Did you check in Battlefield V on which cores the game ran? I saw at a friend, that he had the same issue and the problem was, that only the slow cores were used on his 13700K.
Are you sleeping from time to time Steve or you are a robocop? xD What cooling was used? I'd love to see such tests using normal AIR tower cooling as (almost) nobody is buying 360 AIO for such CPUs.
Yeah...and just for us and them/he to realize that these CPU's are "the same" (because I don't think "anyone" will pair an RTX 4090 with any Ryzen *5* or/and any *i5* ) EDIT: Ryzen will probably be the best choice *if* you live somewhere with a very high electricity prices.
@@azumag4432 As someone who has 5600x and 3080ti and who is planning to sell this PC and build one with 4090. I don't mind paying more to get more fps, but getting a cpu with higher core count for gaming is generally money thrown into the wind. Just waiting for the adapters burning problem to be resolved before i pick the CPU. Will be either 7600x, 13600k or 7800x3d when it comes out/
the infinity fabric on Ryzen 7000 isn't synced to the memory at all. The problem with DDR5-6400 is that most Ryzen memory controllers max out around 6200.
Ohh I didn't mean to imply that it had to be. More that you want to want to keep the RAM and memory controller at a 1:1 ratio with the Fabric at a 3:2 ratio.
Honestly with this range of CPUs no one should consider having better RAM then 6000. Upwards of 6000 prices get ridiculous so you might as well upgrade CPU to 7700x/13700k instead of having better RAM.
I bought the 7600X as my first AMD processor. Upgraded from the 8700k as it was holding my 3090 back in a few games. Was a huge upgrade. Planning on keeping the 7600X up until the 3D V-Cache versions of Zen 4 and will get one of those for the long run.
@@zenithchan1646 Still rocking my 7600X, not sure I will jump to a X3D. Might do Zen 5. The 7600X is just that good. BIOS updates have resolved most of the RAM instability I was initially facing.
@@SamLoki No. Everyone buying Intel now will be crying while watching us upgrading our systems to R7 7800X3D 10C/20T and later R7 8800X3D 12C/24T just like everyone who went and bought the 8700k, 9900k, 10900k and 11900k watching us crush everything with a simple cheap drop in upgrade in R7 5800X3D.
But if you choose intel, the motherboard will be cheaper for the same looks. Intel 13th motherboards support ddr4, so its also cheaper. Almost the same price then.
@@mihaieminescu9943 the 13600k should last 5-6 years, at that point, am5 will be probably be replaced too... so everyone will be getting new motherboards no matter what
First the internet was funny, then it turned negative and toxic, since covid it's gone too far the other way - people gushing over content creators creating content.
Hail the benchmark king! These kind of tests are always appreciated. Would it be possible in future roundups to also have differences in lows consolidated into one slide per resolution, similarly to the slides for averages? I think that would be useful.
Wow, the 40-120W difference in power consumption is way higher than I expected! As a gamer I'd definitely invest ~50€ more today to save money in the long run and also upgrade to Zen 6 without new costs in 2025/2026.
Seems a little strange that difference. 13600k should consume around 60-80 watts in gaming watching other reviews. Almost equals to 7600x (40-60 watts). So it's 20-40 watts difference.
yeah did not expect that either. From the day one reviews I took away that in gaming the higher power draw of the Intel parts is nothing to speak of really. But this is an entire midrange CPU of not so long ago worth of extra power draw right there.
@@crylune just be careful. Intel is already punching back. The 13th gen is crazy good. Not the best for games but it's the "Ryzen" of today. Better all-around. So by next year Intel might very well have taken the lead and your plans will be squashed. I don't think AMD is just going to sit on their laurels though. But it still is a possibility.
@@DimitriMoreira it might be the "Ryzen" of today, except with much worse power consumption to performance, no platform longevity, possible e core ongoing issues... So, no, not the Ryzen of today 😁
Yeah. Fortunately the 13th gen Intels unvolt well but the extra power draw isn't trivial in many parts of the world. Depending on how much you game, that can be $50-100+ a year in electricity. If you pitched this as Intel is roughly the same, better in productivity but we're charging you a $50 annual license fee, Intel would be laughed out of the market.
6 cores vs 14 cores, it's to be expected but also 13600K can be undervolted like crazy under stock clocks, same performance but lower power draw & temps.
Platform longevity is a huge factor personally. Having at least 2 future generations in the bag, not having to upgrade RAM/motherboard later on. Also support for pcie gen 5 makes AM5 a really exciting platform to invest in.
Agreed. But not only those, platform longevity makes it much easier to deal with a potential component failure (it happens), if the warranty is over or defunct. Much easier to just get a suitable drop-in replacement. Even after that platform reaches end-of-life, there'll probably be more "spares" sticking around.
i never understand this platform longetivity thing. I always get max specced PC every 5 years. there's absolutely no reason for me to update an old PC after 5 years have passed and wait a few years more just to replace it.
It depends. For people who upgrade their PCs every 2-3 years, platform longevity matters. For people who build a new computer every 5-6 years, it doesn't matter at all. When upgrade time comes for the latter group to build a PC to last another 5 years, they're not going to pop in the compatible CPU from 5 years later into their old PC. They're going to build a new machine with up to date hardware. After 5 years almost all the components in that PC are now longer supported and the manufacturers have long since moved on.
The results would be even better for AMD due to rebar. It works best between AMD CPU and AMD GPU like HU already tested. And for someone trying to argue it would be unfair to compare AMD CPU with rebar switched on to intel CPU. Well it woludn't be more unfair than comparing 6000 Mz memory on AMD system to 6400 MHz memory on intel CPU system. Every architecture has its strenths so why not to use them.
Id take the AMD for the simple fact that (more than likely) in 3 years Intel would have changed the socket several times for no reason, and i could just drop a newer AMD chip in with a simple BIOS update - same as AMD with a 1000 series AMD part jumping all the way to a 16 core 5000 series.
@@redrock425 I mostly browse internet and play some games while streaming. Every task in the background like Discord or audio mixer with VST's will benefit greatly from those e-cores.
Thanks Steve, if you can i would love to see 3600x - 5600x and 7600x in strickly 4k gaming perfomance, just like 10 games, so it won't take you any more time. I'm interested to find out if gaming in 4k has any difference between those generations of cpu's. Thanks broski for the amazing content.
Black friday just ended here in Romania and I was able to pick up a 7600x for 1380 RON which is about 230 USD if you subtract the VAT and from what I've seen online this also happened in other countries. For reference, the 7600x at launch was 1850 RON (310 USD) and the 13600k is now 1780 RON (300 USD) (no black friday sale on this one), so the platform price is pretty much the same now and AM5 is clearly superior. Conclusion: wait for black friday before buying either of these cpus
This is a great video comparing raw compute power using the 4090, but i imagine the gap will be a lot closer or completely gone if a more reasonable priced gpu was used. Getting a better GPU is way more important
Zen 4 X3D chips will probably have slightly lower clocks and voltages, which should reduce the power consumption even further, similar to what the 5800X3D does. And power consumption in not really about cooling, it is about the heat output inside the room. 100+ W is a substantial difference in the summer.
When you opened the 670E box near the end of the video I thought to myself, that is exactly what I want. SMOKE IN A BOX, so I can test how the airflow in my case is working lol Excellent coverage, keep up the good work
The 7600X is clearly the better value for future proofing B650 now and buyers can slot in Ryzen 9950X/9800X3D sometime in the future But for avg joe like me with 12100f,im thankful if the same 13600KF gets down to $199 in a year or two
This was so helpful! I am on the fence right now and trying to decide between Zen 4 and Raptor Lake. Steve your hard work is so greatly appreciated especially your analysis at the end.
for new build I might go AMD due to raptor lake being the last cpus on 170, while AM5 is still new and shoul hopefully offer 3 more cpus gens,probably just 2, but still a better pick for a new build imo. unless youre on a budget, but at that point you might want to go 12th gen since lower end 13th gen is just 12th basically, but with higher clock speeds.
@@orkhepaj not really it's just if it's only 2 more gens on AM5, it's just not all that great like Intel vs ryzen 3000 wasn't that impressive. Like yeah it was on par with 8th and 9th gen but nothing special. You might as well could've just gotten Intel 8th gen then and not miss out on anything of ryzen 5000 wasn't a thing.
@@XX-_-XX420 ive got intel 7th gen just before amd new cpu-s came out now i switched to intel 13th gen hope this new cpu will last for at least 6 years
You could also say that 7600x is significantly faster for 30% of games at 1080p, which is nothing to sneeze at, and finally - total power consumption with 4090?!? Try this same approach with a more normal card, ie 6700 or 3070, and then you will getting closer to 50%+ for system power consumption with 13600 for a slightly slower platform assuming you are gaming. Makes sense if you want some budget productivity, but if time is money then >>> 7950X is a no brainer, and if you are just gaming, why would you want to use a lot more power for slightly slower output? Depends on your location and power price these days, but in Europe you could be paying a price of half CPU in a year for the difference in power consumption for a slower solution. How does that make sense?
@@bartdierickx4630 I think it's the other way around. The 4090 price difference isn't worth the small performance gain, especially when the SAM kicked in.
These are really hard to benchmark. Example: you could create a 90 seconds gameplay session and benchmark that same session five times and would get every time different data.
You know I am paying like $0.4 per kWh electricity nowadays, and its only going to get more expensive. Shocking that the 13600K can use 100-120W more power in gaming, that's huge.
7600 wins not because of absolute performance but because of 2 reasons, lower power consumption means more flexibility to make compact mini computers where it doesn't need large cooling or a big power supply and less heat dumped into the room for people like me who live in hot climates. Secondly, future upgradeability where I can buy the best value cpu this gen and a few years down the line upgrade to another best value cpu at that time without needing to buy a whole new system, saving money and giving an excellent experience the whole time for those who are not born into money.
To be honest motherboards on am5 are very expensive atm, to the point I will probably save some cash by going intel route and exchanging whole base in 5 years. What is not shown in this test is how much better i5 is in creative applications. In my case I game only 10% of the time overall. So I went full hobo way of taking 13600kf, cheap b660 and putting old ddr4 from previous build. Motherboard cost is below 50% of am5 and ram is free. Of course this setup will be slower and more limited than am5 build, but there is at least an option to do that. Microcenter had good promo now, where 32gb of ddr5 was for free for every 7700x and up and additional -$50 off when paired with motherboard, but I didn't have enough dough to grab that.
@@kilosera Valid argument, though I was talking about the cost savings in the long run relative to the experience you'll get. In a year or 2 when you upgrade to the best value cpu at the time on am5, you will get significantly better performance for overall less cost for the experience you'll be buying. But if you want to save money at the expense of your experience during the years you'll be using the system then I see your solution as sound.
@@perdana5786, well, most people don't really upgrade every 1-3 years. I'd say more like 5-7. I think it's safe to say that system with 13600k with 3200+ 32ddr4 will have no problems running AAA games for another 5 years and if you consider OP's need for other work and that games and apps tend to shift to multithreaded workloads, 16c/20t are a huge advantage and future proofing.
Small bit of feedback: It would be nice to see the GPU that you used in the banner at the top of each graph. For casual viewers like me who might've been making coffee during the beginning of the video, or for future viewers who might be checking in to compare CPUs before they buy one used, it can be a nice bit of extra context if we miss/forget/skip the mention in the intro. The GPU to use might seem obvious for contemporary viewers, but I know HUB used to use the 6900XT and GN still uses a 3090TI (I think). As unlikely as it is, maybe you'll even end up using the 7900XTX for your X3D reviews and then it would be especially nice to have that reminder for current and future viewers. Great content as always!
Amazing work guys! HU has almost consistently the best (and most exhaustive) data for gamers. Can you guys do some deep dive DDR5/OC/Curve Optimizer testing with Ryzen 7000, 7000 V-Cache (when it comes out) and 13th gen? The 7600X launch day review already had some sneak-peak at it, with the FCLK, 6400MT and dual rank configurations testing. Newer/better BIOSes (and RAM maybe) should be out for both platforms by then too.
This is the content I've come to love from HU - comprehensive and responsive to sub requests - this is so thoroughly done. These CPU platforms equal a fresh generation of gaming. Amazing stuff.
I would like to see these cpus battle against each other with the same memory speeds. Even though i don't think the results would change i think it would be interesting to see ddr5 5200 vs 5200 or 6000 vs 6000
Why tho? When intel can go to higher ram speeds, that's a relevant difference when considering a buy. It's the same reason that testing the intel with ddr4 is relevant when looking at value (frames per $).
The key thing is it won’t be forever though. As much as AMD will be able to drop in a better cpu in the future to a old motherboard, intel will arguably be able to with ram without even changing either cpu and motherboard. DDR5 prices are coming down fast, and speeds are going up. It’s up to everyone to decide how worthwhile this upgradability is (in general I think it’s dump, most people don’t upgrade that often and you can always flip a old motherboard or ram so the cost difference isn’t crazy, just a bit more work). But it is unarguably a advantage intel has, just like AMDs advantage for cpu upgradability.
@@pavelk5109 in a similar way future cpu upgrades barely give any benefit unless you are rocking the latest and greatest GPUs (in which case congrats on having plenty of spare money 😊). If you aren’t, any future cpu/ram upgrades in the life cycle of either of these platforms is somewhat meaningless. Less for if you consider non-gaming tasks (which often also see more gains for RAM)
I would still recommend the 7600X simply due to power draw, which is less cost over the lifespan and less heat where you’re gaming. If you live anywhere hot, that’s also a savings on air conditioning. Efficiency is king if you care about the environment.
After selling my old rig to put towards my new one, I was a little torn trying to choose between a 7600x and a 13600k. 13600k paired with ddr4 and a more affordable b660 mobo saving myself a good amount of money was an option. However, Due to the dead end platform that intel’s on right now, I couldn’t choose that option over going with am5. The early extra costs of choosing the am5 platform is definitely worth it. You are paying to futureproof yourself (if am5 is anything like am4, for quite a long time).
That will only work if in 4-5 years there is a good AM5 CPU worth upgrading to, one that is better than a new build. With that said, you're unlikely to even need an upgrade.
The 13600K does lose a bit of performance with DDR4, and that can be fairly substantial if you don't pair it with very expensive fast/low latency DDR4; like 3200 or 3600 CL14. A cheap 3200 CL16 kit would be leaving a fair amount of performance on the table. Probably better off with a 7600X and a B650 board for around $200 since those are finally becoming available.
@@robertmelchert9687 yeah I went with the aorus elite b650m AX for $200. The b650 ds3h is also available on Newegg for $160. Also ddr5 is getting decently affordable. If the cost can just come down $50 more across the board for am5 motherboards and ddr5 pricing continues to get better, the am5 platform will become a no brainer for a lot of people.
Apparently there's some pretty wild disparity between motherboards with 13th gen. Some just don't seem to do anywhere near practical voltage regulation & cause these CPUs to even jump straight to 100+°C in all-core workloads...
I just brought a 7600x which will be coming tomorrow along with a new motherboard as I'm switching from an Intel i7 8700, it's insane to me that the 7600x can keep up with an Intel processor this advanced and the price difference between the two is insane
I had a 5600x and a Ryzen 3700x and now I own an Intel 13600KF. Gaming feels so smooth on this processer, however, even compared to 12th Gen, the 5600X wasn’t that consistent in gaming especially in the 0.1% lows and 1% lows. Also, I overclocked the 13600K 5.4Ghz p core - 4.2ghz e core to 1.3V and I was maxing out at 60W while gaming while running 55C. This chip is insanely powerful and snappy.
@@shiraz1736 I notice it with the simplest tasks. But I agree it’s not a big difference, but I can see a certain level of consistency and even in games it’s especially apparent.
I'm looking to put together a new build, I would love to see out of CES 2023 if AMD drops details about their next 3d chip, intel should launch b760 chipset maybe even non k chips and finally a 27-inch OLED monitors.
going by leaks it should be highly likely that we'll get details about X3D at CES and an actual launch some time in Q1. Sound plausible to me given that AMD would have good reason to take the opportunity to stomp over Raptor Lake, so definitely worth to wait IMHO.
I'm currently running a 5600x gaming on 3440x1440, so cpu upgrades aren't as important, but I'm still very interested in the 7700x3d when it comes out. AMD is great because you should only have to upgrade cpu if you get everything with 1st generation of new socket.
as someone who also plays at 3440x1440p, trust me when I say this: it's more important than you think. I just upgraded from the i9 9900k to the R7 7700X, and the gains are MASSIVE, despite the fact that I play at a mostly-GPU-bound resolution of 3440x1440
I just ordered an i5 12400 for first attempt at building a PC. It hasn't even arrived yet but I'm already watching this review in order to plan a new build in two year's time probably.
Thanks again HUB for all the info! I love AM5 overall but it is still pricey once the MOBO is factored in. On launch last year I picked up a 12700k and z690 Tuf board open box for under 500 USD and reused my Bdie ddr4. Paired with a 6800xt at 1440p I'm set for some time. If building right now I would look at a 7700x or 7600x and splash on a good AM5 board to carry it as long as possible with a CPU upgrade in the future. With that being said , the 13600k or 13700k with a decent z690 or z790 ddr5 board will last 5 years no problem with realistic GPU pairings. Competition is great for consumers right now and you can't really go wrong either way.
the 13600k is kinda impressive is even superior to the ryzen 7 7700x in productivity aswell, in fact is on par with the 5950x what an absolute unit of a CPU...
Could you do a similar video but with the 7700x and 13700k? I watched the video you made on them but there are so many CPUs listed in that video it's kinda hard to keep up. Just the 13700k vs the 7700x testing the same games as you did in this video. I'm not sure which one to get and that would help a lot!
Those power numbers are really strange. I wouldn't expect a stock 13600k to pull 120W during gaming, let alone 120W MORE than the 7600X. Something else going on?
The whole 13th Gen is a case of "dumb power", almost all of them thermo throttled in Cinebench tests and need more power for the same results than Zen 4 in games...
Well thank you! I made my choice last week already, going for 7600X, but it is glad to see a comprehensive comparison that details that the choice was not wrong in general sense. Choice ultimately came to the potential problems with E-cores in the game titles I am looking to play, as noise were made of those back with 12th gen already.
didn't have any problems with e-cores on my 12600k, but for gaming your decision is great imo. you'll be able to drop 7800x3d in your am5 board, which will crush any of intel offerings
Yeah avoid e-cores I know to many people with issues, but like Anything its not provable, so they just have Constant crashes bugs but don’t know why, To me it seems obvious lol
@@afriendofafriend5766 Yeah. Everyone buying Intel now will be crying while watching us upgrading our systems to R7 7800X3D 10C/20T and later R7 8800X3D 12C/24T just like everyone who went and bought the 8700k, 9900k, 10900k and 11900k watching us crush everything with a simple cheap drop in upgrade in R7 5800X3D.
I would really like a test of esport titles like Valorant, CSGO or league at lower quality settings, as esport games are the ones that are usually more cpu dependant, and its also a genre where the 1% lows matter quite a lot.
I wouldn't mind seeing just a 12 game and 4-6 productivity benchmark video using the cheapest 4800MHz RAM and/or 5200MHz, which is what the stock RAM speed for the i5 and Ryzen 5, which for prebuilt PCs will be more realistic. This shows the 7600X is faster in gaming and i5 is better for productivity when all bottlenecks are removed, but what about when the bottleneck is more realistic 🤔
Thanks for the video, I appreciate the amount of work that went into this. Those Battlefield V results don't look right at all, 1% lows are okay(-ish?) but something appears to be capping performance. Whatever the cause may be please let us know once you figure it out.
I went with the 7600 x normally I don’t run any cpu less then 8 cores my old build had the 3900x in it , but with price and how well the 7600x did in games I went with that , seems small but I think it will do me well
I upgraded to a 3600 3 years ago as it was recommended so much. But I did bottleneck my system with the ram which is run at 2.666. I'm not happy with the performance of it though 60 fps is manageable but I play bannerlord and can only play with like 500 units and then it still goes below 60 fps I assume like 30 fps. Next gen consoles can reach 1000 units at the same time. So ye... O guess it does the job if you don't push it much but once you get into the territory where you need more cpu power you wish you didn't.
In reference to MSFS, Have you tried using the XBox app instead? I've noticed the new XBox app is much friendlier and actually allows modding easily as it doesn't lock down the game install directory permissions. I just give it a directory on my game install m.2 SSD for my library named G:\XBoxLibrary (much like I have for every other launcher G:\SteamLibrary, G:\EpicLibrary, etc..etc..) I'd give it a shot over the Microsoft Store for Microsoft games, especially GamePass... Yes.. the Microsoft Store IS trash... but the XBox app isn't bad.
Wow, insane how badly the 13600K gets spanked! 50-100W more power, and much worse fps. Intel will have to drastically cut pricing if they want to stay relevant for gaming. Wonder how this scales to the 7950X vs. 13900K in gaming?
7600X is a good CPU but motherboard prices plus a new DDR5 requirements tarnished its luster. Would just have to wait until MB prices go down a bit probably next year.
Considering pretty much no one has 700+ Hz monitor, I would say that Rainbow Six Siege should be abandoned as a benchmark entirely. Practically anything appearing on this channel easily goes beyond 240 fps in this game and having 700+ fps in your graph severely impacts your "xx Game Average" results
Love the videos! A bit off topic, the 7700x seems to be a top choice for the new CPU's for gaming and I have a 5800x, planning on getting a 4090 soon, should I bother upgrading to a 7700x or will the differences be so minor that it's pointless gaming at 1440p high framerate?
7600x does not lose to 13600k in gaming, JD video states the same, i dont understand why so many other benchmarks reporting that 13600k is faster than 7600x in gaming, what is wrong with others benchmarks?
One important question, Nvidia uses much more CPU as it's drivers have to do ton of work that AMD does on the GPU. Thus will these CPUs with more cores help with Nvidia more than with AMD? Would like to know how these compare with 6950XT, and obviously with 7900XTX when you get hands on that. I think you could pick up the dozen most interesting games based on these benchmarks and test with 6950XT.
Most games come even close to maxing out 12 threads, so I would doubt that the e-cores do make a huge difference for the higher driver overhead of nvidia. But I'm just assuming, hopefully some benchmarks when the 7900XTX comes out might give us some solid data on that.
@@Hugh_I In general I agree. Though with 4090 you are pushing insane FPS and with it's huge amount of shaders scheduling etc. truly takes a ton of CPU. Performance scaling is weird, even though you are not maxing the CPU, having less important threads on the E cores and freeing up the P cores to fully run the bottleneck threads can have more help than what we would assume. Latency issues can start to creep even when there's still lots of perf left on the table. My guess is that on 50% of the games there's no effect, on 25% there's minimal effect that is insignificant but statistically provable difference and on about 10% there can actually be significant difference. But that's pure guess.
Hi HUB, there have recently been allegations on r/ hardware that your tests skew in favour of the R5 7600x (both in response to this video and your recent CPU round up video). Specifically, it was pointed out that other reviewers found the I5-13600K outperforming the 7600x at greater margins. I wonder if you could investigate this discrepancy to put this to bed.
Different motherboards allow different power settings out of the box, some offering higher than Intel's recommendations. There's a lot of variability in that alone
Reddit and allegations go hand in hand. They seem to have an issue with FC6, a game where we don't use the built-in benchmark but you can clearly see in our 1% lows that the 13600K is faster. As for the overall margins, I'm not the only one who has found the 7600X to be slightly faster overall, others have as well, for example: ruclips.net/video/7bDxx0ZGylU/видео.html
honestly reddit is weird, I would just ignore them. I did notice the 13600k was seen as faster in other reviews but its probably just them testing diffrent games or something.
Never seen CL30 memory in existence for DDR5, always CL36 or above. That stuff must cost the moon! COULD you guys compare the impact of CL on these CPU's like CL30-32 vs CL36-40!? That is something I'd like to see, I suspect it will not have much affect at all... but could be wrong.
Thank you for testing at 4K! It’s infuriating to me when CPU tests only test at low resolutions. I want to see if it makes a difference to upgrade based upon how I play at 4K max settings.
Even though 6400 memory was used on the Intel platform, performance was still left on the table. Having the memory running at 6800 with an OC or having a kit rated for it should be the bare minimum a RL system should be tested at. Gives a more accurate representation of what the chip can do.
On avg Ryzen was 4% faster, but if you remove games where difference was 5% or lower, Ryzen is a lot faster. If split was similar avg would be good indicator, but in this case is bad, because if you take game on random 10 would be much better on Ryzen and 0 would be better on Intel. EDIT: on 4k they are same (I ignoring Battlefield V)
Thanks for the benchmarks! I’m pretty surprised about fortnite. Even though it’s medium quality settings I expected to see better results with a 4090 and 7600x/13600k! I expected to see much higher into the 350+ fps as I average between 345-365fps with low settings (except medium view distance) with my 6900xt and 5800x3d @ 1080p. And my 345-365fps average is between tournaments, arena, and battle royal with a 390fps cap.
In my gaming PC I have a 12900K + DDR5-6400 and an RTX 4090, I see between 200-500 fps but late game it's almost always more like 200 fps. This seems to be the norm though, none of the pro players I watch see over 300 fps in late game arena matches.
@@Hardwareunboxed I play with an in game 390 frame cap. Even with late game arena (I’m not talking about endgame arena… I’m talking about for even the late game arena trios mode they had towards the end of last season and are bringing back again shortly) I see over a 330fps average with my specs 🤷♂️.
Interesting... I actually expected 13600K wouldn't leave a chance for 7600X but it seems like AMD provides very solid CPU for gaming here, if only AM5 mobos prices were anywhere near AM4.
I would strongly recommend being wary of comments about lower power draw parts being easier to cool if only because there goes a lot more into how easy something to cool is than just the absolute power draw. Power density is a massive consideration, as is the performance of the thermal interfaces involved. Power draw as such only directly affects the continuous cost of operation.
Nah, any power draw won't just magically appear out of nowhere. Then when more heat created, we need more power just to cool it too. Those fans or pump gonna works harder. It will ended up to even more power draw from the entire system. Not to mention the noisier it gets. Power efficiency is a very important more than you think. It effects everything come after that. Power=heat=more power=noise=longevity=cost
It does also have an effect on how much minimum surface area the cooler will need to keep up.. if you were limited to something like a 55mm tall heatsink then the 7600x would be very usable and the 13600k not so much.
Dam way to go AMD. I know HWU said 5% is marginal but it has a 5% lead over the i5 on slower RAM while using less power! Team red takes the win this time
6000 vs 6400 both DDR5 "slower ram" lmao. Ok I'll give you that but what matters is AMD getting smoked in productivity and multitasking. AMD fanboys copium went off the chart this time
@@seaneckhart9914 But the vast majority only does gaming.... The i5 is certainly better allrounded but if you dont need multi core performance, the R5 offers more FPS for way less power consumption. If motherboard prices go down, its basically a no brainer.
@@seaneckhart9914 this is a gaming benchmark, not productivity. If you need a CPU to work neither of these chips is good either way. Buy a 7950X or a Threadripper and call it a day.
@@seaneckhart9914 For productivity you can buy Threadripper if 1 min of render time is that critical to you. Intel has no use case where it's the clear winner, and when 3d Vcache variants come in a couple of months, Intel will be a loser in all spaces.
Power consumption is really relevant, specially for places like Brazil where 1) it's hot and any additional watt can make the room hotter; 2) if you turn your AC it means that any watt requires another power consumption from the AC to take that heat off; 3) electric price is really expensive, specially if you consider how much people earn on average here. Anyway, thanks for the analysis.
Got the 7600X 2 weeks ago after motherboard and DDR5 ram prices crashed, paired my old RTX 3070 with it, works like a charm, gives much more fps and is much better at 1% lows than my i7 10700 ever was
If you have a prev. gen system try to upgrade to the fastest for a new system go to AM5 for the best price/perf (because of upgradibility) but yeah you might as well wait a bit more now if you have already (for possible CES announcements).
I have just tried my 13600k default settings with asus prime z690p d4 mainboard ddr4-3800 gear1 2x8gb. I have played battfield v at 4k ultra settings dx 11 with my rtx 4090 tuf oc. I got 230 fps. Please check with your result with ddr 4 board also.
![Best CPU & GPU Combos Right Now! 🛠️ [Top Pairings for 1080p, 1440p & 4K Gaming]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/0H6QmrZ46J0/mqdefault.jpg)
For an in-depth value analysis of these two chips please check this video: ruclips.net/video/A-l8dJRvb3c/видео.html
👍
Did you check in Battlefield V on which cores the game ran? I saw at a friend, that he had the same issue and the problem was, that only the slow cores were used on his 13700K.
Are you sleeping from time to time Steve or you are a robocop? xD
What cooling was used?
I'd love to see such tests using normal AIR tower cooling as (almost) nobody is buying 360 AIO for such CPUs.
I want your hoodie! Where can i find it?
Will you do the same test with i7-13700K vs Ryzen 7 7700X ?
Dude tested games 160 times just for viewers, that's real dedication
Stop replying I want to sleep
he gets money, and is trying to build his channel. He enjoys these things
First time you're watching?
Yeah...and just for us and them/he to realize that these CPU's are "the same" (because I don't think "anyone" will pair an RTX 4090 with any Ryzen *5* or/and any *i5* )
EDIT: Ryzen will probably be the best choice *if* you live somewhere with a very high electricity prices.
@@azumag4432 As someone who has 5600x and 3080ti and who is planning to sell this PC and build one with 4090.
I don't mind paying more to get more fps, but getting a cpu with higher core count for gaming is generally money thrown into the wind.
Just waiting for the adapters burning problem to be resolved before i pick the CPU. Will be either 7600x, 13600k or 7800x3d when it comes out/
Of course he is dedicated lol he gets paid
the infinity fabric on Ryzen 7000 isn't synced to the memory at all. The problem with DDR5-6400 is that most Ryzen memory controllers max out around 6200.
The prophet has spoken
Ohh I didn't mean to imply that it had to be. More that you want to want to keep the RAM and memory controller at a 1:1 ratio with the Fabric at a 3:2 ratio.
Uhmm..ok? I don’t fully understand so please tell us what to do about it if we want to get a ryzen 7600x?
@Mrmhmd1993, get low latency DDR5-6000 memory.
Honestly with this range of CPUs no one should consider having better RAM then 6000. Upwards of 6000 prices get ridiculous so you might as well upgrade CPU to 7700x/13700k instead of having better RAM.
I bought the 7600X as my first AMD processor. Upgraded from the 8700k as it was holding my 3090 back in a few games. Was a huge upgrade. Planning on keeping the 7600X up until the 3D V-Cache versions of Zen 4 and will get one of those for the long run.
You could just wait with the 8700k. 3D V cashe coming Q2 2023 ish
Same thing here, coming from 9900k. 7600x seems 7-15% better for short term and then the x3d should be a great upgrade next year.
No wait till zen 6
Any updates? How is it still holding up now?
@@zenithchan1646 Still rocking my 7600X, not sure I will jump to a X3D. Might do Zen 5. The 7600X is just that good. BIOS updates have resolved most of the RAM instability I was initially facing.
It always blows my mind when CPU tests don't include any simulation or turn based games where the CPU has the greatest impact.
Same. I want to see Stellaris, Factorio UPS, maybe Civ, etc.
Then get Intel. Frames in that game do not matter at all. Lower overall latency and much faster ai
@@SamLoki No. Everyone buying Intel now will be crying while watching us upgrading our systems to R7 7800X3D 10C/20T and later R7 8800X3D 12C/24T just like everyone who went and bought the 8700k, 9900k, 10900k and 11900k watching us crush everything with a simple cheap drop in upgrade in R7 5800X3D.
@@lagarttemido lol for Zen 3 def was the case. Zen 4 though - also his question is about turn based games. Intel destroys in this department
@@SamLoki You have proof right? Post it and let us see Intel "destroying" AMD in turn based games, LOL
Steve, you're an absolute monster, in the best possible way.
in my country the 7600x costs almost a 100 euro less than the i5 so I'm very happy with it
But if you choose intel, the motherboard will be cheaper for the same looks. Intel 13th motherboards support ddr4, so its also cheaper. Almost the same price then.
@@max9693But Intel 13th is a dead platform because the next gen will have another socket, so AMD win because AM5 will last until 2026 or so
Yes
@@mihaieminescu9943 the 13600k should last 5-6 years, at that point, am5 will be probably be replaced too... so everyone will be getting new motherboards no matter what
@@PleasantPixelsdoubt it 3600x aged bad most games nearly unplayable at high framerates
You guys are heroes we did not deserve, but the heroes we needed.
Why would we not deserve them? We are conscious buyers, we absolutely deserve them
@@GewelReal Yeah fack this stupid repetated to death saying.
@@GewelReal 🤦♂️
@@GewelReal because we are getting these benchmarks for absolutely for free asshole
First the internet was funny, then it turned negative and toxic, since covid it's gone too far the other way - people gushing over content creators creating content.
Hail the benchmark king! These kind of tests are always appreciated. Would it be possible in future roundups to also have differences in lows consolidated into one slide per resolution, similarly to the slides for averages? I think that would be useful.
Wow, the 40-120W difference in power consumption is way higher than I expected!
As a gamer I'd definitely invest ~50€ more today to save money in the long run and also upgrade to Zen 6 without new costs in 2025/2026.
Seems a little strange that difference. 13600k should consume around 60-80 watts in gaming watching other reviews. Almost equals to 7600x (40-60 watts). So it's 20-40 watts difference.
I'm upgrading to Zen 5 and RDNA4 when it's out. My 5900X needs no replacing.
yeah did not expect that either. From the day one reviews I took away that in gaming the higher power draw of the Intel parts is nothing to speak of really. But this is an entire midrange CPU of not so long ago worth of extra power draw right there.
@@crylune just be careful. Intel is already punching back. The 13th gen is crazy good. Not the best for games but it's the "Ryzen" of today. Better all-around. So by next year Intel might very well have taken the lead and your plans will be squashed.
I don't think AMD is just going to sit on their laurels though. But it still is a possibility.
@@DimitriMoreira it might be the "Ryzen" of today, except with much worse power consumption to performance, no platform longevity, possible e core ongoing issues... So, no, not the Ryzen of today 😁
Look at you guys. Almost 1 million subscribers thanks to all of your hard work. Can't wait till you hit that 1 million.
Well deserved ... this is the only PC hardware channel i take seriously with Gamers Nexus...
13600k +50-100W power usage during gaming on average than 7600X, good lord.
Yeah. Fortunately the 13th gen Intels unvolt well but the extra power draw isn't trivial in many parts of the world. Depending on how much you game, that can be $50-100+ a year in electricity. If you pitched this as Intel is roughly the same, better in productivity but we're charging you a $50 annual license fee, Intel would be laughed out of the market.
6 cores vs 14 cores, it's to be expected but also 13600K can be undervolted like crazy under stock clocks, same performance but lower power draw & temps.
" most of you won't care about watt usage " well I certainly do, especially with eco mode reducing it even further, 100w difference is madness.
Platform longevity is a huge factor personally. Having at least 2 future generations in the bag, not having to upgrade RAM/motherboard later on. Also support for pcie gen 5 makes AM5 a really exciting platform to invest in.
Agreed. But not only those, platform longevity makes it much easier to deal with a potential component failure (it happens), if the warranty is over or defunct. Much easier to just get a suitable drop-in replacement. Even after that platform reaches end-of-life, there'll probably be more "spares" sticking around.
Not sure what the pcie 5 relevance is tho seeing even alderlake had it, no?
i never understand this platform longetivity thing. I always get max specced PC every 5 years. there's absolutely no reason for me to update an old PC after 5 years have passed and wait a few years more just to replace it.
It depends.
For people who upgrade their PCs every 2-3 years, platform longevity matters.
For people who build a new computer every 5-6 years, it doesn't matter at all.
When upgrade time comes for the latter group to build a PC to last another 5 years, they're not going to pop in the compatible CPU from 5 years later into their old PC. They're going to build a new machine with up to date hardware. After 5 years almost all the components in that PC are now longer supported and the manufacturers have long since moved on.
Yes, becasue people that bought the 5800X3D were all still running their B350 on pcie2.0 because "longevity".
Glad I got the 7600X yesterday. Thanks for all the testing
was it a successful upgrade to you? from which cpu did you upgrade from?
@@ragesmirk My last desktop CPU was a 3700X; I also had a 4800H laptop. So Zen 2
Your videos are the best. Clear benchmarks and conclusions are a real helper for my decisions wich hardware to buy next.
I might go for the 7600x since am5 will go on for a few more years and maybe get a new CPU on the last am5 generation.
Would be interesting to see results of Inter vs AMD processors game performance benchmarks with a RADEON graphic card
Nvidia drivers use more cpu cycles (software scheduler), & so are much better for testing the limits of these cpus.
@@dare2liv_nlove You dont get it, Nvidia is not working 100% on AMD system, they have their reasons :)
@@brezimenkobrezprezimenko2131 Says who? Writing after a review where AMD came out faster...
@@Deinorius its even faster than that..
The results would be even better for AMD due to rebar. It works best between AMD CPU and AMD GPU like HU already tested. And for someone trying to argue it would be unfair to compare AMD CPU with rebar switched on to intel CPU. Well it woludn't be more unfair than comparing 6000 Mz memory on AMD system to 6400 MHz memory on intel CPU system.
Every architecture has its strenths so why not to use them.
Id take the AMD for the simple fact that (more than likely) in 3 years Intel would have changed the socket several times for no reason, and i could just drop a newer AMD chip in with a simple BIOS update - same as AMD with a 1000 series AMD part jumping all the way to a 16 core 5000 series.
3 years is too generous, make it 2.
Yep, Intel have changed desktop sockets every two years since at least 2008. It'd be madness to assume it'll change now.
I will choose AMD simply because Intel has a more anti-consumer track record.
I don't like to reward shitty business practices.
@@gelinrefira Which ones? Isn't AMD just as bad?
@@drago939393 how so? Not needing to upgrade your mother for 5 years is anti consumers?
Nice! I'm excited how it turns out, I only know that in Multicore Benchmarks the 13600k is much better.
Yes, the 13600K is a good choice for some people that need productivity. The remaining 99% should just buy an X3D chip, plug and play games 😉
@@redrock425 Thats my plan. Yoink whatever x3d chip they decide to stack on, and get after it.
@@96kylar Good plan, I have the 5800X3D, low power, fast enough and no tinkering required. Also makes use of less than stellar RAM.
@@redrock425 I mostly browse internet and play some games while streaming. Every task in the background like Discord or audio mixer with VST's will benefit greatly from those e-cores.
@@tilapiadave3234 Are you some AMD hate bot? Are you upset that a 5800X3D is better in many games than a 13900K?
Thanks Steve, if you can i would love to see 3600x - 5600x and 7600x in strickly 4k gaming perfomance, just like 10 games, so it won't take you any more time. I'm interested to find out if gaming in 4k has any difference between those generations of cpu's. Thanks broski for the amazing content.
Black friday just ended here in Romania and I was able to pick up a 7600x for 1380 RON which is about 230 USD if you subtract the VAT and from what I've seen online this also happened in other countries. For reference, the 7600x at launch was 1850 RON (310 USD) and the 13600k is now 1780 RON (300 USD) (no black friday sale on this one), so the platform price is pretty much the same now and AM5 is clearly superior. Conclusion: wait for black friday before buying either of these cpus
Black friday is end of november, 1 month before xmas.
@@SixDasher not everywhere
Wow cheaper than US!
Why did you even consider increasing the MSAA and other only GPU related settings when comparing CPUs????????????
This is a great video comparing raw compute power using the 4090, but i imagine the gap will be a lot closer or completely gone if a more reasonable priced gpu was used. Getting a better GPU is way more important
They used the 4090 only to remove gpu bottleneck at 1080p
Yes, there should be one test with reasonable gpu like 3070 or 6800. Its ok to not include all 54 games and other processors
Zen 4 X3D chips will probably have slightly lower clocks and voltages, which should reduce the power consumption even further, similar to what the 5800X3D does.
And power consumption in not really about cooling, it is about the heat output inside the room. 100+ W is a substantial difference in the summer.
When you opened the 670E box near the end of the video I thought to myself, that is exactly what I want. SMOKE IN A BOX, so I can test how the airflow in my case is working lol
Excellent coverage, keep up the good work
The 7600X is clearly the better value for future proofing
B650 now and buyers can slot in Ryzen 9950X/9800X3D sometime in the future
But for avg joe like me with 12100f,im thankful if the same 13600KF gets down to $199 in a year or two
oof man.
This was so helpful! I am on the fence right now and trying to decide between Zen 4 and Raptor Lake. Steve your hard work is so greatly appreciated especially your analysis at the end.
imho go raptor as good as the others for gaming and just faster for everything else
for new build I might go AMD due to raptor lake being the last cpus on 170, while AM5 is still new and shoul hopefully offer 3 more cpus gens,probably just 2, but still a better pick for a new build imo. unless youre on a budget, but at that point you might want to go 12th gen since lower end 13th gen is just 12th basically, but with higher clock speeds.
@@XX-_-XX420 only if you want to get a new cpu in 4 years
@@orkhepaj not really it's just if it's only 2 more gens on AM5, it's just not all that great like Intel vs ryzen 3000 wasn't that impressive. Like yeah it was on par with 8th and 9th gen but nothing special. You might as well could've just gotten Intel 8th gen then and not miss out on anything of ryzen 5000 wasn't a thing.
@@XX-_-XX420 ive got intel 7th gen just before amd new cpu-s came out now i switched to intel 13th gen hope this new cpu will last for at least 6 years
Just picked up a brand new 7600X on sale for $174 USD, cheapest 13600K in my country is $313 usd! Mind blowing value and performance.
Which country?
Damn you got lucky. Here, the 13600K is only around 40-50$ costlier.
Thank you for doing all the testing.
You could also say that 7600x is significantly faster for 30% of games at 1080p, which is nothing to sneeze at, and finally - total power consumption with 4090?!?
Try this same approach with a more normal card, ie 6700 or 3070, and then you will getting closer to 50%+ for system power consumption with 13600 for a slightly slower platform assuming you are gaming.
Makes sense if you want some budget productivity, but if time is money then >>> 7950X is a no brainer, and if you are just gaming, why would you want to use a lot more power for slightly slower output?
Depends on your location and power price these days, but in Europe you could be paying a price of half CPU in a year for the difference in power consumption for a slower solution. How does that make sense?
heh? yup , you make no sense
The burning question for me at this moment in time, is where SMART access memory fits in with choosing between the 4090 and 7900xtx.
You have to wait for reviews of the 7900xtx first m8
The 4090 will still win despite SAM. The difference will not be worth the difference in price.
@@bartdierickx4630 I think it's the other way around. The 4090 price difference isn't worth the small performance gain, especially when the SAM kicked in.
@@Da_W1ck that's my point. The 4090 will still beat the 7900xtx with SAM enabled, but it's not worth the difference in price.
@@bartdierickx4630 Then you should add "but". Haha.
I wish you would include some MMOs in your future testing as these games tend to be very heavily CPU bound.
non of the reviewers use mmos or open world survival games ...
These are really hard to benchmark.
Example: you could create a 90 seconds gameplay session and benchmark that same session five times and would get every time different data.
True, but I'd still like to see it just to get an idea.
Also I think FFXIV has a benchmark tool available.
@@Obscure19 yup as i play these games + strats and not the boredom fps shooters
Still holding for the 7800X3D
@@tilapiadave3234 14th gen intel will be a pathetic uplift with 6 performance cores,15th gen will be a huge leap
@@tilapiadave3234 - Lol No it won't.
You know I am paying like $0.4 per kWh electricity nowadays, and its only going to get more expensive. Shocking that the 13600K can use 100-120W more power in gaming, that's huge.
yeah, I hate the current trend in general. While some models are fine, most cpus seem to throw efficiency out the window
@@kingplunger6033 say that to 5800X3D
@@kaapuuu I repeat... while some models are fine
Consider they are using a 4090 though. With a midrange card, the difference is way smaller. But still good advantage for AMD
@@froznfire9531 good because it shows how much juice there is and it seems for gaming 7600X is much better chip for gaming.
7600 wins not because of absolute performance but because of 2 reasons, lower power consumption means more flexibility to make compact mini computers where it doesn't need large cooling or a big power supply and less heat dumped into the room for people like me who live in hot climates. Secondly, future upgradeability where I can buy the best value cpu this gen and a few years down the line upgrade to another best value cpu at that time without needing to buy a whole new system, saving money and giving an excellent experience the whole time for those who are not born into money.
And upgradability lol people on 13th gen are on a dead socket.
To be honest motherboards on am5 are very expensive atm, to the point I will probably save some cash by going intel route and exchanging whole base in 5 years. What is not shown in this test is how much better i5 is in creative applications. In my case I game only 10% of the time overall. So I went full hobo way of taking 13600kf, cheap b660 and putting old ddr4 from previous build. Motherboard cost is below 50% of am5 and ram is free. Of course this setup will be slower and more limited than am5 build, but there is at least an option to do that. Microcenter had good promo now, where 32gb of ddr5 was for free for every 7700x and up and additional -$50 off when paired with motherboard, but I didn't have enough dough to grab that.
@@kilosera Valid argument, though I was talking about the cost savings in the long run relative to the experience you'll get. In a year or 2 when you upgrade to the best value cpu at the time on am5, you will get significantly better performance for overall less cost for the experience you'll be buying. But if you want to save money at the expense of your experience during the years you'll be using the system then I see your solution as sound.
@@perdana5786, well, most people don't really upgrade every 1-3 years. I'd say more like 5-7. I think it's safe to say that system with 13600k with 3200+ 32ddr4 will have no problems running AAA games for another 5 years and if you consider OP's need for other work and that games and apps tend to shift to multithreaded workloads, 16c/20t are a huge advantage and future proofing.
13600k is almost similar but cheaper because it still support ddr4 ram and old mobo and its integrated graphics are better
Small bit of feedback: It would be nice to see the GPU that you used in the banner at the top of each graph.
For casual viewers like me who might've been making coffee during the beginning of the video, or for future viewers who might be checking in to compare CPUs before they buy one used, it can be a nice bit of extra context if we miss/forget/skip the mention in the intro.
The GPU to use might seem obvious for contemporary viewers, but I know HUB used to use the 6900XT and GN still uses a 3090TI (I think). As unlikely as it is, maybe you'll even end up using the 7900XTX for your X3D reviews and then it would be especially nice to have that reminder for current and future viewers.
Great content as always!
Amazing work guys! HU has almost consistently the best (and most exhaustive) data for gamers.
Can you guys do some deep dive DDR5/OC/Curve Optimizer testing with Ryzen 7000, 7000 V-Cache (when it comes out) and 13th gen?
The 7600X launch day review already had some sneak-peak at it, with the FCLK, 6400MT and dual rank configurations testing.
Newer/better BIOSes (and RAM maybe) should be out for both platforms by then too.
This is the content I've come to love from HU - comprehensive and responsive to sub requests - this is so thoroughly done. These CPU platforms equal a fresh generation of gaming. Amazing stuff.
I would like to see these cpus battle against each other with the same memory speeds. Even though i don't think the results would change i think it would be interesting to see ddr5 5200 vs 5200 or 6000 vs 6000
yes thats what we want because to my knowledge no major youtuber did that!
Why tho? When intel can go to higher ram speeds, that's a relevant difference when considering a buy. It's the same reason that testing the intel with ddr4 is relevant when looking at value (frames per $).
@@timolupwik Well, the price difference between DDR5 6000 and DDR5 6400 is more than 25%, while gaming performance improvement is barely reaching 2%.
The key thing is it won’t be forever though. As much as AMD will be able to drop in a better cpu in the future to a old motherboard, intel will arguably be able to with ram without even changing either cpu and motherboard. DDR5 prices are coming down fast, and speeds are going up. It’s up to everyone to decide how worthwhile this upgradability is (in general I think it’s dump, most people don’t upgrade that often and you can always flip a old motherboard or ram so the cost difference isn’t crazy, just a bit more work). But it is unarguably a advantage intel has, just like AMDs advantage for cpu upgradability.
@@pavelk5109 in a similar way future cpu upgrades barely give any benefit unless you are rocking the latest and greatest GPUs (in which case congrats on having plenty of spare money 😊). If you aren’t, any future cpu/ram upgrades in the life cycle of either of these platforms is somewhat meaningless. Less for if you consider non-gaming tasks (which often also see more gains for RAM)
I would still recommend the 7600X simply due to power draw, which is less cost over the lifespan and less heat where you’re gaming. If you live anywhere hot, that’s also a savings on air conditioning. Efficiency is king if you care about the environment.
The difference in power consumption is just insane, especially for gaming.
Yep 120W in some cases, thats a lot.
@@rdmz135 8 more cores. You can always disable them if you wish.
@@jedenzet Whats the point in a 14 core CPU if you disable most of it... Thats the only advantage it has, multi core performance xD
it be nice to see this with lesser cards. for those of us running non-obscenely priced GPUs. like a 3080, RX 6800 ? perhaps ?
Tbh
After selling my old rig to put towards my new one, I was a little torn trying to choose between a 7600x and a 13600k. 13600k paired with ddr4 and a more affordable b660 mobo saving myself a good amount of money was an option. However, Due to the dead end platform that intel’s on right now, I couldn’t choose that option over going with am5. The early extra costs of choosing the am5 platform is definitely worth it. You are paying to futureproof yourself (if am5 is anything like am4, for quite a long time).
That will only work if in 4-5 years there is a good AM5 CPU worth upgrading to, one that is better than a new build. With that said, you're unlikely to even need an upgrade.
The 13600K does lose a bit of performance with DDR4, and that can be fairly substantial if you don't pair it with very expensive fast/low latency DDR4; like 3200 or 3600 CL14. A cheap 3200 CL16 kit would be leaving a fair amount of performance on the table. Probably better off with a 7600X and a B650 board for around $200 since those are finally becoming available.
@@robertmelchert9687 yeah I went with the aorus elite b650m AX for $200. The b650 ds3h is also available on Newegg for $160. Also ddr5 is getting decently affordable. If the cost can just come down $50 more across the board for am5 motherboards and ddr5 pricing continues to get better, the am5 platform will become a no brainer for a lot of people.
you are a fanatic arent you ?
@@orkhepaj nope. I was on 11th gen intel before this. Just being on an end of life platform without the ability to upgrade is why I decided on am5.
proper review here, 7600x is the way to go for gaming with AM5 platform support for up to 2025
I'm surprised to see such a large power difference in some of those games. They must be causing the 13600k to boost to an unusually high frequency.
Apparently there's some pretty wild disparity between motherboards with 13th gen.
Some just don't seem to do anywhere near practical voltage regulation & cause these CPUs to even jump straight to 100+°C in all-core workloads...
Great work as per usual. You always put those hours in. Much appreciated!
I just brought a 7600x which will be coming tomorrow along with a new motherboard as I'm switching from an Intel i7 8700, it's insane to me that the 7600x can keep up with an Intel processor this advanced and the price difference between the two is insane
I had a 5600x and a Ryzen 3700x and now I own an Intel 13600KF. Gaming feels so smooth on this processer, however, even compared to 12th Gen, the 5600X wasn’t that consistent in gaming especially in the 0.1% lows and 1% lows.
Also, I overclocked the 13600K 5.4Ghz p core - 4.2ghz e core to 1.3V and I was maxing out at 60W while gaming while running 55C. This chip is insanely powerful and snappy.
I never notice this snappy/smooth thing on ant of the Intel/ryzen chips, so I have no idea what your on about.
@@shiraz1736 I notice it with the simplest tasks. But I agree it’s not a big difference, but I can see a certain level of consistency and even in games it’s especially apparent.
Right tuned this i5 beast outperforms a 12900ks 🤣
I'm looking to put together a new build, I would love to see out of CES 2023 if AMD drops details about their next 3d chip, intel should launch b760 chipset maybe even non k chips and finally a 27-inch OLED monitors.
going by leaks it should be highly likely that we'll get details about X3D at CES and an actual launch some time in Q1. Sound plausible to me given that AMD would have good reason to take the opportunity to stomp over Raptor Lake, so definitely worth to wait IMHO.
i5-13400F (6P + 4E cores) @ $170 will also be compelling.
@@gurjindersingh3843 that should be an alder lake chip i think, so if its 10€ cheaper than the old one it would be pointless
Sad to hear about the MSFS sign-in issues... one of the main games I'm looking for to see how it new hardware is improving/impacting it.
Yeah, it's odd it only happens to this channel. Skill issue clearly.
I'm glad to have got my copy from Steam and not from MS Store, a lot less problem for myself.
I'm currently running a 5600x gaming on 3440x1440, so cpu upgrades aren't as important, but I'm still very interested in the 7700x3d when it comes out. AMD is great because you should only have to upgrade cpu if you get everything with 1st generation of new socket.
as someone who also plays at 3440x1440p, trust me when I say this: it's more important than you think.
I just upgraded from the i9 9900k to the R7 7700X, and the gains are MASSIVE, despite the fact that I play at a mostly-GPU-bound resolution of 3440x1440
Within the same gen it usually dont matter as much but a whole new gen bringing way more performance it will make a difference.
I honestly kinda hope for a 7600X3d, but also not as I should probably just be happy with my current cpu.
I just ordered an i5 12400 for first attempt at building a PC. It hasn't even arrived yet but I'm already watching this review in order to plan a new build in two year's time probably.
Thanks again HUB for all the info! I love AM5 overall but it is still pricey once the MOBO is factored in. On launch last year I picked up a 12700k and z690 Tuf board open box for under 500 USD and reused my Bdie ddr4. Paired with a 6800xt at 1440p I'm set for some time. If building right now I would look at a 7700x or 7600x and splash on a good AM5 board to carry it as long as possible with a CPU upgrade in the future. With that being said , the 13600k or 13700k with a decent z690 or z790 ddr5 board will last 5 years no problem with realistic GPU pairings. Competition is great for consumers right now and you can't really go wrong either way.
I went with the 13600k, g skill 6400 & a z790 strix f no gpu yet because im waiting for black Friday to snag a 3080ti tuf “hopefully” lol
@@zawiszaczarny1749 for 3080ti price u can get easy 6950xt... :) or u playing with RT ?:) (if u playing with RT so FPS for u dosn`t matter) :D
@@elgatoltu I allways had intel cpu & Nvidia gpu for me that’s the best combo, I know how all the software works etc
I do need RT & g sync & dlss 😊
the 13600k is kinda impressive is even superior to the ryzen 7 7700x in productivity aswell, in fact is on par with the 5950x what an absolute unit of a CPU...
Could you do a similar video but with the 7700x and 13700k? I watched the video you made on them but there are so many CPUs listed in that video it's kinda hard to keep up. Just the 13700k vs the 7700x testing the same games as you did in this video. I'm not sure which one to get and that would help a lot!
I ended up going for the 7600x simply for upgradablity, lga 1700 is a dead end socket with 13th gen refrash being last on this socket
Those power numbers are really strange. I wouldn't expect a stock 13600k to pull 120W during gaming, let alone 120W MORE than the 7600X. Something else going on?
Lmao ain't no way
i'm guessing its due to the 6 cores vs 14 cores difference but you can also undervolt 13600K without losing any performance.
@@mathesar I have an OC 12900k and it rarely pulls over 100W in games, usually closer to 50-60W.
The whole 13th Gen is a case of "dumb power", almost all of them thermo throttled in Cinebench tests and need more power for the same results than Zen 4 in games...
@@Blafard666 wanna bet my 13700k uses less power to pull higher score than 7900x in cinebench?
This channel is so damn good. Thank you for always delivering on 1080, 1440 and 4k benchmarks and super accessible and straight to the point analysis
14% more powerdraw for less performance. Nice
Ill get the 7600X
Very detailed reasoning. Fanboys are so annoying lol
@No_Name who the fuck games at 1080p lol. At 1440p and up its literally equal with almost anything for half the wattage power usage
@No_Nameah you're going into the realm of what ifs now. CEOs must love the idea that people like you exist lol. Free marketing through fanboyism.
@No_Name no thanks
I'm ultra happy with the R5 7600. Its combined with a RTX 4070 TI and 2x16gb DDR5.
Well thank you! I made my choice last week already, going for 7600X, but it is glad to see a comprehensive comparison that details that the choice was not wrong in general sense. Choice ultimately came to the potential problems with E-cores in the game titles I am looking to play, as noise were made of those back with 12th gen already.
didn't have any problems with e-cores on my 12600k, but for gaming your decision is great imo. you'll be able to drop 7800x3d in your am5 board, which will crush any of intel offerings
Yeah avoid e-cores I know to many people with issues, but like Anything its not provable, so they just have Constant crashes bugs but don’t know why, To me it seems obvious lol
Set the "Cpu lite load" on "Mode 1" on the 13600K and you will get way less power consumption and temperatures without any performance loss.
As someone currently making this exact decision between CPUs, this video was a godsend!
It will just come down to local pricing, no?
@@drago939393 imo AMD is better simply for longer platform life.
I was in that situation few days ago (upgrading from 8600k). Went with AM5, because 7600x+x670+ddr5 price was same as z690+13600kf+ddr5.
@@afriendofafriend5766 Yeah. Everyone buying Intel now will be crying while watching us upgrading our systems to R7 7800X3D 10C/20T and later R7 8800X3D 12C/24T just like everyone who went and bought the 8700k, 9900k, 10900k and 11900k watching us crush everything with a simple cheap drop in upgrade in R7 5800X3D.
@@lagarttemido Bought the 8700k! Good cpu but i wish i had gone amd for the reasons you stated.
I would really like a test of esport titles like Valorant, CSGO or league at lower quality settings, as esport games are the ones that are usually more cpu dependant, and its also a genre where the 1% lows matter quite a lot.
I wouldn't mind seeing just a 12 game and 4-6 productivity benchmark video using the cheapest 4800MHz RAM and/or 5200MHz, which is what the stock RAM speed for the i5 and Ryzen 5, which for prebuilt PCs will be more realistic. This shows the 7600X is faster in gaming and i5 is better for productivity when all bottlenecks are removed, but what about when the bottleneck is more realistic 🤔
@PC_Modder by hardware unboxed?
Thanks for the video, I appreciate the amount of work that went into this.
Those Battlefield V results don't look right at all, 1% lows are okay(-ish?) but something appears to be capping performance. Whatever the cause may be please let us know once you figure it out.
I went with the 7600 x normally I don’t run any cpu less then 8 cores my old build had the 3900x in it , but with price and how well the 7600x did in games I went with that , seems small but I think it will do me well
I upgraded to a 3600 3 years ago as it was recommended so much. But I did bottleneck my system with the ram which is run at 2.666. I'm not happy with the performance of it though 60 fps is manageable but I play bannerlord and can only play with like 500 units and then it still goes below 60 fps I assume like 30 fps. Next gen consoles can reach 1000 units at the same time. So ye... O guess it does the job if you don't push it much but once you get into the territory where you need more cpu power you wish you didn't.
@@stolemycoconut5448 oh my bad I mean I went with the 7600 x lol idk y I said 3600 lol
@@brandonbowser5487 just edit to avoid confusions pls :D
@@ripirius did ^ , thanks
Ryzen 9 to a ryzen 5....
I like how you tested GPU heavy games to benchmark CPUs. Where's Factorio or Satisfactory? Those are games i want to see CPUs tested on.
In reference to MSFS, Have you tried using the XBox app instead? I've noticed the new XBox app is much friendlier and actually allows modding easily as it doesn't lock down the game install directory permissions. I just give it a directory on my game install m.2 SSD for my library named G:\XBoxLibrary (much like I have for every other launcher G:\SteamLibrary, G:\EpicLibrary, etc..etc..) I'd give it a shot over the Microsoft Store for Microsoft games, especially GamePass... Yes.. the Microsoft Store IS trash... but the XBox app isn't bad.
Shhh, they will run out of excuses for not testing MSFS.
I don't care about 5 percent so it's down to price , are the motherboards the same price ?
In 2-3 years I hope to get a 7600 non-x version for a reasonable price. Until then, just enjoying the content :)
It’s just over $200… the 7600x was $199 already for a couple weeks
Wow, insane how badly the 13600K gets spanked! 50-100W more power, and much worse fps. Intel will have to drastically cut pricing if they want to stay relevant for gaming.
Wonder how this scales to the 7950X vs. 13900K in gaming?
7600X is a good CPU but motherboard prices plus a new DDR5 requirements tarnished its luster. Would just have to wait until MB prices go down a bit probably next year.
Considering pretty much no one has 700+ Hz monitor, I would say that Rainbow Six Siege should be abandoned as a benchmark entirely. Practically anything appearing on this channel easily goes beyond 240 fps in this game and having 700+ fps in your graph severely impacts your "xx Game Average" results
Love the videos! A bit off topic, the 7700x seems to be a top choice for the new CPU's for gaming and I have a 5800x, planning on getting a 4090 soon, should I bother upgrading to a 7700x or will the differences be so minor that it's pointless gaming at 1440p high framerate?
1-the difference is most likely too narrow to justify spending 400$ on it
2-wait for the plausible 3dcache models early next year
@@MattJDylan Good advice, thanks!
7600x does not lose to 13600k in gaming, JD video states the same, i dont understand why so many other benchmarks reporting that 13600k is faster than 7600x in gaming, what is wrong with others benchmarks?
It's the other way around. HUB has always been shady.
One important question, Nvidia uses much more CPU as it's drivers have to do ton of work that AMD does on the GPU. Thus will these CPUs with more cores help with Nvidia more than with AMD? Would like to know how these compare with 6950XT, and obviously with 7900XTX when you get hands on that. I think you could pick up the dozen most interesting games based on these benchmarks and test with 6950XT.
Well amd can use SAM properly so theres a little advantage for amd
Most games come even close to maxing out 12 threads, so I would doubt that the e-cores do make a huge difference for the higher driver overhead of nvidia. But I'm just assuming, hopefully some benchmarks when the 7900XTX comes out might give us some solid data on that.
@@Hugh_I In general I agree. Though with 4090 you are pushing insane FPS and with it's huge amount of shaders scheduling etc. truly takes a ton of CPU.
Performance scaling is weird, even though you are not maxing the CPU, having less important threads on the E cores and freeing up the P cores to fully run the bottleneck threads can have more help than what we would assume. Latency issues can start to creep even when there's still lots of perf left on the table.
My guess is that on 50% of the games there's no effect, on 25% there's minimal effect that is insignificant but statistically provable difference and on about 10% there can actually be significant difference. But that's pure guess.
@@tomorpedreiro3032 sam ? and where is frodo?
I swear that Steve is a sentient AI that gained a passion for doing PC benchmarks.
Hi HUB, there have recently been allegations on r/ hardware that your tests skew in favour of the R5 7600x (both in response to this video and your recent CPU round up video). Specifically, it was pointed out that other reviewers found the I5-13600K outperforming the 7600x at greater margins. I wonder if you could investigate this discrepancy to put this to bed.
Different motherboards allow different power settings out of the box, some offering higher than Intel's recommendations. There's a lot of variability in that alone
Reddit and allegations go hand in hand. They seem to have an issue with FC6, a game where we don't use the built-in benchmark but you can clearly see in our 1% lows that the 13600K is faster. As for the overall margins, I'm not the only one who has found the 7600X to be slightly faster overall, others have as well, for example: ruclips.net/video/7bDxx0ZGylU/видео.html
I've done some more testing here: twitter.com/HardwareUnboxed/status/1591568639115001857
@@Hardwareunboxed thanks for the response
honestly reddit is weird, I would just ignore them. I did notice the 13600k was seen as faster in other reviews but its probably just them testing diffrent games or something.
Never seen CL30 memory in existence for DDR5, always CL36 or above. That stuff must cost the moon!
COULD you guys compare the impact of CL on these CPU's like CL30-32 vs CL36-40!? That is something I'd like to see, I suspect it will not have much affect at all... but could be wrong.
CL30 6000mhz 32gb costs 250$
@@SweatyFeetGirl its a bit inflated here and costs a fair bit more.
Thank you for testing at 4K! It’s infuriating to me when CPU tests only test at low resolutions. I want to see if it makes a difference to upgrade based upon how I play at 4K max settings.
Even though 6400 memory was used on the Intel platform, performance was still left on the table. Having the memory running at 6800 with an OC or having a kit rated for it should be the bare minimum a RL system should be tested at. Gives a more accurate representation of what the chip can do.
On avg Ryzen was 4% faster, but if you remove games where difference was 5% or lower, Ryzen is a lot faster. If split was similar avg would be good indicator, but in this case is bad, because if you take game on random 10 would be much better on Ryzen and 0 would be better on Intel.
EDIT: on 4k they are same (I ignoring Battlefield V)
I agree. If you play any of the games in which the 7600 is *significantly* faster, you should get the 7600.
@@afriendofafriend5766 BTW I would love to see them testing old games, because maybe is not problem with one game because e-cores.
what?
Liked it before I watched...that how damn good your videos are.🙌🏾
Thanks for the benchmarks! I’m pretty surprised about fortnite. Even though it’s medium quality settings I expected to see better results with a 4090 and 7600x/13600k! I expected to see much higher into the 350+ fps as I average between 345-365fps with low settings (except medium view distance) with my 6900xt and 5800x3d @ 1080p. And my 345-365fps average is between tournaments, arena, and battle royal with a 390fps cap.
In my gaming PC I have a 12900K + DDR5-6400 and an RTX 4090, I see between 200-500 fps but late game it's almost always more like 200 fps. This seems to be the norm though, none of the pro players I watch see over 300 fps in late game arena matches.
@@Hardwareunboxed I play with an in game 390 frame cap. Even with late game arena (I’m not talking about endgame arena… I’m talking about for even the late game arena trios mode they had towards the end of last season and are bringing back again shortly) I see over a 330fps average with my specs 🤷♂️.
Interesting... I actually expected 13600K wouldn't leave a chance for 7600X but it seems like AMD provides very solid CPU for gaming here, if only AM5 mobos prices were anywhere near AM4.
Yeah, sadly both good 13600k and 7600x Mainboards are very expensive
I would strongly recommend being wary of comments about lower power draw parts being easier to cool if only because there goes a lot more into how easy something to cool is than just the absolute power draw. Power density is a massive consideration, as is the performance of the thermal interfaces involved. Power draw as such only directly affects the continuous cost of operation.
Don't forget heat output, it can be a big point if interest in summer\winter
Power draw ultimately does directly affect how much heat is dumped into your room, no matter what temperature the chip itself runs at
Nah, any power draw won't just magically appear out of nowhere. Then when more heat created, we need more power just to cool it too. Those fans or pump gonna works harder. It will ended up to even more power draw from the entire system. Not to mention the noisier it gets. Power efficiency is a very important more than you think. It effects everything come after that. Power=heat=more power=noise=longevity=cost
It does also have an effect on how much minimum surface area the cooler will need to keep up.. if you were limited to something like a 55mm tall heatsink then the 7600x would be very usable and the 13600k not so much.
Thanks for all of you excellent work! You guys are essential!
Dam way to go AMD. I know HWU said 5% is marginal but it has a 5% lead over the i5 on slower RAM while using less power!
Team red takes the win this time
6000 vs 6400 both DDR5 "slower ram" lmao. Ok I'll give you that but what matters is AMD getting smoked in productivity and multitasking. AMD fanboys copium went off the chart this time
@@seaneckhart9914 for productivity go for a 13700k at least, time is money. let the gamers buy the 7600x it's fine and upgradable
@@seaneckhart9914 But the vast majority only does gaming.... The i5 is certainly better allrounded but if you dont need multi core performance, the R5 offers more FPS for way less power consumption. If motherboard prices go down, its basically a no brainer.
@@seaneckhart9914 this is a gaming benchmark, not productivity. If you need a CPU to work neither of these chips is good either way. Buy a 7950X or a Threadripper and call it a day.
@@seaneckhart9914 For productivity you can buy Threadripper if 1 min of render time is that critical to you. Intel has no use case where it's the clear winner, and when 3d Vcache variants come in a couple of months, Intel will be a loser in all spaces.
Power consumption is really relevant, specially for places like Brazil where 1) it's hot and any additional watt can make the room hotter; 2) if you turn your AC it means that any watt requires another power consumption from the AC to take that heat off; 3) electric price is really expensive, specially if you consider how much people earn on average here. Anyway, thanks for the analysis.
I find 60-120 watt difference to be a lot
Finally, the benchmark I'm waiting for! Thanks!
This is nuts. Does anyone else go to this much trouble?
No
He can't just keep doing this?! Can he? Absolute madlad.
54 Games Benchmark....
Your a benchmarking Machine @Steve
Keep up the Most Excellent Work :)
Hoo boy. So for Europeans it'll be paying more for the CPU immediately (Ryzen 7000) or paying more later on for power consumption (Core 13000).
The power consumption of the 13600k is huge. 😵💫 This cpu is not for me.
The 13600k has an insane amount of undervolting headroom. Getting to 120w on a 100% all core workload should be easy.
is a much more powerfull cpu it makes sense to consume more considering is more powerfull than a 7700x (in productivity)
Got the 7600X 2 weeks ago after motherboard and DDR5 ram prices crashed, paired my old RTX 3070 with it, works like a charm, gives much more fps and is much better at 1% lows than my i7 10700 ever was
If you have a prev. gen system try to upgrade to the fastest for a new system go to AM5 for the best price/perf (because of upgradibility) but yeah you might as well wait a bit more now if you have already (for possible CES announcements).
I have just tried my 13600k default settings with asus prime z690p d4 mainboard ddr4-3800 gear1 2x8gb. I have played battfield v at 4k ultra settings dx 11 with my rtx 4090 tuf oc. I got 230 fps. Please check with your result with ddr 4 board also.