Intel Thread

[majestic]

Speaking purely from my current experience with the i7-13700k, even manually just setting the power limit to Intel's specifications (i.e. 253W PL2, cannot do much besides that, as the B660 chipset does not allow for undervolting) does a number for thermals and power draw, while missing less than 2% of performance on Cinebench R23.

Der8auer had a gaming power draw video a while back with varied CPUs because he had like an old prototype CPU to test, and they were pretty similar. An i5-13600 under gaming load is much faster than a 7600X (well, duh) but draws about as much power, although the usual caveats apply, there's some variance in between the CPUs (and in the case of the 7600Xs, up to 40%).

 

On the topic of Asus doing Asus things, I got myself a 32GB Corsair Vengeance DDR5-7200 CL 34 kit. Loading Asus' "XMP I" profile results in having a blue screen every other minute and stability issues like crashing Firefox tabs in between. Loading the actual XMP profile of the RAM sticks, which Asus calls "XMP II" works though. At least, well, it seems like it is stable.

Also thinking about moving to a larger case or using a front mounted 360mm AIO. Even with the really low height Corsair Vengeance without RGB, I can only install and remove the sticks after dismounting the radiator from the top of the case. Now, I'm not fiddling around with my memory all the time, of course, but still, that is kinda annoying. Especially in light of perhaps having to reinstall the old sticks, if I can't use the new ones at their full potential I'm sending them back, no point in paying extra for memory speeds and timings I can't reach without introducing instability.

[majestic]

6 hours ago, majestic said:

On the topic of Asus doing Asus things, I got myself a 32GB Corsair Vengeance DDR5-7200 CL 34 kit. Loading Asus' "XMP I" profile results in having a blue screen every other minute and stability issues like crashing Firefox tabs in between. Loading the actual XMP profile of the RAM sticks, which Asus calls "XMP II" works though. At least, well, it seems like it is stable.

Asus being Asus aside, I guess trying to run a 7200 kit on a board only rated for 6000 is a bit of a stretch, so that was probably unfair - had some crashes with the XMP profile regardless, so I dropped the clock speeds a little. So far they seem perfectly stable at 6800 MT/s, which isn't so bad considering that the memory is still pretty far out of spec for the mainboard, and 6800 kits with the same timings cost about as much or more due to useless RGB bling.

Guess I'll keep the sticks, and... I need a better mainboard. Well, time to wait a bit, rumor mill has it that Meteor Lake is once again cancelled on desktop, and that would have been a refresh for LGA 1700.

[Bokishi]

I can't even run 7200 on a z790 board rated for 8000. I mean it boots and runs all day, but y-cruncher stability tests fail. I back it to 7000 and that was working. I ended up refunding the Vengeance 7200 and just oc'd my 6400 sticks to 7000, and that has been my daily driver for the past few months

[majestic]

37 minutes ago, Bokishi said:

I can't even run 7200 on a z790 board rated for 8000. I mean it boots and runs all day, but y-cruncher stability tests fail. I back it to 7000 and that was working. I ended up refunding the Vengeance 7200 and just oc'd my 6400 sticks to 7000, and that has been my daily driver for the past few months

I also have the TG contact frame installed, and if I messed up having the right mounting pressure, it could affect memory stability too, but it looks like I can call that a win. I doubt my old Vengeance 5200s can deal with running at 6800.

[Gfted1]

Intel Drops the Price of Its 8GB Arc A750 GPU to Just $199 | Extremetech

[Bokishi]

On 5/23/2023 at 2:24 PM, majestic said:

I also have the TG contact frame installed, and if I messed up having the right mounting pressure, it could affect memory stability too, but it looks like I can call that a win. I doubt my old Vengeance 5200s can deal with running at 6800.

Yeah this 6400 G.Skill set was one of the first DDR5's to be made with Hynix A-Die, so it turned out they can oc pretty far. Could boot 7600 with them, but stability is another story...

[majestic]

If the current rumors are true (and the 14700K leaks suggest that they probably are), Intel is going to give the i3-13400 six performance cores. Single core uplift doesn't look good, so the new i7 and i9 are going to be largely uninteresting. The real killer is going to be the 14600k with eight performance cores. Depends on the pricing of course, but the 13600k is already really good value, if the 14600k is in the same pricing ballbark it's going to kill, and the 14100 is going to be hard to beat as a budget option - can still slap the thing on a cheap ass DDR4 board, after all.

Until Ryzen 8000 and the inevitable 7000 price drop, at least.

[majestic]

Edit:

Okay, so this is basically the same situation with KrisFix a ways back when he had a batch of defective Radeon cards and asked the community for help, and suddenly everyone was screaming AMD DRIVERS KILL THE GPUS even though KrisFix himself never mentioned a single thing about the drivers killing the cards in his video, only that the drivers were the only constant between all the cards he got.

So, basically, here's the original video:

A rather niche situation that may as well be a real issue (hard to tell because DPC issues can be really wonky and caused by myriad reasons), and commenters and others pick this up as - literally - "Intel systems lag like cheap iPads". A well, serves me right for not watching the actual source in the first place.

Also, the, uhm, conclusion is not necessarily correct. DPC issues like that aren't necessarily just the CPU - could be another driver. The Intel Rapid Storage System drivers can cause pretty high DPC latency too. *shrug*

Edited July 17 by majestic