28K score requires an overclock on the 5950X (and all-core clock speeds around 4.4 GHz). At stock, its score is in the 25K range
CPU 2021 Benchmarks - Compare Products on AnandTech
CPU 2021 benchmarks: Compare two products side-by-side or see a cascading list of product ratings along with our annotations.www.anandtech.com
Well, that may be normal, but the site does not say anywhere that the run was overclocked. Its possible it was stock. Where did you see it was OC'ed ??28K score requires an overclock on the 5950X (and all-core clock speeds around 4.4 GHz). At stock, its score is in the 25K range
CPU 2021 Benchmarks - Compare Products on AnandTech
CPU 2021 benchmarks: Compare two products side-by-side or see a cascading list of product ratings along with our annotations.www.anandtech.com
I have a 5950x too, I get a score of about 28.6K using PBO2 overclocking (by increase the package power limit to 250W) and a -9 offset in the curve optimizer which results in all-core clock speeds of 4.45GHz when running CB23:Well, that may be normal, but the site does not say anywhere that the run was overclocked. Its possible it was stock. Where did you see 4.4 ??
I'm sorry. I was a little late. It's just 0+8 is reserved. It doesn't indicate a SKU exists.
But what memory speed are you using ? I have 4000 cl16. I makes quite a difference. I see where you are coming from, but I still don't trust that chinese sites numbers.I have a 5950x too, I get a score of about 28.6K using PBO2 overclocking (by increase the package power limit to 250W) and a -9 offset in the curve optimizer which results in all-core clock speeds of 4.45GHz when running CB23:
View attachment 52509
And I still don't believe anything that a random site says, with NO specs of the details of the run. For all we know, its all photoshop.
Also impressive is the 25244 score with package power of 117W, which is better than the 5950x.
Given the high performance/watt of Alder Lake at reasonable clock speeds, we may see AMD "recommend" 200+W power settings in reviews for its 16-core CPUs going forward.
By undervolting as much as possible he did eat on the stability margin to get those results, so they are meaningless, lower power but not stable at all on the long run.
FWIW, the reviewer stated that it's stable with AIDA 64 FPU at those UVs but your point is valid.
The reviewer also tested putting the wimpy Intel stock LGA1200 cooler on the 12900k.
View attachment 52524
No manual UV was done, package power stabilized at ~140w, with a Cinebench R23 score of over 25k.
If it was set at 140W with default settings then HVinfo wouldnt display 4096W PL1, wich is diplayed when all brakes are removed for manual settings, it would display PL1 = PL2 = 140W or whatever the available factory power limits from Intel.
I have a 5950x too, I get a score of about 28.6K using PBO2 overclocking (by increase the package power limit to 250W) and a -9 offset in the curve optimizer which results in all-core clock speeds of 4.45GHz when running CB23:
View attachment 52509
My point being that the reviewer (probably) plopped a stock Intel cooler on the 12900k w/ zero changes to default MB settings (hence 4096w PL1), and this was the result given the thermal limits of the Intel cooler.
Also impressive is the 25244 score with package power of 117W, which is better than the 5950x.
Given the high performance/watt of Alder Lake at reasonable clock speeds, we may see AMD "recommend" 200+W power settings in reviews for its 16-core CPUs going forward.
I think the next few weeks and months will be interesting in terms of under-volting as some users and reviewers try to optimize Alder Lake for performance/watt and see how that compares with the best under-volts for the 5900X and 5950X.It's possible to do better with custom undervolt and fixed voltage for 4.4Ghz:
Also impressive is the 25244 score with package power of 117W, which is better than the 5950x.
I think Alder Lake is going to be very exciting in the laptop space, seems to scale down with voltage very well. For desktops, it appears slightly less exciting at the high end, and really nice for the midrange parts. Actually 12900K undervolted seems exciting.
Good point, wonder why they don’t have 2 different power planes for p and e coresOn desktop undervolt dips down into power twice. Not only you reduce the power for P cores needed to reach set frequency, the excess power wasted due to E cores being on same voltage plane is also reduced. The "optimum" point is should be nearer to what E cores require for ~4Ghz.
10ESF looking very nice actually, this repurposed mobile CPU is doing better on desktop than most expected.
At stock a 5950X does 26100 pts and consume 125W to do so.
Intel Core i9-12900K, i7-12700K & i5-12600K im Test: Benchmarks in Anwendungen
Intel Alder Lake im Test: Benchmarks in Anwendungen / Ein rekordverdächtiger Testumfang / Windows 10 vs. Windows 11www.computerbase.de
No 5950X out there will actually pull 142W in Cinebench. TDC limits are too restrictive, so the cores sit around 3.7-3.8GHz at 120-130W.They say 142 watts.
They say 142 watts.
No 5950X out there will actually pull 142W in Cinebench. TDC limits are too restrictive, so the cores sit around 3.7-3.8GHz at 120-130W.
I've never quite figured out the logic of buying an overclockable chip and then complaining when it uses more power. If too much power is your concern, lower the PL2 value or wait for the non-overclockable chips to be launched next quarter.Probably. Intel is already capable of being efficient, but they wanted impressive numbers so pulled out the stops and pushed the i9 to the limits. Only this time it's worth that power use and if you look at the gaming results it doesn't even need all of that power.