Intel Core i9-12900K benchmark leak puts the Alder Lake-S way beyond the capabilities of the AMD Ryzen 9 5950X while embarrassing the Core i9-11900K and Core i9-10900K

[Redaktion]

Based on leaked benchmark results, the Core i9-12900K will be more competition to AMD than the Core i9-11900K has been. Supposedly, the Core i9-12900K outscores the Ryzen 9 5950X by up to 25% and the Core i9-11900K by over 90%.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Core-i9-12900K-benchmark-leak-puts-the-Alder-Lake-S-way-beyond-the-capabilities-of-the-AMD-Ryzen-9-5950X-while-embarrassing-the-Core-i9-11900K-and-Core-i9-10900K.551705.0.html

[Wildcard]

A 'next-gen' architecture pulling 200 watts? I'd hardly call that progress.

Furthermore even if this has a higher IPC than everything in its wale, it doesn't alter the fact that Ryzen 5000 is good; is right where AMD wants it to be; and is part of a much broader roadmap. Zen 4 buidls on AMD's proven ability to design, plan and deliver great products at great prices, with great system longevity. Intel of late seems to be in a pickle, literally doing anything and anything to paper over its own cracks. I also wonder whether Intel will be ploughing even more money into 'diversity' policies instead of focusing on delivering products and services the markets actually want.

So yeah, let's see that clock speed and REAL TDP rating, shall we? Let's see the cost? And I don't think I'll have to ask in order to see AMD step upto the next gear and improve upon its track record as planned.

What will Intel do then.. pump even more core voltage into a CPU? Run the core even higher? Continue to charge a premium for an single-digit increase in single-core performance? Continue to omit a requisite cooler? Continute to lob off cores, threads and cache? Lie about the TDP ratings? Require yet another socket? Expensive boards? No thanks.

[Mr.Fox]

Well, it the leaks are accurate and it is what we can reasonably expect from the i9-12900K things are likely to normalize again with Intel back on top. AMD definitely caught them with their pants on the ground for a little while. Hopefully, Intel won't be so over-confident in their superiority going forward.

If performance is your thing, it doesn't matter much if it pulls more watts from the wall. Winning is what matters most and "efficiency" is a distracting excuse card played by losers. If Intel's famous overclocking ease and less buggy product continues to hold true, this is going to present a real dilemma for the competition.

[Tacol0ver]

This exactly. Intel is finally pulling out from the hole they digged onto themselves. Amd is in the end of their socket while Intel is matching them with an undeveloped architecture. It's fun to finally have both companies pulling together like the early 2000's. Honestly I'm willing to bet Intel will pull forward unless they have a major mess up

[Tacol0ver]

A 'next-gen' architecture pulling 200 watts? I'd hardly call that progress.

Furthermore even if this has a higher IPC than everything in its wale, it doesn't alter the fact that Ryzen 5000 is good; is right where AMD wants it to be; and is part of a much broader roadmap. Zen 4 buidls on AMD's proven ability to design, plan and deliver great products at great prices, with great system longevity. Intel of late seems to be in a pickle, literally doing anything and anything to paper over its own cracks. I also wonder whether Intel will be ploughing even more money into 'diversity' policies instead of focusing on delivering products and services the markets actually want.

So yeah, let's see that clock speed and REAL TDP rating, shall we? Let's see the cost? And I don't think I'll have to ask in order to see AMD step upto the next gear and improve upon its track record as planned.

What will Intel do then.. pump even more core voltage into a CPU? Run the core even higher? Continue to charge a premium for an single-digit increase in single-core performance? Continue to omit a requisite cooler? Continute to lob off cores, threads and cache? Lie about the TDP ratings? Require yet another socket? Expensive boards? No thanks.

This is the exact thing that happened when amd came out with Ryzen, and Intel was milking the crap out of the 14nm process. It wasn't until the 9700k where amd became the most powerful choice, and it all went downhill for Intel from there. "Oh Intel's more refined and efficient chips are better because of good single core, the proven architecture destroys amd" until it didn't. How long has amd gone with the same refreshed chips??? Long enough to let Intel catch up. Pretty sure we are seeing the tables turn once again

[Anonymousgg]

If the result is accurate and is confirmed by other benchmarks, the small cores are pulling a lot of weight. Like 8 Gracemont Atom = 4 Zen 3 or something.

[Tom McLernon]

Who did the Benchmarking???  Intel?   Super cooled and overclocked???

Make a big fake announcement to stall AMD sales??  Never seen this tactic before.

[Kevin King]

We all pretty much know these benchmarks are faker than Joan Rivers. I have no doubt that Alder Lake will be faster than Zen 3. On the flip side AMD already has Zen 4 in their pocket promising a 20%+ IPC uplift running on 5nm. With AMD's track record with Ryzen, we have no reason to doubt the 20%+ IPC uplift over Zen 3 they are expecting.  Intel on the underhand has years of overpromising & underdelivering.

I see AMD maintaining the lead over Intel for at least the next 2 years. 

[Anonymousgg]

We all pretty much know these benchmarks are faker than Joan Rivers. I have no doubt that Alder Lake will be faster than Zen 3. On the flip side AMD already has Zen 4 in their pocket promising a 20%+ IPC uplift running on 5nm. With AMD's track record with Ryzen, we have no reason to doubt the 20%+ IPC uplift over Zen 3 they are expecting.  Intel on the underhand has years of overpromising & underdelivering.

I see AMD maintaining the lead over Intel for at least the next 2 years.

We knew that something like a 12900K would beat the 5900X in multithreaded. From there it's a climb to 5950X, but maybe not impossible if one of the assumptions about Alder Lake is wrong. +25% IPC and +10% clock on the Golden Cove cores would get 8 of them close to 12 Zen 3. Then 8 Gracemont have to match 4 Zen 3. Those Gracemont cores are clocked at up to nearly 4 GHz on the 12900K. Also take into account that Alder Lake can use DDR5 which has some serious design advantages over DDR4. Maybe DDR5 will be entirely responsible for the good benchmarks and performance will suffer if Alder Lake uses DDR4, which it will on the cheap OEM systems.

AMD doesn't just have an IPC increase coming. They have the 3D V-Cache for a +15% average gaming boost. They can put that on Zen 3 and get close to Alder Lake. When Zen 4 arrives, they will have an IPC increase, DDR5, 3D V-Cache, and maybe more.

[Venkat Sellappan]

LIQUID COOLER? No Thanks. "Twitter user @oneRaichu claims to be in possession of a Core i9-12900K QS chip, and ran it through a Cinebench R20 run at stock settings, with a liquid cooler in the mix"

[Wildcard]

I seem to recall a previous occasion whereby Intel touted what they claimed was a game-changer CPU. The problem? Intel weren't so fourthcoming on the power supplies required to run it stable. The CPU was neither practical nor affordable. I have a sneaking suspicion we may be seeing history repeat iteself; that Intel it literally coasting on its own fumes simply as a means of buying time and NOT putting faster, better products on the table that everyone can afford.

There are those here who say power draw doesn't matter. Well, do those people remember AMD Bulldozer? Do they remember the architecture's requisite cooling? Intel had the better architecture; one that could be clocked lower and still blow BD out the water. In the end BD simply could not compete except in very specific workloads. Squeezing extra performance from an architecture that draws more power - a LOT more than the competition - is a predicament both Intel and AMD have fallen into over time.. it never ends well.

Overall I think that at the moment we have some decent competition between AMD and Intel; that most of the products on offer from both camps are more than good enough for gaming - at 4K you're almost entirely reliant upon the GPU. Does Intel seriously think people are going to care about single-threaded performance in this day and age? I think most people will look for the best overall solution (including system longevity and compatibility), and in that regard, I think AMD will continue to win hands down.

[Wildcard]

LIQUID COOLER? No Thanks. "Twitter user @oneRaichu claims to be in possession of a Core i9-12900K QS chip, and ran it through a Cinebench R20 run at stock settings, with a liquid cooler in the mix"

LIQUID COOLER? No Thanks. "Twitter user @oneRaichu claims to be in possession of a Core i9-12900K QS chip, and ran it through a Cinebench R20 run at stock settings, with a liquid cooler in the mix"

Exactly. They're running a 'K' sample with liquid cooling. Shouldn't a ground-breaking architecture NOT need to be pushed to such extremes already, in order to be competitive? And naturally, those prepared to spend vast amounts on requisite motherboards and coolers, are then going to pay yet more in the form of obtaining an unlocked multiplier.

Ridiculous, in my opinion. AMD is where it wants to be, and envisaged what Intel is about to offer. AMD also has a solid, proven platform that can deliver on several fronts. This speculative Intel part has to be run on liquid cooling and clocked to the hilt, sucking amps like a Dyson sucks dust in order to compete with something that runs cooler and costs less overall, then isn't the writing on the wall..?

[Wandering Ronin]

LIQUID COOLER? No Thanks. "Twitter user @oneRaichu claims to be in possession of a Core i9-12900K QS chip, and ran it through a Cinebench R20 run at stock settings, with a liquid cooler in the mix"

LIQUID COOLER? No Thanks. "Twitter user @oneRaichu claims to be in possession of a Core i9-12900K QS chip, and ran it through a Cinebench R20 run at stock settings, with a liquid cooler in the mix"

Exactly. They're running a 'K' sample with liquid cooling. Shouldn't a ground-breaking architecture NOT need to be pushed to such extremes already, in order to be competitive? And naturally, those prepared to spend vast amounts on requisite motherboards and coolers, are then going to pay yet more in the form of obtaining an unlocked multiplier.

Ridiculous, in my opinion. AMD is where it wants to be, and envisaged what Intel is about to offer. AMD also has a solid, proven platform that can deliver on several fronts. This speculative Intel part has to be run on liquid cooling and clocked to the hilt, sucking amps like a Dyson sucks dust in order to compete with something that runs cooler and costs less overall, then isn't the writing on the wall..?

This guy has no idea what he's talking about 😂

[Robert]

I would be more surprised if this wasn't true! I believe that Intel is pulling ahead by that amount in both Single and Multi-thread performance. It is a new architecture(finally). The real question is whether it will be able to compete with AMDs Ryzen 6000 series. And the fact that Intel will release first, means that AMD know exactly what they need to beat. I would also be surprised if a 6950x didn't out-perform the 12900k! Intel is heading in the right direction, and they won't relinquish the Gaming title without a fight. Hopefully this means better tech, and (hopefully) competitive pricing.

[systemBuilder]

There are 4 things that an Intel product needs to do to beat AMD. 

First, it needs to run without overclocking.  Traditionally, Intel could not manufacture parts that perform well, consistently.

Second, it needs to run with air cooling (Noctua).  Nobody is going to water cool a data center, Nobody is going to water cool a laptop, water cooling doesn't matter.

Third, it needs not t9 thermally throttle 30-60 after it hits its peak processing ratel that's a FAIL that Intel chips (especially Y-series laptop chips) have been doing for years and years.

Last, it needs to be more than a paper launch, Intel needs to be able to make 1M parts a month, these last few years they can only make enough to seed the reviewers, about 1K flagship parts per month ... consumers?  Can't get any!

I see no evidence that Intel can do all 4 things!