Intel Core i7-13700K: Efficient choice for a gaming “workhorse”

Intel Core i7-13700K in detail

The sixteen-core desktop Raptor Lake (Ci7-13700K) is a curious compromise between Core i9 (13900K) and Core i5 (13600K). Compared to the Core i5, it is significantly faster thanks to higher clock speeds and Turbo Boost 3.0 support, and it doesn’t lose much performance compared to Core i9 in lighter workloads, including gaming, but it is significantly more power-efficient.

Intel Core i7-13700K in detail

This processor is quite similar to the Core i9-12900K from last generation (Alder Lake). This primarily means that the Core i7-13700K uses eight active P cores (Raptor/Golden Cove) and an equal number of small E cores (Gracemont), which, moreover, support Hyper Threading, so they run in 16 threads.

In total, the Ci7-13700K has 16 cores with 24 threads. The main difference is that the Raptor Lake processor reaches higher clock speeds. Both in an all-core workload (up to 5.3 GHz, i.e. an increase of possibly 400 MHz) and in a single-threaded workload on a single core, or two cores that alternate on this task. There, the Core i9-13700K is 200 MHz faster compared to the Core i9-12900K, as long as this increase is not curbed by the CPU cooler used.

Despite the Ci7-13700K being a more efficient processor than the Ci9-12900K in single-threaded workloads, the 5.4 GHz is less fun to cool (than the 5.2 GHz of Alder Lake). At maximum performance in a multi-threaded workload, the cooling requirements are already comparable, with the difference that due to its higher efficiency, the Core i7-13700K comes out of the pair as the model with the higher computational performance. Not only because of the higher clock speeds on the P cores, but also on the E cores. While with the Ci9-12900K they were below the 4 GHz threshold (up to 3.7 GHz MC and 3.9 GHz SC), with the Core i7-13700K they are already beyond it – 4.2 GHz in boosts of all cores and of one (in single-threaded applications). Naturally, though, this applies to settings that consume more than the TDP (125 W).

Also one of the inter-generational changes is a slight increase in the power limit (PL2) from 241 W to 253 W. And although manufacturers tend not to observe it either (and exceed it, especially in the factory settings of Z790s boards with robust power delivery), the Core i7-13700K practically does not exceed it, unlike other processors (even from the Raptor Lake generation, for example, in the form of Ci9-13900K). Depending on the motherboard used, however, this can naturally vary a bit. Anyway, even with unlimited power supply, the Core i7-13700K will be quite close to PL2 values.

And lastly, a few design differences from the Core i9-12900K: The Core i7-13700K processor has a larger L2 cache. Instead of 1.25 MB per core (Ci9-12900K), it’s now 2 MB per core, but the IPC (performance per clock) are very similar on average. Whether the performance in a particular application swings from this average to the minus or to the plus depends on whether the task can take advantage of the larger L2 cache capacity or is instead “hurt” by higher latency.

Also worth noting is the roughly 23 % larger die area of Raptor Lake processors. The integrated graphics core of the Ci7-13700K is the same as that of the Ci9-12900K, the Intel UHD 770 with 32 EU.

The sixteen-core desktop Raptor Lake (Ci7-13700K) is a curious compromise between Core i9 (13900K) and Core i5 (13600K). Compared to the Core i5, it is significantly faster thanks to higher clock speeds and Turbo Boost 3.0 support, and it doesn’t lose much performance compared to Core i9 in lighter workloads, including gaming, but it is significantly more power-efficient.

Gaming tests

We test performance in games in four resolutions with different graphics settings. To warm up, there is more or less a theoretical resolution of 1280 × 720 px. We had been tweaking graphics settings for this resolution for a long time. We finally decided to go for the lowest possible (Low, Lowest, Ultra Low, …) settings that a game allows.

One could argue that a processor does not calculate how many objects are drawn in such settings (so-called draw calls). However, with high detail at this very low resolution, there was not much difference in performance compared to FHD (which we also test). On the contrary, the GPU load was clearly higher, and this impractical setting should demonstrate the performance of a processor with the lowest possible participation of a graphics card.

At higher resolutions, high settings (for FHD and QHD) and highest (for UHD) are used. In Full HD it’s usually with Anti-Aliasing turned off, but overall, these are relatively practical settings that are commonly used.

The selection of games was made considering the diversity of genres, player popularity and processor performance requirements. For a complete list, see Chapters 7–16. A built-in benchmark is used when a game has one, otherwise we have created our own scenes, which we always repeat with each processor in the same way. We use OCAT to record fps, or the times of individual frames, from which fps are then calculated, and FLAT to analyze CSV. Both were developed by the author of articles (and videos) from GPUreport.cz. For the highest possible accuracy, all runs are repeated three times and the average values of average and minimum fps are drawn in the graphs. These multiple repetitions also apply to non-gaming tests.

Computing tests

Let’s start lightly with PCMark 10, which tests more than sixty sub-tasks in various applications as part of a complete set of “benchmarks for a modern office”. It then sorts them into fewer thematic categories and for the best possible overview we include the gained points from them in the graphs. Lighter test tasks are also represented by tests in a web browser – Speedometer and Octane. Other tests usually represent higher load or are aimed at advanced users.

We test the 3D rendering performance in Cinebench. In R20, where the results are more widespread, but mainly in R23. Rendering in this version takes longer with each processor, cycles of at least ten minutes. We also test 3D rendering in Blender, with the Cycles render in the BMW and Classroom projects. You can also compare the latter with the test results of graphics cards (contains the same number of tiles).

We test how processors perform in video editing in Adobe Premiere Pro and DaVinci Resolve Studio 17. We use a PugetBench plugin, which deals with all the tasks you may encounter when editing videos. We also use PugetBench services in Adobe After Effects, where the performance of creating graphic effects is tested. Some subtasks use GPU acceleration, but we never turn it off, as no one will do it in practice. Some things don’t even work without GPU acceleration, but on the contrary, it’s interesting to see that the performance in the tasks accelerated by the graphics card also varies as some operations are still serviced by the CPU.

We test video encoding under SVT-AV1, in HandBrake and benchmarks (x264 HD and HWBot x265). x264 HD benchmark works in 32-bit mode (we did not manage to run 64-bit consistently on W10 and in general on newer OS’s it may be unstable and show errors in video). In HandBrake we use the x264 processor encoder for AVC and x265 for HEVC. Detailed settings of individual profiles can be found in the corresponding chapter 25. In addition to video, we also encode audio, where all the details are also stated in the chapter of these tests. Gamers who record their gameplay on video can also have to do with the performance of processor encoders. Therefore, we also test the performance of “processor broadcasting” in two popular applications OBS Studio and Xsplit.

We also have two chapters dedicated to photo editing performance. Adobe has a separate one, where we test Photoshop via PugetBench. However, we do not use PugetBench in Lightroom, because it requires various OS modifications for stable operation, and overall we rather avoided it (due to the higher risk of complications) and create our own test scenes. Both are CPU intensive, whether it’s exporting RAW files to 16-bit TIFF with ProPhotoRGB color space or generating 1:1 thumbnails of 42 lossless CR2 photos.

However, we also have several alternative photo editing applications in which we test CPU performance. These include Affinity Photo, in which we use a built-in benchmark, or XnViewMP for batch photo editing or ZPS X. Of the truly modern ones, there are three Topaz Labz applications that use AI algorithms. DeNoise AI, Gigapixel AI and Sharpen AI. Topaz Labs often and happily compares its results with Adobe applications (Photoshop and Lightroom) and boasts of better results. So we’ll see, maybe we’ll get into it from the image point of view sometime. In processor tests, however, we are primarily focused on performance.

We test compression and decompression performance in WinRAR, 7-Zip and Aida64 (Zlib) benchmarks, decryption in TrueCrypt and Aida64, where in addition to AES there are also SHA3 tests. In Aida64, we also test FPU in the chapter of mathematical calculations. From this category you may also be interested in the results of Stockfish 13 and the number of chess combinations achieved per unit time. We perform many tests that can be included in the category of mathematics in SPECworkstation 3.1. It is a set of professional applications extending to various simulations, such as LAMMPS or NAMD, which are molecular simulators. A detailed description of the tests from SPECworkstation 3.1 can be found at spec.org. We do not test 7-zip, Blender and HandBrake from the list for redundancy, because we test performance in them separately in applications. A detailed listing of SPECWS results usually represents times or fps, but we graph “SPEC ratio”, which represents gained points—higher means better.

Processor settings…

We test processors in the default settings, without active PBO2 (AMD) or ABT (Intel) technologies, but naturally with active XMP 2.0.

… and app updates

The tests should also take into account that, over time, individual updates may affect performance comparisons. Some applications are used in portable versions, which are not updated or can be kept on a stable version, but this is not the case for some others. Typically, games update over time. On the other hand, even intentional obsolescence (and testing something out of date that already behaves differently) would not be entirely the way to go.

In short, just take into account that the accuracy of the results you are comparing decreases a bit over time. To make this analysis easier for you, we indicate when each processor was tested. You can find this in the dialog box, where there is information about the test date of each processor. This dialog box appears in interactive graphs, just hover the mouse cursor over any bar.

The sixteen-core desktop Raptor Lake (Ci7-13700K) is a curious compromise between Core i9 (13900K) and Core i5 (13600K). Compared to the Core i5, it is significantly faster thanks to higher clock speeds and Turbo Boost 3.0 support, and it doesn’t lose much performance compared to Core i9 in lighter workloads, including gaming, but it is significantly more power-efficient.
Measuring CPU power consumption is relatively simple, much easier than with graphics cards. All power goes through one or two EPS cables. We also use two to increase the cross-section, which is suitable for high performance AMD processors up to sTR(X)4 or for Intel HEDT, and in fact almost for mainstream processors as well. We have Prova 15 current probes to measure current directly on the wires. This is a much more accurate and reliable way of measuring than relying on internal sensors.

The only limitation of our current probes may be when testing the most powerful processors. These already exceed the maximum range of 30 A, at which high accuracy is guaranteed. For most processors, the range is optimal (even for measuring a lower load, when the probes can be switched to a lower and more accurate range of 4 A), but we will test models with power consumption over 360 W on our own device, a prototype of which we have already built. Its measuring range will no longer be limiting, but for the time being we will be using the Prova probes in the near future.

The probes are properly set to zero and connected to a UNI-T UT71E multimeter before each measurement. It records samples of current values during the tests via the IR-USB interface and writes them in a table at one-second intervals. We can then create bar graphs with power consumption patterns. But we always write average values in bar graphs. Measurements take place in various load modes. The lowest represents an idle Windows 10 desktop. This measurement takes place on a system that had been idle for quite some time.

   

Audio encoding (FLAC) represents a higher load, but processors use only one core or one thread for this. Higher loads, where more cores are involved, are games. We test power consumption in F1 2020, Shadow of the Tomb Raider and Total War Saga: Troy in 1920 × 1080 px. In this resolution, the power consumption is usually the highest or at least similar to that in lower or higher resolutions, where in most cases the CPU power draw rather decreases due to its lower utilization.

Like most motherboard manufacturers, we too ignore the time limit for “Tau”, after which the power consumption is to be reduced from the PL2 boost limit (when it exceeds the TDP) to the TDP/PL1 value, recommended by Intel, in our tests. This means that neither the power draw nor the clock speed after 56 seconds of higher load does not decrease and the performance is kept stable with just small fluctuations. We had been considering whether or not to respect the Tau. In the end, we decided not to because the vast majority of users won’t either, and therefore the results and comparisons would be relatively uninteresting. The solution would be to test with and without a power limit, but this is no longer possible due to time requirements.

We will pay more attention to the behavior of PL2 in motherboard tests, where it makes more sense. We always use motherboards with extremely robust, efficient VRM, so that the losses on MOSFETs distort the measured results as little as possible and the test setups are powered by a high-end 1200 W BeQuiet! Dark Power Pro 12 power supply. It is strong enough to supply every processor, even with a fully loaded GeForce RTX 3080, and at the same time achieves above-standard efficiency even at lower load. For a complete overview of test setup components, see Chapter 5 of this article.

The sixteen-core desktop Raptor Lake (Ci7-13700K) is a curious compromise between Core i9 (13900K) and Core i5 (13600K). Compared to the Core i5, it is significantly faster thanks to higher clock speeds and Turbo Boost 3.0 support, and it doesn’t lose much performance compared to Core i9 in lighter workloads, including gaming, but it is significantly more power-efficient.

Methodology: temperature and clock speed tests

When choosing a cooler, we eventually opted for Noctua NH-U14S. It has a high performance and at the same time there is also the TR4-SP3 variant designed for Threadripper processors. It differs only by the base, the radiator is otherwise the same, so it will be possible to test and compare all processors under the same conditions. The fan on the NH-U14S cooler is set to a maximum speed of 1,535 rpm during all tests.
Measurements always take place on a bench-wall in a wind tunnel which simulates a computer case, with the difference that we have more control over it.
System cooling consists of four Noctua NF-S12A PWM fans, which are in an equilibrium ratio of two at the inlet and two at the outlet. Their speed is set at a fixed 535 rpm, which is a relatively practical speed that is not needed to be exceeded. In short, this should be the optimal configuration based on our tests of various system cooling settings.

It is also important to maintain the same air temperature around the processors. Of course, this also changes with regard to how much heat a particular processor produces, but at the inlet of the tunnel it must always be the same for accurate comparisons. In our air-conditioned test lab, it is currently in the range of 21–21.3 °C.

Maintaining a constant inlet temperature is necessary not only for a proper comparison of processor temperatures, but especially for unbiased performance comparisons. Trend of clock speed and especially single-core boost depends on the temperature. In the summer at higher temperatures, processors may be slower in living spaces than in the winter.

For Intel processors, we register the maximum core temperature for each test, usually of all cores. These maximum values are then averaged and the result is represented by the final value in the graph. From the outputs of single-threaded load, we only pick the registered values from active cores (these are usually two and alternate during the test). It’s a little different with AMD processors. They don’t have temperature sensors for every core. In order for the procedure to be as methodically as possible similar to that applied on Intel processors, the average temperature of all cores is defined by the highest value reported by the CPU Tdie sensor (average). For single-threaded load, however, we already use a CPU sensor (Tctl/Tdie), which usually reports a slightly higher value, which better corresponds to the hotspots of one or two cores. But these values as well as the values from all internal sensors must be taken with a grain of salt, the accuracy of the sensors varies across processors.

Clock speed evaluation is more accurate, each core has its own sensor even on AMD processors. Unlike temperatures, we plot average clock speed values during tests in graphs. We monitor the temperature and clock speed of the processor cores in the same tests, in which we also measure the power consumption. And thus, gradually from the lowest load level on the desktop of idle Windows 10, through audio encoding (single-threaded load), gaming load in three games (F1 2020, Shadow of the Tomb Raider and Total War Saga: Troy), to a 10-minute load in Cinebench R23 and the most demanding video encoding with the x264 encoder in HandBrake.

To record the temperatures and clock speed of the processor cores, we use HWiNFO, in which sampling is set to two seconds. With the exception of audio encoding, the graphs always show the averages of all processor cores in terms of temperatures and clock speed. During audio encoding, the values from the loaded core are given.

The sixteen-core desktop Raptor Lake (Ci7-13700K) is a curious compromise between Core i9 (13900K) and Core i5 (13600K). Compared to the Core i5, it is significantly faster thanks to higher clock speeds and Turbo Boost 3.0 support, and it doesn’t lose much performance compared to Core i9 in lighter workloads, including gaming, but it is significantly more power-efficient.

Test setup

* We use the following BIOSes on motherboards. For Asus ROG Strix Z790-E Gaming WiFi v0502, MSI MEG X670E Ace v1.10NPRP, for MEG X570 Ace v1E, for MEG Z690 Unify v10, for MAG Z690 Tomahawk WiFi DDR4 v11, for MEG Z590 Ace v1.14 and for MEG Z490 Ace v17.

Note: The graphics drivers we use are Nvidia GeForce 466.77 and the Windows 10 OS build is 19045 at the time of testing.

Processors of other platforms are tested on MSI MEG Z690 Unify, MAG Z490 Tomahawk WiFi DDR4, Z590 Ace and Z490 Ace motherboards, MEG Z690 Unify (all Intel) and MEG X570 Ace, MEG X670E Ace (AMD).

      

      

On platforms supporting DDR5 memory, we use two different sets of modules. For more powerful processors with an “X” (AMD) or “K” (Intel) in the name, we use the faster G.Skill Trident Z5 Neo memory (2×16 GB, 6000 MHz/CL30). In the case of cheaper processors (without X or K at the end of the name), the slower Kingston Fury Beast modules (2×16 GB, 5200 MHz/CL40). But this is more or less just symbolic, the bandwidth is very high for both kits, it is not a bottleneck, and the difference in processor performance is very small, practically negligible, across the differently fast memory kits.

The sixteen-core desktop Raptor Lake (Ci7-13700K) is a curious compromise between Core i9 (13900K) and Core i5 (13600K). Compared to the Core i5, it is significantly faster thanks to higher clock speeds and Turbo Boost 3.0 support, and it doesn’t lose much performance compared to Core i9 in lighter workloads, including gaming, but it is significantly more power-efficient.

3DMark

We use 3DMark Professional for the tests and the following tests: Night Raid (DirectX 12), Fire Strike (DirectX 11) and Time Spy (DirectX 12). In the graphs you will find partial CPU scores, combined scores, but also graphics scores. You can find out to what extent the given processor limits the graphics card.

---

---

The sixteen-core desktop Raptor Lake (Ci7-13700K) is a curious compromise between Core i9 (13900K) and Core i5 (13600K). Compared to the Core i5, it is significantly faster thanks to higher clock speeds and Turbo Boost 3.0 support, and it doesn’t lose much performance compared to Core i9 in lighter workloads, including gaming, but it is significantly more power-efficient.

Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla

Test environment: resolution 1280 × 720 px; graphics settings preset Low; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

   

---

Test environment: resolution 1920 × 1080 px; graphics settings preset Low; API DirectX 12; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: low; test scene: built-in benchmark.

   

---

Test environment: resolution 2560 × 1440 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

---

Test environment: resolution 3840 × 2160 px; graphics settings preset Ultra High; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

   

The sixteen-core desktop Raptor Lake (Ci7-13700K) is a curious compromise between Core i9 (13900K) and Core i5 (13600K). Compared to the Core i5, it is significantly faster thanks to higher clock speeds and Turbo Boost 3.0 support, and it doesn’t lose much performance compared to Core i9 in lighter workloads, including gaming, but it is significantly more power-efficient.

Borderlands 3

Test environment: resolution 1280 × 720 px; graphics settings preset Very Low; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

   

---

Test environment: resolution 1920 × 1080 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 12; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: None; test scene: built-in benchmark.

---

Test environment: resolution 2560 × 1440 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

   

---

Test environment: resolution 3840 × 2160 px; graphics settings preset Ultra; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

   

The sixteen-core desktop Raptor Lake (Ci7-13700K) is a curious compromise between Core i9 (13900K) and Core i5 (13600K). Compared to the Core i5, it is significantly faster thanks to higher clock speeds and Turbo Boost 3.0 support, and it doesn’t lose much performance compared to Core i9 in lighter workloads, including gaming, but it is significantly more power-efficient.

Counter-Strike: GO

Test environment: resolution 1280 × 720 px; lowest graphics settings and w/o Anti-Aliasing, API DirectX 9; Test platform script with Dust 2 map tour.

   

---

Test environment: resolution 1920 × 1080 px; high graphics settings and w/o Anti-Aliasingu, API DirectX 9; Test platform script with Dust 2 map tour.

   

---

Test environment: resolution 2560 × 1440 px; high graphics settings; 4× MSAA, API DirectX 9; Test platform script with Dust 2 map tour.

---

Test environment: resolution 3840 × 2160 px; very high graphics settings; 4× MSAA, API DirectX 9; Test platform script with Dust 2 map tour.

   

The sixteen-core desktop Raptor Lake (Ci7-13700K) is a curious compromise between Core i9 (13900K) and Core i5 (13600K). Compared to the Core i5, it is significantly faster thanks to higher clock speeds and Turbo Boost 3.0 support, and it doesn’t lose much performance compared to Core i9 in lighter workloads, including gaming, but it is significantly more power-efficient.

Cyberpunk 2077

Disclaimer: Performance in this game varies more than is usual for other titles due to continuous updates. We verify the consistency of results by re-testing the Ryzen 9 5900X processor before each measurement. In case of significant deviations, we discard older results and start building the database anew. Due to the incompleteness of the Cyberpunk 2077 results, we do not use Cyberpunk 2077 to calculate average CPU gaming performance.

Test environment: resolution 1280 × 720 px; graphics settings preset Low; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: custom (Little China).

   

---

Test environment: resolution 1920 × 1080 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: custom (Little China).

   

---

Test environment: resolution 2560 × 1440 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: custom (Little China).

---

Test environment: resolution 3840 × 2160 px; graphics settings preset Ultra; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: custom (Little China).

   

The sixteen-core desktop Raptor Lake (Ci7-13700K) is a curious compromise between Core i9 (13900K) and Core i5 (13600K). Compared to the Core i5, it is significantly faster thanks to higher clock speeds and Turbo Boost 3.0 support, and it doesn’t lose much performance compared to Core i9 in lighter workloads, including gaming, but it is significantly more power-efficient.

DOOM Eternal

Test environment: resolution 1280 × 720 px; graphics settings preset Low; API Vulkan; extra settings Present From Compute: off, Motion Blur: Low, Depth of Field Anti-Aliasing: off; test scene: custom.

   

---

Test environment: resolution 1920 × 1080 px; graphics settings preset High; API Vulkan; extra settings Present From Compute: on, Motion Blur: High, Depth of Field Anti-Aliasing: off; test scene: custom.

   

---

Test environment: resolution 2560 × 1440 px; graphics settings preset High; API Vulkan; extra settings Present From Compute: on, Motion Blur: High, Depth of Field Anti-Aliasing: on; test scene: custom.

---

Test environment: resolution 3840 × 2160 px; graphics settings preset Ultra Nightmare; API Vulkan; extra settings Present From Compute: on, Motion Blur: High, Depth of Field Anti-Aliasing: on; test scene: custom.

   

The sixteen-core desktop Raptor Lake (Ci7-13700K) is a curious compromise between Core i9 (13900K) and Core i5 (13600K). Compared to the Core i5, it is significantly faster thanks to higher clock speeds and Turbo Boost 3.0 support, and it doesn’t lose much performance compared to Core i9 in lighter workloads, including gaming, but it is significantly more power-efficient.

F1 2020

Test environment: resolution 1280 × 720 px; graphics settings preset Ultra Low; API DirectX 12; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: off, Anisotropic Filtering: off; test scene: built-in benchmark (Australia, Clear/Dry, Cycle).

   

---

Test environment: resolution 1920 × 1080 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 12; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: off, Skidmarks Blending: off; test scene: built-in benchmark (Australia, Clear/Dry, Cycle).

   

---

Test environment: resolution 2560 × 1440 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 12; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: TAA, Skidmarks Blending: off; test scene: built-in benchmark (Australia, Clear/Dry, Cycle).

---

Test environment: resolution 3840 × 2160 px; graphics settings preset Ultra High; API DirectX 12; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: TAA, Skidmarks Blending: off; test scene: built-in benchmark (Australia, Clear/Dry, Cycle).

The sixteen-core desktop Raptor Lake (Ci7-13700K) is a curious compromise between Core i9 (13900K) and Core i5 (13600K). Compared to the Core i5, it is significantly faster thanks to higher clock speeds and Turbo Boost 3.0 support, and it doesn’t lose much performance compared to Core i9 in lighter workloads, including gaming, but it is significantly more power-efficient.

Metro Exodus

Test environment: resolution 1280 × 720 px; graphics settings preset Low; API DirectX 12; no extra settings test scene: built-in benchmark.

---

Test environment: resolution 1920 × 1080 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

---

Test environment: resolution 2560 × 1440 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

---

Test environment: resolution 3840 × 2160 px; graphics settings preset Extreme; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

The sixteen-core desktop Raptor Lake (Ci7-13700K) is a curious compromise between Core i9 (13900K) and Core i5 (13600K). Compared to the Core i5, it is significantly faster thanks to higher clock speeds and Turbo Boost 3.0 support, and it doesn’t lose much performance compared to Core i9 in lighter workloads, including gaming, but it is significantly more power-efficient.

Microsoft Flight Simulator

Disclaimer: The performance of this game changes and improves frequently due to continuous updates. We verify the consistency of the results by re-testing the Ryzen 9 5900X processor before each measurement. In case of significant deviations, we discard the older results and start building the database from scratch. Due to the incompleteness of the MFS results, we do not use MFS to calculate the average gaming performance of the processors.

Test environment: resolution 1280 × 720 px; graphics settings preset Low; API DirectX 11; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: off; test scene: custom (Paris-Charles de Gaulle, Air Traffic: AI, February 14, 9:00) autopilot: from 1000 m until hitting the terrain.

   

---

Test environment: resolution 1920 × 1080 px; graphics settings preset Low; API DirectX 11; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: off; test scene: custom (Paris-Charles de Gaulle, Air Traffic: AI, February 14, 9:00) autopilot: from 1000 m until hitting the terrain.

   

---

Test environment: resolution 2560 × 1440 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 11; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: TAA; test scene: custom (Paris-Charles de Gaulle, Air Traffic: AI, February 14, 9:00) autopilot: from 1000 m until hitting the terrain.

---

Test environment: resolution 3840 × 2160 px; graphics settings preset Ultra; API DirectX 11; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: TAA; test scene: custom (Paris-Charles de Gaulle, Air Traffic: AI, February 14, 9:00) autopilot: from 1000 m until hitting the terrain.

   

The sixteen-core desktop Raptor Lake (Ci7-13700K) is a curious compromise between Core i9 (13900K) and Core i5 (13600K). Compared to the Core i5, it is significantly faster thanks to higher clock speeds and Turbo Boost 3.0 support, and it doesn’t lose much performance compared to Core i9 in lighter workloads, including gaming, but it is significantly more power-efficient.

Shadow of the Tomb Raider

Test environment: resolution 1280 × 720 px; graphics settings preset Lowest; API DirectX 12; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: off; test scene: built-in benchmark.

   

---

Test environment: resolution 1920 × 1080 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 12; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: off; test scene: built-in benchmark.

   

---

Test environment: resolution 2560 × 1440 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 12; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: TAA; test scene: built-in benchmark.

---

Test environment: resolution 3840 × 2160 px; graphics settings preset Highest; API DirectX 12; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: TAA; test scene: built-in benchmark.

The sixteen-core desktop Raptor Lake (Ci7-13700K) is a curious compromise between Core i9 (13900K) and Core i5 (13600K). Compared to the Core i5, it is significantly faster thanks to higher clock speeds and Turbo Boost 3.0 support, and it doesn’t lose much performance compared to Core i9 in lighter workloads, including gaming, but it is significantly more power-efficient.

Total War Saga: Troy

Test environment: resolution 1280 × 720 px; graphics settings preset Low; API DirectX 11; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

---

Test environment: resolution 1920 × 1080 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 11; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

---

Test environment: resolution 2560 × 1440 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 11; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

---

Test environment: resolution 3840 × 2160 px; graphics settings preset Ultra; API DirectX 11; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

The sixteen-core desktop Raptor Lake (Ci7-13700K) is a curious compromise between Core i9 (13900K) and Core i5 (13600K). Compared to the Core i5, it is significantly faster thanks to higher clock speeds and Turbo Boost 3.0 support, and it doesn’t lose much performance compared to Core i9 in lighter workloads, including gaming, but it is significantly more power-efficient.

Overall gaming performance

To calculate average gaming performance, we normalized the Intel Core i7-11900K processor. The percentage differences of all other processors are based on this, with each of the games contributing an equal weight to the final result. To see exactly what the formula we use to arrive at each value looks like, see „New average CPU score measuring method“.

---

---

---

The sixteen-core desktop Raptor Lake (Ci7-13700K) is a curious compromise between Core i9 (13900K) and Core i5 (13600K). Compared to the Core i5, it is significantly faster thanks to higher clock speeds and Turbo Boost 3.0 support, and it doesn’t lose much performance compared to Core i9 in lighter workloads, including gaming, but it is significantly more power-efficient.

Gaming performance per euro

The sixteen-core desktop Raptor Lake (Ci7-13700K) is a curious compromise between Core i9 (13900K) and Core i5 (13600K). Compared to the Core i5, it is significantly faster thanks to higher clock speeds and Turbo Boost 3.0 support, and it doesn’t lose much performance compared to Core i9 in lighter workloads, including gaming, but it is significantly more power-efficient.

PCMark

Geekbench

Intel Core i7-13700K in detail”]The sixteen-core desktop Raptor Lake (Ci7-13700K) is a curious compromise between Core i9 (13900K) and Core i5 (13600K). Compared to the Core i5, it is significantly faster thanks to higher clock speeds and Turbo Boost 3.0 support, and it doesn’t lose much performance compared to Core i9 in lighter workloads, including gaming, but it is significantly more power-efficient.

Speedometer (2.0) and Octane (2.0)

Test environment: We’re using a portable version of Google Chrome (91.0.472.101) 64-bit so that real-time results are not affected by browser updates. GPU hardware acceleration is enabled as each user has in the default settings.

---

Note: The values in the graphs represent the average of the points obtained in the subtasks, which are grouped according to their nature into seven categories (Core language features, Memory and GC, Strings and arrays, Virtual machine and GC, Loading and Parsing, Bit and Math operations and Compiler and GC latency).

---

The sixteen-core desktop Raptor Lake (Ci7-13700K) is a curious compromise between Core i9 (13900K) and Core i5 (13600K). Compared to the Core i5, it is significantly faster thanks to higher clock speeds and Turbo Boost 3.0 support, and it doesn’t lose much performance compared to Core i9 in lighter workloads, including gaming, but it is significantly more power-efficient.

Cinebench R20

Cinebench R23

---

Blender@Cycles

Test environment: We use well-known projects BMW (510 tiles) and Classroom (2040 tiles) and renderer Cycles. Render settings are set to None, with which all the work falls on the CPU.

---

LuxRender (SPECworkstation 3.1)

The sixteen-core desktop Raptor Lake (Ci7-13700K) is a curious compromise between Core i9 (13900K) and Core i5 (13600K). Compared to the Core i5, it is significantly faster thanks to higher clock speeds and Turbo Boost 3.0 support, and it doesn’t lose much performance compared to Core i9 in lighter workloads, including gaming, but it is significantly more power-efficient.

Adobe Premiere Pro (PugetBench)

Test environment: set of PugetBench tests. App version of Adobe Premiere Pro is 15.2.

---

---

---

---

The sixteen-core desktop Raptor Lake (Ci7-13700K) is a curious compromise between Core i9 (13900K) and Core i5 (13600K). Compared to the Core i5, it is significantly faster thanks to higher clock speeds and Turbo Boost 3.0 support, and it doesn’t lose much performance compared to Core i9 in lighter workloads, including gaming, but it is significantly more power-efficient.

DaVinci Resolve Studio (PugetBench)

Test environment: set of PugetBench tests, test type: standard. App version of DaVinci Resolve Studio is 17.2.1 (build 12).

---

---

The sixteen-core desktop Raptor Lake (Ci7-13700K) is a curious compromise between Core i9 (13900K) and Core i5 (13600K). Compared to the Core i5, it is significantly faster thanks to higher clock speeds and Turbo Boost 3.0 support, and it doesn’t lose much performance compared to Core i9 in lighter workloads, including gaming, but it is significantly more power-efficient.

Graphics effects: Adobe After Effects

Test environment: set of PugetBench tests. App version of Adobe After Effects is 18.2.1.

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

Intel Core i7-13700K in detail”]The sixteen-core desktop Raptor Lake (Ci7-13700K) is a curious compromise between Core i9 (13900K) and Core i5 (13600K). Compared to the Core i5, it is significantly faster thanks to higher clock speeds and Turbo Boost 3.0 support, and it doesn’t lose much performance compared to Core i9 in lighter workloads, including gaming, but it is significantly more power-efficient.

HandBrake

   

Test environment: For video conversion we’re using a 4K video LG Demo Snowboard with a 43,9 Mb/s bitrate. AVC (x264) and HEVC (x265) profiles are set for high quality and encoder profiles are “slow”. HandBrake version is 1.3.3 (2020061300).

x264 and x265 benchmarks

---

Test environment: We are encoding a short, publicly available sample park_joy_2160p50.y4m: uncompressed video 4096 × 2160 px, 8bit, 50 fps. Length is 585 frames with encoding quality set to 6 which makes the encoding still relatively slow. This test can make use of the AVX2 i AVX-512 instructions.

Version: SVT-AV1 Encoder Lib v0.8.7-61-g685afb2d via FFMpeg N-104429-g069f7831a2-20211026 (64bit)
Build from: https://github.com/BtbN/FFmpeg-Builds/releases
Command line: ffmpeg.exe -i “park_joy_2160p50.y4m” -c:v libsvtav1 -rc 0 -qp 55 -preset 6 -f null output.webm

Intel Core i7-13700K in detail”]The sixteen-core desktop Raptor Lake (Ci7-13700K) is a curious compromise between Core i9 (13900K) and Core i5 (13600K). Compared to the Core i5, it is significantly faster thanks to higher clock speeds and Turbo Boost 3.0 support, and it doesn’t lose much performance compared to Core i9 in lighter workloads, including gaming, but it is significantly more power-efficient.

Audio encoding

Test environment: Audio encoding is done using command line encoders, we measure the time it takes for the conversion to finish. The same 42-minute long 16-bit WAV file (stereo) with 44.1 kHz is always used (Love Over Gold by Dire Straits album rip in a single audio file).

Encoder settings are selected to achieve maximum or near maximum compression. The bitrate is relatively high, with the exception of lossless FLAC of about 200 kb/s.

Note: These tests measure single-thread performance.

FLAC: reference encoder 1.3.2, 64-bit build. Launch options: flac.exe -s -8 -m -e -p -f

MP3: encoder lame3.100.1, 64-bit build (Intel 19 Compiler) from RareWares. Launch options: lame.exe -S -V 0 -q 0

AAC: uses Apple QuickTime libraries, invoked through the application from the command line, QAAC 2.72, 64-bit build, Intel 19 Compiler (does not require installation of the whole Apple package). Launch options: qaac64.exe -V 100 -s -q 2

Opus: reference encoder 1.3.1, Launch options: opusenc.exe –comp 10 –quiet –vbr –bitrate 192

Intel Core i7-13700K in detail”]The sixteen-core desktop Raptor Lake (Ci7-13700K) is a curious compromise between Core i9 (13900K) and Core i5 (13600K). Compared to the Core i5, it is significantly faster thanks to higher clock speeds and Turbo Boost 3.0 support, and it doesn’t lose much performance compared to Core i9 in lighter workloads, including gaming, but it is significantly more power-efficient.

Broadcasting

Test environment: Applications OBS Studio and Xsplit. We’re using the built-in benchmark (scene Australia, Clear/Dry, Cycle) in F1 2020, in a resolution of 2560 × 1440 px and the same graphics settings, as with standard game performance tests. Thanks to this, we can measure the performance decrease if you record your gameplay with the x264 software encoder while playing. The output is 2560 × 1440 px at 60 fps.

---

The sixteen-core desktop Raptor Lake (Ci7-13700K) is a curious compromise between Core i9 (13900K) and Core i5 (13600K). Compared to the Core i5, it is significantly faster thanks to higher clock speeds and Turbo Boost 3.0 support, and it doesn’t lose much performance compared to Core i9 in lighter workloads, including gaming, but it is significantly more power-efficient.

Test environment: set of PugetBench tests. App version of Adobe Photoshop is 22.4.2.

---

---

---

Adobe Lightroom Classic

Test environment: With the settings above, we export 42 uncompressed .CR2 (RAW Canon) photos with a size of 20 Mpx. Then we create 1:1 previews from them, which also represent one of the most processor intensive tasks in Lightroom. The version of Adobe Lightroom Classic is 10.3.

Intel Core i7-13700K in detail”]The sixteen-core desktop Raptor Lake (Ci7-13700K) is a curious compromise between Core i9 (13900K) and Core i5 (13600K). Compared to the Core i5, it is significantly faster thanks to higher clock speeds and Turbo Boost 3.0 support, and it doesn’t lose much performance compared to Core i9 in lighter workloads, including gaming, but it is significantly more power-efficient. If it isn’t the most efficient processor that is this powerful (and that’s the R7 7700X, which we’ ll see about…), it’s the second at worst.

Affinity Photo (benchmark)

Test environment: built-in benchmark.

---

Topaz Labs AI apps

Topaz DeNoise AI, Gigapixel AI and Sharpen AI. These single-purpose applications are used for restoration of low-quality photos. Whether it is high noise (caused by higher ISO), raster level (typically after cropping) or when something needs extra focus. The AI performance is always used.

Test environment: As part of batch editing, 42 photos with a lower resolution of 1920 × 1280 px are processed, with the settings from the images above. DeNoise AI is in version 3.1.2, Gigapixel in 5.5.2 and Sharpen AI in 3.1.2.

XnViewMP

Test environment: XnViewMP is finally a photo-editor for which you don’t have to pay. At the same time, it uses hardware very efficiently. In order to achieve more reasonable comparison times, we had to create an archive of up to 1024 photos, where we reduce the original resolution of 5472 × 3648 px to 1980 × 1280 px and filters with automatic contrast enhancement and noise reduction are also being applied during this process. We use 64-bit portable version 0.98.4.

Zoner Photo Studio X

Test environment: In Zoner Photo Studio X we convert 42 .CR2 (RAW Canon) photos to JPEG while keeping the original resolution (5472 × 3648 px) at the lowest possible compression, with the ZPS X profile ”high quality for archival”.

The sixteen-core desktop Raptor Lake (Ci7-13700K) is a curious compromise between Core i9 (13900K) and Core i5 (13600K). Compared to the Core i5, it is significantly faster thanks to higher clock speeds and Turbo Boost 3.0 support, and it doesn’t lose much performance compared to Core i9 in lighter workloads, including gaming, but it is significantly more power-efficient.

WinRAR 6.01

7-Zip 19.00

---

The sixteen-core desktop Raptor Lake (Ci7-13700K) is a curious compromise between Core i9 (13900K) and Core i5 (13600K). Compared to the Core i5, it is significantly faster thanks to higher clock speeds and Turbo Boost 3.0 support, and it doesn’t lose much performance compared to Core i9 in lighter workloads, including gaming, but it is significantly more power-efficient.

TrueCrypt 7.1a

Aida64 (AES, SHA3)

The sixteen-core desktop Raptor Lake (Ci7-13700K) is a curious compromise between Core i9 (13900K) and Core i5 (13600K). Compared to the Core i5, it is significantly faster thanks to higher clock speeds and Turbo Boost 3.0 support, and it doesn’t lose much performance compared to Core i9 in lighter workloads, including gaming, but it is significantly more power-efficient.

Y-cruncher

---

Stockfish 13

Test environment: Host for the Stockfish 13 engine is a chess app Arena 2.0.1, build 2399.

Aida64, FPU tests

---

FSI (SPECworkstation 3.1)

Kirchhoff migration (SPECworkstation 3.1)

Python36 (SPECworkstation 3.1)

SRMP (SPECworkstation 3.1)

Octave (SPECworkstation 3.1)

FFTW (SPECworkstation 3.1)

Convolution (SPECworkstation 3.1)

CalculiX (SPECworkstation 3.1)

The sixteen-core desktop Raptor Lake (Ci7-13700K) is a curious compromise between Core i9 (13900K) and Core i5 (13600K). Compared to the Core i5, it is significantly faster thanks to higher clock speeds and Turbo Boost 3.0 support, and it doesn’t lose much performance compared to Core i9 in lighter workloads, including gaming, but it is significantly more power-efficient.

RodiniaLifeSci (SPECworkstation 3.1)

WPCcfd (SPECworkstation 3.1)

Poisson (SPECworkstation 3.1)

LAMMPS (SPECworkstation 3.1)

NAMD (SPECworkstation 3.1)

The sixteen-core desktop Raptor Lake (Ci7-13700K) is a curious compromise between Core i9 (13900K) and Core i5 (13600K). Compared to the Core i5, it is significantly faster thanks to higher clock speeds and Turbo Boost 3.0 support, and it doesn’t lose much performance compared to Core i9 in lighter workloads, including gaming, but it is significantly more power-efficient.

Memory tests…

… and cache (L1, L2, L3)

---

---

The sixteen-core desktop Raptor Lake (Ci7-13700K) is a curious compromise between Core i9 (13900K) and Core i5 (13600K). Compared to the Core i5, it is significantly faster thanks to higher clock speeds and Turbo Boost 3.0 support, and it doesn’t lose much performance compared to Core i9 in lighter workloads, including gaming, but it is significantly more power-efficient.

Processor power draw curve

The sixteen-core desktop Raptor Lake (Ci7-13700K) is a curious compromise between Core i9 (13900K) and Core i5 (13600K). Compared to the Core i5, it is significantly faster thanks to higher clock speeds and Turbo Boost 3.0 support, and it doesn’t lose much performance compared to Core i9 in lighter workloads, including gaming, but it is significantly more power-efficient.

Average processor power draw

The sixteen-core desktop Raptor Lake (Ci7-13700K) is a curious compromise between Core i9 (13900K) and Core i5 (13600K). Compared to the Core i5, it is significantly faster thanks to higher clock speeds and Turbo Boost 3.0 support, and it doesn’t lose much performance compared to Core i9 in lighter workloads, including gaming, but it is significantly more power-efficient.

Performance per watt

The sixteen-core desktop Raptor Lake (Ci7-13700K) is a curious compromise between Core i9 (13900K) and Core i5 (13600K). Compared to the Core i5, it is significantly faster thanks to higher clock speeds and Turbo Boost 3.0 support, and it doesn’t lose much performance compared to Core i9 in lighter workloads, including gaming, but it is significantly more power-efficient.

Achieved CPU clock speed

The sixteen-core desktop Raptor Lake (Ci7-13700K) is a curious compromise between Core i9 (13900K) and Core i5 (13600K). Compared to the Core i5, it is significantly faster thanks to higher clock speeds and Turbo Boost 3.0 support, and it doesn’t lose much performance compared to Core i9 in lighter workloads, including gaming, but it is significantly more power-efficient.

CPU temperature

The sixteen-core desktop Raptor Lake (Ci7-13700K) is a curious compromise between Core i9 (13900K) and Core i5 (13600K). Compared to the Core i5, it is significantly faster thanks to higher clock speeds and Turbo Boost 3.0 support, and it doesn’t lose much performance compared to Core i9 in lighter workloads, including gaming, but it is significantly more power-efficient.

Conclusion

In terms of raw performance, the Core i7-13700K is 4–6 % faster compared to the Ryzen 9 7900X when 3D rendering. The lead from a generation older Core i9 processor (12900K) is roughly 15 % and the Ci7-13700K is roughly 12 % more efficient.

Taký However, outside of TDP (at maximum power), the Ryzen 9 7900X is up to 25 % (67W) more power-efficient than the Ci7-13700K. Admittedly at slightly lower performance, but efficiency is clearly in favour of AMD. But note, that’s only at this high of a load, when processors are being squeezed to the max. In a gaming workload where power draw is less than half, the Core i7-13700K is already some 8 % more efficient on average (than the Ryzen 9 7900X). Performance-wise, it’s a tie in gaming. In some titles, the Ryzen 9 7900X has the edge (Borderlands 3, CS:GO, DOOM Eternal, Total War Saga: Troy, …), in some, it’s the Core i7-13700K (Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla, Cyberpunk 2077, F1 2020, Metro Exodus, …). The average increase in “gaming” performance of the Core i7-13700K over the Ci9-12900K is up to 10 %, but in practice (in this class of processors with builds with monitors with typically high resolutions) the differences are getting smaller.

The Core i7 Raptor Lake also draws significantly less power in a single-threaded workload with comparable performance. That’s with performance that’s not much different from the Ryzen 9 7900X, which is, in addition to encoding audio recordings, presenting typically single-threaded tasks, well seen in practical tests of PCMark (speed of working with text editor, spreadsheets, video calls), ale aj in a web environment. Performance-wise, it’s extremely even. In some subtasks, the Ryzen 9 (7900X) has a bit of an edge, in others the Core i7 (1370K). It alternates nicely, and if you want to pick a more suitable processor for your needs, you’ll need to do some serious digging into the results. But don’t forget that even in those tests where the Core i7-13700K pulls the short end of the stick, it has the advantage of more power-efficient operation.

Particularly evenly matched in the battle between the Ci7-13700K and the R9 7900X are the results in video editing programs such as Adobe Premiere Pro and DaVinci Resolve Studio. In more than half of the tasks in Adobe Premiere Pro, the Core i7-13700K is a hair faster, in DaVinci, it’s the Ryzen 9 7900X. There’s an equal balance of better and worse results in Adobe After Effects for creating graphic effects.There are also no big differences in computing performance when encoding video (x264/x265). With that said, the the Core i7-13700K is less power-efficient (at the same performance it has significantly higher power draw) as it always has been in the maximum wattage band. The more demanding and application and thus the higher the wattage, the more the performance/watt ratio of the Ci7-13700K moves away from the more efficient Ryzen 9.

Photo editing and 2D graphics: Most of Photoshop is faster with the Core i7-13700K, but again it’s a 60/40 split (Ryzen 9 7900X). Generating thumbnails of uncompressed photos in Lightroom comes out to within a hundredth of a second anyway, exporting is a tad faster with the Ci7-13700K. The Intel processor is faster in both XnView and Affinity Photo, with some 10 % in favour of the latest Core i7. If there’s anywhere the Ci7-13700K doesn’t catch up to AMD’s competing processor, it’s in Topaz Labs’ AI applications, where Ryzen 7000s effectively benefit from AVX-512 (VNNI) instruction support. In these tests, the Raptor Lake outperforms only the Ryzen 5000s. It is quite clear, but just as clearly the Core i7-13700K lags behind the Ryzen 9 7900X and is slower compared to the Ryzen 5 7600X.

The (de)compression and (de)encryption tests also come out in favour of the Ryzen 9 7900X, with the Core i7-13700K performing more evenly compared to the Ryzen 7 7700X. But you’ll have to wait a while for the exact ratios until we finish and release those R7 7700X tests.

To cool the Core i7-13700K you’ll need a powerful cooler, just like the Core i9-1x900X, but that’s also true for the Ryzen 9 79×0. In a gaming workload, it’s not that critical, you can get by with a mid-range cooler. Or with a better one (and you can slow down the rpm to run quieter), higher demands are placed on cooling performance especially under high load, where processor power draw exceeds 250 W. Then the temperature is high even with an effective cooler.

Overall, we have to rate the Core i7-13700K processor positively. Especially for a high-end gaming PC, for example, to the GeForce RTX 4090, we can recommend it with a clear conscience. Performance-wise, you won’t suffer compared to the Core i9-13900K, but the operation (Core i7-13700K) will be noticeably more economical. But how will the Core i7-13700K hold up against the Ryzen 7 7700X? That will be a question for the next processor test.

English translation and edit by Jozef Dudáš

We are grateful to Datacomp e-shop for cooperation in providing the tested hardware

Special thanks also to Blackmagic Design (for DaVinci Resolve Studio license), Topaz Labs (for DeNoise AI, Gigapixel AI and Sharpen AI licenses) and Zoner (for Photo Studio X license)

• Contents
• Intel Core i7-13700K in detail
• Methodology: performance tests
• Methodology: how we measure power draw
• Methodology: temperature and clock speed tests
• Test setup
• 3DMark
• Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla
• Borderlands 3
• Counter-Strike: GO
• Cyberpunk 2077
• DOOM Eternal
• F1 2020
• Metro Exodus
• Microsoft Flight Simulator
• Shadow of the Tomb Raider
• Total War Saga: Troy
• Overall gaming performance
• Gaming performance per euro
• PCMark and Geekbench
• Web performance
• 3D rendering: Cinebench, Blender, ...
• Video 1/2: Adobe Premiere Pro
• Video 1/2: DaVinci Resolve Studio
• Graphics effects: Adobe After Effects
• Video encoding
• Audio encoding
• Broadcasting (OBS and Xsplit)
• Photos 1/2: Adobe Photoshop a Lightroom
• Photos 2/2: Affinity Photo, Topaz Labs AI Apps, ZPS X, ...
• (De)compression
• (De)encryption
• Numerical computing
• Simulations
• Memory and cache tests
• Processor power draw curve
• Average processor power draw
• Performance per watt
• Achieved CPU clock speed
• CPU temperature
• Conclusion