Intel 12900k has just been released. Best in class performance, giving AMD and Apple a run for their money.

[dermage]

You'd think Jeremy Clarkson was the head of Intel's R&D department.

edit: Why is TP using a NH-U14S? A single-fan aircooler for an i9 is obviously inadequate. TweakTown's used a NH-14A and their reported temps, while still not great, at least look more manageable.

I think it's because they began testing with it and do it now just for referencing. Of course no one would use it with this power draw/heat, but still it gives an impression on the relation between these tested cpus.

[Scotty]

Just a general comment ... for desktop thermal performance and the related power efficiency is not a major concern for me. As long as your motherboard can deliver the power and your cooler keeps it in spec I can live with it running a bit hot with audio/video . It is clear that Intel is pumping up the power and have allowed the chip to absorb it in order to let it compete with Ryzen on heavily multi-threaded workloads. On gaming workloads it remains cool and efficient. Intel is breathing down AMD's neck. Making the new 12900k dominant in the gaming benchmarks was a very smart choice given that this is where the vast majority of the tech community lives. Still, for workstation type of work (audio and visuals) the Ryzen 5950x is for now tops. They will have to reduce the prices to make it more compelling and the hybrid versions with new cache schemes will have to make it to market soon.

What remains to be seen is how expensive that DDR5 memory is going to be (or how critical it is to the results we are seeing in the benchmarks) and what kind of price penalties will come with the new socket and the extended bandwidth of PCIe 5. Interesting times with the M1 Pro Max in the mix as well.

[ghettosynth]

I'm still on an i7 920 2.6 ghz and 6gb ram . I'm actually thinking of just getting an AMD 5600g and calling it a day .

I'm still on i7 3770/8GB RAM, can't really find a reason to upgrade at all, my most demanding projects can't max out this machine, don't game and all that, just use it for audio and casual internet, don't have GPU, use Intel integrated one, which freaks out half of people I talk to about computers/components

I think that for a lot of us this has become more the norm. Audio is no longer the killer app for high end PCs for many, if not most. While I'm interested in the new chips, I'm more interested in small, cool, and quiet over the long term.

I do want to see better and more powerful integrated GPUs, but not for audio, rather video. I recently had problems with getting AMD pro drivers working with an integrated GPU on a Linux box. The machine that I replaced it with has an NVIDIA card , so no problem.

I think that Apple has the right mix ATM, but, I'm moving as much to Linux as possible. So I'd love to see an AMD/Intel laptop chip with 4 big, 4 little, an NVIDIA 3050ish class integrated GPU, and with 16G or 32G of unified RAM at a reasonable price and Linux compatible video drivers out of the box.

So, yes, I like the shakeup in architectures at the moment, I'm hoping that the pressure continues. I'm also ok with ARM as long as it's open enough to run Linux. Just like Apple, I have no intrinsic loyalty to x86.

[Passing Bye]

I think that for a lot of us this has become more the norm. Audio is no longer the killer app for high end PCs for many, if not most. While I'm interested in the new chips, I'm more interested in small, cool, and quiet over the long term.

I do want to see better and more powerful integrated GPUs, but not for audio, rather video. I recently had problems with getting AMD pro drivers working with an integrated GPU on a Linux box. The machine that I replaced it with has an NVIDIA card , so no problem.

I think that Apple has the right mix ATM, but, I'm moving as much to Linux as possible. So I'd love to see an AMD/Intel laptop chip with 4 big, 4 little, an NVIDIA 3050ish class integrated GPU, and with 16G or 32G of unified RAM at a reasonable price and Linux compatible video drivers out of the box.

So, yes, I like the shakeup in architectures at the moment, I'm hoping that the pressure continues. I'm also ok with ARM as long as it's open enough to run Linux. Just like Apple, I have no intrinsic loyalty to x86.

I'm heavily into Linux these days also, actually really love whole Linux Mint Cinnamon OS experience, it's like great mixture of Windows and macOS, Bitwig and majority of my plugins work natively or via yabridge, so it's pretty much smooth sail there for audio.

I'm also more and more into idea of small, quiet and mobile, ditching conventional desktop tower, sitting in sweet spot with monitors kind of thing, really gotten comfortable with using headphones in conjunction with Realphones, so idea of getting cool, quiet and powerful laptop now screams like revelation. I had laptops before, but didn't like whole experience that much, think now everything makes much more sense.

I'm not really tied to an OS or laptop brand kind of thing, Bitwig and my plugins pretty much like all three major platforms and it's just mater of getting something that suits my needs, I see OS as an shell really, not much affection towards Intel, AMD, Apple, Microsoft or whole Linux thing, for me it's purely audio and tools that serve their purpose of helping me in my audio needs, so I'm open to anything really.

To be perfectly honest, M1 Air base model is enough for my needs and it could easily happen that one of those end up in my possession, finally powerful laptop that stays cool and quiet... also feel like we are getting close to having great experience in making and mixing music with headphones too... what I would actually like even more is to have M1 Air with touch screen, that would make ultimate thing for me, so maybe I should wait for the positive consequences of these CPU wars on the market, to see what other vendors will offer, dunno, I'm in no hurry, interesting times!

[buzz1]

I'm still on an i7 920 2.6 ghz and 6gb ram . I'm actually thinking of just getting an AMD 5600g and calling it a day .

I'm still on i7 3770/8GB RAM, can't really find a reason to upgrade at all, my most demanding projects can't max out this machine, don't game and all that, just use it for audio and casual internet, don't have GPU, use Intel integrated one, which freaks out half of people I talk to about computers/components

Can I ask either or both of you what sort of plugins and how many tracks you tend to use? Reason is I have a (I think) well optimised 4790 system and often run short of CPU power.
Thanks.

[Passing Bye]

I'm still on an i7 920 2.6 ghz and 6gb ram . I'm actually thinking of just getting an AMD 5600g and calling it a day .

I'm still on i7 3770/8GB RAM, can't really find a reason to upgrade at all, my most demanding projects can't max out this machine, don't game and all that, just use it for audio and casual internet, don't have GPU, use Intel integrated one, which freaks out half of people I talk to about computers/components

Can I ask either or both of you what sort of plugins and how many tracks you tend to use? Reason is I have a (I think) well optimised 4790 system and often run short of CPU power.
Thanks.

Sure, my biggest recent project got 25 tracks, out of those, 15 are virtual instruments, mostly Zebra, rest is audio/recordings/samples/loops. VI tracks are in MIDI (not bounced to audio) and there's whole mixing/mastering chain on stereo bus, I'm not fan of over-processing, pick the right sound from the get go and than just EQ things properly and process everything just in needed amount, nothing really that crazy, fair amount of automation and etc.

But there are no rules, you can max out resources with few instances of some CPU hogs and having bigger mixing chains on strips, especially in some DAW's that aren't that much optimized for multi-core distribution.

[PAK]

Many reports of over 330W power draw at full load? Never mind Windows 10 or 11, your typical bedroom music producer better have ten or eleven actual Windows! I'm not even joking here - that thing will operate like a space heater and make the typical room seriously uncomfortable during summertime. It's stuff like this that many people won't think about. Not to mention where energy prices might be going, meaning it'd make a noticeable impact on some peoples energy bills.

If someones usage is "bursty" (Brief periods of heavy CPU usage, but mostly not) then I guess they'd get away with it. But, for someone using the performance cores for any extended period of time (more than an hour or two per day), especially non-gaming, I would avoid..

[buzz1]

I'm still on an i7 920 2.6 ghz and 6gb ram . I'm actually thinking of just getting an AMD 5600g and calling it a day .

I'm still on i7 3770/8GB RAM, can't really find a reason to upgrade at all, my most demanding projects can't max out this machine, don't game and all that, just use it for audio and casual internet, don't have GPU, use Intel integrated one, which freaks out half of people I talk to about computers/components

Can I ask either or both of you what sort of plugins and how many tracks you tend to use? Reason is I have a (I think) well optimised 4790 system and often run short of CPU power.
Thanks.

Sure, my biggest recent project got 25 tracks, out of those, 15 are virtual instruments, mostly Zebra, rest is audio/recordings/samples/loops. VI tracks are in MIDI (not bounced to audio) and there's whole mixing/mastering chain on stereo bus, I'm not fan of over-processing, pick the right sound from the get go and than just EQ things properly and process everything just in needed amount, nothing really that crazy, fair amount of automation and etc.

But there are no rules, you can max out resources with few instances of some CPU hogs and having bigger mixing chains on strips, especially in some DAW's that aren't that much optimized for multi-core distribution.

Thanks for that.
My stuff is not really anymore dense than this. Nor do I use CPU hogs like pigments or Diva etc.Like you I prefer to modify or change a sound rather than process it overmuch. I need to take another look at the whole setup I think.

[dermage]

Many reports of over 330W power draw at full load? Never mind Windows 10 or 11, your typical bedroom music producer better have ten or eleven actual Windows! I'm not even joking here - that thing will operate like a space heater and make the typical room seriously uncomfortable during summertime. It's stuff like this that many people won't think about. Not to mention where energy prices might be going, meaning it'd make a noticeable impact on some peoples energy bills.

If someones usage is "bursty" (Brief periods of heavy CPU usage, but mostly not) then I guess they'd get away with it. But, for someone using the performance cores for any extended period of time (more than an hour or two per day), especially non-gaming, I would avoid..

Since moving from I7-2600k to AMD Ryzen 9 5950x I'm noticing more heat output already. I'm not even using the processor by 25% when producing/working. But it still heats the room way more than the old i7.
Intel 12900k seems to have 20%-30% more heat output than the AMD. Would be unbearable in my flat at summer.

[PAK]

Since moving from I7-2600k to AMD Ryzen 9 5950x I'm noticing more heat output already. I'm not even using the processor by 25% when producing/working. But it still heats the room way more than the old i7.
Intel 12900k seems to have 20%-30% more heat output than the AMD. Would be unbearable in my flat at summer.

The ironic thing, about some of those AMD's, is the heat they'll put out can actually go down if you go up in cores. At first this doesn't make any sense. What's happening is they're keeping the "better quality" silicon, which can do equivalent clocks at lower voltages, for their higher end processors. So some of them end up using quite a bit less power. The Gaming market does well in price/performance, but typically they're not giving you their best silicon in those segments. Something to look out for.

In this case, Intel has literally had to add power pins to draw more power, just so they can hopefully look competitive in benchmarks for another while. Apparently the i5 version draws a fair bit less power for not a lot of performance loss in many cases.. Maybe something to consider if someone is going in that direction..

[dayjob]

apple is just beginning w/their line of chips. all things considered.. apple being firmly in the game is good for everyone as it'll help drive competition and everyone will gain regardless of the CPU you use.

https://www.macrumors.com/2021/11/05/ap ... p-roadmap/

Apple is planning a "much bigger leap" with its third-generation chips, some of which will be manufactured with TSMC's 3nm process and have up to four dies, which the report says could translate into the chips having up to 40 compute cores. For comparison, the M1 chip has an 8-core CPU and the M1 Pro and M1 Max chips have 10-core CPUs, while Apple's high-end Mac Pro tower can be configured with up to a 28-core Intel Xeon W processor.

The report cites sources who expect TSMC to be able to reliably manufacture 3nm chips by 2023 for use in both Macs and iPhones. The third-generation chips are codenamed Ibiza, Lobos, and Palma, according to the report, and it's likely they will debut in higher-end Macs first, such as future 14-inch and 16-inch MacBook Pro models. A less powerful third-generation chip is also said to be planned for a future MacBook Air.

looks like the intel i7 and i9 are plenty powerful but require more power.

https://www.macrumors.com/2021/11/05/in ... an-m1-max/

While the first 12th-generation processors are desktop class, they still make for an interesting comparison with Apple's M1 Pro and M1 Max chips in the 14-inch and 16-inch MacBook Pro models, as rumors suggest that Apple plans to release a new 27-inch iMac with the same M1 Pro and M1 Max chips in the first half of next year.

The first Geekbench 5 benchmark results for the Core i9-12900K reveal that the processor is up to nearly 1.5x faster than the M1 Pro and M1 Max in multi-core performance. Specifically, the Core i9 processor has an average multi-core score of approximately 18,500 so far, compared to approximately 12,500 for the M1 Pro and M1 Max. AnandTech has shared additional benchmarks for a closer look at performance.

While the Core i9 processor is considerably faster than the M1 Pro and M1 Max, it also uses a lot more power than Apple's chips, with Intel listing the chip as using up to 125W of power at base frequencies and up to 241W of power with Turbo Boost.

Intel's 12th-generation Core i7-12700K also appears to be faster than the M1 Pro and M1 Max in Geekbench 5 results, but it likewise uses more power.

When Apple first announced that it would be transitioning to its own chips for the Mac in June 2020, the company never said its chips would be the fastest on the market, but rather promised industry-leading performance per watt. Apple's M1 Pro and M1 Max certainly achieve this feat, with the chips outperforming a 12-core Intel-based Mac Pro that starts at $6,999 with minimal to no fan noise as a result of impressive power efficiency.

Intel expects to release 12th-generation Core processors for laptops in early 2022.

[fedexnman]

@buzz1 Hi , mainly do audio (guitar bass vocals ) and with drum samples or drum sample VST , I don't have a high track count either . My main reason for wanting to upgrade my computer is to use AMP sims and I'm also wanting to do some loFi and triphop stuff so I do want to fool with some synths soon . I'm not big on high track counts and softsynths that eat CPU up like a Snickers bar (Diva) lolz ... I would be fine with an AMD 5600G ... I'd really like to buy the regular AMD5600 or X and get a GPU and game a bit , but the GPU market is crap right now so I guess I wasn't go down that hole yet ... I feel sorry for gamers . They can't even get a newer Xbox or Playstation

[anttimaatteri]

over 300w usage...its not only the heat. its just money blowin out compared to lets say 65w/105w ryzens or apples arm tec.
not to mention the blatant nerves you must have to release a tec that blows out energy like its 1999. very nice environment awareness by intel...

[Passing Bye]

I need to take another look at the whole setup I think.

Sometimes audio interface drivers aren't most optimized either and that can contribute in some ways to overall performance, also size of buffer you are using.

Really informative video on that subject

[buzz1]

@buzz1 Hi , mainly do audio (guitar bass vocals ) and with drum samples or drum sample VST , I don't have a high track count either . My main reason for wanting to upgrade my computer is to use AMP sims and I'm also wanting to do some loFi and triphop stuff so I do want to fool with some synths soon . I'm not big on high track counts and softsynths that eat CPU up like a Snickers bar (Diva) lolz ... I would be fine with an AMD 5600G ... I'd really like to buy the regular AMD5600 or X and get a GPU and game a bit , but the GPU market is crap right now so I guess I wasn't go down that hole yet ... I feel sorry for gamers . They can't even get a newer Xbox or Playstation

Agreed. I am inclined to wait out this current GPU bottleneck too.