Intel Core i9-14900K, i7-14700K and i5-14600K Review

14900K... consume more power than the 13900K...

Pathetic...

R00sT3R said:

I wish you guys would include an emulation based benchmark to your testing.

These days I don't really bother with new, big games but stick to emulators, where single core IPC & Ghz, reigns supreme.

It's why to this day I still tend to stick with Intel but I've heard these 3D cache CPUs from AMD are very effective in some emulators, so I could be tempted to switch.

Click to expand...

Why, it is the same stupid thing as 13th gen minus an OC that was absolutely not required that just kill efficiency.

This is as bad as 11th gen...

"Looks like Intel is still stuck on toc after 8 years," - 7800X3D *laugh in efficiency*

14900K is simply a rebranded 13900KS. Nothing more to see here folks.

Holy moly thats alotta watts. Cooling these things is a royal PITA.

And for what? TO still lose to AMD's x3d chips. It's the Netburst era all over again, fitting as the FX-55 launched 19 years and 1 week ago and destroyed intel at the time.

R00sT3R said:

I wish you guys would include an emulation based benchmark to your testing.

These days I don't really bother with new, big games but stick to emulators, where single core IPC & Ghz, reigns supreme.

It's why to this day I still tend to stick with Intel but I've heard these 3D cache CPUs from AMD are very effective in some emulators, so I could be tempted to switch.

Click to expand...

AMD wins not just because of cache. their AVX-12 implementation is more efficient then intel's, which was so bad they disabled it. So until intel unscrews 512, AMD will be superior for emulation going forward.

Still no performance / watt chart, alright then.

Simply pathetic and pointless release. This is coming from a 13900k owner.

pencea said:

Simply pathetic and pointless release. This is coming from a 13900k owner.

Click to expand...

That's intel's MO. Now imagine if they could launch new ARC GPUs with the same voracity they launch new CPUs.

There was a point to this release?

EdmondRC said:

There was a point to this release?

Click to expand...

To remind you that intel exists and is TOTALLY competitive guys

I genuinely had to stare long at the graphs sometimes to find the 14900k and see the difference, and any difference that was there was purely because they made it more of an oven that chomps through power, may as well have called it a "refresh" and something like a 13950k, but no, had to get that money from new motherboards....

EdmondRC said:

There was a point to this release?

Click to expand...

It's a mind game. If you have the inferior product in terms of efficiency or performance you just release a higher nomenclature number to perceive that its superior than previous generation for the brand loyalists, naive consumers and the such. This is to keep the price stack from collapsing imo. Zen 4 3d is probably a big headache especially with the price fall of the 7800X3D at $329.99.

godrilla said:

It's a mind game. If you have the inferior product in terms of efficiency or performance you just release a higher nomenclature number to perceive that its superior than previous generation for the brand loyalists, naive consumers and the such. This is to keep the price stack from collapsing imo. Zen 4 3d is probably a big headache especially with the price fall of the 7800X3D at $329.99.

Click to expand...

I plan on platform upgrade next year. So hopefully I'll be able to find the 7800X3D at that price. I haven't seen it that low. I guess by then Ryzen 8000 will likely be out though. Definitely sticking with AMD, the power consumption alone I think is enough reason to stay with AMD.

From article:

In a nutshell, the advantage of the Intel CPUs is generally strong performance.

Click to expand...

No, it should be:

In a nutshell, the advantage of the Intel CPUs is generally strong performance on benchmark applications running foreground.

Click to expand...

Try to put some heavy calculations on background task like something on virtual machine that is not active window. You might be surprised as "performance" of E-cores simply suck. As Thread director or something gladly puts background tasks on E-cores despite being heavy load.

So basically those "performance" CPUs are totally useless unless running one software at a time. Like you do on benchmarks. As usual, benchmarks and real life performance are totally different things.

EdmondRC said:

I plan on platform upgrade next year. So hopefully I'll be able to find the 7800X3D at that price. I haven't seen it that low. I guess by then Ryzen 8000 will likely be out though. Definitely sticking with AMD, the power consumption alone I think is enough reason to stay with AMD.

Click to expand...

I just checked the price it went back up to $349.99.

godrilla said:

AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D CPU Is An Amazing Value For Gamers For Just $299 US At Microcenter

AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D CPU is now available at an insanely good price of $299 US at Microcenter which makes it the best gaming chip right now.

wccftech.com

I just checked the price it went back up to $349.99.

Click to expand...

Oh, yeah, takes me about an hour and a half to get to nearest MC, I'll definitely check there before my upgrade, but probably would need to save at least $100 total to make the trip worthwhile. Even then, the hassle might not be worth it.

Best bit about the AMD 3D cache parts is they respond well to an undervolt. Makes them boost higher on all cores and reduces their power consumption. Intel have gone full Pentium 4 on us here and the thermals on the top chips look bonkers.

EdmondRC said:

Oh, yeah, takes me about an hour and a half to get to nearest MC, I'll definitely check there before my upgrade, but probably would need to save at least $100 total to make the trip worthwhile. Even then, the hassle might not be worth it.

Click to expand...

I heard some had success at Bestbuy with price matching fyi. Also Microcenter gives you $25 credit if you submit your rig via online showcase but they expire at the end of the month. You can probably time it. They also give you an additional 5% off with membership discount or 6 months no interest with store credit card. If you don't live near it might not be worth it. I am noticing a similar price pattern to the 5800X3D last year. Sooner or later it will come down in price at other retailers normally around black Friday.

That's a rough price point for Intel given the 7950X3D is $650 right now

Then if it's productivity you're interested in, the 7950X is hard to beat at $580 as 16 big cores if you will, often end up being faster for complex workloads.

Click to expand...

Not sure how being cheaper than the 7950X3D while being slightly faster is a rough price point.

And in regard to productivity, did I miss something or did the 14900 out perform the 7950X across the board (with a couple of exceptions)?

The main issue I see here is power consumption. It's ridiculous.

R00sT3R said:

I wish you guys would include an emulation based benchmark to your testing.

These days I don't really bother with new, big games but stick to emulators, where single core IPC & Ghz, reigns supreme.

It's why to this day I still tend to stick with Intel but I've heard these 3D cache CPUs from AMD are very effective in some emulators, so I could be tempted to switch.

Click to expand...

TechPowerUp included emulator tests in their 14900k review.

AMD's 3D cache processors are actually substantially faster than Intel's in regards to Switch Emulator.

For PS3 Emulation it's on par with Intel's fastest.

redgarl said:

14900K... consume more power than the 13900K...

Pathetic...

Click to expand...

But now Intel can say it's more "powerful" without really lying.

Could you maybe do a idle total system power consumption?