Even though I don't intend on buying 99% of the products shown in this channel, I still watch every video just to support the channel because such channels SHOULD NOT DIE.
@@mikem9536for content creators I5 13600k/kf its a best .If you go for full gaming you should go AMD both is good but I5 has more cores and power draw most but you can achieve more performance
What a lot of bullshit benchmark from this channel, i've seen more reliable source than Jarrod and the result in gaming the i5 stomp r5 really easy. This review is very suspicious just like HUB review.
@@runninginthe90s75 the benchmark u have seen is probably intel rigged userbenchmark lol. I prefer Intel over amd and Jarrod is probably the most objective content creator I've watched when it comes to intel/amd
This is a far more balanced and sincere review IMO, whereas most channels are telling you to buy the i5-13600K for performance, ignoring power-efficiency and socket deadend.
intel is more power efficient since it idles at lower tdp and normal workloads thanks to efficiency cores, also if u cap max tdp u can get similar efficiency as AMD, watch Testing and Tuning the new 13900K for Efficiency
When seeing individual CPU prices , the 7600x is a no brainer . But when you consider platform costs the choice is a little bit more difficult with the i5's overall platform cost !
How is it a no brainer??? the gains the 7600x has in gaming are miniscule, and almost nothing at 4k.. The gains the 13600K has over using your system outside of gaming are actually significant... The 7600X does have a lower wattage though b y a decent amount, so if you're a penny pincher, the 7600x is a better choice I guess
@@michaelangst6078 if you have a 4090 then yes, the 7600x is the better choice for games, obviously you are not going to get a 4090 with a budget cpu.. so if we are considering getting a budget gpu with one of these 2 cpu's then there is no doubt that the 13600k / kf are much better and there will be no difference in gaming benchmarks
What? It's slightly more for the Intel chip, and it's got massive performance advantages across the board of computing, and trades blows in gaming. For pure gaming, sure, but even then it's not a "no brainer" because some games run better on Intel, and if those are the games you play you may as well get it.
I have trust issues with all the bigger Media outlets out there. Hearing they try to manipulate by using different Ram, limiting Wattage or even different GPUs! Thank you Jarrod for the Video, you're one of the few reviewers left that I truly and deeply trust when new tech gets launched!
@@Luka_Nogalo here's my suggestion for other UA-camrs who test stuff like this it's jayztwocents and LLT and if you want laptop reviews Dave2d is one of my favorites and if you want phone reviews then i recommend marquesbrownlee and mrwhoseboss, these are the best UA-camrs that i could find that aren't biased and don't get paid to say what the company wants them to say and give every detail that you need.
yes, almost 10% in the case of the versions with 2 chiplets. But that doesn't change anything anyway. Whatever you choose you will be pleased. I personally would go to AMD. I had 2600x, now I have 5800x and probably the next one will be 8800x. Unless Intel comes up with something cool in the future.
@@rENEGADE666JEDI It's definitely not a huge difference but 10% is enough of a difference to make the AMD offering a lot better for gaming. Would be nice if there could be a comparison with a Windows 11 before the 22H2 update and/or Win10 performance.
I love Jarrod's reviews for actually trying to make it so that each platform uses the exact same memory kit. Can I request in the future that you do 7700X vs 13700K? That's the market I'm looking in right now as 6 performance cores isn't enough for my desktop use.
@Jarrod'sTech You might as well clarify that your test is legit or not, your benchmark number is way off from actual number just like HUB review. Other youtube reviewer shows the i5 13600k beating r5 7600x in almost every game even the i5 beating 7700x too. Your benchmark is very suspicious not gonna lie.
The fact that he insisted on using the same DDR5-6000 on both Intel and AMD CPUs is an insult to the Intel platform that can support way faster DDR5 memory. He used the AMD sweet spot DDR5-6000 CL30 EXPO kit on an Intel CPU, lol. I won't watch his 13700K vs 7700X comparison if the test setup remains the same.
@@kkostadinof seriously bro imagine getting a desktop over a laptop and then limiting the performance ... Its like gaming in a laptop without plugging to the wall..
I don't know what is going on with this guys benchmarks but every other outlet i have seen has shown that 13600k is faster in both games and productivity when compared to 7600x, often faster than 5800x3d even. It also costs less money since motherboards are way cheaper and you can go with ddr4 if you want. So your recommendation to go with 7600x seems little wierd to me. You get less by paying more if you go with AMD.
In some reviews 13600k even beats the 7700x and 7900x in some games (LTT,Gamers Nexus to give an example), it would make sense since it squares of with the 12900k and the 13700k .
Not everybody used the same memory, that would be a difference. LTT IIRC used DDR5 6800 with Intel which is a bit faster than DDR5 6000 used for Zen 4 (I forgot the timings, but I left with the impression that they're equally good). Also, in this test, Jarrod showed 99 degrees Celsius for i5 13600K which hints that it might've been thermal throttled. Not everybody has top of the line coolers for this kind of CPUs I guess. Though that doesn't explain the below 2000 Cinebench R23 single core score. All in all, they're quite similar. Though I'm still waiting for an optimized Intel CPU benchmark for gaming. One where they disable the E cores and maybe even undervolt the CPU so it has less power draw, and also increase the cache ring frequency. And, of course, maximum RAM, not just 6000 MT/s.
he have 25 games and others have 3,4-6 games and HW 12 at most!! bigger channels are lazy and wait that game developers pay to them to show their games
@@andreivasile821 Big channels as Linux,Jay2,GN are lazy ones and waiting for money from game developers and they have as you see 5-6 games in tests ., same games all the time
There seem to be a few inconsistencies with different reviews. It's possible this is caused by the 22H2 update that, once again, is hurting AMD's performance by a decent margin.
The 13600k makes way more since for me because I already have a compatible motherboard (b660) and I would have to spend at least 300 dollars more for ryzen.
Comparing based on the price of a CPU is pretty pointless, because owning a CPU in isolation is pretty pointless. When you look at platform costs, the 7600X is a lot more expensive than the 13600K.
It makes up for it a little by actually having a future upgrade path though, so if you plan on keeping your system for a few years, amd presents as good/better value
@@sstier48 Yes, exactly. For that reason I was looking forward to getting an am5 system. But at the moment... The prices are just too high. Probably will wait till early next year to see how things look then.
Platform cost is roughly the same. DDR5 RAM doesnt cost much more than DDR4 anymore, its 20€ more here. And the cheapest AM5 board is 10€ cheaper than the cheapest LGA1700 Board here.
It's interesting because in Gamers Nexus 13600K review it scored higher than the 7600X in most gaming tests and in Cyberpunk the 13600K was 5% faster than the 7950X (!) Guess its always good to get a 2nd opinion.
and how many games have Gamer Nexus in tests?? 5-6 only like all bigger channels with over million sucsribers !! Hardware Unboxed and Jarrod tech have 25 -54 games tests and there 7600x win while those ( lazy) guys as GN and Linux have few titles
AMD is pushing hard this gen. What we need to consider is that AMD gaming CPU 3D V-cache is not out yet. Really start to think to go for AMD this gen....
At this level of CPU, all-core loads aren't the main concern. People in general are going to step up to 8 core parts like the 7700X or the 13700K or higher depending on how much all-core workloads they have So, from a gaming perspective they're about the same if you feed them about the same speed of memory. DDR4 isn't good enough anymore to push out the faster fps as should have been expected, so there is very little cost benefit doing either system. There are two advantages of going the AM5 route. If this is the level of gaming performance you want for now but you want to consider upgrading in the future, the MB is going to take up through Zen 6 CPUs. On the other hand 13th gen is the last CPU for LGA-1700. The next socket is LGA-1851 and it's for 14th and 15th gen. Also, a CPU upgrade for LGA-1700 after you already bought the 13600K doesn't make sense since the gains won't be enough to spend the money. The 2nd advantage REGARDLESS of how people view the way AMD does clock management based on temp, is the 7600X only uses about 45W during gaming. So, heat output from the SoC is going to be low EVEN THOUGH a single sensor on the die hits 95 C. So this is a very low power CPU for gaming. The 13600K on the other hand is using about 75W. This isn't high power but you're going to notice 30 extra watts in heat output. It's not going to be like a furnace, but added to the heat of the GPU it does start to matter. So, regardless of how people feel about a sensor hitting 95 C, power consumption is actually low for AMD parts during gaming. Even the 7700X uses less power than the 13600K during gaming, using only 62W on avg. These numbers are averages, as reported by Techpowerup. Other numbers for power consumption, the 5800X3D uses about 45W, so OUTSTANDING performance based on power consumption, the 13900K uses about 117W which is getting into flamethrower territory when you sum that with the heat of the GPU, and the 7950X is using about 87W. AMD CLEARLY has Intel beat in gaming performance based on power consumption for the last couple of generations of products. I use the 5800X3D and really enjoy it.
between am4 and am5 its 20-100$ difference, between ddr4 and ddr5 its 30-100$ difference, 13600 has 6 cores nearly as strong as 7600x 6 cores and has small cores and it gives it more power and 13600 costs like 7700x and 7700x is stronger ,13700 has a little more multicore than 7700x like 13600 7600x and costs like 7900x and 7900x is is stronger, and also 7600x vs 12600 7600x 6 cores are stronger than all the p and e cores in the 12600
Got a 5600x for $150 on Amazon prime day in July. Mobo for $110idh, DDR4 for $50. It cost almost as much as a 7600x by itself, really good for budget gaming.
@@glordium1951 I don’t trust Ali express and want am5 for pcie 4.0. Gonna upgrade to a new gpu because I do plan to get a 3440x1440p or 4K monitor soon. 3060 ti is fine for now for 1080p.
Honestly I am in shock Jarrod.. I thought the 13th gen would throttle the AMD in games.. to see it completely reversed was a real surprise.. for those who only want to game, the AMD therefore makes the most sense, I am guessing the 7700X will be the sweet spot overall. Lower power consumption and heat and higher FPS in most titles. For those doing gaming AND multi thread work, the Intel. For example for music production that involves a lot of tracks and plugins it would be the Intel hands down for me. Very interesting video, thanks! I am going to settle on the 13700K I have decided, but I am waiting for cooler tests to find something that can keep it below 100.
amd focus is gaming/efficiency bc productivity workload on reallife usage is verysmall different. they only shown on benchmark. but i think amd need to add more cores to ryzen 5 and 7 series to close the gap on productivity benchmark
@@storyanaksekolah2 Well as a gamer I disagree, because I've done my fair share of productivity & I always would let it run & walk off to let it do its job. So basically a within a 5minute difference is no big deal, and could just make separate productivity cpus if it was profitable.
@@stevenanderson9532 5 minutes of what? render time? how about design/editing work? its longer than render time. also now you can use gpu acceleration. its way faster. so the cpu usage is just for the workflow
@@storyanaksekolah2 MP4 MKV, even a 4k render won't be instant on either. If your doing full motion editing it's more about which software usability in ease of use most of the time. Also if your inputing on excel or word I doubt either can run less then you type. Now if you are outputting to a plate for a newspaper it will still be limited to how fast the plate printer is. I know I did this work.
In other videos the 13600k outperforms/ties with 7600x with fewer games getting more frames with 7600x, this video is the only one I've seen where 13600k has this weird performance in comparison
Can you get your hands on some 7700X and 13700K to test similarly? The AMD lower end parts look great for gaming and efficiency, but they need to lower the MSRPs at some point in the near future, Intel really cut into their margins to eek out better price competitivity (RTL dies are quite a bit bigger than ADL). They need the lower prices twofold, since they also need to make room for the X3D parts (the segmentation/pricing). Which allegedly will be on a whole new level than both Vanilla Zen4 and 5800X3D (new stacking tech and more experience on building them).
tks bro, really appreciated the effort comparing two valuable chips.. i love the argumen " those performance come with high price, more watt!..." seal the deal to the pc picker!
Hey Jarod, if you have your msi 2080 ti still. Could you post an i5 13600k and ddr4 16gb benchmark please. I just bought a 13600kf and am upgrading from 6th gen i7 6700k.
Intel supports higher RAM speed by default. AMDs recommended spec is less. Why should the reviewer artificially cap the memory speed for Intel to make it same? What else he should do to make the two processors the same? Disable the extra 8 cores in Intel to make it same core count as AMD?
@@WilliamNFMS How would you test the 5600x vs 7600x using same memory. One doesn’t support DDR5, other doesn’t support DDR4. The whole same memory argument is just dumb.
Yeah 13600K Owners are not happy with these results as they are now losing by a 4% margin in gaming, so glad im waiting on 3D V-Cache, Wont even be close in gaming for intel.
So a year later would you (or anyone in the comments that knows about this stuff) recommend the i5 over amd? I wouldn’t be using the integrated graphics. I’m trying to build something I can game on, use flight sim and video edit.
Now with the addition of 7600 at 230$ which gives basically the same performance as 7600x but with lower Tgp, and hance more efficient there is no reason to go for team blue.
awesome video 🔥, Intel does have a price advantage with ddr4 and b660 support for those wanting to save money, the b660 aorus master at $164 supports 13th gen and can be flashed without a cpu
That's also right If u care abt upgrading then it's Amd If it's about saving money and not really considering later upgrade then intel is great.. I still hate the watts and temps on both sadly That's the only issue they don't pay attention for..
@@horuherodorigesu241 no way bro As long as the MB covers the watts needed all u need is just the rams.. Plus it depends on what kind of work u r doing if it's gaming and creating medium level then it won't fail or even feel slow But if u r a creator the more expensive the better the equation would be..
kinda, but theyre not that much cheaper, you can have a decent AM5 mobo for like 170 bucks, the cheapest 1700 board you want to pair with a cpu with suchs a higher power draw really starts at basically the same price ( cheapest 1700 board that even has VRMs was like +/- 150 last time I checked for somebody).
Im going to build my first pc, and currently there's a sale going on for the 7600x and theres a $100 difference, really don't know if the 13600K is worth $100 more...
are we on a state of reaching the point of diminishing return from a good CPU? i mean like comparing games that already at 100+ FPS is something, whether going for Intel or AMD you barely can go wrong with your option
@@notenjoying666 Intel at 10nm already SMASHING useless AMD that uses 5nm ,, ahhh just think how quickly AMD will need to leave the CPU business once Intel moves to 5nm ,, LAOVE IT
IMO the difference in threads is too big, here. Yep, they are considered same category (intel did change the game here a bit) but while I see the point of doing so, 12 threads against a cpu with 20 threads (and the e-cores are very good for productivity, so is not that much of a lesser core in this scenario) is going to give the advantage to the latter, big time, if both generations are more or less recent. Clearly seen when realizing how identical these two are for Photoshop (or cinebench single core). I'd get the 7600X for _only_ , or mainly, Photoshop uses. And probably the 13600k for a station mainly for video. Or the 7700X for that. As he says in another video tho, the AM5 platform it seems will have more of an upgrade path in the future. And... for those into gaming (not me, I just do casuals or other low end gaming) the X3D chips might tell a very different story. But if it is like the last time, those chips tend to be slower than the no-x3d version for productivity, so this is the peak in productivity from AMD. Again, IMO price will be the factor, as intel in same category is not having the same number of cores anymore. Which is funny, as it has been always accused of having bet for more clock speed and not caring bout cores. Turnes have tabled. These videos are amazing, loved the other new one about the 13900k vs 7950x.
aka if you are not using the godly 4090 for gaming they are gonna be gpu limited. buy a nice 13600k or 7600x and pair it with the next mid range gpu out of amd/nvidia.
hii can we get some test's with streaming ? Gameplay + streaming 1060 60fps CPU SETTINGS : super fast OR very fast AND including streaming by GPU BOTH with 7000 bitrate I just cant find ppl showing that diferences. I want to upgrade my intire PC . and the budget is freaking Small and limited. I saw a friend with a 5700x and a 3060 ti and the performance was good, but the 1% Lows was going from 70 FPS to 33 . The game in question is GTA V . Testing with 5700x on both Settings " super fast as very fast " the 1% lows was basicly the same, but streaming via GPU the 1% low did go up to 43 FPS . and on both test's either CPU or GPU streaming the game was still stuttering BAD , like 0.5 S to 1 Sec stutterings .. And to be honest i dont want to upgrade to still face the same stupid stuttering problems . what can i Do ??? Get 3070 ti ? 700+€ or a 3080 ? 800€+ a 13600k ? 420€ or a 5700x ? 250€ Or a 5600x 200€ ? or a 7600x 350€ 5800X3D out of reach . custs Like 500€ I realy needed some advices. If someone wants to help . i would apreciate
Thanks to Intel for not overpricing their CPUs. Thanks to AMD for kicking Intel in the nuts to start innovating again. Thanks to Intel for creating great early Core-Branding products like Sandy Bridge to force AMD to come up with a newer and better architecture. Thanks to AMD for being competitive with their Athlons throughout the 2000s to make sure Intel kept making good products. Thanks to Intel for inventing the first CPU to begin with. Thanks to Bill Shockley for being an asshole to his employees, which force them to leave to form Fairchild and Intel.
IMHO it is not correct to define value with only the processor price, without taking into consideration the total platform cost. AMD really need to make some corrections in MSRPs and have some chat with AIBs for the ridiculous prices in motherboards.
Jarrod i have an idea for you to test my good buddy, Recently in the world of Dj'ing, a dj software company named Serato introduced a feature on its dj software where it can separate 4 STEMS (vocal-instrument-base-beat) on the fly while mixing. the thing is this feature uses a huuuuuge about of CPU power to which people are talking that if you don't have an M1 at least u cant utilize this feature. to make a long story short, can you maybe dive into this subject as it is EXTREMLY important to djs across the globe and no pro tech guy ever covered the subject. i think this will be some very unique content for you as well!!! cheers!!
waitt why your 13600k running hot and power draw dmn mine its not like that i think its your mother board or cpu cooler not sure hmmmm im using z690 rog strix.
Do you think will be any difference between 13600k and 13900k in 4k resolution with RTX 4090 in Microsoft Flight Simulator? I am building a system for MSFS2020 in 4k and I'd like to see a comparison or to know if in that resolution would be any difference in fps and smoothness for the 2 processors.. Great work, I really like your video and your comparison mad in a professional and precise way! Many thanks
Not sure in what part of the world the 13600K costs 300,= but definitely not in Europe.. More like 420,= euros so not sure you are making the right comparison...
AMD Zen 4 launch is suffering from the same, albeit worse, problem as Intel's 12th Gen launch - overpriced motherboards. Being DDR5 exclusive also doesn't help AMD although DDR5 is rapidly becoming affordable. AMD's strategy is to reserve Zen 3 as its budget and midrange segment while Zen 4 is for high performance. This strategy fails on several grounds. The 7600X and 7700X are meant to be the 'budget' Zen 4 options but don't make any sense when compared to the 5800XD which is almost always faster in gaming and the 5950X which is always faster in productivity both of which are on the much cheaper Zen 3 platform. This strategy also fails to recognize that people generally do not like buying 'outdated' parts when purchasing firsthand. So most people are going to ignore Zen 3 in favour of 13th Gen despite Zen 3 still offering decent value options.
Yeah definitely a problem with the motherboard cuz it's expensive to upgrade, but for AMD i am very interested in their mobile chips in the future for 7000 series cuz since they have great power efficiency and better cooling because of the lower wattage difference between AMD and intel. Some great laptops will come hopefully, if they don't fuck it up somehow.
@@buckduck3624 The power draw of the 13 gen is very much Motherboard dependant and if set up correctly can draw significantly less whilst the performance barely suffers. This can be with Zen 4 motherboards as well although the %age saving is not as great as they don't use as much to begin with. Looking at UK prices (cos that's where I am) the saving on CPU is offset and then some by the extra cost of the motherboard. X670E boards as tested here are VERY expensive.
AMD would've been okay if they made this gen compatible with ddr4 imo. 13th gen's power draw and high temps mean they're gonna be expensive due to electricity bills and people in hot countries just will NOT be able to run them properly
@@jubayerwasidraiyan5874 Agreed but the eco performance, just like AMD, runs them a lot, lot cooler and temps are far better. Both companies are laying on the power and temps this round which in the current climate (no pun intended) is not a good optic.
I'm going to scrap everything you said and use different logic. For most people, PCs were fast enough in 2018 for almost anything they do. Zen 3 with AM4 makes a VERY capable platform for most users. For gamers, there's a lot to consider. For people who use a desktop PC to do video editing and a a few other tasks, there's more to consider. So, Zen 3 is WAY more capable than what probably 80% of the global population needs. For professionals, they're expected to use Pro parts or have to accept what desktop offers. For the gamers, AM4 MBs are perfectly capable gaming platforms even WITH a 4090 as long as you get the 5800X3D. It's not ideal but it's certainly a good system. I'd say a person could STILL buy into that platform (B550, 5800X3D) and have great gaming experiences for the next 6 - 7 years. This is regardless of the fact that there are faster CPUs. That doesn't matter. What matters is if YOU like your system, the last I checked. And in fact that's exactly what I did and am more than happy using X570, 32GB CL16, 5800X3D and the 6800 XT as a 2K gaming platform and don't plan on giving it up for MY gaming until Zen 6 is out, and there's lots of reasons for that, one being I don't like the CPU-chipset link being only 8GB/s and I can't buy into AM5 until that's bumped up to 16GB/s otherwise it's no better than my X570 MB. For those people who run one or two NVMe drives, B650E with gen5 to the PCIe slot for the GPU is more than capable though Zen 6. You at least get the NVMe drives off the CPU at gen5 speed and you can upgrade the GPU in the future with a gen5 GPU. So it's a plenty capable platform for typical gamers who other than that do light workloads. It only gets messy if you REALLY need all the ports that X670/E offer because of the limitation of the CPU-chipset link. On the other hand, if you want to build the best gaming rig for Intel 13th gen you need DDR5 and that puts you at cost parity with AMD AM5 platforms. AND if you want to take advantage of the better CPU-chipset interface of 16GB/s like I would want then you need Z790. So no, AMD if perfectly fine with what they're doing. AM5 will pick up in sales once they release Vcache parts so which most the AMD fans I see in comment threads seem to be waiting for just like I would, and they they'll pick up even more when their RDNA 3 based APUs come out because THOSE will be the best APUs on the market and will game just like low end GPUs, and this means people buying those get REAL 1080p gaming performance without having to buy a GPU. Intel might have this parity for APUs once they release Meteor Lake but I don't think Raptor Lake will. In other words, what exists right now for Zen 4 isn't appealing because it doesn't match up right. They'll be GREAT gaming platforms, but for people wanting to buy into AM5 for gaming most of them are waiting for Vcache parts. They'll be GREAT for people who want decent GPU performance but don't want to spend the money on a GPU. Once partners put out lower cost MBs they'll be GREAT for typical usage. But 600 series MBs have a limitation with the CPU-chipset link which different types of special case users or content creators that want to take advantage of 4 NVMe ports on the MB because of that 8GB/s cap on the link. As long as that speed is acceptable to a person then AM5 is perfectly fine. And everything I said about Zen 3 would also be true for Intel 10th gen, but there isn't a kick ass gaming CPU for 10th gen like there is the 5800X3D. If you don't consider gaming, 10th gen CPU are WAY more capable than what 80% of the population of the world needs. As far as 12th gen, Meh. If you follow the Amazon top 50 best selling CPUs on Amazon, AMD has dominated the top 20, and these are DIY builders now. People LOVE taking advantage of lower cost products and AMD with Zen 3 is dominating here no matter what you say. The Amazon top 50 list has shown this to be the case for the last 6 months. There's going to be an initial surge for 13th gen purchases, and then it will slow down and people will be buying everything from 10th gen - 13th gen CPUs and they'll be buying Zen 2 - Zen 4 CPUs just like they have been. The data don't lie.
Both these CPUs seem to be overkill for gaming, as the frame rates at 4k are still really high. For now I think I'd save money and buy a cheaper 12xxx or 5xxx chip or wait for this generation's budget chips to launch. Still, what I'm really waiting for is a better GPU price to performance.
I mean, at 4k, it's more about the GPU rather than the CPU. At 4k, you probably be fine with something like 12400f or 5600. There is no need to to even glance at this gen, assuming that you have 4090 level of performance, which was used on this CPU review
Great video segment. If you are playing open world games then you will see the i5-13600k stretch it's legs. The chart clearly shows it. I recommend the i5-13600k for content creators.
Hard disagree with your conclusion. Not only total platform is much cheaper for 13600k but if you want, you can pair it with ddr4 which doesnt perform that much worse compared to ddr5. ddr4 can be super relevant for users who already have it from their previous systems. 13600k performs in the same ballpark in gaming and much better in core heavy workloads AND is much cheaper. Recommending 7600k just for couple % of gaming advantage and questionable upgradeability path is ludicrous, considering that most people upgrade their cpus at the earliest every 3 years and by that time current am5 mobos will be significantly outdated and most likely unsupported. Now if anyone says "but amd made commitment to support am5 through 2025" Well they certainly did, here is the catch though "am5" not "b650/x670 chipset motherboards" Not to mention that the price saved today with 13600k+ddr4+z690 already easily covers new motherboard when you will want to upgrade your system later. zen 4 are not bad products but their cpus and motherboards are severely overpriced.
@@Shineinpoverty 4 year old cpu is not that old and performs very well, something like 8700k or 9900k are still fine for todays gaming unless you are chasing super high refresh rates but then the price to performance metric goes out of the window anyway :)
Really isn't that big? Where all youtubers check prices? 13600K 450CAD vs 7600X 330CAD today. I get 7700X on sale for 430CAD. Nobrainer against discontinued 13600K platform (no discount on 13600K btw)
As of right now 7600x is 250$ and comes with free 16gb DDR5 5600mhz ram at Microcenter and New egg running a sale Asrock b-650 Mobo for $150 just picked both of this for 400$ plus tax so stoked!
@@Kaygoooo With 9th, 10th & 11th gen vs what AMD had at the time, it was the opposite; AMD smoked Intel in performance. This back and forth between CPU manufacturers like this is exactly what we need; without it, companies get lazy...
@@green_block Except it was around 50% faster in multi core while consuming much less power. I mean, a Ryzen 4900HS, a 35 watt LAPTOP CPU was close to beating a 9900K DESKTOP CPU. Intel just didn't have an answer to that until 12th gen because they were too lazy to add more cores once AMD were (temporarily) out of the market with their awful Bulldozer architecture. Ryzen was the turnaround they and the market needed, and combined with Apple's own silicon, it pushed Intel back into actually having to compete rather than just offer quad core CPUs for 5 generations and have 14 nm CPUs from 5th gen to 10th/11th gen.
it's just dumb to spend more at the moment for a way worse product for the sake of "upgradability". buy a 13600k and you can just skip entire AM5/14th,15th socket.
@@hoangd4132 I respectfully disagree. You can save more, have better performance in the long run but you'll have the worse experience in multicore productivity at the moment. If gaming is your only concern and future upgrades for cheap, let's say in 3 years, go amd. If you need it for work and gaming NOW, go intel.
DDR5 6000 🫠. Don’t do that if you’re planning to go with the 13600K. Either get yourself one of the better DDR4 kits or go with DDR5 6400+. The 13600K was handicapped with the memory used here.
For a new PC buyer almost evenly matched. But Intel has the edge especially for those who wanted to upgrade their intel CPUs as they can still use the same motherboard and memory. For AMD, you have no other option but to replace your MB and buy a DDR5 memory which entails more cost. Anyways, if you have a shiny RTX 4090 and playing 4K resolution, it does not matter to upgrade your CPU as a 5600x or even a 12400F could have an fps within striking distance of their big cpu brothers.
And if you want to upgrade the system in the future, on AMD you simply swap the CPU and in Intel, you buy a New setup. Im 100% going with AMD because i like the longevity of the socket they make.
@@Petrixxxxxxx Not keen on buying the new CPUs as the previous gen will be an ok upgrade for me. My 6700K still serves me well for hires gaming. Would just have to push my GPU to get the right fps. With RT Ultra and Quality DLSS, I still hit 70 fps for Cyberpunk at 1620P. That is fine with me.
@@ThePauch1 No point compairing 6C/12T to 14C/20T CPU. Even with 8E Cores in the 13600k. The real competitor to the 7600x is the upcoming 13400K/KF. This shows that the 7600x and 7700x are overpriced, and AMD should reduce prices or release 7600 and 7700 (non X). I'm not fan for Intel, I have amd CPU. But Intel CPUs are better deal this time. Especially with the expensive AMD motherboards.
that 13600K easily overclocks to 5.5-5.6ghz all cores beating even 7700x in productivity on cheaper board and oc3d tv showed, having decent ddr4 is even enough without any loss of performance. I think Jarrod undervalued Intel this time and ignored the platform cost into equation, usually that is what reviewers always scream on top of their lunge saying, AM4 cost less for years.
Hmm, I’m actually seeing more benefits from AMD for gaming. I was going to buy a 13600K, but after watching this, I might go AMD or wait until next year when lower end launches
All testing was done with core isolation off, as mentioned at 1:21 testing with it on is not "wrong" either, it's just a different way of testing and completely valid as it matches the Windows 11 default. As long as both CPUs are tested the same way and compared fairly, it does not matter.
Even though I don't intend on buying 99% of the products shown in this channel, I still watch every video just to support the channel because such channels SHOULD NOT DIE.
Basically
For content creators: 13600k is better
For gaming: toss a coin, whichever lands buy
So overall, the i5 is the better choice.
@@mikem9536for content creators I5 13600k/kf its a best .If you go for full gaming you should go AMD both is good but I5 has more cores and power draw most but you can achieve more performance
Basically@@mikem9536
@@mikem9536 yes basically
Price is a big factor.
You're really a gem when it comes to making their viewers understand things better ! Thanks jarrod
That's why homie has got like 600k subs in just a couple years. lol.
Remember when he had less than 40k.
Yeah he's my favorite. He gives the info out clearly and you can tell that he puts in the work. I really appreciate his videos.
What a lot of bullshit benchmark from this channel, i've seen more reliable source than Jarrod and the result in gaming the i5 stomp r5 really easy. This review is very suspicious just like HUB review.
@@runninginthe90s75 the benchmark u have seen is probably intel rigged userbenchmark lol. I prefer Intel over amd and Jarrod is probably the most objective content creator I've watched when it comes to intel/amd
Intel's 13th gen already?
Apparently..
Feels like 12th gen was launched just yesterday.
that’s what i thought😂
Gen 14 Meteor lake Q2 ' Q4 2023.🤔
intel launch new processor every year lol intel afraid lose to amd
This is a far more balanced and sincere review IMO, whereas most channels are telling you to buy the i5-13600K for performance, ignoring power-efficiency and socket deadend.
intel is more power efficient since it idles at lower tdp and normal workloads thanks to efficiency cores, also if u cap max tdp u can get similar efficiency as AMD, watch Testing and Tuning the new 13900K for Efficiency
When seeing individual CPU prices , the 7600x is a no brainer . But when you consider platform costs the choice is a little bit more difficult with the i5's overall platform cost !
If you are not upgrading it anytime soon.
How is it a no brainer??? the gains the 7600x has in gaming are miniscule, and almost nothing at 4k.. The gains the 13600K has over using your system outside of gaming are actually significant... The 7600X does have a lower wattage though b y a decent amount, so if you're a penny pincher, the 7600x is a better choice I guess
@@michaelangst6078 if you have a 4090 then yes, the 7600x is the better choice for games, obviously you are not going to get a 4090 with a budget cpu.. so if we are considering getting a budget gpu with one of these 2 cpu's then there is no doubt that the 13600k / kf are much better and there will be no difference in gaming benchmarks
But in the long term it might hurt because intel switches platform every 2 gens
What? It's slightly more for the Intel chip, and it's got massive performance advantages across the board of computing, and trades blows in gaming. For pure gaming, sure, but even then it's not a "no brainer" because some games run better on Intel, and if those are the games you play you may as well get it.
11:06 Can i just say i will always be grateful for how intuitive and efficient this data presentation is. Thank you Jarrod!
I have trust issues with all the bigger Media outlets out there. Hearing they try to manipulate by using different Ram, limiting Wattage or even different GPUs!
Thank you Jarrod for the Video, you're one of the few reviewers left that I truly and deeply trust when new tech gets launched!
you're so funny
@@xslvrxslwt a ti nisi jeli? Balkanac s profilnom slikom Kineskinje.
@@Luka_Nogalo here's my suggestion for other UA-camrs who test stuff like this it's jayztwocents and LLT and if you want laptop reviews Dave2d is one of my favorites and if you want phone reviews then i recommend marquesbrownlee and mrwhoseboss, these are the best UA-camrs that i could find that aren't biased and don't get paid to say what the company wants them to say and give every detail that you need.
@@buckduck3624 Mrwhosetheboss gets sponsored for some of the products he reviews.
@@milkyy4168 I specifically said they don't get paid to say what the companies want them to say he's honest about it
Is this affected by the new windows 11 22H2 AMD performance bug? If so these results may not be a fair comparison.
yes, almost 10% in the case of the versions with 2 chiplets. But that doesn't change anything anyway. Whatever you choose you will be pleased. I personally would go to AMD. I had 2600x, now I have 5800x and probably the next one will be 8800x. Unless Intel comes up with something cool in the future.
@@rENEGADE666JEDI It's definitely not a huge difference but 10% is enough of a difference to make the AMD offering a lot better for gaming.
Would be nice if there could be a comparison with a Windows 11 before the 22H2 update and/or Win10 performance.
competition at its finest
I love Jarrod's reviews for actually trying to make it so that each platform uses the exact same memory kit.
Can I request in the future that you do 7700X vs 13700K? That's the market I'm looking in right now as 6 performance cores isn't enough for my desktop use.
Just have to buy the i7 when I get back from holiday in 2 weeks but it's planned!
@@JarrodsTech sweet. Thank you, sir. Looking forward to the future video.
@Jarrod'sTech You might as well clarify that your test is legit or not, your benchmark number is way off from actual number just like HUB review. Other youtube reviewer shows the i5 13600k beating r5 7600x in almost every game even the i5 beating 7700x too. Your benchmark is very suspicious not gonna lie.
@@runninginthe90s75 do ur own benchmark mark then
The fact that he insisted on using the same DDR5-6000 on both Intel and AMD CPUs is an insult to the Intel platform that can support way faster DDR5 memory. He used the AMD sweet spot DDR5-6000 CL30 EXPO kit on an Intel CPU, lol. I won't watch his 13700K vs 7700X comparison if the test setup remains the same.
13600k better choice now, we can buy "old" motherboard on z690 + ddr4 cheaper than am5 and ddr5
Is not needed, 13600k is an almost max out 12600k, meaning you can get a b660 motherboard and B-die to lower you timings.
@@goa141no6 yep, also good. But I don't like b660 motherboards, potential problem with vrm
@@MrDerguncik Try the MSI b660 pro wi-fi, they have good vrm (hardware unbox tested it), have around 5-6 layers of fiber and cost $125~140 on ddr4.
Not really, Loses to AMD's lowest end in gaming already, better choice is waiting for 3D V-Cache to destroy everything in gaming.
@@jasonferreira4761 1 more year ? At that moment 13600k better
Why not show the results with power limits as well? I never use a CPU without power limits.
Why
Nobody cares about power limits in a desktop bruh. This is not a laptop comparison
@@kkostadinof seriously bro imagine getting a desktop over a laptop and then limiting the performance ...
Its like gaming in a laptop without plugging to the wall..
I’m getting the 7600x for 256 usd and 13600k for 353 usd which one should I go with?
7600x for sure
in my country the i5 13600k is only 10$ more expensive, but a 100$ difference is crazy
I don't know what is going on with this guys benchmarks but every other outlet i have seen has shown that 13600k is faster in both games and productivity when compared to 7600x, often faster than 5800x3d even. It also costs less money since motherboards are way cheaper and you can go with ddr4 if you want. So your recommendation to go with 7600x seems little wierd to me. You get less by paying more if you go with AMD.
In some reviews 13600k even beats the 7700x and 7900x in some games (LTT,Gamers Nexus to give an example), it would make sense since it squares of with the 12900k and the 13700k .
Not everybody used the same memory, that would be a difference. LTT IIRC used DDR5 6800 with Intel which is a bit faster than DDR5 6000 used for Zen 4 (I forgot the timings, but I left with the impression that they're equally good).
Also, in this test, Jarrod showed 99 degrees Celsius for i5 13600K which hints that it might've been thermal throttled. Not everybody has top of the line coolers for this kind of CPUs I guess. Though that doesn't explain the below 2000 Cinebench R23 single core score.
All in all, they're quite similar. Though I'm still waiting for an optimized Intel CPU benchmark for gaming. One where they disable the E cores and maybe even undervolt the CPU so it has less power draw, and also increase the cache ring frequency. And, of course, maximum RAM, not just 6000 MT/s.
he have 25 games and others have 3,4-6 games and HW 12 at most!! bigger channels are lazy and wait that game developers pay to them to show their games
@@andreivasile821 Big channels as Linux,Jay2,GN are lazy ones and waiting for money from game developers and they have as you see 5-6 games in tests ., same games all the time
There seem to be a few inconsistencies with different reviews. It's possible this is caused by the 22H2 update that, once again, is hurting AMD's performance by a decent margin.
The 13600k makes way more since for me because I already have a compatible motherboard (b660) and I would have to spend at least 300 dollars more for ryzen.
I really wish Intel to provide 5 year socket support.
@@shreyasdharashivkar8027 am5 will support only 9000 series more only(probably also 11000(
sense*
@@Caseoh_Music autocorrect moment
@@Pividol cap...
Comparing based on the price of a CPU is pretty pointless, because owning a CPU in isolation is pretty pointless. When you look at platform costs, the 7600X is a lot more expensive than the 13600K.
It makes up for it a little by actually having a future upgrade path though, so if you plan on keeping your system for a few years, amd presents as good/better value
@@sstier48 Yes, exactly. For that reason I was looking forward to getting an am5 system. But at the moment... The prices are just too high. Probably will wait till early next year to see how things look then.
Do to inflation I've decided to buy neither except in mobile laptop form.
Platform cost is roughly the same. DDR5 RAM doesnt cost much more than DDR4 anymore, its 20€ more here. And the cheapest AM5 board is 10€ cheaper than the cheapest LGA1700 Board here.
It's interesting because in Gamers Nexus 13600K review it scored higher than the 7600X in most gaming tests and in Cyberpunk the 13600K was 5% faster than the 7950X (!) Guess its always good to get a 2nd opinion.
This could be due to the 22H2 update causing inconsistencies with different test setups. It seems to be hurting AMD's performance by a decent amount.
Power consumption for 13th gen seems to also be all over the place depending on the motherboard used 😐
@@MLWJ1993 when some don't use "balanced powerplan" the power skyrocket, making the E cores totally useless.
and how many games have Gamer Nexus in tests?? 5-6 only like all bigger channels with over million sucsribers !! Hardware Unboxed and Jarrod tech have 25 -54 games tests and there 7600x win while those ( lazy) guys as GN and Linux have few titles
@@MLWJ1993 its usualy very high and a mobo or cooler can make it run at less speed and watts than automatic 200w
AMD is pushing hard this gen. What we need to consider is that AMD gaming CPU 3D V-cache is not out yet. Really start to think to go for AMD this gen....
At this level of CPU, all-core loads aren't the main concern. People in general are going to step up to 8 core parts like the 7700X or the 13700K or higher depending on how much all-core workloads they have
So, from a gaming perspective they're about the same if you feed them about the same speed of memory. DDR4 isn't good enough anymore to push out the faster fps as should have been expected, so there is very little cost benefit doing either system.
There are two advantages of going the AM5 route. If this is the level of gaming performance you want for now but you want to consider upgrading in the future, the MB is going to take up through Zen 6 CPUs. On the other hand 13th gen is the last CPU for LGA-1700. The next socket is LGA-1851 and it's for 14th and 15th gen. Also, a CPU upgrade for LGA-1700 after you already bought the 13600K doesn't make sense since the gains won't be enough to spend the money.
The 2nd advantage REGARDLESS of how people view the way AMD does clock management based on temp, is the 7600X only uses about 45W during gaming. So, heat output from the SoC is going to be low EVEN THOUGH a single sensor on the die hits 95 C. So this is a very low power CPU for gaming. The 13600K on the other hand is using about 75W. This isn't high power but you're going to notice 30 extra watts in heat output. It's not going to be like a furnace, but added to the heat of the GPU it does start to matter.
So, regardless of how people feel about a sensor hitting 95 C, power consumption is actually low for AMD parts during gaming. Even the 7700X uses less power than the 13600K during gaming, using only 62W on avg.
These numbers are averages, as reported by Techpowerup.
Other numbers for power consumption, the 5800X3D uses about 45W, so OUTSTANDING performance based on power consumption, the 13900K uses about 117W which is getting into flamethrower territory when you sum that with the heat of the GPU, and the 7950X is using about 87W.
AMD CLEARLY has Intel beat in gaming performance based on power consumption for the last couple of generations of products. I use the 5800X3D and really enjoy it.
little update 7600x is $249 now, making it better deal, and thanks to its 32MB of cache memory, it benefits the competitive games more
But 13600k is 30 to 50 percent faster in productivity
How nice to ignore the price of AMD motherboards.
Exactly what i was going to comment...
50$ more than am4
To be fair he has mentioned that in other videos and it was probably pretty well known at the time this video was uploaded how much more they costed.
Scratch my other comment he actually mentions motherboards at 12:12
between am4 and am5 its 20-100$ difference, between ddr4 and ddr5 its 30-100$ difference, 13600 has 6 cores nearly as strong as 7600x 6 cores and has small cores and it gives it more power and 13600 costs like 7700x and 7700x is stronger ,13700 has a little more multicore than 7700x like 13600 7600x and costs like 7900x and 7900x is is stronger, and also 7600x vs 12600 7600x 6 cores are stronger than all the p and e cores in the 12600
Got a 5600x for $150 on Amazon prime day in July. Mobo for $110idh, DDR4 for $50. It cost almost as much as a 7600x by itself, really good for budget gaming.
Yeah that's a sweet deal, nice.
5600x is by default at 150$ on aliexpress lol, and the cheapest am4 mobo's are about 55$ aswell
@@glordium1951 I don’t trust Ali express and want am5 for pcie 4.0. Gonna upgrade to a new gpu because I do plan to get a 3440x1440p or 4K monitor soon. 3060 ti is fine for now for 1080p.
@@Wusyaname_ AM4 has PCIe Gen 4. You need to use B550 board or higher.
Honestly I am in shock Jarrod.. I thought the 13th gen would throttle the AMD in games.. to see it completely reversed was a real surprise.. for those who only want to game, the AMD therefore makes the most sense, I am guessing the 7700X will be the sweet spot overall. Lower power consumption and heat and higher FPS in most titles. For those doing gaming AND multi thread work, the Intel. For example for music production that involves a lot of tracks and plugins it would be the Intel hands down for me. Very interesting video, thanks! I am going to settle on the 13700K I have decided, but I am waiting for cooler tests to find something that can keep it below 100.
amd focus is gaming/efficiency bc productivity workload on reallife usage is verysmall different. they only shown on benchmark. but i think amd need to add more cores to ryzen 5 and 7 series to close the gap on productivity benchmark
@@storyanaksekolah2 Well as a gamer I disagree, because I've done my fair share of productivity & I always would let it run & walk off to let it do its job. So basically a within a 5minute difference is no big deal, and could just make separate productivity cpus if it was profitable.
@@stevenanderson9532 5 minutes of what? render time? how about design/editing work? its longer than render time. also now you can use gpu acceleration. its way faster. so the cpu usage is just for the workflow
@@storyanaksekolah2 MP4 MKV, even a 4k render won't be instant on either. If your doing full motion editing it's more about which software usability in ease of use most of the time. Also if your inputing on excel or word I doubt either can run less then you type. Now if you are outputting to a plate for a newspaper it will still be limited to how fast the plate printer is. I know I did this work.
In other videos the 13600k outperforms/ties with 7600x with fewer games getting more frames with 7600x, this video is the only one I've seen where 13600k has this weird performance in comparison
Can you get your hands on some 7700X and 13700K to test similarly?
The AMD lower end parts look great for gaming and efficiency, but they need to lower the MSRPs at some point in the near future, Intel really cut into their margins to eek out better price competitivity (RTL dies are quite a bit bigger than ADL).
They need the lower prices twofold, since they also need to make room for the X3D parts (the segmentation/pricing). Which allegedly will be on a whole new level than both Vanilla Zen4 and 5800X3D (new stacking tech and more experience on building them).
I mean I don't get it. I see every other channel showing the 13600K beating the 7600X except from this one.
tks bro, really appreciated the effort comparing two valuable chips.. i love the argumen " those performance come with high price, more watt!..." seal the deal to the pc picker!
Hey Jarod, if you have your msi 2080 ti still. Could you post an i5 13600k and ddr4 16gb benchmark please. I just bought a 13600kf and am upgrading from 6th gen i7 6700k.
Hi, I also have a i7 6700k, and planing to get a 13600k, and to keep my 16gb ddr4, it was worth the upgrade? how is general performance? cheers !
Finally, a benchmark comparison that uses the same memory kit, unlike other reviewers who use 6000mhz for amd then 6400mhz for Intel
Intel supports higher RAM speed by default. AMDs recommended spec is less. Why should the reviewer artificially cap the memory speed for Intel to make it same? What else he should do to make the two processors the same? Disable the extra 8 cores in Intel to make it same core count as AMD?
@@green_block You understand there is a difference between messing with the cpus themselves and messing with the other parts right?
@@WilliamNFMS How would you test the 5600x vs 7600x using same memory. One doesn’t support DDR5, other doesn’t support DDR4. The whole same memory argument is just dumb.
@@green_block Maybe a complete chart with Ryzen 5k/Intel 12k & 13k 3600C14, Ryzen 7k/Intel 13k 6000C30, Intel 13k with Intel recommended specs?
Yeah 13600K Owners are not happy with these results as they are now losing by a 4% margin in gaming, so glad im waiting on 3D V-Cache, Wont even be close in gaming for intel.
So a year later would you (or anyone in the comments that knows about this stuff) recommend the i5 over amd? I wouldn’t be using the integrated graphics. I’m trying to build something I can game on, use flight sim and video edit.
I'm planning to buy the Core i5 12600K, it is a good choice?
Went with the 13600k as im constantly alt tabbing and multitasking while playing games
Now with the addition of 7600 at 230$ which gives basically the same performance as 7600x but with lower Tgp, and hance more efficient there is no reason to go for team blue.
if you are not on render or smthng
6 cores won't be enough. Intel is the way to go.
awesome video 🔥, Intel does have a price advantage with ddr4 and b660 support for those wanting to save money, the b660 aorus master at $164 supports 13th gen and can be flashed without a cpu
That's also right
If u care abt upgrading then it's Amd
If it's about saving money and not really considering later upgrade then intel is great..
I still hate the watts and temps on both sadly
That's the only issue they don't pay attention for..
@@grey.98 True but 13600k on DDR4 is even slower.
@@horuherodorigesu241 no way bro
As long as the MB covers the watts needed all u need is just the rams..
Plus it depends on what kind of work u r doing if it's gaming and creating medium level then it won't fail or even feel slow
But if u r a creator the more expensive the better the equation would be..
kinda, but theyre not that much cheaper, you can have a decent AM5 mobo for like 170 bucks, the cheapest 1700 board you want to pair with a cpu with suchs a higher power draw really starts at basically the same price ( cheapest 1700 board that even has VRMs was like +/- 150 last time I checked for somebody).
@@grey.98 actually it is slower, especially on Ubisoft games.
Just want to ask have you known a laptop with r5 7600x/5600x cpu with rtx3050?
Im going to build my first pc, and currently there's a sale going on for the 7600x and theres a $100 difference, really don't know if the 13600K is worth $100 more...
You have to consider the motheeboard prices too
are we on a state of reaching the point of diminishing return from a good CPU? i mean like comparing games that already at 100+ FPS is something, whether going for Intel or AMD you barely can go wrong with your option
For gaming, yeah, we kind of did.
The 13600K mostly beats the 7600X in DirectX 12 games, but stumbles in DX 11 and 9
😂😂😂😂😢😢😢😢😢
Most underrated desktop hardware reviewer. I know you mainly do laptop stuff, but your desktop hardware videos are better than HUB and Gamers Nexus.
So now that i can get the 7600X for $200 going intel just seems stupid
AMD need to add more core to the Ryzen 5 lineup going forward.
If amd want to up core. Amd muat have new motherboard
@@YudaXD8K_ why?
Because of the socket size
@@notenjoying666 AMD fails to compete ,, Agree :)
@@notenjoying666 Intel at 10nm already SMASHING useless AMD that uses 5nm ,, ahhh just think how quickly AMD will need to leave the CPU business once Intel moves to 5nm ,, LAOVE IT
There's now a 90 dollar difference in my country. 7700x is now in 13600k territory.
IMO the difference in threads is too big, here. Yep, they are considered same category (intel did change the game here a bit) but while I see the point of doing so, 12 threads against a cpu with 20 threads (and the e-cores are very good for productivity, so is not that much of a lesser core in this scenario) is going to give the advantage to the latter, big time, if both generations are more or less recent. Clearly seen when realizing how identical these two are for Photoshop (or cinebench single core). I'd get the 7600X for _only_ , or mainly, Photoshop uses. And probably the 13600k for a station mainly for video. Or the 7700X for that. As he says in another video tho, the AM5 platform it seems will have more of an upgrade path in the future. And... for those into gaming (not me, I just do casuals or other low end gaming) the X3D chips might tell a very different story. But if it is like the last time, those chips tend to be slower than the no-x3d version for productivity, so this is the peak in productivity from AMD. Again, IMO price will be the factor, as intel in same category is not having the same number of cores anymore. Which is funny, as it has been always accused of having bet for more clock speed and not caring bout cores. Turnes have tabled.
These videos are amazing, loved the other new one about the 13900k vs 7950x.
13600k is AWESOME ,,, drinking the tears of the AMD fan/soy boys delights me
aka if you are not using the godly 4090 for gaming they are gonna be gpu limited. buy a nice 13600k or 7600x and pair it with the next mid range gpu out of amd/nvidia.
12700k vs 13600k while the 12700k is $40 higher than 13600k... Which one should I go with as a coder?
I saw an all AMD HP Victus at a decent price. It contains a Radeon RX 6500M. Would you happen to know the Nvidia equivalent?
hii can we get some test's with streaming ? Gameplay + streaming 1060 60fps CPU SETTINGS : super fast OR very fast AND including streaming by GPU BOTH with 7000 bitrate
I just cant find ppl showing that diferences. I want to upgrade my intire PC . and the budget is freaking Small and limited.
I saw a friend with a 5700x and a 3060 ti and the performance was good, but the 1% Lows was going from 70 FPS to 33 .
The game in question is GTA V .
Testing with 5700x on both Settings " super fast as very fast " the 1% lows was basicly the same,
but streaming via GPU the 1% low did go up to 43 FPS .
and on both test's either CPU or GPU streaming the game was still stuttering BAD , like 0.5 S to 1 Sec stutterings ..
And to be honest i dont want to upgrade to still face the same stupid stuttering problems .
what can i Do ???
Get 3070 ti ? 700+€ or a 3080 ? 800€+
a 13600k ? 420€ or a 5700x ? 250€ Or a 5600x 200€ ? or a 7600x 350€
5800X3D out of reach . custs Like 500€
I realy needed some advices. If someone wants to help . i would apreciate
Finally, someone doing 1% low at 4k, where people reading these sort of comparison actually care!
Why all other review on internet show 13xx at least a lead by 1-10% in games and only this one review does not?????
do AMD pay you?
Why is the i5 13600K 370+ quid in the UK?? Hope those prices settle down.
which one is better for gaming and streaming?
Thanks to Intel for not overpricing their CPUs.
Thanks to AMD for kicking Intel in the nuts to start innovating again.
Thanks to Intel for creating great early Core-Branding products like Sandy Bridge to force AMD to come up with a newer and better architecture.
Thanks to AMD for being competitive with their Athlons throughout the 2000s to make sure Intel kept making good products.
Thanks to Intel for inventing the first CPU to begin with.
Thanks to Bill Shockley for being an asshole to his employees, which force them to leave to form Fairchild and Intel.
Awesome channel, thank you for your work. I will be switching off my ad block waching your videos.
Are there any major differences between i5-12400H/i5-12450H/i5-12500H from their newer 13th gen counterparts ??
If they follow the 12th get schedule, then 13th gen mobile will likely be early 2023. So, we have to wait a bit for the comparison.
IMHO it is not correct to define value with only the processor price, without taking into consideration the total platform cost. AMD really need to make some corrections in MSRPs and have some chat with AIBs for the ridiculous prices in motherboards.
Which of them won ?
Jarrod i have an idea for you to test my good buddy,
Recently in the world of Dj'ing, a dj software company named Serato introduced a feature on its dj software where it can separate 4 STEMS (vocal-instrument-base-beat) on the fly while mixing. the thing is this feature uses a huuuuuge about of CPU power to which people are talking that if you don't have an M1 at least u cant utilize this feature.
to make a long story short, can you maybe dive into this subject as it is EXTREMLY important to djs across the globe and no pro tech guy ever covered the subject.
i think this will be some very unique content for you as well!!!
cheers!!
problem is not 7600x, problem is its motherboard price, here in india I am getting its motherboard at $320 while the CPU at less than $300
whole cpu for 300?? where?? whats the configuration?
waitt why your 13600k running hot and power draw dmn mine its not like that i think its your mother board or cpu cooler not sure hmmmm im using z690 rog strix.
So streaming and Gaming at the same time should I go for intel or Amd ?
Probably Intel since it has those extra e cores which will handle the streaming
what about power consumption comparison while gaming?
Do you think will be any difference between 13600k and 13900k in 4k resolution with RTX 4090 in Microsoft Flight Simulator?
I am building a system for MSFS2020 in 4k and I'd like to see a comparison or to know if in that resolution would be any difference in fps and smoothness for the 2 processors.. Great work, I really like your video and your comparison mad in a professional and precise way! Many thanks
Not sure in what part of the world the 13600K costs 300,= but definitely not in Europe.. More like 420,= euros so not sure you are making the right comparison...
Here both 7600x and 13600kf are 379eur
He is making the right comparison you just have different prices
AMD Zen 4 launch is suffering from the same, albeit worse, problem as Intel's 12th Gen launch - overpriced motherboards. Being DDR5 exclusive also doesn't help AMD although DDR5 is rapidly becoming affordable.
AMD's strategy is to reserve Zen 3 as its budget and midrange segment while Zen 4 is for high performance. This strategy fails on several grounds. The 7600X and 7700X are meant to be the 'budget' Zen 4 options but don't make any sense when compared to the 5800XD which is almost always faster in gaming and the 5950X which is always faster in productivity both of which are on the much cheaper Zen 3 platform. This strategy also fails to recognize that people generally do not like buying 'outdated' parts when purchasing firsthand. So most people are going to ignore Zen 3 in favour of 13th Gen despite Zen 3 still offering decent value options.
Yeah definitely a problem with the motherboard cuz it's expensive to upgrade, but for AMD i am very interested in their mobile chips in the future for 7000 series cuz since they have great power efficiency and better cooling because of the lower wattage difference between AMD and intel. Some great laptops will come hopefully, if they don't fuck it up somehow.
@@buckduck3624 The power draw of the 13 gen is very much Motherboard dependant and if set up correctly can draw significantly less whilst the performance barely suffers. This can be with Zen 4 motherboards as well although the %age saving is not as great as they don't use as much to begin with. Looking at UK prices (cos that's where I am) the saving on CPU is offset and then some by the extra cost of the motherboard. X670E boards as tested here are VERY expensive.
AMD would've been okay if they made this gen compatible with ddr4 imo. 13th gen's power draw and high temps mean they're gonna be expensive due to electricity bills and people in hot countries just will NOT be able to run them properly
@@jubayerwasidraiyan5874 Agreed but the eco performance, just like AMD, runs them a lot, lot cooler and temps are far better. Both companies are laying on the power and temps this round which in the current climate (no pun intended) is not a good optic.
I'm going to scrap everything you said and use different logic. For most people, PCs were fast enough in 2018 for almost anything they do. Zen 3 with AM4 makes a VERY capable platform for most users.
For gamers, there's a lot to consider.
For people who use a desktop PC to do video editing and a a few other tasks, there's more to consider.
So, Zen 3 is WAY more capable than what probably 80% of the global population needs. For professionals, they're expected to use Pro parts or have to accept what desktop offers. For the gamers, AM4 MBs are perfectly capable gaming platforms even WITH a 4090 as long as you get the 5800X3D. It's not ideal but it's certainly a good system. I'd say a person could STILL buy into that platform (B550, 5800X3D) and have great gaming experiences for the next 6 - 7 years. This is regardless of the fact that there are faster CPUs. That doesn't matter. What matters is if YOU like your system, the last I checked. And in fact that's exactly what I did and am more than happy using X570, 32GB CL16, 5800X3D and the 6800 XT as a 2K gaming platform and don't plan on giving it up for MY gaming until Zen 6 is out, and there's lots of reasons for that, one being I don't like the CPU-chipset link being only 8GB/s and I can't buy into AM5 until that's bumped up to 16GB/s otherwise it's no better than my X570 MB.
For those people who run one or two NVMe drives, B650E with gen5 to the PCIe slot for the GPU is more than capable though Zen 6. You at least get the NVMe drives off the CPU at gen5 speed and you can upgrade the GPU in the future with a gen5 GPU.
So it's a plenty capable platform for typical gamers who other than that do light workloads. It only gets messy if you REALLY need all the ports that X670/E offer because of the limitation of the CPU-chipset link.
On the other hand, if you want to build the best gaming rig for Intel 13th gen you need DDR5 and that puts you at cost parity with AMD AM5 platforms. AND if you want to take advantage of the better CPU-chipset interface of 16GB/s like I would want then you need Z790.
So no, AMD if perfectly fine with what they're doing. AM5 will pick up in sales once they release Vcache parts so which most the AMD fans I see in comment threads seem to be waiting for just like I would, and they they'll pick up even more when their RDNA 3 based APUs come out because THOSE will be the best APUs on the market and will game just like low end GPUs, and this means people buying those get REAL 1080p gaming performance without having to buy a GPU. Intel might have this parity for APUs once they release Meteor Lake but I don't think Raptor Lake will.
In other words, what exists right now for Zen 4 isn't appealing because it doesn't match up right. They'll be GREAT gaming platforms, but for people wanting to buy into AM5 for gaming most of them are waiting for Vcache parts. They'll be GREAT for people who want decent GPU performance but don't want to spend the money on a GPU. Once partners put out lower cost MBs they'll be GREAT for typical usage.
But 600 series MBs have a limitation with the CPU-chipset link which different types of special case users or content creators that want to take advantage of 4 NVMe ports on the MB because of that 8GB/s cap on the link. As long as that speed is acceptable to a person then AM5 is perfectly fine.
And everything I said about Zen 3 would also be true for Intel 10th gen, but there isn't a kick ass gaming CPU for 10th gen like there is the 5800X3D. If you don't consider gaming, 10th gen CPU are WAY more capable than what 80% of the population of the world needs.
As far as 12th gen, Meh. If you follow the Amazon top 50 best selling CPUs on Amazon, AMD has dominated the top 20, and these are DIY builders now. People LOVE taking advantage of lower cost products and AMD with Zen 3 is dominating here no matter what you say. The Amazon top 50 list has shown this to be the case for the last 6 months.
There's going to be an initial surge for 13th gen purchases, and then it will slow down and people will be buying everything from 10th gen - 13th gen CPUs and they'll be buying Zen 2 - Zen 4 CPUs just like they have been. The data don't lie.
Both these CPUs seem to be overkill for gaming, as the frame rates at 4k are still really high. For now I think I'd save money and buy a cheaper 12xxx or 5xxx chip or wait for this generation's budget chips to launch. Still, what I'm really waiting for is a better GPU price to performance.
Maybe we'll get lucky on Nov 3rd
I mean, at 4k, it's more about the GPU rather than the CPU. At 4k, you probably be fine with something like 12400f or 5600. There is no need to to even glance at this gen, assuming that you have 4090 level of performance, which was used on this CPU review
Buy 12400f
IN GAMING! This is an ABSOLUTE BUTTWHIPPING! The 7600x is handing INTEL it's behind.
@@doctorfresh3856 Err no it's not. Look at total platform cost for a start.
Maybe the reason why intel was low in red dead and csgo is the lower baseclock?
I need maximum oc benchmark for 13600k and 7600x pls
Thank you for including 1440p ! ❤
You're welcome!
This was so much work to make! Thanks for doing this!
Thanks for watchibng!
Great video jarrod 👍🏾. Hope you can get your hands on the 13900k
Great video segment. If you are playing open world games then you will see the i5-13600k stretch it's legs. The chart clearly shows it. I recommend the i5-13600k for content creators.
How different would it be with a rtx 4070
Only handful of reviews would recommend 7600X, is this a sponsored video of AMD ?
No.
Hard disagree with your conclusion. Not only total platform is much cheaper for 13600k but if you want, you can pair it with ddr4 which doesnt perform that much worse compared to ddr5. ddr4 can be super relevant for users who already have it from their previous systems. 13600k performs in the same ballpark in gaming and much better in core heavy workloads AND is much cheaper.
Recommending 7600k just for couple % of gaming advantage and questionable upgradeability path is ludicrous, considering that most people upgrade their cpus at the earliest every 3 years and by that time current am5 mobos will be significantly outdated and most likely unsupported. Now if anyone says "but amd made commitment to support am5 through 2025" Well they certainly did, here is the catch though "am5" not "b650/x670 chipset motherboards" Not to mention that the price saved today with 13600k+ddr4+z690 already easily covers new motherboard when you will want to upgrade your system later.
zen 4 are not bad products but their cpus and motherboards are severely overpriced.
Idk... My mobo cpu and gpu are all freaking old, I mean 4-6 yo.
For people like me a platform price does not even matter. I will upgrade everything
@@Shineinpoverty 4 year old cpu is not that old and performs very well, something like 8700k or 9900k are still fine for todays gaming unless you are chasing super high refresh rates but then the price to performance metric goes out of the window anyway :)
AMD = cheaper, more performance, future proof
Future proofing doesn’t exist so long as technology improves. You’ll keep upgrading as you move down the line to get the best performance.
@@-Krispin- at least not as short as intel
Where is the iGPU comparison? Many people don't even bother about games you know?
Ждал этого теста именно от тебя .
Thank you for showing gaming and creator scenarios good sir 👍👌🙏
At 4:08 13600k was not 43% faster, as you claimed. Do the math again, amigo.
I cannot believe where they reached with this prices, to pay just for a processor more than a gaming console.......
Really isn't that big? Where all youtubers check prices? 13600K 450CAD vs 7600X 330CAD today. I get 7700X on sale for 430CAD. Nobrainer against discontinued 13600K platform (no discount on 13600K btw)
Eagerly to see this review! As always nice content Jarrod's!! 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼
I been watching your content a lot lately. I subscribed and gave a like
Welcome aboard!
As of right now 7600x is 250$ and comes with free 16gb DDR5 5600mhz ram at Microcenter and New egg running a sale Asrock b-650 Mobo for $150 just picked both of this for 400$ plus tax so stoked!
Great to see both CPU manufacturers trading blows, giving us consumers great products!
Trading blows? Besides 7950X Intel scrapped everything that AMD can offer, especially 7600X.
@@Kaygoooo With 9th, 10th & 11th gen vs what AMD had at the time, it was the opposite; AMD smoked Intel in performance. This back and forth between CPU manufacturers like this is exactly what we need; without it, companies get lazy...
Trading blows 😝😝😝
Intel 50% faster = Trading blows
AMD 5% faster = Intel dead
@@green_block Except it was around 50% faster in multi core while consuming much less power. I mean, a Ryzen 4900HS, a 35 watt LAPTOP CPU was close to beating a 9900K DESKTOP CPU. Intel just didn't have an answer to that until 12th gen because they were too lazy to add more cores once AMD were (temporarily) out of the market with their awful Bulldozer architecture. Ryzen was the turnaround they and the market needed, and combined with Apple's own silicon, it pushed Intel back into actually having to compete rather than just offer quad core CPUs for 5 generations and have 14 nm CPUs from 5th gen to 10th/11th gen.
@Garrus Vakarian True. But we have to thank AMD for forcing Intel off their lazy ass.
If you do gaming and work, go intel. If gaming and upgradability is your main concern, go for amd.
it's just dumb to spend more at the moment for a way worse product for the sake of "upgradability". buy a 13600k and you can just skip entire AM5/14th,15th socket.
@@hoangd4132 I respectfully disagree. You can save more, have better performance in the long run but you'll have the worse experience in multicore productivity at the moment. If gaming is your only concern and future upgrades for cheap, let's say in 3 years, go amd. If you need it for work and gaming NOW, go intel.
Or just wait 2 months for x3d
DDR5 6000 🫠. Don’t do that if you’re planning to go with the 13600K. Either get yourself one of the better DDR4 kits or go with DDR5 6400+. The 13600K was handicapped with the memory used here.
Your results in gaming are quite different from GN and HU 🤔
yeah i saw it aslo
Should I go for 13600k Or 7700x ??
in gaming i prefer ryzen, since intel so hot when gaming and u need proper cooler that makes your budget scale high
For a new PC buyer almost evenly matched. But Intel has the edge especially for those who wanted to upgrade their intel CPUs as they can still use the same motherboard and memory. For AMD, you have no other option but to replace your MB and buy a DDR5 memory which entails more cost. Anyways, if you have a shiny RTX 4090 and playing 4K resolution, it does not matter to upgrade your CPU as a 5600x or even a 12400F could have an fps within striking distance of their big cpu brothers.
And if you want to upgrade the system in the future, on AMD you simply swap the CPU and in Intel, you buy a New setup.
Im 100% going with AMD because i like the longevity of the socket they make.
@@Petrixxxxxxx Not keen on buying the new CPUs as the previous gen will be an ok upgrade for me. My 6700K still serves me well for hires gaming. Would just have to push my GPU to get the right fps. With RT Ultra and Quality DLSS, I still hit 70 fps for Cyberpunk at 1620P. That is fine with me.
Grabbed the 7600x for $250 and got Star Wars: Jedi Survivor for free not to mention, AM5 will be supported for 2 more generations
I would rather compare the 13600k with the 7700x. The 13600K/KF is much better deal than the 7600x for arround 300$.
No point comparing two different prized products
@@ThePauch1 No point compairing 6C/12T to 14C/20T CPU. Even with 8E Cores in the 13600k. The real competitor to the 7600x is the upcoming 13400K/KF. This shows that the 7600x and 7700x are overpriced, and AMD should reduce prices or release 7600 and 7700 (non X). I'm not fan for Intel, I have amd CPU. But Intel CPUs are better deal this time. Especially with the expensive AMD motherboards.
that 13600K easily overclocks to 5.5-5.6ghz all cores beating even 7700x in productivity on cheaper board and oc3d tv showed, having decent ddr4 is even enough without any loss of performance. I think Jarrod undervalued Intel this time and ignored the platform cost into equation, usually that is what reviewers always scream on top of their lunge saying, AM4 cost less for years.
Without "any" loss of performance? That's some good stuff you're smoking.
Ddr4 is slower
13600K beats already 7700X without oc
Hmm, I’m actually seeing more benefits from AMD for gaming. I was going to buy a 13600K, but after watching this, I might go AMD or wait until next year when lower end launches
Haha :v i upgrade processor 3 years im use 2600x want buy i5 14600k next year
Get your eyes tested
@@tilapiadave3234 found the Intel fan boy (maybe a blind guy as well)
@@makeurmomproud
Bro tell me this thing what if intel i5 13th gen is fabricated with 7nm technology. Does AMD has a chance to beat 😅
what about the 13600k overclocked?
What happens if someone gets a 13700k at the 13600k price ?
Thank you for your work and this video!
Feels like yesterday I built my 10700k PC and they are already coming out with 13th gen? Hope the mobile variants will be good as well.
Tech yes city sayed you must turn off core isolation and that your fps numbers are wrong (because his numbers are on 13600k side )
All testing was done with core isolation off, as mentioned at 1:21 testing with it on is not "wrong" either, it's just a different way of testing and completely valid as it matches the Windows 11 default. As long as both CPUs are tested the same way and compared fairly, it does not matter.
@@JarrodsTech then he bullshiting because he have other results and few games only as always