Intel Core i9-13900K and i5-13600K Review: Raptor Lake Brings More Bite
by Gavin Bonshor on October 20, 2022 9:00 AM ESTSPEC2017 Multi-Threaded Results
Single-threaded performance is only one element in regard to performance on a multi-core processor, and it's time to look at multi-threaded performance in SPEC2017. Although things in the single-threaded SPEC2017 testing showed that both Zen 4 and Raptor Lake were consistently at loggerheads, let's look at data in the Rate-N multi-threaded section.
Looking at the data in our first part of SPEC2017 (int) nT testing, we're seeing similar trade-offs between Raptor Lake (13th Gen) and Zen 4 (Ryzen 7000) platforms. While Raptor Lake won in the 500.perlbench_r single-threaded test, Zen 4 has the lead by around 13% in multi-threaded performance, despite the Core i9-13900K having eight more physical cores (albeit efficiency cores).
One stand-out part of our SPECint2017 multi-threaded testing is just how far ahead the Core i9-13900K is ahead of the previous Core i9-12900K in multi-threaded tests. This comes thanks to more cores (2x the E-cores), and higher turbo frequencies. For example, in the 525.x264_r test, the Core i9-13900K is nearly 50% better than the i9-12900K; the only part where Raptor Lake failed to outperform Alder Lake was in the 502.gc_r test.
Moving onto the second half of our SPEC2017 multi-threaded results (Floating Point), the Core i9-13900K really does show itself to be a formidable force compared to Zen 4. In the majority of SPECfp2017 tests, the Core i9-13900K is ahead in multi-threaded performance. The improvements in overall performance from Rocket Lake (11th Gen) to Alder Lake were decent, but the improvement from Rocket Lake last year in Q1 2021 to Raptor Lake today – a more useful metric for the usual 2-4 year hardware upgrade cycle – is very impressive indeed.
Summarizing the SPEC2017 multi-threaded results, in some areas Zen 4 is the winner, some areas Raptor Lake (Raptor Cove + Gracemont) is the winner. It is incredibly close in quite a few of the tests, and without sounding negative on the Zen 4 architecture here, but Intel has done a very good job bridging that initial gap to make things competitive against AMD's best.
Update 18/07/23
Following on from our initial results in our SPECint2017 Rate multi-threaded testing of the Core i9-13900K, we wanted to investigate the 502.gcc_r result, which we believed to be an anomaly of sorts. We observed a score of 49.1 on the Core i9-13900K, which, compared to the previous generation Core i9-12900K, is a regression in performance; the result was around 37% lower than the previous generation.
To investigate further, we've re-tested the Core i9-13900K using SPEC2017 Rate to identify any issues and to see if we could further replicate the issue or, at the very least, provide a more up-to-date list of results.
Looking at our updated SPECin2017 results, we are comparing the original Core i9-13900K data to the new data for comparative purposes. Although the results are very similar in many cases, we can see some slight regression in a few results, which could be attributed to various factors, including Windows 11's scheduler, power budget, or just general variance in running.
The biggest highlight of our re-test is the 502.gcc_r result, which seems to be an anomaly for the original run. We've run SPEC2017 numerous times to confirm that the above results are exactly where they should be.
Focusing on our latest results for SPECfp2017 Rate N, we can see a similar story, with very similar results in multi-threaded SPEC2017 performance as with our original testing. In fact, a couple of the results yielded slightly higher results, which could be simply down to scheduler maturity, OS-related improvements including the scheduler, or overall firmware maturity. The results include 527.cam4_r, 549.fotonik3d_r, and 554.roms_r, which show better gains in our latest testing, especially compared to the Core i9-12900K, which this chip replaced in the market.
The biggest takeaway from our re-testing is the updated SPECint2017 Rate-N result for 502.gcc_r, which shows that our original results were nothing more than an anomaly, and we've been unable to replicate the issue.
Update: 07/22/23
We are aware of potential issues with memory capacity, and as such, we are re-running the Core i9-13900K with higher capacity DDR5 memory at JEDEC settings relevant to the platform. We have done a run with 64 GB instead of the regular 32 GB, which with the Core i9-13900K is 2 GB per thread (2 GB x 32 = 64 GB). Looking at preliminary results, we aren't seeing any major variances in these results.
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