Question Which would be the best buy for high productivity use? i7 13700K or i7 14700 non-K?

[ThomasKinsley]

I'm looking at PC builds but I can't figure out which one is better. Right now the 13700K can be had for around the same price or slightly cheaper than a 14700. The 14th gen is more modern, but I hear it's hardly an improvement. Would it be better to snag a 13700K or 14700? This is for non-gaming use.

 

[Eximo]

They are essentially the same processor, just different boost clocks and overclocking and power limits.

14700 has 4 more e-core and the accompanying cache. The advantage the 13700k has is the potential to configure for unlimited tau duration, ie permanent boost, with the proper cooling and an adequate motherboard and power supply.

14700k has the same advantages and is the same price as the 14700 right now at $400.

13700KF is only $325.

Just depends what you can do with that $75 difference I suppose, and if you need the integrated graphics then the 13700k at $345 is a decent deal.

 

[falcon291]

Buy the cheapest. And buy the best cooler air or liquid. For these CPUs, heat is the limiting factor.

 

[vMax]

I have the 13700K and it is a stellar CPU but if the 14700K is at the same price or very near the same price then go 14700K as it has 4 extra e-cores providing a bump in performance for multi-threadsed workloads.

PS also make sure whichever one you get, undervolt it as the auto bios settings tend to push a bit too much voltage for no good reason! Easy to do and plenty of guides to help once you get it and it will make sure the CPU is not running hot yet still boosting to 5.3/5.4GHz.

 

[ThomasKinsley]

Thanks for all of your responses. This helps a lot.

They are essentially the same processor, just different boost clocks and overclocking and power limits.

14700 has 4 more e-core and the accompanying cache. The advantage the 13700k has is the potential to configure for unlimited tau duration, ie permanent boost, with the proper cooling and an adequate motherboard and power supply.

[...]

This is very good to know, but I'm a little bit out of the loop with the latest Intel processers. Without an overclock (i.e. running stock), will the K series make a functional difference compared to the non-K or is it all in the overclocking potential?

Buy the cheapest. And buy the best cooler air or liquid. For these CPUs, heat is the limiting factor.

That's a good point. I know the K series requires more power. Assuming both chips have the same coolers, will it naturally run hotter at stock or will they be similar in temp?

I have the 13700K and it is a stellar CPU but if the 14700K is at the same price or very near the same price then go 14700K as it has 4 extra e-cores providing a bump in performance for multi-threadsed workloads.

PS also make sure whichever one you get, undervolt it as the auto bios settings tend to push a bit too much voltage for no good reason! Easy to do and plenty of guides to help once you get it and it will make sure the CPU is not running hot yet still boosting to 5.3/5.4GHz.

This is true, but I'm looking at the non-K 14700 compared to the K series 13700. I am not sure if the K is an added hassle or worth it.

 

[Eximo]

The non-K have different power limits and boost clocks. They are inherently slower, but will run cooler as a result. Non-K CPUs also won't stay at peak clocks forever, they will taper off over time. The base clock is much lower, but in practice you won't see this with decent cooling.

If you pair a K CPU with a Z series board the out of the box experience is likely to be overclocked to some extent, which can be problematic. Too much voltage or no power limit at all out of the box. You can set power limits in the BIOS on Z and B boards if want to and effectively turn a K series chip into a regular one.

Clock for clock and core for core there is no difference, but the K series chips are kind of the rejects. They are leaky (an electrical term) which means that they are less efficient, but the end result is often the ability to clock higher. So they sell them to the gamers who don't care about power requirements and keep the decent chips for the non-K, and the best chips for the mobile market.

It really depends on what you plan to do. If you are going to run CPU number crunching/rendering/compiling/transcoding for hours on end then cooling is more important. You can always tweak the power of the CPU. You just can't modify the boost behavior of non-K chips other than turning it off (a big downside since the base clock is so low)

If your plan is a high performance computer with no setup, then the non-K is the better choice. If you want to spend 10 minutes in the BIOS to set up some realistic power limits or try your hand at undervolting for maximum efficiency, then the K chip is worth it.

I would say if you are planning long endurance runs of work, then go ahead and pick up a Z class motherboard regardless. They tend to be more fully featured as well. 2.5Gbps network, high speed USB ports, and a better audio chipset are the usual gains.

 

[vMax]

The same applies to the non K version so if price is the same go with the 14700 as the 4 additional cores will help.

 

[ThomasKinsley]

It really depends on what you plan to do. If you are going to run CPU number crunching/rendering/compiling/transcoding for hours on end then cooling is more important. You can always tweak the power of the CPU. You just can't modify the boost behavior of non-K chips other than turning it off (a big downside since the base clock is so low)

If your plan is a high performance computer with no setup, then the non-K is the better choice. If you want to spend 10 minutes in the BIOS to set up some realistic power limits or try your hand at undervolting for maximum efficiency, then the K chip is worth it.

I would say if you are planning long endurance runs of work, then go ahead and pick up a Z class motherboard regardless. They tend to be more fully featured as well. 2.5Gbps network, high speed USB ports, and a better audio chipset are the usual gains.

This makes perfect sense. Thanks for breaking it down.

The same applies to the non K version so if price is the same go with the 14700 as the 4 additional cores will help.

That is something to consider. The one negative of building computers is I'm completely out of the loop afterwards. I've yet to learn where e-cores are most effective.

 

[NedSmelly]

14700k is roughly 5% faster than the 13700k in content creation benchmarks.

Intel Core 14th Gen Processors Content Creation Review

The new Intel Core 14th Gen processors are a refresh update of the previous 13th Gen processors. But, how much faster are they for content creation workflows?

www.pugetsystems.com

What @Eximo said is correct - however the non-k power limits may be completely ignored by some motherboards, and get blasted with power in the same way a K would. It’s one of those current issues with Intel that savvy system builders need to double check when setting up BIOS.

 

[RaidHobbit]

I'm looking at PC builds but I can't figure out which one is better. Right now the 13700K can be had for around the same price or slightly cheaper than a 14700. The 14th gen is more modern, but I hear it's hardly an improvement. Would it be better to snag a 13700K or 14700? This is for non-gaming use.

Depends what mobo you pair it with, assuming you want decent stable OC.

 

[vMax]

On the e-cores side, they do make a significant difference, not so much for gaming though it would be good to understand what your core workloads will be?

 

[bill001g]

The pricing on 13th gen k chips may soon get strange. There were articles saying intel is going to stop taking orders for these chips very soon. All depends on how many of these chips are already sitting in warehouses.

 

[ThomasKinsley]

On the e-cores side, they do make a significant difference, not so much for gaming though it would be good to understand what your core workloads will be?

The workload would be primarily creative content. E.g., 4k resolution, higher resolution photo creation/manipulation, and maybe some video editing.

 

[35below0]

The workload would be primarily creative content. E.g., 4k resolution, higher resolution photo creation/manipulation, and maybe some video editing.

What motherboard are you looking at?

Will you buy a GPU?

The 14700 is the one you want. For reasons explained above. Chiefly the extra cores.
Don't spend your money on a K series CPU. Nothing wrong with it but if you don't need the extra power then don't buy it. 14700 non-K is plenty powerfull.

Speaking of power, it can draw up to ~220w, so don't skimp on a power supply just because it's not a gaming PC

 

[geofelt]

Your two choices are so close in performance that you will not be able to tell the difference.
One plus for the i7-14700 is that it comes with a good laminar flow cooler.

Do not fall for the fear mongering about heat.
Intel processors are designed to run at 100c.
The capability of the cooler makes only a minor difference in real app performance.
Here is a study of strong processors with less than top end coolers:
https://www.tomshardware.com/features/intel-core-13900k-cooling-tested/2
The biggest delta was 12%

Before you spend $200 or more on a top cooler for a 14700K, spend that on a stronger processor like the i9-14900 in the first place.
It is a 65w tdp processor and comes with an excellent RH1 laminar flow cooler.

 

[ThomasKinsley]

What motherboard are you looking at?

Will you buy a GPU?

The 14700 is the one you want. For reasons explained above. Chiefly the extra cores.
Don't spend your money on a K series CPU. Nothing wrong with it but if you don't need the extra power then don't buy it. 14700 non-K is plenty powerfull.

Speaking of power, it can draw up to ~220w, so don't skimp on a power supply just because it's not a gaming PC

Motherboard is up in the air. GPU I'm thinking Nvidia 4060 (or Ti) would be a good fit to assist in productivity apps. No worry about gaming performance.

 

[ThomasKinsley]

Your two choices are so close in performance that you will not be able to tell the difference.
One plus for the i7-14700 is that it comes with a good laminar flow cooler.

Do not fall for the fear mongering about heat.
Intel processors are designed to run at 100c.
The capability of the cooler makes only a minor difference in real app performance.
Here is a study of strong processors with less than top end coolers:
https://www.tomshardware.com/features/intel-core-13900k-cooling-tested/2
The biggest delta was 12%

Before you spend $200 or more on a top cooler for a 14700K, spend that on a stronger processor like the i9-14900 in the first place.
It is a 65w tdp processor and comes with an excellent RH1 laminar flow cooler.

I found stock coolers worked great on non-K i7s in older generations. I'm glad to hear it's still the case. I wasn't looking at the 14900 but I will keep it in mind as I double check everything.

 

[sonofjesse]

Have you looked at the 7900x deal at MC for 570-600? Hard to beat that deal IMHO.

I like to save money and don't pick based on which I like better.

I wish you luck!

 

[35below0]

Motherboard is up in the air. GPU I'm thinking Nvidia 4060 (or Ti) would be a good fit to assist in productivity apps. No worry about gaming performance.

I'd stay away from anything but the vanilla 4060. They offer very little value. Maybe in a few specific tasks, but the performance difference is small.

Intel's Arc might offer something video-wise, but their drivers are an adventure at the moment.


What is important to you? Lots of SSDs? USB-C? Thunderbolt?
Or are most of those just "would be nice" features rather than "must have"?

I ask about motherboards because their prices can escalate quickly. If i were to suggest one i would not like it to be missing something important, and i would not like it to be stupidly expensive either.
Just as an example, i have a decent but basic Gigabyte motherboard because it turned out it's all i need. I had a good look at all the more expensive models but could not find any use for the more expensive features.


As for the stock cooler, the only reason to get an aftermarket one for a non-100C intel is the silence, but i mean dead silence. If you're not going to hear the cooler fan over the GPU fans while gaming then what's the point in combating noise?
On the other hand, if you want the PC to be so quiet it might not even be on, then you need an expensive cooler.

It's more a question of whether you're budget limited or not. You can always pay for what you want/demand/need.

 

[ThomasKinsley]

I'd stay away from anything but the vanilla 4060. They offer very little value. Maybe in a few specific tasks, but the performance difference is small.

Intel's Arc might offer something video-wise, but their drivers are an adventure at the moment.


What is important to you? Lots of SSDs? USB-C? Thunderbolt?
Or are most of those just "would be nice" features rather than "must have"?

I ask about motherboards because their prices can escalate quickly. If i were to suggest one i would not like it to be missing something important, and i would not like it to be stupidly expensive either.
Just as an example, i have a decent but basic Gigabyte motherboard because it turned out it's all i need. I had a good look at all the more expensive models but could not find any use for the more expensive features.


As for the stock cooler, the only reason to get an aftermarket one for a non-100C intel is the silence, but i mean dead silence. If you're not going to hear the cooler fan over the GPU fans while gaming then what's the point in combating noise?
On the other hand, if you want the PC to be so quiet it might not even be on, then you need an expensive cooler.

It's more a question of whether you're budget limited or not. You can always pay for what you want/demand/need.

Honestly not a lot of demands on this one. I've been keeping a close look at pricing, and the 13700K and 14700 being similar caught my eye. I wondered if I was leaning towards the wrong one, but people here broke it down well.

Have you looked at the 7900x deal at MC for 570-600? Hard to beat that deal IMHO.

I like to save money and don't pick based on which I like better.

I wish you luck!

I appreciate it.

 

[Bob.B]

I'm looking at PC builds but I can't figure out which one is better. Right now the 13700K can be had for around the same price or slightly cheaper than a 14700. The 14th gen is more modern, but I hear it's hardly an improvement. Would it be better to snag a 13700K or 14700? This is for non-gaming use.

If your not going to game and your not going to overclock go for the 14700 and some B series mobo.

 

[vMax]

The workload would be primarily creative content. E.g., 4k resolution, higher resolution photo creation/manipulation, and maybe some video editing.

Yep the 13700/14700 will be great...Well worth taking a look at Technotice on youtube as he is all about creators and really goes into detail on hardware and the software side including a section on the photo edditing side. PS even the 13600 will do a good job for your workloads!!!

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oTbuFYqNg8U&t=125s

 

[35below0]

... PS even the 13600 will do a good job for your workloads!!!

Maybe compared to 13700, but the 14700 is a considerably stronger CPU.

If it can make a difference speeding up all those progress bars, it's worth spending money on.

 

[vMax]

Maybe compared to 13700, but the 14700 is a considerably stronger CPU.

If it can make a difference speeding up all those progress bars, it's worth spending money on.

I'm with you, if there is price parity or only a little difference with the 13700 then the 14700 is the way to go with it's additional e-cores...