Question Raptor Lake - Official Thread

[Hulk]

Since we already have the first Raptor Lake leak I'm thinking it should have it's own thread.
What do we know so far?
From Anandtech's Intel Process Roadmap articles from July:

Built on Intel 7 with upgraded FinFET
10-15% PPW (performance-per-watt)
Last non-tiled consumer CPU as Meteor Lake will be tiled

I'm guessing this will be a minor update to ADL with just a few microarchitecture changes to the cores. The larger change will be the new process refinement allowing 8+16 at the top of the stack.

Will it work with current z690 motherboards? If yes then that could be a major selling point for people to move to ADL rather than wait.

 

[eek2121]

What are you basing this on? In Anandtech's review, in the SPEC 1T section, they call out the 7950x as the IPC leader though they don't show exactly how they calculated this. I haven't really seen any other real IPC comparison yet.

AMD Zen 4 Ryzen 9 7950X and Ryzen 5 7600X Review: Retaking The High-End

www.anandtech.com

Note that AT SPEC results (unless something has changed) are run at stock clocks, so those aren't IPC numbers, but rather 'performance numbers'.

EDIT: IMO the numbers that should matter to most folks are 'perf/watt for my workloads' and 'total peformance for my workloads' anyway. Instructions per clock matter little if the CPUs are drastically different in terms of clock and IPC.

 

[deasd]

I found a better in-depth IPC test : https://zhuanlan.zhihu.com/p/568419115

Zen 4 shows clear advantage over Golden Cove in SPEC 2017 integer test (need to scroll down to the middle of the page). FP is about equal.

View attachment 68247

This article is a gold mine. But I think it had better be posted in Zen4 thread. The author just tested everything except Raptorlake.

 

[Hitman928]

Note that AT SPEC results (unless something has changed) are run at stock clocks, so those aren't IPC numbers, but rather 'performance numbers'.

EDIT: IMO the numbers that should matter to most folks are 'perf/watt for my workloads' and 'total peformance for my workloads' anyway. Instructions per clock matter little if the CPUs are drastically different in terms of clock and IPC.

Yeah, you would have to normalize for clock speeds in Anandtech's results which they've done in the past. You can easily make arguments for running all CPUs at the same frequency or letting them run at max clocks and then calculating IPC by normalizing for clock speed. I tend to support letting them run at their target clock speeds because there are numerous design decisions that go into the target clock speed and you can easily handicap a core by forcing it to run at a lower frequency.

I agree wholeheartedly on your second point though.

 

[tamz_msc]

Just because AT benchmarks don't align with your views does not mean that they are a joke. They are perfectly valid. The only flaw they have is that they use a dated GPU and do not regularly update the GPU and/or results.

Testing a GPU equivalent of a RTX 3070 wherein half the games are GPU-bound is obviously a great example of a gaming benchmark.

 

[Exist50]

Just because AT benchmarks don't align with your views does not mean that they are a joke. They are perfectly valid. The only flaw they have is that they use a dated GPU and do not regularly update the GPU and/or results.

Having an outdated GPU for gaming benchmarks is certainly a problem. What do you think people care more about - 480p numbers or Amphere performance? Pretty much everything about their suite is years out of date.

 

[inf64]

I think the only way to remove the GPU bottleneck is to retest all these CPUs with 4090 or the RDNA3 equivalent (when it launches). Only then we will have a clearer picture which chip is the best for gaming.

 

[StinkyPinky]

They're up for pre order on newegg for those interested. Reasonable prices actually.

 

[Carfax83]

What are the gaming and productivity equivalent Zen 4 parts to 13600K and 13700K?

According to the price leaks 13600K will be $330 which will put it against the 7600x at $299, and the 13700K will be $449 which will pit it against the 7700x at $399.

13600K will be about equal to 7700X in productivity, and lose the ST and gaming (easily)

The 13700K is the closest price competitor to the 7700x.

13700K should win against 7700X in productivity but lose in ST and tie it in gaming. Also, 13700K will lose in about everything against 7900X (which beats 12900K in about everything).

I have a question. If the Computerbase.de review put the 12900KS beating the 7950x in gaming overall, why do you think Raptor Lake, which is basically Alder Lake on steroids is going to lose to Zen 4 in gaming at the equivalent price points?

The 7900x is already slower than the 12900KS in gaming, imagine what the 13900K will do.

The only domination Zen 4 offers is in heavy multithreaded apps.

 

[Saylick]

Pricing is better than rumored:
- 13600K = $319
- 13700K = $409
- 13900K = $589

Intel didn't raise prices at all it seems. For comparison:
- 12600K = $290
- 12700K = $410
- 12900K = $590

Kudos to Intel for offering the consumer literally more silicon for the same price, but those margins...

 

[jpiniero]

According to the price leaks 13600K will be $330 which will put it against the 7600x at $299

As people are mentioning you can now preorder. The 13600K is indeed $329. That is a price hike from the 12600K but also less than I had expected.

 

[tamz_msc]

RCP (1000 unit tray price) seems nearly identical to Alder Lake.

Intel announces 13th Gen Core "Raptor Lake" desktop series: Core i9-13900K price is $589 - VideoCardz.com

Intel announces 13th Gen Core Desktop CPU family The next-generation 125W SKUs are here. Today Intel unveils 13th Gen Core series codenamed “Raptor Lake”. The new series feature three SKUs, each to be available in two variants (with and without built-in graphics). The company is adding 4 (for...

videocardz.com

 

[coercitiv]

Pricing is better than rumored:
- 13600K = $319
- 13700K = $409
- 13900K = $589

Hahaha, freE cores!

 

[Saylick]

Decent die shot of Raptor Lake S:

 

[Carfax83]

What are you basing this on? In Anandtech's review, in the SPEC 1T section, they call out the 7950x as the IPC leader though they don't show exactly how they calculated this. I haven't really seen any other real IPC comparison yet.

Well you know me, I hate Spec so I don't pay any attention to it. Computerbase.de did an IPC analysis at 3.6ghz between Zen 1, Zen 2, Zen 3, Zen 4 and Alder Lake in Pov Ray and Cinebench.

Link

 

[Saylick]

Some more Intel slides:

 

[cebri1]

Very competitive price. I don't think AMD has anything to compete at this price levels.

 

[nicalandia]

@65 Watts the 7950X beats the 13900K

 

[Hitman928]

Looks like the top Raptor Lake CPU will take the gaming title but not by much and will depend on exact test suite used. It won't catch the 7950X in heavy MT or efficiency, but what they were able to accomplish on the same node at roughly the same power is pretty impressive. Looking forward to 3rd party reviews.

 

[msj10]

I found a better in-depth IPC test : https://zhuanlan.zhihu.com/p/568419115

Zen 4 shows clear advantage over Golden Cove in SPEC 2017 integer test (need to scroll down to the middle of the page). FP is about equal.

View attachment 68247

that test isn't at the same frequency

 

[Abwx]

@65 Watts the 7950X beats the 13900K

View attachment 68264

Those numbers are boggus, from 65W to 115W there s 76% higher power for only 21% better perf.

This would mean that Intel s process has a cubic curve at quite low power, wich is not the case at all, actually that s more like 90-100W to perform like a 12900K stock, indeed they use Spec_int_copy as "bench", not something like CB R23...

 

[eek2121]

Pricing is better than rumored:
- 13600K = $319
- 13700K = $409
- 13900K = $589

Intel didn't raise prices at all it seems. For comparison:
- 12600K = $290
- 12700K = $410
- 12900K = $590

Kudos to Intel for offering the consumer literally more silicon for the same price, but those margins...

Those prices are likely per tray. Here is the pricing at NewEgg:

 

[Hitman928]

Well you know me, I hate Spec so I don't pay any attention to it. Computerbase.de did an IPC analysis at 3.6ghz between Zen 1, Zen 2, Zen 3, Zen 4 and Alder Lake in Pov Ray and Cinebench.

Link

I'm not going to argue that Spec is the end all, be all, but I'll gladly take it over 2 tests, both of which are rendering benchmarks.

 

[Exist50]

Those numbers are boggus, from 65W to 115W there s 76% higher power for only 21% better perf.

This would mean that Intel s process has a cubic curve at quite low power, wich is not the case at all, actually that s more like 90-100W to perform like a 12900K stock, indeed they use Spec_int_copy as "bench", not something like CB R23...

You're seriously arguing that Cinebench is better than SPEC? Really?

 

[Harry_Wild]

“Over 50 processors planned as part of the 13th Gen Core family!”

 

[Det0x]

Some more Intel slides:
View attachment 68256
View attachment 68257
View attachment 68258
View attachment 68259
View attachment 68260
View attachment 68261
View attachment 68262

Wow thats a first.. Intel admitting the 5800x3d is beating both the 12900k and 13900k in some games ?