Intel Core i9-12900K, i7-12700K, i5-12600K Specs, Pricing & New TDP!

DPI said:
What I can't find in any reviews is 12900K benchmarks OC'd at 5.x GHz. Because I certainly wouldnt buy it to run stock, and would be running at 5.0 - 5.2 depending on silicon lottery.

Stock for stock is the appropriare apples to apples test for reviews, but ignores the fact Intel has more OC headroom than AMD almost always.
Click to expand...
Techpowerup said they couldn't get their 12900k stable at 5.2. And 5.1 required so much power and heat anyway----the didn't think it was worth it to run it like that.
 
ea6b123 said:
can someone explain in simple terms what the fast and slow cores do or help with pc's and gaming. I read that this core is actually slower in some games and applications anyway.
Click to expand...
Fast cores are bigger, more power hungry, and take up more die space, so they can't fit as many of them in. They are the reason this CPU is beating AMD in single threaded and gaming tests in terms of pure performance and ignoring power consumption. It's recommended that Windows 11 is used with this CPU because it has had updates to schedule tasks correctly to either fast or slow cores. I'm not sure if linux is already patched for it.
 
vegeta535 said:
Pretty good showing from intel but I see no reason to upgrade from my 5950x.
Click to expand...

Indeed, but I am hoping this introduces price drops on AMD side. My 3600 is still good but not enough, I need to get the FPS minimums up for VR gaming stability and 5600x is tempting as a quick drop in boost.

Or if cheap enough motherboards become available, I might even try Intel. It has been a while, 2500K was my last Intel rig until Ryzen happened.
 
lopoetve said:
Thunderbolt is an Intel product - AMD has generally declined to license it, while a couple of motherboard companies have and added it anyway. It's not cheap - still a little surprised that Apple is paying for it with the M series.

There were ultra high-end boards for AMD in the early days of x570 - that's a limited market though, and so several of them were discontinued after 6-12 months of sales. Asus did make a WB version for x570 - as did Gigabyte. With piles of addons, including 10g cards and M2 expanders/etc. In time though, since hte platform stuck around for several years, they were just discontinued - not many people buying them after 12 months (that tended to be more budget minded).
Click to expand...


While it would be advisable to license it (especially during the TB3 days) USB4 is compatible with Thunderbolt4, so they can go out of their way for a certification but even lower end ones could support it simply by the native USB4 20 / 40gbps implementations in the vast majority of cases.

Indeed there were higher end boards for the first generation of x570, but they were mostly along with Zen2 / 3000 series CPU releases. Zen2 was no slouch certainly, but when the Zen3 refresh came around there were relatively few updates made for the 5000 series, but those that were in place - notably the Asus Dark Hero - became some of the more desirable ones around. Ultra high end will always be niche, but if we look at Intel EVERY little generation, every year, there was a new Maximus Extreme or whatnot for the mainstream, along with a host of other things. This, during a time when up until 12th gen / AlderLake, AMD has been the go to high end gaming CPUs for the past several years. Not to mention that prices continue to skyrocket for legitimate (and less so) reasons, it would have been nice to see Zen3 era x570 boards get a full refresh when the CPUs were so desirable - lots of people were thinking that Zen 3 X570 (or a hypothetical X670) would have been the first with USB4, buti it was not to be. AMD has been behind in this way and it is frustrating, even on the high end.
 
chameleoneel said:
According to Techpowerup's results-----the only places a 12600k doesn't beat a 5800x, is superpi, wprime, and their encryption tests. The 5800x definitely has a big advantage for those encryption tests.

Techpowerup hasn't posted a DDR5 Vs. DDR4 test yet. But the 12600k beats the 5800x is most of their games. And Toms hardware shows that DDR4 is actually better in gaming. So, a 12600k with DDR4 likely beats a 5800x in just about every game.
Click to expand...
But hardly by much, maybe 5% overall in gaming. BUT when it comes to the price/performance the 12600k is hard to beat.

AMD needs to lower prices.
 
chameleoneel said:
I just came to post that----Anandtech used DDR4 3200 with CL22.

As far as I could see....Tom's didn't actually say what they ran their DDR4 at...
Click to expand...
The only thing I could see is that they're running on an old image of Windows 10. Version 19041.450 is feature update 2004. I can't find what version Anand was running.
 
chameleoneel said:
Interesting. Toms Hardware showed DDR5 regression in Windows 10 and DDR4 doing better with games even in W11.
Click to expand...
Games are still coded and optimized around dual-channel DDR3, DDR5 will really shine in situations where you would have seen gains going from dual to quad-channel DDR3/4, but those are primarily limited to Workstation and Server environments. Until we see some next-gen engines optimized around DDR5 and its "quad" channel memory interfaces an increase in CPU L3 is going to show better gains than faster memory. That is not to say DDR5 is a gimmick or anything like that, it has the potential for some significant real-world benefits and adoption has to start somewhere, I just think that it is still a year or two off until we will start to see it pull ahead significantly for consumer uses.
 
serpretetsky said:
Fast cores are bigger, more power hungry, and take up more die space, so they can't fit as many of them in. They are the reason this CPU is beating AMD in single threaded and gaming tests in terms of pure performance and ignoring power consumption. It's recommended that Windows 11 is used with this CPU because it has had updates to schedule tasks correctly to either fast or slow cores. I'm not sure if linux is already patched for it.
Click to expand...
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=intel-12600k-12900k&num=14

"While the Core i5 12600K and Core i9 12900K weren't leading in the Linux gaming race, overall with all of the other CPU/system workloads tested, Alder Lake did prove to provide strong competition against AMD's current Ryzen 5000 series line-up in raw performance and performance-per-dollar. There were though some exceptions where the workloads were being mistakenly tossed onto the E cores rather than P cores, but hopefully we'll see more Linux improvements out of Intel soon."

Based on a quick read of the Phoronix review it does appear that Intel put more effort into their Windows 11 integration than their Linux one, that said it still looks good in Linux and only shows room for improvement.
 
RanceJustice said:
While it would be advisable to license it (especially during the TB3 days) USB4 is compatible with Thunderbolt4, so they can go out of their way for a certification but even lower end ones could support it simply by the native USB4 20 / 40gbps implementations in the vast majority of cases.

Indeed there were higher end boards for the first generation of x570, but they were mostly along with Zen2 / 3000 series CPU releases. Zen2 was no slouch certainly, but when the Zen3 refresh came around there were relatively few updates made for the 5000 series, but those that were in place - notably the Asus Dark Hero - became some of the more desirable ones around. Ultra high end will always be niche, but if we look at Intel EVERY little generation, every year, there was a new Maximus Extreme or whatnot for the mainstream, along with a host of other things. This, during a time when up until 12th gen / AlderLake, AMD has been the go to high end gaming CPUs for the past several years. Not to mention that prices continue to skyrocket for legitimate (and less so) reasons, it would have been nice to see Zen3 era x570 boards get a full refresh when the CPUs were so desirable - lots of people were thinking that Zen 3 X570 (or a hypothetical X670) would have been the first with USB4, buti it was not to be. AMD has been behind in this way and it is frustrating, even on the high end.
Click to expand...
Well, every Intel version wasn’t entirely compatible (if at all) with the prior generation hardware. When you HAVE to make a new motherboard for a chipset, you do. When you don’t…. Why bother? Would you swap one perfectly fine x570 board for another? I don’t know many people that would- no way I’m buying a dark hero when I’ve got another x570 box sitting here already. My Altus Elite isn’t the nicest board (I spent on Threadripper instead), but there’s really no justification for swapping it with another unless it dies.

Conversely, I didn’t really need features beyond what my Z170 had for my consumer Intel box, but I HAD to upgrade it to get a 10700- there wasn’t an option. Say what you will about cpus within platform generations (I don’t do a ton of upgrading there) - but with two truly high end processors on the same platform, why upgrade the motherboard? It’s still x570.

If I needed thunderbolt or USB4 on a system that didn’t have it, I’d buy an add-in card. Not a new motherboard.
 
Brackle said:
AMD needs to lower prices.
Click to expand...

They'll lower prices when Zen 3D comes out. And only on their 2D parts. People building their PCs will not recognize a real difference in pricing when they total the cost of a complete rig, and OEMs don't use MSRPs.

Things will get a whole lot more interesting when both AMD and Intel can bundle CPUs with GPUs for OEMs. Unless they work out some kind of detente where the portion the market with some kind of agreement, I think things will get pretty wild.
 
Axman said:
They'll lower prices when Zen 3D comes out. And only on their 2D parts. People building their PCs will not recognize a real difference in pricing when they total the cost of a complete rig, and OEMs don't use MSRPs.

Things will get a whole lot more interesting when both AMD and Intel can bundle CPUs with GPUs for OEMs. Unless they work out some kind of detente where the portion the market with some kind of agreement, I think things will get pretty wild.
Click to expand...
Agreed. I am excited there is finally some really good competition going on. This will keep AMD and Intel innovating new stuff!

With the recent rumor that Zen 5 will have 16c chiplets (Big core) and possibly zen4 chiplets being the (small cores) like Intel does. The future really does look fantastic.
 
kirbyrj said:
Not to mention, I've seen reports that low/mid tier LGA1700 boards throttle chips because of weak VRMs. You either pay up, or you don't get the performance.

I'd definitely wait for a review if you're not spending $350-400+ on a board.
Click to expand...

LGA1700 Z690 boards are easily $50-$100+ more than the equivalent Rocket Lake Z590 board which already had real markups over the prior generations of motherboards. Then there's also the very large price premium for two sticks of DDR5 RAM compared to an equivalent 32GB pair of DDR4.
 
The performance difference between DDR4 3200 CL14 and DDR5 memories used seem so small. Apparently the reason is because these CPUs have to run the ram speed out of sync with CPU in Gear 2 mode. I wonder if the performance difference can be closed with higher speed overclocked DDR4? Say, 3800 CL16 and in Gear 1 mode?
 
MaZa said:
The performance difference between DDR4 3200 CL14 and DDR5 memories used seem so small. Apparently the reason is because these CPUs have to run the ram speed out of sync with CPU in Gear 2 mode. I wonder if the performance difference can be closed with higher speed overclocked DDR4? Say, 3800 CL16 and in Gear 1 mode?
Click to expand...
We will have to wait for the Alder Lake tests exploring RAM details but....Rocketlake usually wasn't stable in gear 1, past about 3733mhz.
 
Lakados said:
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=intel-12600k-12900k&num=14

"While the Core i5 12600K and Core i9 12900K weren't leading in the Linux gaming race, overall with all of the other CPU/system workloads tested, Alder Lake did prove to provide strong competition against AMD's current Ryzen 5000 series line-up in raw performance and performance-per-dollar. There were though some exceptions where the workloads were being mistakenly tossed onto the E cores rather than P cores, but hopefully we'll see more Linux improvements out of Intel soon."

Based on a quick read of the Phoronix review it does appear that Intel put more effort into their Windows 11 integration than their Linux one, that said it still looks good in Linux and only shows room for improvement.
Click to expand...
The same issues are an issue on Win 11. There are cases where the E cores are getting work when the P cores are free.
 
Oh yeah, Newegg didn't have any Alder Lake stuff in the shuffle today. I was expecting a few things for MSRP and especially was expecting some DDR5. but I guess they just want to milk every last person ;)
 
chameleoneel said:
We will have to wait for the Alder Lake tests exploring RAM details but....Rocketlake usually wasn't stable in gear 1, past about 3733mhz.
Click to expand...

Yeah, my current set up really doesn't like using either MSI's "game mode" auto-overclocking or using Gear 1 with DDR4 4,000 RAM.
 
Looking pretty good for Intel. Glad they're back with a competitive product, and price doesn't seem bad.

That said, I just got the 5950X a few months ago and that still looked strong. Only about 5% slower in games, and even then at 1080p.

Once you are talking about ultrawide 1440p+, 4K, etc. I think the difference in gaming is not all that much. Still very happy with AMD (and no, they don't have to reduce prices).
 
Last edited:
cybereality said:
Looking pretty good for Intel. Glad they're back with a competitive product, and price doesn't seem bad.

That said, I just got the 5950X a few months ago and that still looked strong. Only about 5% slower in games, and even then at 1080p.

One you are talking about ultrawide 1440p+, 4K, etc. I think the difference in gaming is not all that much. Still very happy with AMD (and no, they don't have to reduce prices).
Click to expand...
Totally agreed. I myself play at 4k with the 5900x and I honestly do not see a need to switch. I plan to hold off until Zen 5 or whatever Intel has at that time.

The only thing I am baffled by is why go with PCI-E gen 5? I would think they could of dropped using Gen 5 and lowered the costs of motherboards.
 
MrC4 said:
Marginally faster than 5950x with twice the power draw, makes this a luke warm recommendation at best.

Funny to hear Steve state so many reservations along with his analysis. Sounds a bit like a drug commercial at the end.
Click to expand...
yeah, it's better in some benchmarks, worse in others, and really really hot.

The "i5" is "better" in many ways. Still hot, just manageable. If priced well, it might be "ok".

IMHO, this series is in desperate need of a "tock".
 
Brackle said:
Totally agreed. I myself play at 4k with the 5900x and I honestly do not see a need to switch. I plan to hold off until Zen 5 or whatever Intel has at that time.

The only thing I am baffled by is why go with PCI-E gen 5? I would think they could of dropped using Gen 5 and lowered the costs of motherboards.
Click to expand...
It is a bit curious. But with the upcoming chiplet and MCM GPU designs and the rise of high refresh 4K and also 8K: its certainly possible would could need a lot more bandwidth, sooner than we think. So maybe Intel is giving it to us now, so we can keep these CPUs for awhile.
 
Brackle said:
The only thing I am baffled by is why go with PCI-E gen 5? I would think they could of dropped using Gen 5 and lowered the costs of motherboards.
Click to expand...

If you bought or built an Intel gaming rig in 2012 or 2013, it was a viable gaming rig up until 2021, maybe late 2020, as long as you upgraded the video card and RAM. Maybe the CPU, too.

I'm thinking they're going for the same kind of approach with this. Like, "Look, we're back, we're trading blows. We're winning in single-thread. We're doing alright in multi-thread. Power consumption comes with a new platform. But you're getting a whole new platform. The other guys are using old tech. You know we were solid for a long time, we're doing that again."

I don't think anyone buying DDR5 today thinks they're getting a great product at a great price, but they do know that they are future-proof for a good long while. Same for the rest.

AMD is a good option right here and right now, but we know this is the last of that whole generation for them. Intel's onto the next one. The only question, especially with Zen 3D, will be do you want the best of the last generation, or get in on the first step of the next generation?
 
cjcox said:
yeah, it's better in some benchmarks, worse in others, and really really hot.

The "i5" is "better" in many ways. Still hot, just manageable. If priced well, it might be "ok".

IMHO, this series is in desperate need of a "tock".
Click to expand...
The i5 really isn't hot. And is actually pretty great in terms of efficiency. 2 more cores than 5800x and 15 more watts at Intel stock power limits. Its like 70watts less than a 10900k. *that said, AMD is clearly on a better process which scales VERY well for power usage Vs. cores. But this is a big leap for Intel compared to their last 2 gens.
 
Axman said:
I'm thinking they're going for the same kind of approach with this. Like, "Look, we're back, we're trading blows. We're winning in single-thread. We're doing alright in multi-thread. Power consumption comes with a new platform. But you're getting a whole new platform. The other guys are using old tech. You know we were solid for a long time, we're doing that again."
Click to expand...
Bingo. We’re back to relative parity. this is a very very good thing.
 
kirbyrj said:
So pretty much the auto-boosting has reached the point where both AMD and Intel have just about zero room for manual OC. No more free lunch out there.
Click to expand...

We need more data first before declaring no manual OC headroom.

I won't assume it based on techpowerup's half assed effort. It came across more like they blew off any real time with OC in the rush to get the article out fast.
 
DPI said:
Maybe but I won't assume it based on techpowerup's half assed effort. It came across more like they blew off any real time with OC in the rush to get the article out fast.
Click to expand...
well yeah, embargo was ending. im sure there will be more thorough reviews coming.
 
I am not sold on the hybrid design on the desktop.

Experiments shall occur if I can get one.
 
chameleoneel said:
The i5 really isn't hot. And is actually pretty great in terms of efficiency. 2 more cores than 5800x and 15 more watts at Intel stock power limits. Its like 70watts less than a 10900k. *that said, AMD is clearly on a better process which scales VERY well for power usage Vs. cores. But this is a big leap for Intel compared to their last 2 gens.
Click to expand...
It's "ok", it's just not an i9. So performs "ok", but arguably "not ok" for the wattage. Needs a tock. Again, the i5 is more reasonable, just not a "winner"... unless the price is cheap.
 
cjcox said:
It's "ok", it's just not an i9. So performs "ok", but arguably "not ok" for the wattage. Needs a tock. Again, the i5 is more reasonable, just not a "winner"... unless the price is cheap.
Click to expand...
it performs great for the wattage? It beats a 10900k handily, for dozens of watts less. And matches or beats a 5800x for marginally more power. For 8-10 cores, its the market leader right now.

They COULD be better if Intel or AMD made an 8 or 10 core with their best binned silicon. But they don't. They use that stuff for the i9 and R9. and as I said, AMD is able to pull out some pretty amazing scaling with their process.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DPI
like this
Well I'm both impressed and unimpressed all at once. lol

Yes Intel has a chip that can win some game benchmarks by single digits their way again. (the gaming side of things has been more even for a few years now then anyone likes to admit... single digits either way doesn't matter to anyone gaming at realistic resolutions) They do well in cases where the software already heavily favored Intel such as Photoshop benchmarks (I'm pretty sure Intel has never lost in general PS benches)... and they do better then you would expect in render type stuff. On the flip side to get there they burn a lot of power despite having "efficiency" core marketing. (the e core stuff has allowed them to feed the stupid amount of power required to compete with AMD to their other cores... is my take away)

Glad they are back in the game... but this is no knock out punch that's for sure. I expect AMD will retake the benchmark battle with their 3Dcache parts.

Anyway better then expected... but imo still just laying the groundwork for hopefully something more competitive when Intel can shrink their process for real. This proves the P/e core idea can actually provide the best of all worlds... but Intels "7" 10nm whatever this is isn't quite up to the task yet. The chip designers have been let down by the fab once again. I just hope when they do manage to get to the next node... they aren't up against AMD and Apple 2nm parts. (That almost sounds crazy till you realize TSMC has 2nm scheduled for 2024... 2 years isn't far away.)
 
chameleoneel said:
For 8-10 cores, its the market leader right now.
Click to expand...
Has someone that did not look at intel in a very long time, is that still true with the different motherboards in mind ? I have the impression that you are right.

That seem true a 5800x + a good B550 is around 525-530, a deluxe x570 will be around $580

The cheapest LGA 1700 + 12600k seem to be around $520

ChadD said:
Well I'm both impressed and unimpressed all at once. lol
Click to expand...
Same, would it have released at the same time has the latest Ryzen it would have been really good and impressive, but with the amount of power needed, that make it look that AMD will retake the lead next release or right now with a price drop, but maybe there is performance on the driver/windows/game side left on the floor at the moment. It is an impressive Intel jump, but specially with the power in mind, not that impressive jump for the x86 Pc platform has a whole, until PCI xpress 5 has some general people purpose and DDR 5 significant at least.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChadD
like this
Alder Lake looks' pretty good. I like the i5 and i7 versions best. I'm not tempted at the moment. I'll wait and see what AMD's "3d cache" does since I've a x570 waiting in the wings if need be. In the meantime I'll keep rocking my 3600. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChadD
like this
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top