Intel Core i9-12900KF Desktop Processor 16 (8P+8E) Cores up to 5.2 GHz Unlocked  LGA1700 600 Series Chipset 125W

Product Information

Intel processor numbers are not a measure of performance. Processor numbers differentiate features within each processor family, not across different processor families. See http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/processor-numbers.html for details. This article compares Intel's Core i9-12900K and Core i9-12900KF desktop CPUs. We evaluated Intel's Core i9-12900K and Core i9-12900KF desktop CPUs to determine which would be better for various use cases. We shaped our testing methodology to focus on each CPU's attributes rather than relying solely on benchmarks. Here we can see that the effect of Windows 11 and Thread Director on the Intel Core i9-12900K's benchmark results. In some cases it was within the margin of error, but it did also correct for the issues we saw in HandBrake and POV-Ray during the Windows 10 test set. Moving to Windows 11 also adds a not-insignificant boost to the Adobe Photoshop and Adobe Premiere test runs (using the Puget Systems PugetBench test utilities), which showcases usage scenarios more along the lines of what Intel says Thread Director was made to handle. The 7900X was also dominant in Blender, trailing the 7950X by just 18%, making it 16% faster than the 5950X and a whopping 30% faster than the 12900K. That scheduler, then, is a key player, especially when the CPU's resources are much in demand. (And that demand is the point of buying any high-end CPU!) So, speaking of schedulers...meet Windows Thread Director, the ostensible Spielberg of the whole scheme. Windows Thread Director

Then we've got the Intel 10th-gen core series including popular Core i5, i7 and i9 models, but we decided to skip the 11th generation as it wasn't as relevant and due to time constraints. Of course, the 12th-gen Core processors are part of the comparison and we've tested them using DDR4-3200 dual-rank CL14 memory and DDR5-6400 single-rank CL32 memory, with various models that go from the Core i3-12100 up to the Core i9-12900K. The Intel Core i9-12900K's 8 Performance cores have a 3.20 GHz base frequency and support a 5.10 GHz max turbo boost frequency.Professional tools are often well optimized to use many cores. CPU cores allow tools to parallelize processing tasks. Increasing the number of cores can divide the time required to process a task if the tool has good multi-threading support. This means under heavy load they'll sit at TJMax which is about 95 degrees Celsius for the Ryzen 7000 series, and this will be particularly true for the 12 and 16-core models. No, your eyes don't deceive you: Intel has carried its wins from content creation right on through to gaming, and for the first time in too long, has released a desktop gaming CPU that's competitive with AMD on both price and performance. Sure, games like F1 2021 are a "gimme" due to their RAM sensitivity, but both the 3DMark and Rainbow Six Siege results leave us optimistic that Intel can keep pace in the gaming race for at least the next several months (if rumors of Zen 4's launch date prove true). One Gaming Caveat, Though... The Core i9-12900K is Intel's first truly innovative high-end desktop CPU in years, showing great potential in its performance/efficiency mixed-core design and support for DDR5 memory. Just expect a high initial cost of adoption—and, perhaps, some PC-gaming growing pains. For our testing we used the be quiet! Pure Loop 2 FX 360mm liquid cooler which is fully compatible with AM5. After an hour of looping Cinebench multi-core with the Pure Loop 2 FX installed inside the be quiet! Silent Base 802, we recorded a peak CPU temperature of 97C for the primary CCD and 94C for the secondary CCD, so just above the 95c TJMax. Cost vs. Performance

There isn’t anything like the Core i9-12900K on desktop right now. The closest competitor is the AMD Ryzen 9 5950X, though it’s not nearly as fast as the Core i9-12900K. How long will it last? Counter-Strike: Global Offensive has no surprises for us. The 7900X was a whisker faster than the 7950X with 518 fps and that made it 15% faster than the 12900K, a convincing win there. 12 Game Average Performance The issue with games like Assassin's Creed: Valhalla arises either on launch or on load, because Denuvo thinks that the P-cores and E-cores belong to two separate systems, rather than two different core types on the same chip. Once it detects that some portion of the load has been split between the P and E cores, it sees the new cores as a new license holder (a separate system), and force-quits the game to prevent what it believes is two PCs trying to play one game on the same key. The 7900X also stood up strong in the Adobe Photoshop benchmark despite coming in behind the 7700X and 7950X. A score of 1488 pts meant it was a whisker faster than the 12900K and 21% faster than its predecessor, the 5900X. Ryzen, Ryzen, Ryzen! With apologies to The Brady Bunch: For more than a few years now, everywhere you look, AMD has been dominating the content-creator market for desktop CPUs. Through multiple generations of the Zen architecture, starting in 2017, AMD has defined new limits of cores-for-the-money, revolutionizing the kind of desktop power available for media-minded applications. Professional creative users and prosumers alike couldn't be happier with the trend.

For the 12-game average, as expected the 7900X matched the 7950X making it a fraction faster than the 6-core 7600X overall and a mere frame slower than the 12900K, in other words the same performance as the Core i9. That was expected given what we've seen so far. We've seen that in terms of power consumption Zen 4 isn't too impressive, typically worse off than Zen 3 when it comes to performance per watt, at least based on our recorded Blender data. The 7900X pushed total system usage to the same level as the 10900K and slightly higher than the 12700K.

As was the case with the 7950X, the 7900X is a bit broken in The Riftbreaker. Realistically it would be able to match at least the 7600X, if not the 7700X, but as we saw with the 7950X this game has an issue with the dual CCD design of the 12 and 16-core models, and this is something AMD is in talks with the developer to try and solve.Intel's Core i9-12900K CPUs have 8 Performance cores (P-cores) and 8 Efficiency cores (E-cores) for a total of 16 cores. And while normally we'd take the rest of this section to talk about all the nuances of the results and what they could mean for Intel's new position in PC gamer's minds, there's just one problem we noted: The Core i9-12900K can't play every game. Italics intentional.

It's a similar story with the Corona benchmark, the 7900X was 26% slower than the 7950X but 13% faster than the 12900K and a massive 28% faster than the old 5900X. This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. The Core i9 brand was expanded to incorporate mainstream processors in October 2018, following the release of the Core i9-9900K processor, which uses Intel's mainstream consumer platform. [5] Desktop processors [ edit ] Skylake-X (14 nm, 7th generation) [ edit ] All models support up to DDR5-4800 or DDR4-3200 memory, and 16 lanes of PCI Express 5.0 + 4 lanes of PCIe 4.0. DDR5 has a lot more bandwidth, but that comes at the cost of latency. Clearly, modern applications favor bandwidth more, but some do much more so than others. Overall, you’re looking at a slight bump with DDR5, with some applications taking particularly well to the new memory standard.Today, we’ll be comparing Intel’s flagship processor the Core i9-14900K against the older Core i9-12900KF and the previous gen, the Core i9-13900K. We've experienced that single-core performance is essential for some games, as many don't take full advantage of multiple cores. Similarly, we have experienced that professional tools depend on high single and multi-core turbo frequencies to maximize their processing speed. Based on our evaluation of using Intel's Core i9-12900KF CPU for gaming, you can expect excellent game performance with a high-performance CPU cooler. CONCLUSION : Intel have adequate number of cores most program (including serious games) can use at max but AMD has so many cores that a program rarely or doesn't use all of the cores ( unless you are doing 3D rendering and blending stuff which would benefit from more cores ) and we know that Intel has far better cores than AMD , so for me the Winner is Intel . FINALLY IF YOU'RE READY TO SPEND SOME MONEY ON A GREAT COOLING SYSTEM FOR YOUR PC THEN THIS CPU IS A BIG YES FOR ME ! In our more limited run of benchmarks on Windows 11 we did find that, in certain circumstances, Thread Director provided a sizable benefit. Sometimes the difference was negligible (for example, Cinebench R23, POV-Ray, and gaming tests all stayed roughly the same), while in others like the Adobe Photoshop and Adobe Premiere runs, we saw an improvement of nearly 30% in both benchmarks. Whether that means it's 30% faster in Windows 11 or 30% slower in Windows 10 is all a matter of your vantage point.