News Intel Launches Raptor Lake at AMD: 24-core i9-13900K Arrives Oct 20 for $589

This is a strong hint AMD will keep the all-threaded crown in most applications, but will trade blows or lose in gaming.

I think Intel understands the writing on the wall with the 3D chips coming next year and Phoenix on mobile.

The increase in power won't be enough to keep all the little gremlins fed to surpass AMD, I think. And I don't think they'll re-take the efficiency crown... Not that they wanted to, as it had zero mentions. And no; adding more E-cores is not the same as making the whole SoC more efficient XD

Interesting times ahead, for sure.

Regards.
 

RichardtST

Great
May 17, 2022
48
41
60
0
So.... I can get 8 full-throttle cores for $589, or 16 full-throttle cores for $699. Seems an easy choice to me! E-cores are a gimmick. There is no reliable way to determine what any one thread is going to do in the next few milliseconds such that it can be 100% scheduled on the proper core. You need a long consistent history for that, and even given that it is not reliable. By the time you've pegged an E-core a few times and decide to reschedule on a P-core, you've missed a few frames. I ain't falling for it!
 
Reactions: PEnns
Oct 23, 2021
6
11
15
0
So.... I can get 8 full-throttle cores for $589, or 16 full-throttle cores for $699. Seems an easy choice to me! E-cores are a gimmick. There is no reliable way to determine what any one thread is going to do in the next few milliseconds such that it can be 100% scheduled on the proper core. You need a long consistent history for that, and even given that it is not reliable. By the time you've pegged an E-core a few times and decide to reschedule on a P-core, you've missed a few frames. I ain't falling for it!
its amazing how much nonsense can a one person write...
 

PCWarrior

Distinguished
May 20, 2013
185
75
18,670
3
Intel not raising prices and keeping the same price structure as Alderlake is great news. We already have performance leaks about the MT performance of 13900K and we know how the 7950X performs from the reviews. And the 13900K is besting or trading blows with the 7950X for $100 dollars less. As for the p and e cores argument, what matters is performance in every workload, not how you architecturally achieve it. Intel is achieving their performance with that hybrid approach just like AMD is achieving theirs by stitching dies together and advertising a dual-octacore as a 16core.
 

Neilbob

Distinguished
Mar 31, 2014
108
121
18,770
2
I've become grumpy in my old age and so, whether justified or not, feel the need to spurt out this sort of stuff:

I'm not sure that simply slapping on additional 'Efficiency' cores is really sustainable in the long-run - at least not for a consumer oriented CPU. As far as I can tell, they seem to exist mostly so that Intel can claim victories (or parity) in multi-threaded benchmarks, because what workload is the typical consumer going to be running that involves using that many cores in the first place?

Obviously a lot of heavily threaded tasks don't need all the cache and features that a full core comes with, but many do and at that point I daresay that anyone serious about such work is going to be looking higher up the products stacks at things like Threadripper and whatever Intel comes out with because a 'proper' core is likely more important.

For balance, I think that 16 core CPUs by AMD are totally pointless for general consumer tasks (including gaming) too, but obviously many people buying them engage in hefty doses of confirmation bias in order to justify their overspend. We see that with GPUs too.
 
Which part is the hint?!
Not charging more per segment. They need the higher margins (I mentioned this, please read the whole post; EDIT: no I didn't; I need to re-read my posts, lol) as evidenced by charging more for the i5.

It's interesting they aren't listing the tray prices this time around and are using the RCP (Reasonable Charge Pricing ) instead. That is not quite MSRP, but it's more or less the same thing.

Regards.
 
Not charging more per segment. They need the higher margins (I mentioned this, please read the whole post) as evidenced by charging more for the i5.
I know I'm not thaaat blind...
There is nothing about margins or cost here.
This is a strong hint AMD will keep the all-threaded crown in most applications, but will trade blows or lose in gaming.

I think Intel understands the writing on the wall with the 3D chips coming next year and Phoenix on mobile.

The increase in power won't be enough to keep all the little gremlins fed to surpass AMD, I think. And I don't think they'll re-take the efficiency crown... Not that they wanted to, as it had zero mentions. And no; adding more E-cores is not the same as making the whole SoC more efficient XD

Interesting times ahead, for sure.

Regards.
 
Reactions: -Fran-

tennis2

Judicious
We're scaling so much into higher power limits of CPUs and GPUs that I feel we've nearly/now reached the point where many consumers aren't going to be able to afford enough cooling to use these chips to their fullest/advertised potential (or that would be comfortable to use a machine that's pumping out >500/600/700W in a normal sized room for any amount of time). Similar to the laptop market. It's clear that physical/architectural limits are being hit, and that pushing up frequency/power are the only way forward. Reminds me of the P4 days.

Would be interesting to get an interview piece with Intel/AMD/Nvidia regarding this seemingly looming barrier we're about to hit and how they're planning on progressing forward. Be it >>> cache or otherwise. Not sure how much info they could divulge...
 
Reactions: RodroX and sherhi

SonoraTechnical

Commendable
May 28, 2020
32
14
1,535
0
Clearly both manufacturers are producing vey compelling products this time around. At the $600-$700 mark we have two CPUs trading blows; R9-7950X & i9-13900K. We will have updates of both lines, with AMD adding 3D Cache and Intel increasing Boost Speeds. Probably can't go wrong with either choice, neither one dominates the other completely.

I think I'll bite this time around. Yeah I know Zen5 will be a new architecture and Intel will adopt chiplets and all of the benefits that accompany them... But, I think either one of these chips, probably available in volume in 1st quarter 2023, will serve most folks well.
 

JarredWaltonGPU

Senior GPU Editor
Editor
Feb 21, 2020
1,411
1,437
4,070
1
We will have updates of both lines, with AMD adding 3D Cache and Intel increasing Boost Speeds.
For gaming purposes, Zen 4 with 3D V-Cache will likely be the way to go. I hope AMD can manage much higher core clocks even with stacked cache this time. I'll be very curious to see what the CPU landscape looks like in games once we have RTX 4090 as well. 🙃
 
Reactions: Makaveli

SunMaster

Proper
Apr 19, 2022
78
61
110
0
I think the 7950s performance at low wattage (45 and 65W) are mighty impressive and I think it shows that AMD is focused at the server and laptop segments. Intel will not be able to compete in either segment due to poor efficiency.
 
I think the 7950s performance at low wattage (45 and 65W) are mighty impressive and I think it shows that AMD is focused at the server and laptop segments. Intel will not be able to compete in either segment due to poor efficiency.
Intel claims 12900k level of performance at 65W for the 13900k
We will of course have to see how close to reality that claim is.
 
Reactions: KyaraM

Tom Sunday

Commendable
Jul 24, 2020
167
45
1,610
0
I loved to see on how the Ryzen 7000 stacking up against Intel’s existing Alder Lake chips. But I don’t really care in comparing the Ryzen 7000 series against an outgoing and past generation Intel chip. What I want to know is how the AMD 7000 will compare against to the yet-to-be-fully-available Raptor Lake. Besides both chips having been tested and reviewed by at least a dozen or so reputable tech-channels allowing the reader in making their own decision based on plain facts and not storefront or synthetic talk! What is a further bone in the throat is the mandatory, expensive and forced new motherboard and DRAM required for these new Ryzen 7000 CPUs and which in these ongoing inflationary and uncertain economic times remains a very big deal!

Indeed the 7950X delivered some impressive performance gains that beat Alder Lake. But considering and comparing productivity-oriented applications, where premium priced CPUs often justify their true cost, Intel has usually (past and present) proving to be the more common sense choice. Yesterday I overheard a few people at 'Best Buy' who remarked: “I will not be buying either the new Raptor Lake or Ryzen 7950X. Instead I will be reaching out for a RTX 4090 for my Z690 system and as such getting a much bigger bang for my buck!” What do I know then standing there with absolutely no money in my pocket? But then it is always nice to see and feel how the other half lives.
 

Papusan

Honorable
Jul 26, 2016
14
3
10,515
0
For balance, I think that 16 core CPUs by AMD are totally pointless for general consumer tasks (including gaming) too, but obviously many people buying them engage in hefty doses of confirmation bias in order to justify their overspend. We see that with GPUs too.
Same also the 16 baby cores for Intel's new flagship. Aka 0-0 LOOL

But 13900K at below 600$ means my upgrade will be relatively cheap once I sell my 12900K.
 

JarredWaltonGPU

Senior GPU Editor
Editor
Feb 21, 2020
1,411
1,437
4,070
1
As opposed to ADL beating the then ,1 yr old Zen 3 chips last year!
When did Zen 4 launch? Oh, that's right...

It doesn't matter that Zen 3 was a year old, because there was literally no update around the Alder Lake launch. The Ryzen 7 5800X3D didn't come out until May 29, 2022. Meanwhile, Zen 4 is coming out less than a month ahead of Raptor Lake. Obviously, no one can compare RPL and Zen 4 performance yet without breaking embargo, and AMD shouldn't have RPL chips for testing. But if his point is that he wants to see how RPL stacks up to the new Ryzen chips, that's entirely valid and waiting a few weeks is hardly that big of a deal.
 
When did Zen 4 launch? Oh, that's right...

It doesn't matter that Zen 3 was a year old, because there was literally no update around the Alder Lake launch. The Ryzen 7 5800X3D didn't come out until May 29, 2022. Meanwhile, Zen 4 is coming out less than a month ahead of Raptor Lake. Obviously, no one can compare RPL and Zen 4 performance yet without breaking embargo, and AMD shouldn't have RPL chips for testing. But if his point is that he wants to see how RPL stacks up to the new Ryzen chips, that's entirely valid and waiting a few weeks is hardly that big of a deal.
I think all of us are looking forward to seeing how RPL stacks up. I wasn't suggesting that RPL is irrelevent for Zen 4 at all. It looks likely it will beat Zen 4 for single thread and gaming, maybe not so much in multi. I was only pointing out that this is the normal comparison in-between each CPU release.
 

aalkjsdflkj

Reputable
Jun 30, 2018
38
24
4,535
0
I'm just happy both blue and red teams have legitimate areas they can brag about. For a while it was just Intel for performance, AMD for value. They're both pushing each other now, and we're benefiting.
 

A Stoner

Distinguished
Jan 19, 2009
282
51
18,860
0
I did not really like the big little idea at first, but the idea is starting to look like a good idea. The little cores do not split into multi threads, and if you end up with more total cores that come in at the same number of threads, it seems you end up with a more powerful processor in the end. Now what they need to do is get rid of the multi-threaded aspect of the big cores to ensure absolute top performance in single threaded applications.
 
Reactions: Nephern

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS