Test Setup
Please read our test setup information carefully below, we are using Windows 11 Pro, and each testbed is customized for each CPU platform being compared. There are common components.
System Config
Take note that the same G.SKILL DDR5-6000 memory kit is being used on the Intel Alder Lake platform, Intel Raptor Lake platform, and AMD AM5 platform. We are using the same memory profile on all systems at the same frequency and timings. We have updated the BIOSs on every motherboard to the absolute latest BIOS versions. We are using the same CPU cooler MSI MEG CORELIQUID S360 AIO Cooler on all CPUs. We are also using the same GeForce RTX 3090 Ti Founders Edition video card on all systems. We have updated the chipset drivers to the latest versions.
Note that we installed a fresh copy of Windows 11 Pro and applications and games on each platform tested With each new platform, we set up, a new fresh copy of Windows and games was put on. We are using the latest Windows 11 Pro 22H2 on the Raptor Lake platform to benefit from Intel Thread Director 2 as recommended by Intel.
Also, take note of the motherboard settings we have disabled. Firstly, we did set each motherboard to its “Optimized Defaults” before testing each CPU. We utilize the default motherboard settings across all CPUs. We set the CPU Cooler option in the BIOS to AIO, which is what is being used. However, we did specifically disable PCI-Express Resizable BAR in the BIOS. The reason for this is so that we can isolate CPU performance only when it comes to gaming performance differences. We did not want Resizable BAR to add to, or interfere with the CPU performance in games. We wanted to isolate the CPU differences so you see what the real CPU performance is bringing to the table, not what PCIe Resizable BAR is adding to it.
The same reasoning is also why we disabled Hardware Accelerated GPU Scheduling on the GeForce RTX 3090 Ti FE in Windows. In addition, Virtual Based Security is also disabled so it doesn’t interfere with performance. We are using the “High Performance” power profile on all CPUs.
Again, we want to isolate CPU performance, and this was the goal of turning these features off. In our GPU reviews, we ALWAYS have Resizable BAR enabled, so if you want to see what performance in games is with that feature enabled, all of our GPU reviews have it enabled and will continue to in the future.
Discussion (13 replies)
Join Discussion →These CPU's are amazing... but the high core counts... seem odd.
IF you need high core count systems are you really gonna 'save' the 50-100 bucks and not just get the higher end part? I mean there are efficiencies and such and desktop consumers who see a 50 buck price difference as just TOO much of a hurdle... but lets get real. Those are starting enthusiests... and will they be doing something that need or warrants that many threads? Couldn't they have gotten the performance for gaming without the complexity of more threads and reduced cost even more? Even if only cost internally for the product stack?
I think, as you move down the stack - it's all about salvage bins and strategically pricing/marketing them. Not that these were specifically created for this mid-market segment.
I really like Intel's CPU. I want to REALLY like them. That power draw though. I can't. I can't do it.
It's kind of funny that all those Efficiency cores and the power is still what it is.
They are "Efficient" at consuming power.. :)
E-cores are cheap. Really cheap, as they're essentially re-worked, stripped-down Skylake cores. They lack HT which was one of the main sources of security issues for Skylake.
And for Raptor Lake, over Alder Lake before, the E-cores run a bit faster, have lower latency, and do not inhibit ring clock speed - which results in higher overall memory bandwidth and lower memory access latency for every core.
So those eight E-cores on the 13600K and 13700K are extremely helpful. They still have full-fat FPUs and so on, so you could think of them as being something like having a whole 9700K (at 10nm / Intel 7) bolted on to the side of the six or eight P-cores in these CPUs. They can handle any work assigned to them.
For the 13600K, you probably should stretch to the 13700K for the additional two P-cores. But just for gaming? Hard to make that argument depending on what other budget considerations are at hand.
I guess this depends on the comparison. There's a lot of elegance to be found in AMD's more traditional approach, but for those that do more with their systems than just gaming - and by more I mean they have all the stuff running that a desktop user and a gamer would have in the background - Intel's approach makes sense. The P-cores can handle the demanding gaming threads, the E-cores can handle everything else - effortlessly.
Hard to measure and hard to reproduce I know, as no reviewer would purposefully use such a methodology on a product launch review, let alone variability with all the additional variables and likely run-to-run variance casting doubt on the results. This is just how I look at it.
As long as Intel has been doing these bins, I expect they very much planned things this way. Intel needed to both head off AMD's gains with Zen 4 as well as provide an uplift in comparison to Alder Lake, thus providing a motive for folks with anything older to jump in this round.
Strong gaming performance, strong MT performance, and available inexpensive boards and support for less expensive DDR4 with Raptor Lake all put Intel pretty substantially in the value leader slot.
Zen 4 is leading in perf/watt at the very highest loads, but average loads are surprisingly 'normal' for both of them. For gaming and general desktop use, outside of say 3D rendering, both ecosystems are more or less equivalent.
Such a mixed bag with these new processors for gamers but this one is a bit more palatable than the 13900K. Still going to wait and see what AMD's next 3D offering is but it all adds up to more knowledge for the most informed purchase.
Yeah, if I were building a system from scratch right now, I could see going any direction really and coming out with a really solid system. Would probably come down to whatever I could catch on sale that particular day.
Hell no, just factor the cost of an AIO cooler and suddenly the value crashes to the ground.
Zen 3 is a much better value if only not as fast.
I'd have figured that in anyway :unsure:
Not a 'fan' of using HSFs except where necessary or in truly low-powered scenarios.
Bringing up this old thread due to my "downgrading" from a 13900K to a 13600KF. After moving into my new home and being in a designated main level bedroom/man cave over my basement man cave in my previous home where temperatures were not as noticeable I just wanted to have something that ran cooler which this does compared to my previous 13900K. The 13600KF is just as good as the 13900K at 4K with little to no drop off in FPS as this review suggests.
That's nice to see! Thanks for sharing!
So, I take this back. The latest round or two of air coolers have pushed more than adequate cooling down to US$50 to US$70. Obviously be mindful of voltages under load!