I have one of those on my Asus Z690 board and honestly it doesn't work all that well. The spring is weak and it doesn't 100% release the latch, so I usually still have to futz around with a screwdriver.This is the biggest breakthough for Z790
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I have one of those on my Asus Z690 board and honestly it doesn't work all that well. The spring is weak and it doesn't 100% release the latch, so I usually still have to futz around with a screwdriver.This is the biggest breakthough for Z790
IIRC, that's all at 1080P - which I dont' play at. I run at 1440P ultra/maxed, 4k, or 5160x1440. In those ranges, it's a few percentage points - not enough to justify a jump from a 10900K on my gaming system, and doesn't have enough cores to compete with my 3960X/3970X/10980XE systems. It COULD replace my VR system (x570/3950X) and offer a boost, but it's a core drop (8c vs 16c - remember I can't use E cores) and VR is only a small part of what that box does.Not a huge boost? Techpowerup says a 14700k averages out to a 30% increase in gaming over a 10900k. That's huge for an averaged increase.
E cores are great for the 200 background tasks on a modern Windows system even if they don't help foreground tasks.remember I can't use E cores
For you? No.Is this even worth upgrading to? I'm using a 13900K
Yes, them too. They have competition again. But you can't leave Apple out of the equation. It was very much a reason:Ryzen is the reason Intel's CPUs kick ass, now.
27% at 1440p and 15% at 4KIIRC, that's all at 1080P - which I dont' play at. I run at 1440P ultra/maxed, 4k, or 5160x1440. In those ranges, it's a few percentage points - not enough to justify a jump from a 10900K on my gaming system, and doesn't have enough cores to compete with my 3960X/3970X/10980XE systems. It COULD replace my VR system (x570/3950X) and offer a boost, but it's a core drop (8c vs 16c - remember I can't use E cores) and VR is only a small part of what that box does.
If anything, it'd be a replacement for my wife's system (VR on Rift 1, 6700K + GTX 1080), but she doesn't use it enough to justify it.
From what though?27% at 1440p and 15% at 4K
10900k to 13700k/14700k.From what though?
You don’t follow - I can’t use them. . The software I run doesn’t know about them and doesn’t understand how to schedule against them, if it doesn’t outright crash. My only consumer systems are gaming boxes - the one 12900 I have I have to either thread lasso the workloads entirely to P cores - or on some of it disable E entirely.E cores are great for the 200 background tasks on a modern Windows system even if they don't help foreground tasks.
Meh. $1500+ for 27% on a gaming box isn’t really justified to me. I was wrong on the amount for sure - but I still crank over 100FPS in most of my games - and it lacks enough other features to replace one of my workstations.10900k to 13700k/14700k.
Yes. Just like the previous generation, they will release it in January close to CES. And yes, it will be a *renamed* 13900KS just like 14900K.Is a KS version coming? Curious.
Damn you try dusting off your Radiator and Fan?ive got a 14700k it does run a bit toasty, max on mine after running cinebench was 91c , that's with stock power limits and a slight undervolt. did get 34520 in cinebench r23 though and is boosting to 5.6 ghz on two of the cores from time to time. ive got a msi z690 carbon wifi motherboard, doesnt seem to support apo at the minute. cooler is an aio arctic freezer 360.
Damn you try dusting off your Radiator and Fan?
Userbenchmark.com, FWIW, calls the 14900K about a 15% increase over the 12700K. Now, if you consider ~$600 (minus whatever you can get for the 12700K) worth a 15% bump in perf, maybe. I've got a 12600K and personally I'm going to wait for Meteor, Arrow, or Lunar Lake, I'm not sure which.Would a i7 12700k to a i9 14900k or i7 14700k be much of a upgrade overall? Mostly in the latest games though.
Guessing it is better to wait but wanted to see.
Userbenchmark.com, FWIW, calls the 14900K about a 15% increase over the 12700K. Now, if you consider ~$600 (minus whatever you can get for the 12700K) worth a 15% bump in perf, maybe. I've got a 12600K and personally I'm going to wait for Meteor, Arrow, or Lunar Lake, I'm not sure which.
not to take anything away from the other fellas sources (i've seen less than stellar reviews of them as of late)Thank you.
not to take anything away from the other fellas sources (i've seen less than stellar reviews of them as of late)
If you can get a decent return or re-home value for your 12700k, i would consider it.
The new tech that can assist the E-cores be more productive is only available on 14th gen, there are MORE cores per chip than our 12th gen chips (fellow 12600k owner here) and the IPC improvements.
If you got the cash, you wont miss it, and you have ANY need for improvement in performance you really have nothing to lose. Its people that just upgrade and throw things away that annoy me. Hopefully that helped, there should be enough direct comparisons now that if you do a search on youtube you can find some nice graphs to see specific use cases for your personal use.
14700k without a second thought... but that's me and I have a obsession with "value" and also FOMO issues... (ie, buying a last gen chip when the new one is available)One last question if you had to decide between a 14700k or 13700k which would you take ?
I know seems easy.
That is also an excellent choice, because YOU made it take care sir.I am not upgrading decided to wait until Intel 15 th generation or beyond! I know I will need a new mobo.
14700k was only $50 more than 13700k at MC, and I needed one for a new build. The reviews shit on 14th gen as being "not even an upgrade" so I had low expectations, but I've been A/B testing a 13700k and 14700k on the same system, same BIOS settings, amount and method of thrrmal paste and cooler mounting, and the differences are noticeable in benches. With 14700k the same DDR5 sticks OC higher, and it hits higher sustained P-core frequencies at the same temps.One last question if you had to decide between a 14700k or 13700k which would you take ?
I know seems easy.
Oh it was definitely going to be faster, more cores as well sealed its fate there, so long as things were setup properly and no issues arose.14700k was only $50 more than 13700k at MC, and I needed one for a new build. The reviews shit on 14th gen as being "not even an upgrade" so I had low expectations, but I've been A/B testing a 13700k and 14700k on the same system, same BIOS settings, amount and method of thrrmal paste and cooler mounting, and the differences are noticeable in benches. With 14700k the same DDR5 sticks OC higher, and it hits higher sustained P-core frequencies at the same temps.
I initially chalked this up to variance in binning because I know 14700k isn't objectively supposed to be much faster (meaning I assumed I simply got a good bin on the 14700k). However if anyone is familiar with "SP" rating on newer ASUS motherboards (a score that makes an inference on the quality of the silicon) my 14700k's SP rating is actually lower than my 13700k's. Nevertheless take this n=1 sample with a grain of salt since there are so many variables. But I'm pleased.
Yeah my first Cinebench run was distinctly faster, which I expected with 4 extra E-cores, so I disabled E-Cores 9-12 in BIOS so I was comparing each CPU in 8+8 config, and 14700k was still faster in cinebench, 3dmark, etc.Oh it was definitely going to be faster, more cores as well sealed its fate there, so long as things were setup properly and no issues arose.
So glad to hear of your positive results, enjoy the new silicon.
Which ram kit? And setting XMP? Or what are the magical settings to push them up so high?Yeah my first Cinebench run was distinctly faster, which I expected with 4 extra E-cores, so I disabled E-Cores 9-12 in BIOS so I was comparing each CPU in 8+8 config, and 14700k was still faster in cinebench, 3dmark, etc.
Not a huge diff, but my biggest interest was in seeing any improved IMC performance anyway, since that's still what sets Intel apart from Ryzen, and 14700k managed to squeeze out +400MHz on my A-Die DDR5 (8200, whereas 13700k couldnt even complete memory training at 8000).
Intel is still the holding the performance crown in most 0.1 and 1% Low benches though. Insane clocks + bus speed + proper timings + still the most effective way of boosting Intel chips, 14900KS with DDR5 9000 can dethrone 7800-7950X3D in pretty much all tasks including cache sensitive ones.Suspect Intel dropping the ball on shrinking their processes might have a little to do with this. AMD, or TSMC really, cleaned their clocks in that regards.
I upgrade every ~5 years and am definitely due as my i7-8700K is a little long-in-the-tooth. Now engaged in the classic "Intel vs AMD" struggle. Realize this is the Intel sub; but am considering going with the Ryzen 7 79003DX just to do something different after a decade+ with Intel. Will have to look into this 14xxx series to decide if I can hold off scratching the upgrade itch.
Intel is still the holding the performance crown in most 0.1 and 1% Low benches though. Insane clocks + bus speed + proper timings + still the most effective way of boosting Intel chips, 14900KS with DDR5 9000 can dethrone 7800-7950X3D in pretty much all tasks including cache sensitive ones.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=SO87YBTnYU0
I've said this before, around Zen 4 launch: But I would like to see Intel segment their CPUs better.
With Ryzen, you can buy a 7700x or 7800x3D, and have their two best levels of gaming performance, for under $400. With deals last week, you could get a 7800x3D for the same money as a 14600k. And 7800x3D is the best gaming CPU you can get.
And hell, 7600 and 7600x give 12900k/13600k/14600k a run for their money. Again, for way less money.
If you need lots of cores for productivity, you can go ahead and pay for that. But with Ryzen, gamers aren't forced to buy the whole thing, to game the best.
While costing essentially double and using up to 3x the power while gaming----to sometimes have a win.
View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Ys4trYBzzy0
7800X3D is an animal, but the 0.1 and 1% can't be denied and it matters a lot for extremely competitive and E-Sport type of gamers.
14700K-14900KS also beat the X3D in pretty much all productivity tasks.
I'm happy with my 13600K system as well. I downgraded from a 13900K just because I wanted the less power draw/heat and had no noticeable frame hits playing at 4k with the 13600K. I have been thinking about trying an AMD system again (last time I used them was the Athlon 64 days.) Depends on what gift cards I get for Christmas as to whether I'll try a different build or not.So then I picked up a 13600k, which was an excellent system, for months.
But I recently tried again with AM5. Got a 7800X3D and....AM5 is in a good place, now. So I sold the 13600k CPU and motherboard.
My only issue so far, with my second try of Zen 4:I'm happy with my 13600K system as well. I downgraded from a 13900K just because I wanted the less power draw/heat and had no noticeable frame hits playing at 4k with the 13600K. I have been thinking about trying an AMD system again (last time I used them was the Athlon 64 days.) Depends on what gift cards I get for Christmas as to whether I'll try a different build or not.