Discussion Intel i9-12900K - Gamers Nexus review

Here you go -

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhI9tLOg-6I


(gaming benchmarks start at 14:20)

Some highlights -
In overall gaming, the i9-12900K wins over the R9 5900X and 5950X. The win is costly as power efficiency goes is still completely out the window. This is not an issue for me, as I don't care to limit power on a gaming rig.
Windows 11 definitely gives the i9-12900K an uplift in application performance, compared to Windows 10.

Thoughts?

Edit - Didn't see Tom's review when I started this post. Here it is -

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/i...re-i5-12600k-review-retaking-the-gaming-crown
 
Last edited:
Frankly, underwhelming considering the build-up with the leaks and all. Intel get's 'top gaming cpu', but that's really not important to me since I've never gone for a top of line system. They lose their luster really quick when the next round of competitor's hardware comes out so I just content myself with mid-range value anyway. Not that there's really much value to be found in the current CPU/GPU market.

It does make for a bit of intrigue as Ryzen 3D comes up next, promising 15% uplift in IPC. With the often single digit (29:00 in video) performance margins in the gaming reviews this ought to be interesting.

Who's the winner here? well...we are! Intel's back to doing good things...as has AMD for 5 years now. Just wish the market was less messed up.
 
Hopefully. When prices come back down from crazytown.
True that! I'm hoping AMD brings 5800X price down so it's interesting enough to me.

But I halfway think they'll only use this release to inform market positioning of Zen 3D. Depends on how much unsold inventory of Zen 3 CPU's there are of course but they could just let retail channel take care of what's out there now. Maybe some rebates and/or game bundles to help it along.

Not sure, but they could re-direct un-packaged Zen 3 chiplets into server or HEDT (Threadripper) chips. It's all very interesting when you consider Ryzen is more than just a desktop processor.
 
Last edited:
I'm actually more impressed by the 12600K, which according to W1zzard at TechPowerUp, whom is a very knowledgeable and trusted reviewer, beats every CPU at RDR2 (on W11), even without disabling the power limiter. The only slight inaccuracy is the launch price, but I'm sure that had more to do with it exceeding even Intel's expectations. In his defense though, the KF model not reviewed will likely be just under $300, nor does the graphics built into the K model help it benefit from ANY of the benches. Even the $319 the K is going for is exactly what I paid for my 8700K though, and that was only due to an exceptional deal Newegg gave me when I told them I missed the sale on it because my online order didn't process for some reason.

Pretty sure this is going to be my next CPU.

 
Last edited:
The two items that make me go 'hmmmm,' in the review -

They couldn't even get past the intro in Total WarThree Kingdoms with any of the 12th gen Intel CPUs. Steve thinks it's the new CPU architecture causing this. In Windows 11 it ran fine.
There were also some weird 1% and .1% lows in gaming benchmarks that are also probably due to the core scheduling and new arcitecture. Not sure if these lower-than-normal lows are still there in Windows 11.

Steve tested in Windows 10 since that's what more than 89% of Steam users are still on. Less than 2% are on Windows 11.

In short, Windows 10 is not quite ready for the 12th gen Intel chips. I'm just wondering if Microsoft will fix the issues.
 
The i5-12600K review is up -

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OkHMh8sUSuM

Definitely a performer and blows away that middle pricepoint - nothing else can compete.
Still on W10 though, and I find it strange he talks about W11 being bug riddled (which we all know it still is), when he clearly stated there were crashing problems when testing these chips on W10.

The fact is, all this W11 12th gen Intel stuff is still in the early adopter stage, so there's no perfect way to test it if you expect to look at it from a wholistic user experience approach. At least with W1zzard's review at TPU, we get a glimpse of what the future brings gaming performance wise, as well as multitasking, editing, and all sorts of work and user related applications.

Nit picking about OS bugs though seems a bit silly given the path MS has chosen. It's hard to say whether they will be inclined to flesh out W10 better to support these chips. Seems like that would be asking for people to ignore all the work they put into W11, and stay on W10. It should at the very least teach them that they need to test their OSes better before releasing them, and work together with chip designers that make use of it's features more stringently.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Phaaze88
In short, Windows 10 is not quite ready for the 12th gen Intel chips. I'm just wondering if Microsoft will fix the issues.
They did by releasing windows 11, all the intel based OEM machines will come out with 12th gen and win11, job done.
Nobody cares that much about the DIY market that is going to cling to windows 10 for as long as possible, it's a very niche market.

And yes I think they will release updates that will improve performance but I'm also not going to hold my breath.
 
They did by releasing windows 11, all the intel based OEM machines will come out with 12th gen and win11, job done.
Nobody cares that much about the DIY market that is going to cling to windows 10 for as long as possible, it's a very niche market.

And yes I think they will release updates that will improve performance but I'm also not going to hold my breath.
What they should have done, is realize that as many people as there are still using W10, there was need for more thorough testing of W11 before launching it, especially with Intel making their new architecture for it.

IMO, Intel has mostly done their part, as their 12th gen chips on W11 are nearly flawless. especially for such a new desktop architecture, and that's largely because Intel plans ahead better, using it first in laptops, and then using it more robustly in desktops.

W11 in general though is far too buggy to be ready for launch. MS does things more spur of the moment than via long term planning. That was no more evident than with Vista, where they kept scrapping all progress to make it look more MAC like. MS compared to Intel are a bunch of idiots really.
 
Last edited:
What they should have done, is realize that as many people as still use W10, they needed to more thoroughly test W11 before launching it, especially with Intel making their new architecture made for W11.

IMO, Intel has mostly done their part, as their 12th gen chips on W11 are nearly flawless. W11 in general though is far too buggy to be ready for launch.
Yes and that is true for any software they all come out way before they are ready but ever since the internet has made updates trivial nobody cares anymore.
 
The two items that make me go 'hmmmm,' in the review -

They couldn't even get past the intro in Total WarThree Kingdoms with any of the 12th gen Intel CPUs. Steve thinks it's the new CPU architecture causing this. In Windows 11 it ran fine.
There were also some weird 1% and .1% lows in gaming benchmarks that are also probably due to the core scheduling and new arcitecture. Not sure if these lower-than-normal lows are still there in Windows 11.

Steve tested in Windows 10 since that's what more than 89% of Steam users are still on. Less than 2% are on Windows 11.

In short, Windows 10 is not quite ready for the 12th gen Intel chips. I'm just wondering if Microsoft will fix the issues.

That part was just short of retarded, given the common knowledge that the Thread DIrector enhancements were only in Win11. (Whatever excuse they give was merely rationalizing. No biggie, other reviewers had results for both OS's, which was useful)
 
Like Steve and many others said many times in reviews, the main take away here is the huge jump in performance between Alder Lake and 10th and 11th gen.


If you own an old/oldish system, specially anything intel, Alder Lake is the right choice for heavy productivity uplift performance. And of course is the right choice for a new system too.

From my humble point of view, Alder Lake is good for gaming too but, there is the i5 10400 + B460/560 which is really the budget king (for now!), or if you have a compatible AM4 motherboard the 5600X (which is expensive, but still cheaper as a drop-in upgrade).

If we get the i5 12400 chip soon and the B660 and/or H670 mobos (and the stock is decent enough and the performance too) then this combo may become the new performance-budget king for any gaming build. Then again, first we needs reviews, lots of them!!!

This are very interesting times for us gamers and power users. Lots of nice choices and very powerfull ones for every pocket size.

Im still more than happy with my R5 3600. For my line of work is more than enough and for gaming at 1440p my GPU is the limit, so really no point there for changing to anything. Probably not the same case for someone who is a pro coder or a creative artist using adobe suite.

Gigabyte launched a new BIOS for my mobo, so I could just get a Ryzen 5xxx cpu. But with my current GPU and 1440p resolution I wont see any difference in gaming. I bet all those big 7-zip files would zip/unzip faster with a Zen 3 chip, but thats not enough to get a new CPU for me, not right now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Phaaze88
Still on W10 though, and I find it strange he talks about W11 being bug riddled (which we all know it still is), when he clearly stated there were crashing problems when testing these chips on W10.
They definitely had a negative slant towards Windows 11 but, as they pointed out, they are testing for the masses, not for the 2% Windows 11 outlier.


The fact is, all this W11 12th gen Intel stuff is still in the early adopter stage, so there's no perfect way to test it if you expect to look at it from a wholistic user experience approach. At least with W1zzard's review at TPU, we get a glimpse of what the future brings gaming performance wise, as well as multitasking, editing, and all sorts of work and user related applications.
I disagree here.
Software (Windows 11/10) and hardware (Alder Lake CPUs) should function according to spec, when released [period]. Anything less is unacceptable. To automatically expect less is dangerous and makes manufacturers lazy and complacent. 'A glimpse of the future' does nothing for me today - I want an operating system and CPU to fully function according to specifications, TODAY.


Nit picking about OS bugs though seems a bit silly given the path MS has chosen. It's hard to say whether they will be inclined to flesh out W10 better to support these chips. Seems like that would be asking for people to ignore all the work they put into W11, and stay on W10. It should at the very least teach them that they need to test their OSes better before releasing them, and work together with chip designers that make use of it's features more stringently.
...and this is the danger I'm referring to.
Windows 10 is supposed to be fully supported by Alder Lake CPUs. If this is the case, why shouldn't Microsoft update Windlws 10? You are already giving them a pass to NOT update an operating system that will be fully supported, by Microsoft, for at least the next four year??
 
I want an operating system and CPU to fully function according to specifications, TODAY.
Then you have to make both of those yourself because there is no other way for you to know the specifications of either one so you will never know if they are fully function according to specifications.
Windows 10 is supposed to be fully supported by Alder Lake CPUs.
This is completely baseless speculation, supposed by whom? By you?
 
To automatically expect less is dangerous and makes manufacturers lazy and complacent.
Kinda like the current state of game development, huh?


Back to topic, IMO: 12th gen is ok and 12700K is Neo. Steve and Co seem to like knocking down '7s', but this looks like one of the best 7s in a while.
Windows 11 still needs work(unsurprisingly) and the cost of Alder Lake's entry is up there for the time being, unless you wait for the 12400 + B and H chipsets.
Not going to actually buy, but wait for 13th gen and whatever the AMD options are then.
 
  • Like
Reactions: alceryes and RodroX
They definitely had a negative slant towards Windows 11 but, as they pointed out, they are testing for the masses, not for the 2% Windows 11 outlier.



I disagree here.
Software (Windows 11/10) and hardware (Alder Lake CPUs) should function according to spec, when released [period]. Anything less is unacceptable. To automatically expect less is dangerous and makes manufacturers lazy and complacent. 'A glimpse of the future' does nothing for me today - I want an operating system and CPU to fully function according to specifications, TODAY.



...and this is the danger I'm referring to.
Windows 10 is supposed to be fully supported by Alder Lake CPUs. If this is the case, why shouldn't Microsoft update Windlws 10? You are already giving them a pass to NOT update an operating system that will be fully supported, by Microsoft, for at least the next four year??
1. I feel anyone looking to use W11 (or a CPU made for it) would be more interested in THOSE results than how it functions on an OS not made to support it thoroughly. It's clear as I stated that both W11 and Alder Lake are presently in early adopter status because of this.

2. But we simply have to face the reality that most of MS' OSes aren't ready for launch at the time they start releasing them, and often well after. So if we want to look at reviews at all, it makes sense to look beyond those stumbling blocks to get a better idea of how they're intended to work.

3. Who said W10 is "supposed to" fully support Alder Lake? As pretty much all reviews have stated, it doesn't have the scheduler made for AL like W11 does, so clearly it wasn't designed with AL in mind. How could it be? It was released well before AL was even conceived, let alone launched.

My take on this whole thing is some, not all, but clearly some, want to have their cake and eat it too, meaning they want an OS that released some time ago to be as up to date as the one replacing it. I also get the feeling MOST W10 users are content to say they are not interested in W11 (at least not yet), and may even look at upgrading to a 10th gen Intel CPU to wait until they are if on an older chip, especially if prices drop, which they should when AL catches on.
 
Last edited:
If not running a 12th gen intel, there's little point in side grading to Win11. The differences between the two only really affect the upper few % fps and for just about anyone pushing 1080p, that's well above refresh, at 4k there's no difference at all and even 1440p the differences are within margin of error. Assuming 11th gen or prior.

With Amd there's no telling. Scheduler bugs are supposedly now ironed out, but who is to say, so I'd not be in any rush to jump up there. 12th gen has done a decent job of playing catchup, doing what 11th gen should have done but failed miserably. Being relatively equal to the 5950x for the flagship race, ahead by a small, often single digit % though is going to cost Intel the title, again. Not only is Amd dropping updated 3d chips shortly, with an IPC increase, but Zen4 and AMD's DDR5 isn't that far behind.

Hardware Unboxed did it best imho, they put ddr4 12th vs ddr4 11th and ddr4 Ryzen. Der8auer had some interesting observations on ddr4 vs ddr5 as did Ali (optimum tech) and with Win11 there's a definite advantage to using ddr5 with a 12th gen. I just don't believe Intel brought there A-game this time around, doing just enough to get the title.

Imho, this is another skylake cpu, where Alderlake+, ++ etc will improve the architecture, considerably, but only for the short periods between Amd releases. If Amd releases Zen4 before Intel can drop 13th Gen, Intel is going to be behind and playing catchup, again.
 
So supported in your mind gets translated into fully supported?
Firstly, thank you for conceding that I am correct.

Secondly, it looks like you've moved on to a different point. I'm not sure how your definitions of 'supported' and 'fully supported' compare so I'll await your answer on that one.

To me, both 'supported' and 'fully supported' would mean being able to run a program/game without that program/game crashing.
 
To me, both 'supported' and 'fully supported' would mean being able to run a program/game without that program/game crashing.
So if a third party company screws up and causes their game/app to get crashes it's the fault of windows?

Support=limited support, as limited as the company decides, they could provide one single driver that is even very bad and it would still be called support.

Fully supported= you can argue what that would mean if they don't state exactly what that covers.