AllInfo

Intel Core i9-13900KS in the test: A milestone (with single-core turbo clock)

admin

With the Core i9-13900KS, Intel also positions a special edition CPU in the 13th Gen Core above the K model of the Core i9. For the first time, a 6.0 GHz single-core turbo is available ex works for a surcharge of more than 150 euros. In the end, the processor does not offer much more than this psychological milestone compared to the K model in the test.

Table of contents

  1. The Intel Core i9-13900KS in detail
    1. The first 6.0 GHz CPU for the mass market
    2. The new 320 watt mode
    3. KS vs. K: clock rates in theory and practice
    4. The 13900K has “slacked off”
  2. Test results
    1. Performance in applications (single -Core)
    2. Performance in applications (multi-core)
    3. Performance in games (720p)
    4. Power consumption
    5. Temperature
  3. Conclusion

The Intel Core i9-13900KS in detail

Once again, Intel has introduced the K model of the Core i9 followed by a KS model with a slight time lag. The Core i9-13900KS is only the third model in this series. The first KS was the Core i9-9900KS (test) at the end of 2019, the second as the Core i9-12900KS (test) a year ago.

The first 6.0 GHz CPU for the mass market

As usual from the predecessors, there is no difference in the chip, but in its clock speeds. With its maximum turbo clock, the Core i9-13900KS even clears a new hurdle: The Core i9-13900KS is the first (x86) CPU for the mass market that clocks at up to 6.0 GHz ex works.

The Intel Core i9-13900KS with 6.0 GHz max. Turbo tested

CPU manufacturers have been struggling with this mark for a long time. Under halfway “normal” conditions, the first Intel processor only reached the 5 GHz mark in mid-2018, at the time also as a limited special edition in the form of the Intel Core i7-8086K (test). The Core i9-9900K(S) also offered this clock a year later. AMD had already reached this milestone in 2013, but for the AMD FX-9590 (test) it was nothing more than a Pyrrhic victory.

And now the Core i9- 13900KS 6.0 GHz – 200 MHz or 3.4 percent more than the Core i9-13900K.

But watch out: The highest clock rate advertised by the manufacturer is only at low load, i. H. on a maximum of two cores. Intel has firmly defined which of these come into question in the CPU or its firmware. For example, the test sample only has 6.0 GHz on the performance cores 5 and 6. The rest runs with a maximum clock of 5.6 GHz, with the Core i9-13900K it is 5.8 GHz on the fastest and 5.5 GHz on the remaining cores.

6 GHz is only specified for two cores

The new 320 watt mode

This is interesting, because Intel itself speaks of a maximum of 5.4 GHz multi-core turbo for both CPUs in its own Intel Ark database. But in this case, the manufacturer refers to the clock in compliance with the specifications (PL1 = TDP = PL2 = 253 watts). If they are overridden, the KS can, on the other hand, clock 100 MHz higher than the K model (said 5.6 to 5.5 GHz) with higher consumption even under full multi-core load. On paper, that's 1.8 percent – and that's not much.

Up until now, “overridden” or “open” operation meant that PL2 was boosted to infinity (usually 4,096 watts) either manually or via the “Auto” setting of conventional retail mainboards. But with the KS, “Auto” means “only” 320 watts – Intel calls this mode “Extreme Power Delivery Profile”. Of course, even higher limit values ​​can still be defined.

TDP, PL1, PL2 and Tau of the 12th & 13th Gen Intel Core CPU PL1 PL2 Tau “OC” K models 13th Gen Core Core i9-13900KS 253 watts officially unlimited 320 watt mode
+ manual Core i9-13900K 253 watts manual Core i7-13700K 253 Watts Core i5-13600K 181 watts 12th Gen K models Core i9-12900KS 241 watts officially unlimited manual Core i9-12900K 241 watts Core i7-12700K 190 watts Core i5-12600K 150 watts Core i5-12400(F) 65 Watts 117 watts 28 seconds

However, the 320 watt mode (like the previously completely open operation) is not without it and explains in the reviewer's guide: Even the group was not able to keep the CPU running with a good 360 AiO water cooling system under control (i.e. cool enough with 320 watt package power). In “most cases”, however, it would have worked, the manufacturer explains diplomatically.

Even the best AIO cooler may not be able to allow the CPU to maintain 320W indefinitely without thermal throttling. Intel used a 360mm AIO cooler for our testing which was able to keep our system running without thermally throttling in most cases.

The new official mode above the official one maximum TDP (PL2) of 253 watts is reminiscent of the introduction of “Adaptive Boost” with the Intel Core i9-11900K “Rocket Lake”, which offered 5 percent more performance for 50 percent more consumption.

KS vs. K: clock rates in theory and practice

But how exactly does the Core i9-13900KS clock in practice compared to the 13900K? Putting it to the test shows that the KS can use 6.0 GHz in single-core loads (here Cinebench R23), while the K reaches a maximum of 5.8 GHz. The CPUs do not keep the clock constant, but because both act in a similar way, an average of 200 MHz more clock ultimately leads to 3 percent more single-core performance – exactly the result to be expected.

Single-core turbo -clock (CB R23 SC) 01.4002.8004.2005.6007.000MHz 15101520253035404550556065707580859095100105110115120 381425″> Core i9-13900KS, P-Cores

  • Core i9-13900KS, E-Cores
  • Core i9-13900K, P-Cores
  • Core i9-13900K, E-Cores

    • Under Multi- Core full load looks different. Intel itself speaks of a 5.4 GHz all-core turbo in compliance with the official maximum power loss of 253 watts. However, a glance at the BIOS has already revealed: The KS can clock up to 5.6 GHz, the K up to 5.5 GHz if consumption or alternatively the temperature does not slow it down.

    The Intel Core i9-13900KS with 6 .0 GHz max. Turbo tested

    With AV1 encoding in Handbrake with air cooler (Noctua NH-D15), this difference is also evident at the beginning: The KS starts with 5.6 GHz on all cores, the K with 5.5 GHz – in this case both CPUs were allowed act “openly”. After just a few seconds, however, the clocks of both CPUs drop slightly, because even with a large air cooler, both processors get too warm and have to keep lowering the clocks slightly in order not to break the 100 °C mark.

    < p class="p text-width">Effectively, the KS on the P-Cores (dark blue) achieves an average clock advantage of 64 MHz (5,430 MHz to 5,366 MHz) over the P-Cores of the K (dark orange) when running on the same platform with the same BIOS as of January 2023.

    The 13900K has “decreased”

    This is surprising in view of the following benchmarks, in which 13900KS and 13900K in the multi-core course, even when unleashed, are equally fast on average operate, while 66 MHz would mean a one percentage point advantage for the KS.

    The solution to the puzzle is revealed by looking at the Core i9-13900K log files from the October test, which match the benchmark results. Because with the BIOS available at the time for the Asus Z790 Maximus Hero, the clock of the Core i9-13900K was 59 MHz higher in the same benchmark and thus only 7 MHz below the level of the KS model today.

    Multi-core turbo -Clock (Handbrake) 01.0002.0003.0004.0005.0006.000MHz 150100150200250300seconds “> Core i9-13900KS, P-Cores

  • Core i9-13900KS, P-Cores, AiO
  • Core i9-13900KS, E-Cores
  • Core i9-13900KS, E-Cores, AiO
  • Core i9-13900K, P-Cores
  • Core i9-13900K, P-Cores 10/22
  • Core i9-13900K, E-Cores
  • Core i9-13900K, E-Cores 10/22

    • The consumption of the CPU was also a bit higher then, as the following course of the package power shows.

    Package Power (Handbrake) -1000100200300400Watt (W) 150100150200250300

    When running the 13900KS with a 360mm AiO, it can hold an average of 5,558MHz – still not the maximum allowed 5,600MHz, but 128MHz more than with the air cooler. However, the difference only becomes apparent after about 20 to 30 seconds, which is why not all subsequent benchmarks benefit from it. Furthermore, the CPU sometimes has to slow down the clock drastically in order not to exceed the 100 degree Celsius mark with the now higher consumption.

    Like looking at the concluding summary The table reveals that the surcharge from K to KS is significantly lower overall than in the two previous generations.

    Overclocking (with Noctua NH-D15 air cooler) Single-Core* Multi-Core** Gaming*** 13900KS vs. 13900K 200 MHz (+3.4%) -*/100 MHz** (66 MHz***) 100 MHz (1.8%) 12900KS vs 12900K 300MHz (+5.8%) 100MHz (+1.9%) 300MHz (6.1%) 9900KS vs 9900K – 300MHz (+6.4% ) 300 MHz (+6.4%) * according to Intel Ark ** according to firmware *** determined in the test

    Test results< /h2>

    The following application benchmarks of the Core i9-13900K are still based on the status of October 2022, the gaming benchmarks were again determined in January 2023 based on the same BIOS for all Intel Core CPUs of the 12th and 13th generation. The KS was tested in the applications with 253 watts (PL2, Noctua NH-D15), completely open (4,096 watts., with 360 mm AiO) and throttled to 142 watts (Noctua NH-D15).

    UV benchmarks were also planned. Because the sample, in contrast to that of the Core i9-12900KS a year ago, did not want to run stably with either -0.125 volts or -0.100 volts VCore, it was left out in the end.

    Performance in applications (single-core)

    The Intel Core i9-13900KS shows a 6 GHz clock in single-core applications and increases as a result here to the old new king. On average, this means around 3 percent more performance than an Intel Core i9-13900K.

    142 entries Edit Single-Core – Performance Rating Inflow charts All None

    Unit: percent

    Performance in applications (multi-core)

    As already discussed when looking at the clock speeds, the sample of the Core i9-13900KS with the current BIOS of the Asus Z790 Maximus Hero with 253 watt PL2 limit clocks only slightly higher than the Core i9-13900K with the BIOS at its start did in October 2022 – so both CPUs in the course are exactly as fast. The same applies to “open” operation, in which a 360 mm AiO was used, because the clock rate of the KS, which is then almost 130 MHz higher in longer loads, only comes into play: in longer loads.

    142 Entries Edit Multi-Core – Performance Rating Inflowing Charts All None

    Unit: percent

    It is interesting that even at 142 watts there is no measurable advantage for the KS, which indicates that the pattern of the KS and that of the K from the previous year differ little. Although Igor's Lab recently showed that the KS series does in fact have better dies than the K series, this does not necessarily mean that every KS is better than every K, because the selection is not free of overlaps.

    Performance Rating

    71 entries Edit Multi-Core – Performance Rating Inflowing Charts All None

    Unit: Percentage 71 entries Edit Single-Core – Performance Rating Input Charts All None

    Unit: Percentage

    In the editorial team's multi-core test course, the 13900KS can't ultimately benefit from being a KS, because under the general conditions of temperature and consumption limits it doesn't clock significantly higher than the pattern of the 13900K.

    Performance in games (720p)

    The gap between the Core i9-13900K and Core i9-13900KS is also smaller when playing games than in the single-core course: the KS model can differ by 1 percent from the K model in both average FPS and percentile frame times drop. This matches the clock increase of 100 MHz in the tested games (5.6 to 5.5 GHz, 1.81 percent), which is half as large as the 200 MHz with maximum turbo (3.44 percent).

    Performance rating

    Edit Performance rating – Rasterizer, AVG-FPS Inflow charts All None

    Unit: Percent Edit Performance rating – rasterizer, percentile FPS Inflow charts All None

    Unit: percent

    The 12900KS could 2 percent more in this discipline, but also increased the “game clock” by 300 MHz (6 percent) from 4.9 to 5.2 GHz. So the air was also very thin in games for the KS this year.

    Core i9-13900KS Core i9-13900K Core i5-13600K Core i5-13400F Core i5-12500 Core i5-12600K Cyberpunk 2077 5.600 5.500 5.100 4.100 4.100 4.100 Death Stranding 5.600 5.500 5.100 4.100 4.100 4.100 Dota 2 5.600 5.500 5.100 4.100 4.100 4.100 Far Cry 6 5,600 5,100 4.100 4.100 Ghostwire: Tokyo 5.600 5.100 4.100 4.100 Resident Evil Village 5.600 5.100 4.100 4.100 Spider-Man Remastered + RT 5,500 5.100 4.100 4.100 All information in MHz, average max. seconds) Core i9-13900KS Core i9-13900K Core i5-13600K Core i5-13400F Core i5-12500 Core i5-12600K Cyberpunk 2077 169/191 132/152 101/133 62/67 62/66 72/77 Death Stranding 144/157 143/155 99/111 62/69 62/69 73/82 Dota 2 130/142 103/112 78/86 56/72 50/56 59/64 Far Cry 6 91/102 89/97 75/85 50/52 52/55 54/58 Ghostwire: Tokyo 149/160 118/123 87/92 58/62 59/63 68(82 Resident Evil Village 98/102 98/102 81/85 53/55 55/58 62/69 Spider -Man Remastered + RT 144/152 142/150 115/141 6th 9/72 68/72 79/82 All figures in watts, average package power in the benchmark (25 seconds)

    Depending on the game, the 100 MHz more clock on 8 P-cores have a small to larger influence on the power consumption (package power according to HWiNFO): From parity to an additional 30 watts, everything is represented on the course.

    1,280 × 720

    Cyberpunk 2077 + RT – 1,280 × 720

  • FPS, 1% percentile:
    • Intel Core i9-13900KS
      8P+16E, DDR5-5600CL3298.3
    • Intel Core i9-13900K
      8P+16E, DDR5-5600CL3297.3

      • < li class="chart__row">Intel Core i5-13600K
      6P+8E, DDR5-5600CL3273,7

  • AMD Ryzen 9 7900X
    12 Zen 4, DDR5-5200CL3270 ,3
  • Intel Core i5-13400F, RAM OC
    6P+4E, DDR5-5600CL3270,1
  • Intel Core i5 -12600K
    6P+4E, DDR5-4800CL3269.5
  • Intel Core i5-13400F
    6P+4E, DDR5-4800CL3268,6
  • AMD Ryzen 7 7700X
    8 Zen 4, DDR5-5200CL3268,1
  • AMD Ryzen 9 7900
    12 Zen 4, DDR5-5200CL3267,7
  • AMD Ryzen 5 7600X
    6 Zen 4, DDR5-5200CL3267,3
  • AMD Ryzen 7 7700
    8 Zen 4, DDR5-5200CL3267.0
  • AMD Ryzen 5 7600
    6 Zen 4, DDR5-5200CL3267.0< /li>
  • AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D
    8 Zen 3D, DDR4-3200CL1464,7
  • Intel Core i5-12500
    6P+0E, DDR5-4800CL3264.1
  • AMD Ryzen 7 5800X
    8 Zen 3, DDR4-3200CL1453.6

    • < li class="chart__row">Intel Core i3-12100F
    4P+0E, DDR5-4800CL3251,6

  • Intel Core i5-11600K
    4K/8T, DDR4- 3200CL1444,9

    • Unit: frames per second (FPS) Death Stranding – 1,280 × 720

    Unit: frames per second (FPS) DOTA 2 – 1,280 × 720

    < /li>

  • FPS, 1% percentile:
    • Intel Core i9-13900K
      8P+16E, DDR5-5600CL32178,1
    • Intel Core i9-13900KS
      8P+16E, DDR5-5600CL32172,7
    • AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D
      8 Zen 3D, DDR4-3200CL14164,5
    • Intel Core i5-13600K
      6P+8E, DDR5-5600CL32158.8
    • AMD Ryzen 9 7900X
      12 Zen 4, DDR5-5200CL32151.4

      • < li class="chart__row">AMD Ryzen 9 7900
      12 Zen 4, DDR5-5200CL32141,7

  • AMD Ryzen 7 7700X
    8 Zen 4, DDR5-5200CL32137,1
  • AMD Ryzen 7 7700
    8 Zen 4, DDR5-5200CL32135 ,8
  • Intel Core i5-13400F, RAM-OC
    6P+4E, DDR5-5600CL32129,2
  • Intel Core i5 -12600K
    6P+4E, DDR5-4800CL32128,0
  • AMD Ryzen 5 7600X
    6 Zen 4, DDR5-5200CL32124,4
  • AMD Ryzen 5 7600
    6 Zen 4, DDR5-5200CL32120,7
  • Intel Core i5-13400F
    6P+4E, DDR5-4800CL32114,7
  • AMD Ryzen 7 5800X
    8 Zen 3, DDR4-3200CL14113,5
  • Intel Core i5-12500
    6P+0E, DDR5-4800CL32107.6
  • Intel Core i5-11600K
    4K/8T, DDR4-3200CL1486.2

    • < li class="chart__row">Intel Core i3-12100F
    4P+0E, DDR5-4800CL3286.0

    Unit: frames per second (FPS) Far Cry 6 + RT – 1,280 × 720

  • FPS, 1% percentile:
    • Intel Core i9-13900KS
      8P+16E, DDR5-5600CL32117.7
    • Intel Core i9-13900K
      8P+16E, DDR5-5600CL32115.4
    • AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D
      8 Zen 3D, DDR4-3200CL14108,6
    • Intel Core i5-13600K
      6P+8E, DDR5-5600CL32106,3
    • AMD Ryzen 7 7700X
      8 Zen 4, DDR5-5200CL32101,1
    • AMD Ryzen 9 7900< br>12 Zen 4, DDR5-5200CL3297.8
    • AMD Ryzen 9 7900X
      12 Zen 4, DDR5-5200CL3297,2
    • AMD Ryzen 7 7700
      8 Zen 4, DDR5-5200CL3296,4
    • Intel Core i5-12600K
      6P+4E, DDR5-4800CL3295.9
    • Intel Core i5-13400F, RAM OC
      6P+4E, DDR5-5600CL3292.9< /li>
    • AMD Ryzen 5 7600X
      6 Zen 4, DDR5-5200CL3292,5
    • AMD Ryzen 5 7600
      6 Zen 4, DDR5-5200CL3290,3
    • Intel Core i5-13400F
      6P+4E, DDR5-4800CL3285,9
    • Intel Core i5-12500
      6P+0E, DDR5-4800CL3283,7
    • AMD Ryzen 7 5800X
      8 Zen 3, DDR4- 3200CL1482.1
    • Intel Core i3-12100F
      4P+0E, DDR5-4800CL3277.1

    • Unit: Frames per second (FPS) Ghostwire Tokyo – 1,280 × 720

    Unit: frames per second (FPS) Resident Evil Village – 1,280 × 720

  • FPS, 1% percentile :
    • Intel Core i9-13900KS
      8P+16E, DDR5-5600CL32325,1
    • AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D
      8 Zen 3D, DDR4-3200CL14323,4
    • < strong>Intel Core i9-13900K
      8P+16E, DDR5-5600CL32317,3
    • AMD Ryzen 7 7700X
      8 Zen 4, DDR5-5200CL32292, 8
    • Intel Core i5-13600K
      6P+8E, DDR5-5600CL32278.0
    • AMD Ryzen 7 7700
      8 Zen 4, DDR5-5200CL32272.8
    • AMD Ryzen 5 7600X
      6 Zen 4, DDR5-5200CL32268,9
    • AMD Ryzen 9 7900X
      12 Zen 4, DDR5-5200CL32266,3
    • AMD Ryzen 9 7900
      12 Zen 4, DDR5-5200CL32266,2
    • AMD Ryzen 5 7600
      6 Zen 4, DDR5-5200CL32261,3
    • AMD Ryzen 7 5800X
      8 Zen 3, DDR4-3200CL14236,5
    • Intel Core i5-13400F, RAM OC
      6P+4E, DDR5 -5600CL32226,9
    • Intel Core i5-12600K
      6P+4E, DDR5-4800CL32222,6
    • Intel Core i5-13400F
      6P+4E, DDR5-4800CL32215.9
    • Intel Core i5-12500
      6P+0E, DDR5-4800CL32210.3
    • Intel Core i3-12100F
      4P+0E, DDR5-4800CL32185,5
    • Intel Core i5-11600K
      4K/8T, DDR4 -3200CL14130,3

    • Unit: frames per second (FPS) Spider Man Remastered – 1,280 × 720

    Unit: frames per second (FPS)

    For comparison, the clock rates and consumption values ​​of the AMD Ryzen 7000 in the test course are shown below.

    Electricity consumption and clock rates in games ryzen 9 7900x ryzen 7 7700x ryzen 7 7700 ryzen 5 7600 cyberpunk 2077 5.485 5.450 5.150 Death Beaching 5.488 5.350 5.150 DOTA 2 5.500 5.446 5 5.150 CRY 5.500 5.500 5.450 5,150 Ghostwire: Tokyo 5.437 5.500 5.450 5.150 Resident Evil Village 5.500 5.450 5.150 Spider-Man remastered + RT 5.472 5.500 5.450 5.150 All information in MHz, average max. ) Ryzen 9 7900X Ryzen 9 7900 Ryzen 7 7700X Ryzen 7 7700 Ryzen 5 7600X Ryzen 5 7600 Cyberpunk 2077 106/111 89/90 69/75 66/72 63/68 61/65 Death Stranding 113/119 90/91 74/85 72/79 57/68 56/70 Dota 2 102/108 84/90 62/65 58/63 51/55 50/55 Far Cry 6 95/101 80/89 58/62 54/58 51/57 48/50 Ghostwire: Tokyo 103/107 87/90 65/71 61/69 57/61 56/60 Resident Evil Village 100/105 85/90 67/77 61/69 56/65 54/60 Spider-Man Remastered + RT 114/119 90/91 88/92 80/84 69/73 68/73 All figures in watts, average package power in the benchmark (25 seconds)

    Power consumption< /h3>

    Strictly according to the specifications, the Intel Core i9-13900KS behaves like a 13900K – at the maximum of 253 watts it is blocked.

    If the CPU is again operated openly, with 535 watts to 465 watts in the first test and 347 to 315 watts in the second analysis for the open 13900KS in comparison to the 13900K, which is also already being operated without a power limit, there is a considerable premium for about 60 to 130MHz multi-core clock. Round 10 to, in the worst case, 15 percent more is no problem for the KS.

    Power consumption

    82 entries Power Consumption – AVX Load (PC)

    Unit: Watt (W) 83 entries Power consumption – full load (CPU Package Power)

    < /ul> Unit: Watt (W) 85 entries Power consumption – full load (PC)

    Unit: Watt (W) 83 entries Power Consumption – Part Load (PC)

    Unit: Watt (W) 85 entries Power Consumption – Idle (PC)

    Unit: Watt (W)

    In Cinebench R20, the Intel Core i9-13900KS also needs 10 percent more energy directly from the socket in open mode, but with the additional 100 MHz more clock across all cores under high load, it only provides added value that is within the scope of the measurement inaccuracies.< /p>

    Temperature

    Intel's Core i9 in the K versions has been struggling with the temperatures for several generations, which is also why the manufacturer does not peddle a higher TDP – it simply cannot be cooled under normal circumstances, not even Intel managed this in its own test.< /p> 85 entries CPU temperature (multi-core load)

    Unit: °C

    Conclusion

    This year, Intel only made the Core i9-13900KS official in a press release one week after CES 2023 at market launch, instead of lifting it onto the big stage from the CEO, and has thus taken the product into account: just a look at the theoretical clock rates -Premium on the K model shows how thin the air was for the 3rd generation of the KS this year.

    Fastest gaming CPU, fastest CPU in single – and dual-core loads, with the Ryzen 9 7950X almost on par in multi-core apps – all this reads impressive, but should not hide the fact that there is almost the same performance with the 13900K, which is 150 euros less costs.

    The Intel Core i9-13900KS with 6.0 GHz max. Turbo under test

    Already the i9-12900KS (test) struggled to compete with the 12900K and threw away any claim to efficiency to be faster. With the clock surcharges he was then on the course but also everywhere. In the duel 13900KS to 13900K it's even tighter.

    With a maximum of 200 instead of 300 MHz in single/dual-core loads and a maximum of 100 MHz more in multi-core scenarios (100 MHz in games, quickly less under full load in applications due to the temperature) it is only enough for the KS in two of the three Scenarios (single-core apps, games) for a razor-thin victory. In the multi-core test course, the samples of K and KS are on par within the measurement inaccuracy.

    The Intel Core i9-13900KS with 6.0 GHz max. Turbo in the test

    Interestingly, this also applies if the K and KS are on a lower TDP level ( 142 watts in the test): The test pattern of the KS therefore does not have a better die (binning) per se than the test pattern of the K.

    In the end, the only thing left for the Core i9-13900KS is that it is the first mass-market CPU to reach the 6.0 GHz mark without overclocking because it relies on the highest quality Raptor Lake dies. But only overclockers on the hunt for the last MHz will know how to use it.

    Intel Core 12th and 13th generation as K, KF and KS model model cores /Threads Clock/with Turbo
    /TVB (P-Core) Clock/with Turbo
    (E-Core) L2 + L3 Graphics PBP
    (TDP/PL1) MTP
    (PL2) Price< br>(RCP*) Price
    (Retail) i9-13900KS 24 (8P + 16E)/32 3.2/5.4/6.0 GHz 2.4/4.3 GHz 32 + 36 MB UHD 770 150 watts 253 watts $ 699 from 759 euros i9-13900K 24(8P+16E)/32 3.0/5.4/5.8GHz 2.2/4.3GHz 32+36MB UHD 770 125W 253W $589 from €618 i9-13900KF24 (8P + 16E)/32 3.0/5.4/5.8 GHz 2.2/4.3 GHz 32 + 36 MB – 125 watts 253 watts $ 564 from 599 euros i9-12900KS 16 (8P + 8E )/24 3.4/5.2/5.5 GHz 2.4/3.9 GHz 14 + 30 MB UHD 770 150 watts 241 watts $ 739 from 549 euros i9-12900K 16 (8P + 8E)/24 3 .2/5.1/5.2 GHz 2.4/3.9 GHz 14 + 30 MB UHD 770 125 watts 241 watts $ 589 from 479 euros i9-12900KF 16 (8P + 8E)/24 3.2/5 .1/5.2 GHz 2.4/3.9 GHz 14 + 30 MB – 125 watts 241 watts $ 564 from 490 euros i7-13700K 16 (8P + 8E)/24 3.4 /5.3/5.4 GHz 2.5/4.2 GHz 24 + 30 MB UHD 770 125 watts 253 watts $ 409 from 449 euros i7-13700KF16 (8P + 8E)/24 3.4/5.3/5.4 GHz 2.5/4.2 GHz 24 + 30 MB – 125 watts 253 watts $ 384 from 421 euros i7-12700K 12 (8P + 4E )/20 3.6/4.9/5.0 GHz 2.7/3.8 GHz 12 + 25 MB UHD 770 125 watts 190 watts $ 409 from 362 euros i7-12700KF 12 (8P + 4E)/20 3 .6/4.9/5.0 GHz 2.7/3.8 GHz 12 + 25 MB – 125 watts 190 watts $ 384 from 366 euros i5-13600K 14 (6P + 8E)/20 3.5/5.1/– GHz 2.6/3.9 GHz 20 + 24 MB UHD 770 125 watts 181 watts $ 319 from 340 euros i5-13600KF 14 (6P + 8E) /20 3.5/5.1/– GHz 2.6/3.9 GHz 20 + 24 MB – 125 watts 181 watts $ 294 from 317 euros i5-12600K 10 (6P + 4E)/16 3.7/4 .9/– GHz 2.8/3.6 GHz 9.5 + 20 MB UHD 770 125 watts 150 watts $ 289 from 275 euros i5-12600KF 10 (6P + 4E)/16 3.7/4.9/– GHz 2.8/3.6 GHz 9.5 + 20 MB – 125 watts 150 watts $ 264 from 282 euros *) without taxes

    ComputerBase became the Core i9 13900KS provided on loan by Intel for testing. The manufacturer did not influence the test report and there was no obligation to publish it. There was no NDA.

    This article was interesting, helpful or both? The editors are happy about any support from ComputerBase Pro and disabled ad blockers. More about ads on ComputerBase.

    Exit mobile version