News Intel Core i9-12900K and Core i5-12600K Review: Retaking the Gaming Crown

[larkspur]

I didn't want to take chances with the amount of new stuff in Alder Lake and on-going component shortages that seemed poised to get worse before getting better, so I got an i5-11400 back in May.

All this talk about Zen3d but I'm worried that it will only come to the top-end CPUs. Will we see it on the 5600x? As in, will Zen3d come to affordable CPUs? Anyone know yet? 12 cores, 16 cores, I mean that's great but the fps/$$ is pretty bad - especially when you look at 1440+ resolutions... This is true of both AMD and Intel's top-end lineup. Myself and most of the folks I know simply won't spend more than $300 on a CPU for a gaming machine. Most of us are looking to spend ~$200 on a CPU. GPU prices are so high that most people's gaming machine budgets demand a sub-$300 CPU...

And in the meantime, AMD still hasn't responded to the i5-11400. And now we're a few months away from an i5-12400 (which appears to be a traditional 6c/12t CPU that likely doesn't need entry-level DDR5, Intel Thread Detector and Win 11 to reach its full potential). I'm approaching the point of needing a new gaming platform and unless AMD gets a winner in the <$300 CPU arena it's a no-brainer to go Intel. I'm starting to get the feeling that AMD isn't going to compete with the i5-11400 and i5-12400 until Zen4, a year away... I mean tray pricing on i5-11400f is $157. Even at ~$200 those things are a great value over the competition. What gives?

 

[RodroX]

All this talk about Zen3d but I'm worried that it will only come to the top-end CPUs. Will we see it on the 5600x? As in, will Zen3d come to affordable CPUs? Anyone know yet? 12 cores, 16 cores, I mean that's great but the fps/$$ is pretty bad - especially when you look at 1440+ resolutions... This is true of both AMD and Intel's top-end lineup. Myself and most of the folks I know simply won't spend more than $300 on a CPU for a gaming machine. Most of us are looking to spend ~$200 on a CPU. GPU prices are so high that most people's gaming machine budgets demand a sub-$300 CPU...

And in the meantime, AMD still hasn't responded to the i5-11400. And now we're a few months away from an i5-12400 (which appears to be a traditional 6c/12t CPU that likely doesn't need entry-level DDR5, Intel Thread Detector and Win 11 to reach its full potential). I'm approaching the point of needing a new gaming platform and unless AMD gets a winner in the <$300 CPU arena it's a no-brainer to go Intel. I'm starting to get the feeling that AMD isn't going to compete with the i5-11400 and i5-12400 until Zen4, a year away... I mean tray pricing on i5-11400f is $157. Even at ~$200 those things are a great value over the competition. What gives?

Indeed, i5 10400 and 11400 are basically even on most games (and right now when you add the cost of a decent B560 + DDR4) they are the best budget gaming CPU.
Still no clear how the 12400 will land on performance, with less L3 cache than the K model, lower boost frecuency and no e-cores, but my guess is it will still be better than the 10 and 11th gen.
So if price is decent for the 12400 and we can get a DDR4 B660 mobo then that will become the best budget/performance cpu on the market..... Unless of course AMD do something else besides the 5600G, which where I live is more expensive than the 5600X, because it have a "decent" GPU.

 

[kinney]

I have a conscious preference of the lesser evil. I don't even need to give more explanations, it will be like talking to the wind to an individual like you. I'm not wasting my time anymore and this is why you are now blocked and ignored.

Talking to the wind? I operate on facts. Kryptonite to many of you so-called "enthusiasts". Quite a lot of text just to announce one is butthurt beyond comprehension. Yowzers- evil? This is business. These are cold hard facts on gaming FPS. Intel wins.

I didn't say anything wrong to this "man". Just told him the truth. Information is just that- you look at all of it and come to the best conclusion. It's not there to hurt your feelings and set you into a rage. I apologize on behalf of Intel that they're faster in gaming today, and have been. Intel made my 5900X obsolete with Rocket Lake's launch, at least in the AAA titles that I build for like Cyberpunk. I'd hate to be stuck on your Ryzen 3600 OC @ 4.4Ghz. That's really slow. I'm clocking at a rock solid 5.1GHz on 8 cores in every game with better IPC. Zen3 did have a brief respite in older titles like CSGo, but that's now gone too with Alder Lake. I can't wait to get my new rig together.

Enjoy the sidelines commenting from the peanut gallery with your head in the sand!

 

[RodroX]

Talking to the wind? I operate on facts. Kryptonite to many of you so-called "enthusiasts". Quite a lot of text just to announce one is butthurt beyond comprehension. Yowzers- evil? This is business. These are cold hard facts on gaming FPS. Intel wins.

I didn't say anything wrong to this "man". Just told him the truth. Information is just that- you look at all of it and come to the best conclusion. It's not there to hurt your feelings and set you into a rage. I apologize on behalf of Intel that they're faster in gaming today, and have been. Intel made my 5900X obsolete with Rocket Lake's launch, at least in the AAA titles that I build for like Cyberpunk. I'd hate to be stuck on your Ryzen 3600 OC @ 4.4Ghz. That's really slow. I'm clocking at a rock solid 5.1GHz on 8 cores in every game with better IPC. Zen3 did have a brief respite in older titles like CSGo, but that's now gone too with Alder Lake. I can't wait to get my new rig together.

Enjoy the sidelines commenting from the peanut gallery with your head in the sand!

I couldn't care less about the discussion you and the other member are having. I already wrote whats on my mind about this new CPU.

But please if its not too much to ask, try no not hurt the feeling of other people trashing their components. People who may not be as lucky as you, to be able to have/get the latest and greatest. I know you probably work really hard to get whatever you want, and you deserve to get the best and greatest, but is not cool to trash others people systems.

You may not care about the following, when I got my R5 3600 (1 week after the international launch) the only "similar" options available, and at a higher price, were the i5 8400 or i5 9400, Im realy proud I went with AMD instead(for less money).

I hope you enjoy your new Alder Lake CPU.

 

[TerryLaze]

But please if its not too much to ask, try no not hurt the feeling of other people trashing their components. People who may not be as lucky as you, to be able to have/get the latest and greatest. I know you probably work really hard to get whatever you want, and you deserve to get the best and greatest, but is not cool to trash others people systems.

Eh V already stated plenty of times that he already made his decision on what to upgrade to, so he does have the money, he is just waiting in case enough people boycott AMD products now for them to lower prices, because why not save a few bucks by hurting the company you pretend to like the most.

 

[InvalidError]

All this talk about Zen3d but I'm worried that it will only come to the top-end CPUs.

That is my expectation too, quite possibly only on multi-CCD refresh SKUs to better hide the CCD-to-CCD chatter penalty, just like how doubling L3$ was AMD's answer to increased CCX-to-CCX latency between Zen 2 CCDs.

 

[kinney]

But please if its not too much to ask, try no not hurt the feeling of other people trashing their components. People who may not be as lucky as you, to be able to have/get the latest and greatest. I know you probably work really hard to get whatever you want, and you deserve to get the best and greatest, but is not cool to trash others people systems.

You may not care about the following, when I got my R5 3600 (1 week after the international launch) the only "similar" options available, and at a higher price, were the i5 8400 or i5 9400, Im realy proud I went with AMD instead(for less money).

I hope you enjoy your new Alder Lake CPU.

Great, but that fellow said Rocket Lake was a failure, so you need to go chastise your boy first. And I had a 5900X. I know which one is better- I'm not just reading reviews, I tested them side by side, hands on. I'm sorry he went with the popular fanboy notion that it's slower than his Ryzen chip because GN, a clickbait institution if I ever saw one, benched it with power restrictions that they arbitrarily changed themselves. But in the end, when presented with the real results, the default, warrantied configuration that nearly every user will run, which results in the domination of his Ryzen by my 11900K... he gets upset. I accepted his benches, they're real results- they're just not the whole picture. Only 1 person here is deluded.
He wants to toss out results not gimping for power restrictions with arbitrary reasoning. Too bad.

 

[RodroX]

Eh V already stated plenty of times that he already made his decision on what to upgrade to, so he does have the money, he is just waiting in case enough people boycott AMD products now for them to lower prices, because why not save a few bucks by hurting the company you pretend to like the most.

What does that have to do with me?. I own a Ryzen 5 3600 too, Did you even read the whole post I made?

 

[RodroX]

Great, but that fellow said Rocket Lake was a failure, so you need to go chastise your boy first. And I had a 5900X. I know which one is better- I'm not just reading reviews, I tested them side by side, hands on. I'm sorry he went with the popular fanboy notion that it's slower than his Ryzen chip because GN, a clickbait institution if I ever saw one, benched it with power restrictions that they arbitrarily changed themselves. But in the end, when presented with the real results, the default, warrantied configuration that nearly every user will run, which results in the domination of his Ryzen by my 11900K... he gets upset. I accepted his benches, they're real results- they're just not the whole picture. Only 1 person here is deluded.
He wants to toss out results not gimping for power restrictions with arbitrary reasoning. Too bad.

As I wrote already I do not want to get in the middle of it. I feel there is perhaps another way to write what you wrote up there. A less hurtful way to everyone else who may have the same CPU in this case. Thats all.

 

[Unolocogringo]

Some of us need bleeding edge performance, some do not.
Some need high mid performance with 100% stability.
I fold so power consumption plays a large part in the components I buy.
I do not nee 250 fps in whatever game I play occasionally,
My running systems
R5 3600 @4.4GHZ all core boost. 1.28v not a 4.4 set so unused cores idle. And lowered voltage keeps me in the processor power limits.
16 gig ram
3060 TI My daily driver.

I5 6600
16gig ram
GTX 1070 retired to folding

Phenom 2 1090
8 gig ram
GTX 1060 6 gig
Gtx 960 4 gig retired to folding.

Phenom 2 1090
8 gig ram
GHT 650 ti boost retired to wife's computer.

All of these run 24/7/365 and the top 3 have folded their entire life. The wife's no longer folds. She edits photos and does her Etsy site from it.
And if you don't mind tinkering around a bit you can get high end performance out of them.

https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/67653142

 

[cryoburner]

All this talk about Zen3d but I'm worried that it will only come to the top-end CPUs. Will we see it on the 5600x? As in, will Zen3d come to affordable CPUs? Anyone know yet? 12 cores, 16 cores, I mean that's great but the fps/$$ is pretty bad - especially when you look at 1440+ resolutions... This is true of both AMD and Intel's top-end lineup. Myself and most of the folks I know simply won't spend more than $300 on a CPU for a gaming machine. Most of us are looking to spend ~$200 on a CPU. GPU prices are so high that most people's gaming machine budgets demand a sub-$300 CPU...

And in the meantime, AMD still hasn't responded to the i5-11400. And now we're a few months away from an i5-12400 (which appears to be a traditional 6c/12t CPU that likely doesn't need entry-level DDR5, Intel Thread Detector and Win 11 to reach its full potential). I'm approaching the point of needing a new gaming platform and unless AMD gets a winner in the <$300 CPU arena it's a no-brainer to go Intel. I'm starting to get the feeling that AMD isn't going to compete with the i5-11400 and i5-12400 until Zen4, a year away... I mean tray pricing on i5-11400f is $157. Even at ~$200 those things are a great value over the competition. What gives?

Yeah, I'm also thinking 3D V-Cache may be mainly restricted to the higher-end, perhaps just for the i7 and i9 counterparts and above. Though if it's notably more expensive to implement, the existing models without it could remain viable at lower price points. The 5800X is already rather competitive with the 12600K in terms of performance, and the 5600X will likely be competitive with the 12400. So, dropping their prices to around $300 and $200 respectively could keep them relevant. They could even relaunch them under new product names with slightly adjusted clock rates.

If they do bring 3D V-Cache to 6 and 8-core parts, and if it manages to push their overall performance above that of Alder Lake, I suspect they might also price those models above Alder Lake, much like we saw with the existing 5000 series lineup. If the performance only manages to be similar though, or faster at some tasks but slower at others, then they'll be a lot more restricted on how high they can price them.

 

[InvalidError]

They could even relaunch them under new product names with slightly adjusted clock rates.

Zen 3D likely uses a different CCD design to squeeze all of those TSVs in, so there will almost certainly be a full-stack refresh to pass the new duds and shift most Zen 3 wafers to Zen 3+. With rumors saying Zen 4 will "skip" to 7000, the 6000s would then be open for 3+.

 

[VforV]

Based on what MLiD said, that V-Cache turns out is not really that expensive (in his latest Broken Silicon) and based on the fact that Infinity Cache for AMD GPUs is on all tiers (I know it's not exactly the same thing, but similar enough), I think we have more chances to see Zen3D + V-Cache on all tiers, top to bottom, especially because Alder Lake is actually competitive, so they need this even for 5600x.

This series will be 6000s (+15% perf and small core frequency boost) and Zen4 will be 7000s.

 

[Unolocogringo]

According to press releases all Zen 3 cpus are capable of 3d cache. It was part of there original design.
all of the necessary parts are already there in the mask. So AMD could start manufacturing them today if wanted.
No new masks or redesign is needed.
As for those wanting lower end AMD cpus, We will just have to wait until AMD has enough defective chips to warrant a lower tier release.
They are not going to disable good cores to make lower end budget SKUs.

 

[TerryLaze]

According to press releases all Zen 3 cpus are capable of 3d cache. It was part of there original design.
all of the necessary parts are already there in the mask. So AMD could start manufacturing them today if wanted.
No new masks or redesign is needed.

That isn't the issue, the layer of cache still has to be produced by someone and amd will have to pay for that and somebody will have to put that new layer on top of the cores and amd will have to pay for that as well.
The question is how much will that cost and is amd going to roll this cost to the customer, is it going to be worth it for the smaller skus or not.

 

[-Fran-]

Just to remind everyone in here about AMD's plans... Lisa Su was very explicit a while ago saying "AMD is not going to be the cheaper alternative going forward" and all the things they've done ever since have been reflective of that statement.

So, in short, Zen3+ is not going to be cheap if it can take the crown back and if they can avoid getting "budget" CPUs, they will. This is true for both Enterprise and Consumer on both CPU and GPU ends.

If you don't trust this, then you can go back and look for when Lisa Su made that (very bold at the time) claim. I can't exactly remember when it was. And while you may think I'm being too literal... Well, the proof is in the pudding.

Regards.

 

[TerryLaze]

Just to remind everyone in here about AMD's plans... Lisa Su was very explicit a while ago saying "AMD is not going to be the cheaper alternative going forward" and all the things they've done ever since have been reflective of that statement.

So, in short, Zen3+ is not going to be cheap if it can take the crown back and if they can avoid getting "budget" CPUs, they will. This is true for both Enterprise and Consumer on both CPU and GPU ends.

Regards.

While I do agree that this is what they will do this is still terrible for them as a company, their biggest problem is that people don't know them and not supplying cheap cpus for people to try them out is digging their own graves in the long term.
One of the biggest sellers for intel is celeron and pentium, you can find them everywhere and everybody has seen them and worked with them at some point.
If amd waits to make money first it's going to be too late, if intel releases alder lake pentiums it's going to be extremely tough for amd to release anything against them.

 

[-Fran-]

While I do agree that this is what they will do this is still terrible for them as a company, their biggest problem is that people don't know them and not supplying cheap cpus for people to try them out is digging their own graves in the long term.
One of the biggest sellers for intel is celeron and pentium, you can find them everywhere and everybody has seen them and worked with them at some point.
If amd waits to make money first it's going to be too late, if intel releases alder lake pentiums it's going to be extremely tough for amd to release anything against them.

Like it or not, you take mindshare by being on the spotlight at the top and not at the bottom. That's just the way it is.

AMD has had competitive alternatives for years and years, but since they weren't consistently at the top (the big showcase), people just ignored most systems made by them. I can say that with* absolute confidence as I've recommended AMD laptops based on Bulldozer APUs and Athlons when in Desktop no one wanted anything to do with them, and people acknowledged they were just better thanks to the iGPU and all around better for basic functionality at a lower price of Intel based stuff.

There's also the thing about nVidia and Intel threatening AIBs and OEMs to not put AMD in their best tier products. That's a bag of another discussion that is important to remember and that is related to this, but I'll leave on the side for now. What is important is that AMD wants to get out of that place where they were easy to bully (in corporate terms) and they're managing to do so little by little.

And, given the few past fiscal reports, they are absolutely not hurting. So what Lisa Su said, may actually be working as she wanted. Too bad for us, but that means true competition will happen as long as nVidia and Intel see AMD as a real threat and not the "easy to bully kid" anymore.

Regards.

 

[TerryLaze]

Like it or not, you take mindshare by being on the spotlight at the top and not at the bottom. That's just the way it is.

Great, so people are going to want to buy amd, go to the store to get a sensible cpu at about 100 moneys 150 at the most and see that the cheapest amd one is 300+ , that's going to make them think "well, no wonder they are better at twice the price"

AMD has had competitive alternatives for years and years, but since they weren't consistently at the top (the big showcase), people just ignored most systems made by them.

Now they aren't ignoring them they are going to actively keep in mind that amd has only expensive cpus, well beyond the point where amd maybe will have cheap ones again.

 

[-Fran-]

Great, so people are going to want to buy amd, go to the store to get a sensible cpu at about 100 moneys 150 at the most and see that the cheapest amd one is 300+ , that's going to make them think "well, no wonder they are better at twice the price"

You say that in jest, but you'd be surprised at how many people say "ah, this costs more, so it must be better". It's... Quite interesting to be honest.

Now they aren't ignoring them they are going to actively keep in mind that amd has only expensive cpus, well beyond the point where amd maybe will have cheap ones again.

Having an expensive top, doesn't mean you can't have cheaper versions; it all depends on fab capacity and defect rates. As someone already correctly pointed out a few posts above: there's zero economical incentive in "downgrading" perfectly capable chips for no real demand at the lower end. This is also why Intel hasn't released an i3 with the current Alder Lake line up, I'd say. If you think about it, a 4P+4/6/8E would be a budget king at under $250, no?

Regards.

 

[TerryLaze]

You say that in jest, but you'd be surprised at how many people say "ah, this costs more, so it must be better". It's... Quite interesting to be honest.

When they are looking for something high end, yes.
I'm talking about broad masses here and the mid range at the most, this 100-150 range is what a normal user would consider mid tier, celerons for the rocket platform start at $42.

This is also why Intel hasn't released an i3 with the current Alder Lake line up, I'd say. If you think about it, a 4P+4/6/8E would be a budget king at under $250, no?

For rocket lake maybe they did it to make more money, maybe they did it because they couldn't get enough raw materials for laptops and a full desktop lineup, for alder lake i3 is rumored, we have to see. I give it low chances as well because intel said that supply would be bad in 2021 but you never know.
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-alder-lake-non-k-series-cpus-could-start-at-119

 

[larkspur]

So, dropping their prices to around $300 and $200 respectively could keep them relevant.

Yes, please! The 5600x should be $200 right now. I guess we'll see what happens...

Anyone remember the article specifying that Intel will have (at least) two separate AL dies for desktop? This sounds to me like a distinct advantage in the lower-end: https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-alder-lake-6p-revealed
More dies per wafer, cheaper to produce, cheaper to buy. No specific need to "accumulate" defective dies just to offer a reasonably-priced CPU.

I assume AMD doesn't do something like that with Zen? I understand if they don't - since they are selling everything they can get from TSMC, why bother designing something specifically for the lower-end where margins are smaller? It's a weird market these days!

 

[Unolocogringo]

AMD is limited by the number of wafers it can get from TSMC.
They have obligations to make Xbox and play station chips at TSMC.
Low profit per chip but profit none the less.
They have obligations to produce Super computer processors and accelerators
They have obligations to produce processors for Microsoft.
All very high profit items.
Yields are good at TSMC for thier chiplet designed processors. But with most of them high quality chiplets lower SKUs will be limited.
Market conditions and supply determines prices and availability not our wishes.

 

[cryoburner]

One thing to consider is that even if 3D V-Cache comes to AMD's 6 and 8-core parts, if they were to price those similarly to their 5000-series counterparts, it seems unlikely that would be enough to allow them to match Intel in terms of multithreaded performance near those price points.

At heavily multithreaded tasks like rendering and video encoding, the 12600K tends to perform relatively similar to the 5800X, which has 33% more cores than the similarly-priced 5600X. So, even a performance uplift of around 15% is not likely to be enough for a 6-core part to match it. Likewise, the 12700K can perform close to the 5900X in such workloads. So, a 6-core part at around $300, or an 8-core at around $400-$450 would likely get outperformed by the competition in most heavily-multithreaded workloads.

As such, it might not be all-that surprising if AMD were to reduce the price-per-core somewhat compared to the 5000-series, even with the inclusion of more cache. Of course, there's also the question of what lightly-threaded performance will be like. If the new processors manage to pull ahead at most light to moderately-threaded workloads, then that might potentially make similar pricing more viable, even if the processors are not all-around faster.

While I do agree that this is what they will do this is still terrible for them as a company, their biggest problem is that people don't know them and not supplying cheap cpus for people to try them out is digging their own graves in the long term.
One of the biggest sellers for intel is celeron and pentium, you can find them everywhere and everybody has seen them and worked with them at some point.
If amd waits to make money first it's going to be too late, if intel releases alder lake pentiums it's going to be extremely tough for amd to release anything against them.

Considering they were able to sell their processors as fast as they could make them for a long time following the launch of the 5000-series, I would say a bigger problem is their limited 7nm production. If production is limited, it doesn't make much sense to set a big chunk of that aside for low-margin parts when they can't meet demand for the higher-margin ones.

Budget chips can be money makers, but only in much larger quantities, and only if you have production to spare after satisfying demand at the higher-end. And while people might be familiar with Pentium and Celeron processors, they are generally viewed as being rather low-end, and lacking in performance. So I don't really think that does much for establishing brand loyalty. If anything, someone getting a low-end processor and finding performance of the system to be substandard may be more likely to tarnish a brand's reputation.

I do think it would be good to see them return to at least the ~$200 mid-range segment though, provided they have the supply to make that happen.

Great, so people are going to want to buy amd, go to the store to get a sensible cpu at about 100 moneys 150 at the most and see that the cheapest amd one is 300+ , that's going to make them think "well, no wonder they are better at twice the price"

How many people actually go to a store looking for a $100 CPU? The vast majority of people buying processors around that range will be getting them in a budget prebuilt system where the cost of the processor is obscured within the overall cost of the system. Self-built budget gaming systems haven't really been all that viable for the better part of the last year either, due to the graphics card situation.

And I don't see how gaining a reputation as a premium brand would be a problem. When it eventually makes sense for AMD to return to selling more moderately-priced chips, those same people are more likely to remember the positive things that were said about the brand during the time when they were only serving the higher-end. It might lose them some lower-end sales in the short term, but it can't really be considered a lost sale if that enables them to fulfill a sale at a higher price point instead.

 

[Howardohyea]

Is the i7 12700K review coming any time soon? With 4 less E cores and the same number of P cores than the 12900K it can very well be an extremely promising single/multi thread/value blend like the 10850K before it.

I'm planning on getting the 12700K for my new build next month.