Intel Core i9-13900K and i5-13600K Review: Raptor Lake Brings More Bite
by Gavin Bonshor on October 20, 2022 9:00 AM ESTSPEC2017 Single-Threaded Results
SPEC2017 is a series of standardized tests used to probe the overall performance between different systems, different architectures, different microarchitectures, and setups. The code has to be compiled, and then the results can be submitted to an online database for comparison. It covers a range of integer and floating point workloads, and can be very optimized for each CPU, so it is important to check how the benchmarks are being compiled and run.
We run the tests in a harness built through Windows Subsystem for Linux, developed by Andrei Frumusanu. WSL has some odd quirks, with one test not running due to a WSL fixed stack size, but for like-for-like testing it is good enough. Because our scores aren’t official submissions, as per SPEC guidelines we have to declare them as internal estimates on our part.
For compilers, we use LLVM both for C/C++ and Fortan tests, and for Fortran we’re using the Flang compiler. The rationale of using LLVM over GCC is better cross-platform comparisons to platforms that have only have LLVM support and future articles where we’ll investigate this aspect more. We’re not considering closed-source compilers such as MSVC or ICC.
clang version 10.0.0
clang version 7.0.1 (ssh://git@github.com/flang-compiler/flang-driver.git
24bd54da5c41af04838bbe7b68f830840d47fc03)
-Ofast -fomit-frame-pointer
-march=x86-64
-mtune=core-avx2
-mfma -mavx -mavx2
Our compiler flags are straightforward, with basic –Ofast and relevant ISA switches to allow for AVX2 instructions.
To note, the requirements for the SPEC licence state that any benchmark results from SPEC have to be labeled ‘estimated’ until they are verified on the SPEC website as a meaningful representation of the expected performance. This is most often done by the big companies and OEMs to showcase performance to customers, however is quite over the top for what we do as reviewers.
Opening things up with SPECint2017 single-threaded performance, it's clear that Intel has improved ST performance for Raptor Lake on generation-upon-generation basis. Because the Raptor Cove P-cores used here don't deliver significant IPC gains, these performance gains are primarily being driven by the chip's higher frequency. In particular, Intel has made notable progress in improving their v/f curve, which allows Intel to squeeze out more raw frequency.
And this is something Intel's own data backs up, with one of Intel's performance breakdown slides showing that the bulk of the gains are due to frequency, while improved memory speeds and the larger caches only making small contributions.
The ST performance itself in SPECint2017 is marginally better going from Alder Lake to Raptor Lake, but these differences can certainly be explained by the improvements as highlighted above. What's interesting is the performance gap between the Core i9-13900K and the Ryzen 9 7950X isn't as far apart as it was with Alder Lake vs. Ryzen 9 5950X. In 500.perlbench_r, the Raptor Lake chip actually outperforms the Zen 4 variant by just under 4%, while Ryzen 9 7950X is a smidgen over 10% better in the 505.mcf_r test.
Looking at the second set of SPEC2017 results (fp), the Ryzen 9 7950X is ahead of the Core i9-13900K by 16% in the 503.bwaves_r test, while the Raptor Lake chip is just under 10% better off in the 508.namd_r test. The key points to digest here is that Intel has done well to bridge the gap in single-threaded performance to Ryzen 7000 in most of the tests, and overall, it's a consistent trade-off between which test favors which mixture of architecture, frequency, and most importantly of all, IPC performance.
While we highlighted in our AMD Ryzen 9 7950X processor review, which at the time of publishing was the clear leader in single-core performance, it seems as though Intel's Raptor Lake is biting at the heels of the new Zen 4-core. In some instances, it's actually ahead, but stiff competition from elsewhere is always good as competition creates innovation.
With Raptor Lake being more of a transitional and enhanced core design that Intel's worked with before (Alder Lake), it remains to be seen what the future of 2023 holds for Intel's advancement in IPC and single-threaded performance. Right now, however SPEC paints a picture where it's pretty much neck and neck between Raptor Cove and Zen 4.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
169 Comments
View All Comments
Bruzzone - Friday, October 21, 2022 - link
Raptor ask first day in the open market;13900K = $845 + 43% over i$1K
13900KF = $1187 + 110%
13700K = $393 (-12.5%) some assemblance of reality in the world
13700KF = $415 + 8%
13600K = $393 + 23%
13600KF = $415 + 34%
Raphael R7K fifth week of supply open market;
7950X = $933 + 33.6%
7900X = $695 + 26.6%
7700K = $477 + 19.5%
7600X = $422 + 41.3%
In July Intel signaled a +20% price increase and AMD ignored Intel counsel and the channel will settle that question by Black Friday Cybor Monday. The question has already been answered for dGPU in the market for RTX 4090?
mb Reply
Wrs - Friday, October 21, 2022 - link
That's why I usually buy new hardware a bit after Xmas. That wouldn't have worked for several reasons in 2020-21, but other years it's served me well. ReplyBruzzone - Friday, October 21, 2022 - link
Prior gen CPU and dGPU production overage run end absolutely a "bit after Christmas".New primary dGPU a Pareto distribution curve and that does not explain it the situation assessment fully for all consideration.
On new CPU production AMD ignoring Intel + 20% price increase offer it's a CPU new primary price war unless the channel disagrees bringing normalcy to cost : price / margin assessment on cost : price / margin realities.
mb Reply
Ryan Smith - Thursday, October 20, 2022 - link
Like any other CPU launch, the only prices we have at the start are the prices provided by the manufacturers. Retail prices can and will vary, especially at the very start when chips are in short supply.It's best to consider it guidance rather than hard numbers. Reply
allenb - Thursday, October 20, 2022 - link
Now this is what we want to see! Proper, vicious, dog-eat-dog competition from Intel and AMD. I've rarely seen a clearer example of why competition is good and entrenched monopolies (or near monopolies) are bad. Hats off to both competitors. ReplyOxford Guy - Friday, October 28, 2022 - link
Duopoly is hardly adequate competition. ReplySilver5urfer - Thursday, October 20, 2022 - link
I will keep it short.Buy Intel get it under AIO and get ready for 340W load on 13900K while AMD Zen 4 is at 95C but its significantly lower power at 230W only max. The flagship parts need AIOs no Air coolers, but with AMD some of the Air coolers can work without problem since the heat is only factor but not the high power as the Temp target can be set on AMD platform from 95C to 92C. Intel 12900K and up aka 13700K, 13900K cannot be tamed on Air coolers esp when you tune them. So a mild win to AMD.
The I/O is a win for Intel due to DMI is 4.0x8 while X670E is PCIe4.0x4 like X570 bummer from AMD perhaps PCIe5.0 redrivers and layers cost.
IMC wise Intel is winning, but with DDR5 in this infancy stage even buying 7000MHz low Latency DRAM won't benefit RPL at all. AMD stuck to 6000MHz EXPO why did you not review on that ? I think AT should have stuck to XMP for Intel and EXPO for AMD as AMD will have better performance with better DRAM since the Zen 2 days. Ultimately IMC is bragging right for Intel DDR5 RPL now, the socket is EOL and you cannot install new Kits and expect magic just like 8th gen vs 10th gen IMCs you will need a new Chip.
Socket is dead end for Intel nothing extra is coming, you are locked out. AM5 will get Zen 4D and Zen 5 and 5D as well. Much better longevity past 2025+ if AMD launches Zen 6 then it's insane on this AM5 socket. Also Z790 will have CPU socket bending issues note that as well.AMD wins here.
Performance wise, both are neck to neck. High clocks on both high MT workloads on both camps, this is very interesting market for R9 and i9 parts. Coming to i5 and R5 parts, Intel has more performance but AMD has better pricing. However the most parts shipped will be this range only I think Intel may win more Client sales vs AMD due to DDR4. No winner but it's a great consumer choice. One point to note, AMD has higher Base Freq vs Intel this means better performance for AMD on all workloads and not just demanding. Esp with Zen 4 which is a solid chip than Zen 3 with it's lower clocks annoying IOD crapping out and IMC being subpar.
AVX512 is dead, big shame to Intel. They are wasting 30% of the die space in the RPL processors P cores, ultimate pathetic move. AMD is a champion with dual AVX256 making it solid no AVX offset performance unlike Intel 11th and 12th gen. AMD wins here. Reply
WaltC - Thursday, October 20, 2022 - link
I hope this sad excuse from Intel shuts the facial orifices of those who thought the power draw of the 7950X was "too high"...;) These CPUs should sell well in colder climes, no doubt (for people who can afford the power bills...;)) ReplyWrs - Friday, October 21, 2022 - link
For workload efficiency it's mainly about the process tech. AMD with TSMC are at 5nm, Intel is still at 7nm (or you can say TSMC is around Intel's 7nm, while Intel is using its 3rd-gen 10nm).I like my P-cores on 12900k, thank you, they are the reason I didn't stick with Zen 3. A desktop computer needs to be highly responsive and it needs throughput when called for. I weigh those as 50% ST:50% MT, but everyone should personalize their ratio to what they really do. 90% ST:10% MT? Get a laptop. 10% ST:90% MT? A workstation or remote server/cloud.
I also have no issue with a D15 air cooler. The processor automatically tamps down to 250W sustained, but if I want something intense done, it'll blitz through the first second or two. As for power bill considerations, the Zen 3 did idle pretty high and I noticed. But on my desktop I rarely ever idle. It was more that a year ago, Zen 3 and Alder Lake were the same process generation, and Alder Lake hands down won the ST. Reply
yh125d - Thursday, October 20, 2022 - link
So top of the line Raptor Lake trades blows/equals on average to Zen 4. But only if you have a motherboard/cooler capable of delivering and cooling 300+w, which means top of the line hardware. By the time you factor in the cost of a top notch MB and 360 AIO, you erase the price advantage of the processor itself.Limit i9 to similar power levels, and the performance would reduce more than just a few % I'd wager, so for those sticking with air cooling or smaller AIO's, Zen 4 has a clear advantage. This also points out that Raptor Lake doesn't have much headroom above this to go, where Zen 4 (if allowed 250w+) would clearly outperform RL at same power levels
Overall, this generation is much closer than I'd thought it would be, which as always is great for consumers Reply