News Overclocked Core i9-12900K Hits 5.2 GHz At 330W, Challenges Ryzen 9 5950X

[BX4096]

11% worse in what? Show a link because in this article the 12900k is even faster than the 5950x in multi, at least when overclocked.

This article refers to it overclocked to 5.2GHz and draining eye-watering 330 watts. At 5.3GHz, it becomes 400 watts. Hardly realistic. Here's the article you asked for:

Intel Core i9 12900K ES Benchmarks Leaked: ST Score 25% Higher Than 5950X, Overall MT Score 11% Lower

As for the percentage of people that "care about multi", it's irrelevant. Virtually everyone who does any kind of CPU intensive work on their PC, from video encoding, to media editing, to archiving, to even gaming, would benefit from better multithreading performance. Try encoding a 4K video in AV1 or HEVC and see how much difference 11% in multithreading will make.

Anyway, I wanted to see something that would easily beat AMD's last year offerings and make me look forward to an upgrade. As of how things currently stand, I'm rather reluctant to spend my hard-earned cash on it, especially since the 2022 AMD/Intel lineup will undoubtedly offer much better performance at similar prices. But hey, if you want to buy it, go right ahead.

 

[TerryLaze]

This article refers to it overclocked to 5.2GHz and draining eye-watering 330 watts. At 5.3GHz, it becomes 400 watts. Hardly realistic. Here's the article you asked for:

Intel Core i9 12900K ES Benchmarks Leaked: ST Score 25% Higher Than 5950X, Overall MT Score 11% Lower

ES means engineering sample, those get supplied to OEMs way way before launch so that they can check for compatibility and issues, history has shown that they are almost always weaker than the final product.

 

[spongiemaster]

Anyway, I wanted to see something that would easily beat AMD's last year offerings and make me look forward to an upgrade. As of how things currently stand, I'm rather reluctant to spend my hard-earned cash on it, especially since the 2022 AMD/Intel lineup will undoubtedly offer much better performance at similar prices. But hey, if you want to buy it, go right ahead.

Upgrade from what? Are you currently using a 5950x?

 

[BX4096]

Why would I need to upgrade from 5950x? But no, I'm more of an Intel guy. After a couple of earlier (way earlier) disappointments, I wouldn't be caught dead buying CPUs or GPUs from AMD. At least until 2020. I'm sure things are much better now, but their early Radeon drivers, CPUs, and overall quality were so abysmal thatI sort of gave up on the company after several frustrating purchases. If I have decent Geforce and Intel options, I prefer to stay with the things I know and can rely on.

 

[spongiemaster]

Why would I need to upgrade from 5950x?

You don't. If leaked benchmarks are reasonably accurate, then Alder Lake is going to beat everything currently available, easily in 16 thread work loads and lower. When it comes to multithreaded workloads, only the top end 5950x is going to be competitive with the 12900k. So the 5950x is the only CPU you can own from the mainstream platforms and claim Alder Lake doesn't offer a solid upgrade. You don't even own a 5000 series CPU, nor do you want one, so why do you care what kind of upgrade AL is vs it? What are you currently using from Intel that Alder Lake won't be a big enough upgrade from?

 

[BX4096]

I guess you and I define "a solid upgrade" differently, but then again, I'm not made of money the way some people are. Paying close to $750 (retail plus taxes) for a moderate upgrade that requires an expensive new motherboard and cooler (let alone ridiculously overpriced DDR5) is not something I'm looking forward to, especially when we'll be able to get a much better deal and better choices in less than a year.

I wouldn't even comment on this, but all the promotional "leaks" from past month got me so excited that I was really looking forward to a serious challenger to AMD's recent dominance. As things stand, I could have bought a superior CPU a year ago, when 5950x came out.

 

[alceryes]

Let me just see the power consumption while using the blasted thing as Intel intended, sheesh.
The cpu is likely pretty darn fast and power efficient without that nonsense.
Overclocking is dead The bar for overclocking raised some time ago, cutting off the more casual users.

Agreed.

The gains from overclocking, for the casual overclocker, are no longer worth the hassle. Gone are the days of easily getting the 1.6GHz Pentium 4 Northwood CPU to run at 2.8GHz, or FSB overclocks of 15-20+MHz. Manufacturers now bin the crap out of their CPUs so overclocking headroom is little to non-existent.

I also think that too many users want instant gratification and aren't willing to go through the arduous process of testing, tweaking, testing, tweaking, etc..

My current desktop CPU is the perfect example. Everyone wants to get it to 5.0GHz because of the '5' number. They think that it is somehow leaps and bounds faster than 4.9GHz and even 4.8GHz. Although I lock my CPU at only 4.8GHz I have my uncore running at 4.6GHz. With my bclk at 102MHz, and my memory OCd with super tight timings, this system easily outperforms many, many 5.0GHz 9900k systems I've seen the benchmarks of, all while running cool and virtually quiet. However, this took weeks of tweaking and testing to get set up properly - something the casual overclocker just won't do.

 

[mirai99]

As pointed out you are comparing overclocked to stock.

a 5950X uses more than 105 Watts when you also overclock it I think it hits about 230watts which is still 100 watts lower than this and that is only 8 cores for intel and 16 for AMD so not really a good look. If intel was able to do 16 Performance cores in this thing it would do like 450watts lol.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CEFQxsgZ20&t=780s


5950X pulls 448 Watts on LN2.

 

[Makaveli]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CEFQxsgZ20&t=780s


5950X pulls 448 Watts on LN2.

lol really LN2?

What is the 12900K doing to pull on LN2?

We will wait for that because its coming.

Another person with 1 post where are you guys coming from lol.

 

[TerryLaze]

lol really LN2?

What is the 12900K doing to pull on LN2?

We will wait for that because its coming.

Another person with 1 post where are you guys coming from lol.

Your point in your previous post was that if intel had 16 p cores it would use 450W and this guy is basically agreeing with you.
He is showing you that in deed overclocking 16 cores does reach into 450W.
The LN2 is just a necessity because ryzen would explode otherwise under so much power.

 

[mirai99]

lol really LN2?

What is the 12900K doing to pull on LN2?

We will wait for that because its coming.

Another person with 1 post where are you guys coming from lol.

I just created an account. I am sure that each and every person here has just created an account at some point in history...

 

[Makaveli]

Your point in your previous post was that if intel had 16 p cores it would use 450W and this guy is basically agreeing with you.
He is showing you that in deed overclocking 16 cores does reach into 450W.
The LN2 is just a necessity because ryzen would explode otherwise under so much power.

Yes but an LN2 overclock is pointless that is not on a machine you can use as a daily driver. And LN2 overclock on anything will pull ridiculous wattage regardless of the CPU.

So to me that example is irrevelant as the ADL-S test above was not done on LN2 and if it was i'm fairly certain it will pull more wattage.

 

[TerryLaze]

Yes but an LN2 overclock is pointless that is not on a machine you can use as a daily driver. And LN2 overclock on anything will pull ridiculous wattage regardless of the CPU.

All of this goes also for running an avx512 stresstest on an overclocked intel system.
Nobody is going to do it but everybody uses it as an example.

 

[Makaveli]

All of this goes also for running an avx512 stresstest on an overclocked intel system.
Nobody is going to do it but everybody uses it as an example.

Not going to disagree with you there that is accurate.