any desktop task of course. But that's if you have a need for it; the 12700K ain't slow by any means!
Alas, my poor Haswell-E...
I think both AMD and intel dropped the towel on power efficiency (and nvidia too for that matter). To think that all of them at some point touted power efficiency for their next gen products. At least nvidia delivered with Maxwell and Pascal.
Think of it another way - compare a modern V8 that's more powerful (more torque and horsepower) across its RPM range than a similarly displacing V8 from thirty years ago, and then note that said modern V8 is not only more efficient when putting power down, but has cylinder deactivation and is more efficient at idle. Or, can be made significantly more powerful than the older V8 peak to peak tuned, but again peak to peak, the newer V8 uses more fuel. Because it can, not because it needs to.
We're seeing massive leaps in efficiency, and we're also seeing companies be able to push their parts closer to the limit stock.
Hey, I'm right there with you with my Ivy Bridge E. I was thinking of saving up for one of these this summer but now after seeing the gaming performance I'm rethinking it.
I do need to upgrade but I think I'll wait for the Ryzen 7000 3D versions. The only thing I know for sure is I'd like something that can last around 7-10 years as this has and since I've already got a rig with a 5800X3D it doesn't make sense to build another with the same, especially seeing it within a couple of frames of this processor at 4K gaming. Those 3930/4930/5930 K processors are still amazing after all this time but definitely getting long in the tooth.
I think this is closer to the truth.
The flip side of that coin is that stock power goes up when companies hit walls on other means to generate performance increases.
If you can't engineer it in more performance as part of the architecture, or throw more cores at it, then you hope like hell you can just push more power through it and boost the clocks.
It will continue to go up until people stop buying them. For the mass market - you aren't going to see 280W 13900K's in the average desktop computer in a cubicle for a call center, or in a POS cash register, or a laptop. All the chips in that market will continue to get more efficient -- because the cost of cooling is an overhead item they can cut out as the technology does get more efficient - the performance boosts just aren't as pronounced when the technology to run it has been fast enough for more than a decade now.
That part the V8 analogy still carries through - you don't see big Hellcat-driven minivans mass produced at the car lot, you see smaller displacement and more fuel efficiency and more gears in the transmission, while staying around a hp/torque level that seems "good enough" for the size of the car. The speed limit on the highways haven't changed in a long time, after all (but Americans have gotten fatter - hence turbochargers becoming more common ---- that's a bad joke, but only because part of that is at least true).
Those big, power hungry chips really only have two markets: big workstations that do serious work (pro content creation, engineering CAD, simulations, etc) - and gamers/enthusiasts. And in those markets - they won't really care about power until they start tripping breakers. And even then, good odds on them just saying "Oh well, I'll call the electrician" and still not caring.
Great review. This just drives home the point, if you use your rig for gaming primarily, and that's done in 4K, jumping up to the 13th Gen isn't really worth it since you are more GPU bound.
IMO the current price/performance cpu for 4k would be a 5800X3D. Might go as low as a 5600X if in a budget.
If you're on Intel... 7th-gen maybe, or have an AMD board that cannot take a 5800X3D, then it's a good upgrade if you also have a higher-end GPU. Especially keeping in mind that GPUs drive higher average framerates, while CPUs drive minimum framerates.
Well I went against my thoughts and got a 13900K as my buddy wanted my 12900K and offered me a fair deal. I thought about just going with a 13700K or 13600K, but I wanted to stick with an i9. Honestly when gaming this chip only gets about 5 degrees Celsius hotter than the 12900K using a NH-U12A cooler which isn't bad at all to me. Goes to show you what a good air cooler and a high airflow case can do to even a hot running chip.
This... is entirely relative to the load. Granted, that only matters if you do something that would benefit from more cooling - gaming and general desktop usage aren't going to really tax these CPUs.
Agreed, but I was just comparing it to my 12900K and what temps I had with that chip doing the same games/work loads. I'll probably never push this chip to its limits, but I never really did that with the 12900K either, just on occasion. I'm just impressed with the NH-U12A on how it has been effectively cooling this chip so far. I had some doubts, but it shows that air cooling isn't dead.