raptor lake Intel Launches $699 Core i9-13900KS, the World's First 6 GHz 320W CPU: Review & Benchmarks from Hardware Unboxed

[BiG StroOnZ]

Summary

Intel's Core i9-13900KS Special Edition processor, which is available today for $699, is the world's first consumer CPU to run at 6 GHz without overclocking. With a whopping 250W base power specification, it's also now officially the most power-hungry desktop CPU in history — it also peaks at 320W in a new Extreme Power Delivery Profile. Hardware Unboxed had a chance to get ahold of the processor, and conducted a thorough review, with many benchmarks. While the CPU performs better than its 13900K brother, it's usually by 1-7% on average (faster in some other specific scenarios). It also appears that this CPU takes advantage of higher speed memory too. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Quotes

Quote

In essence, Intel's Core i9-13900KS is an i9-13900K with higher base and boost clock speeds and a TDP that is 25 watts higher (150W vs 125W). Fundamentally, the i9-13900KS uses the same silicon as its K-series counterpart, but its higher clock speeds will grant it higher performance levels out of the box.

 

It is pre-binned through a unique selection process to ensure the Core i9-13900KS's special edition status for their highest level of frequency of 6 GHz in a desktop chip out of the box, without the need to overclock manually.

 

At an MSRP of USD $700, the i9-13900KS is positioned a notch above the $590 i9-13900K, which it replaces as the top 13th Gen Core desktop part you can buy.

 

Of course, 6GHz ‘max turbo clock' theoretically only applies to one core, but thankfully Hardware Unboxed has already reviewed this CPU. They observed an all-core frequency of just under 5.5GHz with the 13900KS during Cinebench R23, with power averaging 280W package as per HWInfo. In comparison, the 13900K delivered an all-core speed of just over 5.3GHz, but with similar power, which Hardware Unboxed claims saw the 13900KS come in just 3% faster.

 

It's genuinely such an awesome milestone to see a CPU at 6GHz out-of-the-box, but no gamer is really going to benefit from its slightly speedier cores. The i9-13900KS is a chip designed for extreme overclocking by people with the necessary expertise and the ability to deal with extremely high temperatures.

 

My thoughts

So I'm sure many people expected this. That there was going to be a price premium over the 13900k, for not that much of an increase in performance. However, for those that need the best of the best, this is definitely the chip for you. There seemed to be some specific use cases where it performed notably. However, on average, it seemed to hover around the 1-7% mark over the 13900k, as mentioned in the summary. I guess if you are an overclocker and want to see what the binning is like, this processor also might be for you. However, for the majority of us, the 13900KS is just a KOTH CPU for bragging rights. I agree that it's nice to break the 6 GHz out of the box barrier though. That's definitely cool. Nevertheless, I see this processor as possibly also being a beta test for whatever revisions they plan on doing with the Raptor Lake refresh coming out in Q3 of 2023. Regardless, it's nice that Hardware Unboxed got ahold of the processor and gave us a proper review. As it doesn't seem Intel seeded out this CPU to reviewers, and I'm hard pressed to find one besides from HW Unboxed.   

 

Sources

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-launches-dollar699-core-i9-13900ks-the-worlds-first-6-ghz-cpu-available-now

https://www.overclock3d.net/news/cpu_mainboard/intel_launches_limited_edition_i9-13900ks_cpu_for_689_99/1

https://www.anandtech.com/show/18726/intel-unveils-core-i9-13900ks-raptor-lake-spreads-its-wings-to-6-0-ghz

https://www.techpowerup.com/303478/intel-launches-core-i9-13900ks-8p-16e-flagship-processor-at-usd-700

https://www.kitguru.net/components/cpu/dominic-moass/intel-announces-i9-13900ks-with-6ghz-turbo-clock/

https://www.guru3d.com/news-story/intel-unleashes-core-i9-13900ks-8p16e-processor-at-699.html

https://hothardware.com/news/intel-unleashes-6ghz-core-i9-13900ks-raptor-lake-processor

https://videocardz.com/newz/intel-launches-core-i9-13900ks-24-core-6-0-ghz-cpu-at-699

https://www.pcgamer.com/intel-core-i9-13900ks-release-date-price/

https://www.eteknix.com/intel-finally-unveils-core-i9-13900ks-700/

[mr cheese]

$100 for 4 fps... whatever it takes for the chart toppers huh

Can't wait to see if the X3D can put up a fight!

[starsmine]

1 hour ago, DaJakerBoss said:

$100 for 4 fps... whatever it takes for the chart toppers huh

Can't wait to see if the X3D can put up a fight!

Which to me is fine. 
Extreme chips in the past were generally always like this on both CPU and GPU side (titans), diminishing returns. double digit increase in price with single digit increase in performance.

To me this part seems fair for what it is, the target market is extremely small, and production of it will be extremely small. 

[TetraSky]

320W ... This thing consume as much power as my low power heater under my desk. I expect the power bills to go through the roof leaving that thing running.

I miss the days where Intel would actually be optimizing their chips instead of basically factory overclocking them.

[BiG StroOnZ]

This guy overclocks his 13900KS to 6.7GHz with just the P-Cores enabled and runs a slew of benchmarks/tests with it:

 

 

He was using an Intel Cryo-Cooling Technology solution. 

[da na]

Jeez. 320w is 30w more than my dual socket Xeon workstation (72 threads). I'm mainly impressed how a tiny piece of silicon can use that much power. 

[Arika]

I want one....I just don't want to have to try and cool it

[BlueChinchillaEatingDorito]

5 hours ago, DaJakerBoss said:

$100 for 4 fps... whatever it takes for the chart toppers huh

Diminishing returns on the high and low end. Just like exotic cars where you have the luxury of paying 100k for 50 more horsepower that you're never going to use. Halo products will forever remain impractical. 

[Ydfhlx]

Let's not forget that the DDR5-7200 RAM is also more expensive than normal, and it is where most gains are from

[porina]

2 hours ago, Ydfhlx said:

Let's not forget that the DDR5-7200 RAM is also more expensive than normal, and it is where most gains are from

Using the 1080p results in OP, 13900 to KS is +1.8%. KS to KS with 7200 ram is +3.0%. I wont give HUB videos the click, what speed did they use as standard? It seems to follow for me that someone buying a high end CPU is more likely to buy higher end ram to go along with it, but it isn't a necessity and can be balanced with cost if needed.

 

 

BTW I bought the 8086k over the 8700k. The price delta was not significant as far as I was concerned. I guess that was a bit like a KS before they used the term, which I think it was introduced a generation later. It's a niche market, but it is a market nonetheless.

[BiG StroOnZ]

Wendell from Level1Techs got around to reviewing the KS:

 

 

His conclusion is the same as some others. Most of the performance gains seen are from the 7200MHz DDR5 memory. His recommendation was to maybe instead opt for a 13700k and some 7000MHz memory as an alternative. He did argue that the binning on the 13900KS might allow the higher quality IMC to allow faster memory frequencies though. Which is something to keep in mind when trying to run a kit @ 7200MHz. 

[Brooksie359]

On 1/12/2023 at 5:44 PM, DaJakerBoss said:

$100 for 4 fps... whatever it takes for the chart toppers huh

Can't wait to see if the X3D can put up a fight!

No you are going to have to get a better cooling system as well so likely more than just 100 dollars more. Also want to make sure your motherboard vrm is beefy enough too. All of that just for your PC to run way hotter and likely louder for that 4 fps increase and bragging rights I guess. This seems as practical as driving a mustang in the winter. 

[AnonymousGuy]

17 hours ago, Brooksie359 said:

No you are going to have to get a better cooling system as well so likely more than just 100 dollars more. Also want to make sure your motherboard vrm is beefy enough too. All of that just for your PC to run way hotter and likely louder for that 4 fps increase and bragging rights I guess. This seems as practical as driving a mustang in the winter. 

No one is buying this chip who doesn't already have the best of everything.   This isn't meant to be an incremental upgrade thing for your 2 year old budget build.

[Brooksie359]

15 minutes ago, AnonymousGuy said:

No one is buying this chip who doesn't already have the best of everything.   This isn't meant to be an incremental upgrade thing for your 2 year old budget build.

I'm fully aware of that I am just pointing out that the performance gain doesn't justify the price and power increase. I mean why run a cpu way outside the efficiency range just to get a few extra fps at the expense of huge increases in power and noise. Also I hate when people just assume that people going for the best of things will always get the best regardless of how stupid it is. I remember a time when people would get the best of almost everything but the gpu as there was usually a titan and then there was an 80ti which was a fraction of the price but the performance was close enough to the titan that most people didn't bother with the titan. I would imagine there are alot of people will simply opt for the 13900k over this even though they are building a top of the line pc simply because the 13900k is basically the cpu but cheaper. Chances are they will probably opt to overclock the 13900k themselves instead of going for the 13900ks. 

[porina]

18 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

I'm fully aware of that I am just pointing out that the performance gain doesn't justify the price and power increase.

A problem I see is that price considerations therefore value are often calculated in a way that is at best misguided but flawed regardless. Value may not be the deciding factor at all. Performance first, then can you afford it? Yes or no. Only if the answer is no might value start to be a consideration.

 

18 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

I remember a time when people would get the best of almost everything but the gpu as there was usually a titan and then there was an 80ti which was a fraction of the price but the performance was close enough to the titan that most people didn't bother with the titan. I would imagine there are alot of people will simply opt for the 13900k over this even though they are building a top of the line pc simply because the 13900k is basically the cpu but cheaper. Chances are they will probably opt to overclock the 13900k themselves instead of going for the 13900ks. 

Those people are welcome to look at alternatives, but they are not the people buying this CPU. To me, if the performance of the KS was a required thing, I'd just pay for it. Saving a tiny amount to gamble on a CPU that might or might not overclock that far, and you'd have to do the stability testing. What is your time worth? Maybe if your time is worthless or you consider that exercise a form of entertainment in itself. Basically a different market. There is some value to convenience, like the overclock binning companies of the past, but a statement of performance from the manufacturer carries much more weight.

 

Even if the masses wont buy this CPU, is there a good reason for it not to exist for those that do want it?

[Brooksie359]

43 minutes ago, porina said:

A problem I see is that price considerations therefore value are often calculated in a way that is at best misguided but flawed regardless. Value may not be the deciding factor at all. Performance first, then can you afford it? Yes or no. Only if the answer is no might value start to be a consideration.

 

Those people are welcome to look at alternatives, but they are not the people buying this CPU. To me, if the performance of the KS was a required thing, I'd just pay for it. Saving a tiny amount to gamble on a CPU that might or might not overclock that far, and you'd have to do the stability testing. What is your time worth? Maybe if your time is worthless or you consider that exercise a form of entertainment in itself. Basically a different market. There is some value to convenience, like the overclock binning companies of the past, but a statement of performance from the manufacturer carries much more weight.

 

Even if the masses wont buy this CPU, is there a good reason for it not to exist for those that do want it?

The problem I see with this is alot of people wouldn't want the cpu because of the performance is not worth the extra noise and heat which I find alot of people actually care about. Again the performance increase is basically margin of error higher than your typical 13900k and to spend more to get a chip that runs hotter and therfore louder for this margin of error increase in performance doesn't really make sense. I mean yeah some will buy the cpu but I do not believe that this will be all that popular. For me the main reason I wouldn't get it is the power consumption and heat the thing would output rather than the cost tbh. 

[porina]

23 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

The problem I see with this is alot of people wouldn't want the cpu because of the performance is not worth the extra noise and heat which I find alot of people actually care about.

We're going around in circles. It isn't the product for you. It isn't the product for me either. But that does not preclude it meeting someone's needs, and why not be happy they now have that option. It doesn't have to be a mass market part to be worth existing.

[starsmine]

1 hour ago, Brooksie359 said:

The problem I see with this is alot of people wouldn't want the cpu because of the performance is not worth the extra noise and heat which I find alot of people actually care about. Again the performance increase is basically margin of error higher than your typical 13900k and to spend more to get a chip that runs hotter and therfore louder for this margin of error increase in performance doesn't really make sense. I mean yeah some will buy the cpu but I do not believe that this will be all that popular. For me the main reason I wouldn't get it is the power consumption and heat the thing would output rather than the cost tbh. 

cool dude.

Its literally the best of the best of the best.
This is what happens when you hit diminishing returns, everyone who buys these types of products knows that.

Like super cars that cost 2million, but the 3mil variant has 25 more horse power and 25 kilos less weight because carbon fiber rims. 
Or manufacturing at just half a magnitude more precise costing 4 to 10 times more or whatever

you are at the edge of what is possible. That does not mean its a problematic or a bad product. you are literally the best of the best of the best.
Think about how much more work athletes have to put in to cut that last .1 second off of a 27 second sprint.

[Brooksie359]

11 hours ago, starsmine said:

cool dude.

Its literally the best of the best of the best.
This is what happens when you hit diminishing returns, everyone who buys these types of products knows that.

Like super cars that cost 2million, but the 3mil variant has 25 more horse power and 25 kilos less weight because carbon fiber rims. 
Or manufacturing at just half a magnitude more precise costing 4 to 10 times more or whatever

you are at the edge of what is possible. That does not mean its a problematic or a bad product. you are literally the best of the best of the best.
Think about how much more work athletes have to put in to cut that last .1 second off of a 27 second sprint.

Unless you are going to ln2 overclock the thing and try to set a record your analogy about a sprinter doesn't make a ton of sense. I guess for me it just seems pointless to have a product that preforms so close to the existing 13900k that I bet if you had two systems side by side playing the same game one with the KS vs one with the just the k you wouldn't be able to tell the difference other than maybe one producing alot more heat and noise. Also my main point is that you are already so far into the diminishing returns that it's not practical. It's not like you are going to notice a difference when actually using the machine so why waste the heat and power?

[Sauron]

On 1/13/2023 at 12:25 AM, BiG StroOnZ said:

However, for those that need the best of the best, this is definitely the chip for you.

or you could just slightly OC your K

On 1/13/2023 at 12:25 AM, BiG StroOnZ said:

no gamer is really going to benefit from its slightly speedier cores.

"gamers" haven't had a reason to get a high end CPU for years

[BiG StroOnZ]

9 hours ago, Sauron said:

or you could just slightly OC your K

 

"gamers" haven't had a reason to get a high end CPU for years

 

You could argue that the binning of the KS allows for better overclocks though.

 

Depends on what kind of gamer you are, average gamer, sure, but competitive gamers always want the best of the best for the best advantage. 

[Sauron]

12 minutes ago, BiG StroOnZ said:

You could argue that the binning of the KS allows for better overclocks though.

It's possible but we always have to take their word for it, don't we? Who knows how many chips would be able to reach these speeds but are sold as K because the demand for KS is low...

[BiG StroOnZ]

1 hour ago, Sauron said:

It's possible but we always have to take their word for it, don't we? Who knows how many chips would be able to reach these speeds but are sold as K because the demand for KS is low...

 

Yeah the masses are not going to get ahold of the KS, so the sample size will be much smaller. However, we do know that it should be binned better if it's hitting 6GHz out of the box. Also, if it's able to run memory at higher speeds that means the IMC is also most likely binned.

 

But back to the standard 13900K. This overclocker was able to hit 9 GHz with the 13900K (a WR). I believe this chip was also heavily binned. While one of two supposed off the shelf 13900KS samples were able to do 8785MHz:

 

 

This seems to echo what you are saying, that the 13900K might have just as much potential as the KS. However, being that Silicon Lottery isn't in business anymore. It's almost as if the KS is Intel providing the same service that Silicon Lottery used to. 

[BiG StroOnZ]

PC Games Hardware also got a 13900KS in for review, here is their 11 game average:

 

 

https://www.pcgameshardware.de/Core-i9-13900KS-CPU-279405/Tests/Preis-Release-Benchmark-Review-vs-13900K-1411692/2/

 

We can see from these results the 13900KS is almost 31% faster than the 7950X. 

 

7000X3D comparisons should get interesting.