- Cyberpunk 2.0 Ray Reconstruction Comparison, DLSS 3.5, & Benchmarks Gamers Nexus
- Nvidia Says Native Resolution Gaming is Out, DLSS is Here to Stay Tom’s Hardware
- I’ve tested Nvidia’s latest ray tracing magic in Cyberpunk 2077 and it’s a no-brainer: at worst it’s just better-looking, at best it’s that and a whole lot more performance PC Gamer
- Amazon deal drops price of DLSS 3.5 ready GPU ahead of Cyberpunk DLC launch WePC – PC Tech & PC Gaming News
- Cyberpunk 2077 gets huge performance boost with DLSS 3.5 thanks to Nvidia driver update Dexerto
- View Full Coverage on Google News
Tag Archives: benchmarks
Wrinkle-free Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 to come with 108 MP main camera and to reach greater heights than the Galaxy Z Fold4
So, the 5th generation of the Galaxy Z Fold reaches new physical heights over the predecessor in folded/unfolded states, and it is a little wider when folded. The source also reveals that the unfolded screen of the Galaxy Z Fold5 will not have wrinkles, which should please those who find the crease in the Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4 too egregious for their liking.
As for the camera equipment, the Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 will allegedly sport a 108 MP main camera (f/1.7, OIS, dual-pixel PDAF) that is supported by a 64 MP telephoto unit with 2x optical zoom and a 12 MP ultra-wide lens. In addition, the 7.6-inch Galaxy Z Fold5 is expected to offer a 1768 x 2208 resolution and come with Gorilla Glass Victus. It’s opined that the mysterious “Snapdragon 985” processor may be renamed by the time the latest premium foldable smartphone from Samsung hits the shelves.
Buy the Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4 on Amazon
Intel Core i9-13900T CPU Benchmarks Show Faster Than 12900K 125W Performance at 35W
Intel recently introduced brand new 13th Gen T-series chips which feature the Core i9-13900T that operates at a 35W TDP. The new chip has been benchmarked within Geekbench 5 and showcases impressive performance given its limited power budget.
Intel’s 13th Gen Core i9-13900T 35W CPU Beats The 125W Core i9-12900K In Geekbench 5 Benchmark
Starting with the specifications, the Intel Core i9-13900T is a variation of the Core i9-13900 series that comes with a limited TDP design. While the standard chips boast 125W TDP in the unlocked and 65W TDP on the Non-K SKUs, the T-series chip is limited to a 35W TDP. The Unlocked CPU is rated at up to 253W, the Non-K is rated at up to 219W while the T-series chip is rated at up to 106 Watts which is less than half the power budget of its higher-end siblings.
The Intel Core i9-13900T retains the same core configuration with 24 cores that are made up of 8 P-Cores and 16 E-Cores with 32 threads, a base clock of 1.10 GHz, a boost of up to 5.30 GHz & 68 MB of cache (L2+L3). The CPU also comes at a slightly lower price point of $549.00 US. Now the CPU is tested within the Geekbench 5 benchmark using an ASUS TUF Gaming B660M-PLUS WIFI board and coupled with 64 GB of DDR5 memory.
The CPU scored 2178 points in the single-core and 17339 points in the multi-core tests. We used the Intel Core i9-12900K for comparison which scores 1901 points in single-core and 17272 points in multi-core tests. This puts the Intel Core i9-13900T up to 15% faster in single-core and slightly faster in multi-threaded tests which is very impressive considering the Core i9-12900K also has a higher 125W base TDP (3.58x higher) and a peak TDP rating of 241W (2.27x higher).
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
This goes off to show the immense efficiency that Intel’s 10nm ESF process node and the new hybrid architecture packs and we will also get to see some similar results with the mobility lineup, especially the 13th Gen HX parts which are going to ship in enthusiast-grade gaming laptops in the coming months. AMD also introduced its brand new 65W Ryzen 7000 Non-X CPUs which have been showcasing some impressive efficiency feats on their own with the Zen 4 core architecture.
News Source: Benchleaks
Sort of PS5 Slim: No hardware upgrades and no disc drive compatibility with PlayStation 5 Digital Edition for the modular PS5 “Gen 2” console
There might be some considerable criticism heading Sony’s way soon if new details about the so-called modular PS5 shared by Insider Gaming’s Tom Henderson are true. The source has frequently discussed upgrades and changes to the PlayStation 5, and he revealed that there was work ongoing with a console that would have a detachable disk drive, which will eventually replace the current PlayStation 5 and PlayStation 5 Digital Edition devices. This “PS5 Gen 2” would have a slimmer profile thanks to its modular nature, so it could even end up being the widely expected PS5 Slim.
While official word about a PS5 Slim would undoubtedly excite the community, Henderson’s latest tweet about PlayStation matters will likely not. Firstly, he states, “doesn’t seem like there are any major hardware changes from the original console”. So, this apparent PS5 v2 device will clearly not be any kind of PS5 Pro machine, and it won’t be the frequently rumored console coming with an improved custom SoC from AMD inside it. A sort of PlayStation 5 Slim console may be the best fans can hope for in regard to something new turning up in 2023.
However, Henderson rubs salt into the wound with the second part of his post, claiming, “disc drive likely won’t be compatible with the current digital version”. So, all those PlayStation 5 Digital Edition owners out there, and there are millions of them, may feel a pang of disappointment and even disapproval that this modular next-generation PS5 will be incapable of sharing its detachable disc drive with them. Some commenters have even called this potential situation a kind of money grab from Sony.
According to the source, production of this PlayStation 5 revision will start in April, and it could be available to buy in September. This means there will be a lot more leaks about the device to come yet, and it seems likely that Sony will make sure a PS5 Gen 2 will have plenty of selling points. If this rumored 2023 variant actually does end up being the PS5 Slim, there will still be many flocking to buy a slimmed-down and lighter PlayStation 5 console, regardless of it having a detachable and backwards incompatible disc drive.
Buy the PlayStation 5 – God of War Ragnarök console bundle on Amazon
My interest in technology began after I was presented with an Atari 800XL home computer in the mid-1980s. I especially enjoy writing about technological advances, compelling rumors, and intriguing tech-related leaks. I have a degree in International Relations and Strategic Studies and count my family, reading, writing, and travel as the main passions of my life. I have been with Notebookcheck since 2012.
New Samsung Galaxy S23, Galaxy S23+, and Galaxy S23 Ultra storage size leak leads to 128 GB resurrection and three different leakers in disagreement
The latest Samsung Galaxy S23 RAM and storage leak has come courtesy of SnoopyTech, who has built up a decent reputation for offering up accurate tech-related information. The leaker uses the codenames “DM1”, “DM2”, and “DM3” for the devices, with “Project Diamond” being the internal codename for the Samsung Galaxy S23 series. According to the tipster, the Galaxy S23 series will come in the following configurations:
- DM1 – Samsung Galaxy S23: 8 GB + 128 GB, 8 GB + 256 GB
- DM2 – Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus: 8 GB + 256 GB, 8 GB + 512 GB
- DM3 – Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra: 8 GB + 256 GB, 12 GB + 512 GB, and probably a 12 GB + 1 TB model available via the Samsung store
While using the codenames may offer an added hint of credibility to the leak, the source has avoided using a term such as “confirmed” or “official”. But this did not stop Ahmed Qwaider, who previously posted a memory + storage configuration-related leak along with the qualifier “officially”. Qwaider claimed that there would be no 128 GB of storage to be seen anywhere, and while neither the Galaxy S23+ nor Galaxy S23 Ultra are stuck with 128 GB in the above leak, it is clear to see that the Galaxy S23 is.
To confuse matters a little more, yet another leaker, TheGalox_, has thrown another spanner in the works by stating that both the regular Galaxy S23 and Galaxy S23+ would be treated with up to 512 GB of storage space. It appears the three tipsters simply cannot agree on what Samsung has planned with the base model in the upcoming Galaxy S23 series:
- SnoopyTech – 128 GB option but no 512 GB option (S23)
- Qwaider – no 128 GB option and with no 512 GB option specifically mentioned (S23/S23+)
- TheGalox – up to 512 GB option (S23/S23+)
The newest leak, from SnoopyTech, is certainly believable, as it would allow Samsung to launch the Galaxy S23 series with an “affordable” SKU in the lineup. Meanwhile, the 128 GB option is eliminated from the Galaxy S23+ and Galaxy S23 Ultra model choices, while the former gets a better higher option of a 512 GB variant, thus also demonstrating how Samsung has upgraded the 2023 flagship smartphones over the previous year’s offering.
Buy an unlocked and renewed Samsung Galaxy S20+ on Amazon
My interest in technology began after I was presented with an Atari 800XL home computer in the mid-1980s. I especially enjoy writing about technological advances, compelling rumors, and intriguing tech-related leaks. I have a degree in International Relations and Strategic Studies and count my family, reading, writing, and travel as the main passions of my life. I have been with Notebookcheck since 2012.
Samsung Galaxy S23, Galaxy S23+, and Galaxy S23 Ultra to come with 256 GB minimum storage option
All three of the phones in the Samsung Galaxy S23 series will come with a minimum of 256 GB storage, according to a new leak. The lineup, which features the Galaxy S23, Galaxy S23+, and Galaxy S23 Ultra, is expected to be launched in February. The Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra will apparently feature a 1 TB variant.
Sometimes it is the small changes between smartphone generations that please fans the most, and it is likely this new leak from Ahmed Qwaider will make many future Samsung Galaxy S23 owners happy. It seems the South Korean manufacturer has decided to boost the minimum amount of storage available in its flagship smartphones from the 128 GB option of the Galaxy S22 series to a 256 GB option for the Galaxy S23 series.
Qwaider breaks down the storage options for each device in the Galaxy S23 range, and the standard Galaxy S23 and the Galaxy S23+ are mentioned with only one variant each at the moment: 8 GB + 256 GB. It seems there will be three choices for the Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra, with 256 GB, 512 GB, and 1 TB being the options for the premium device in the lineup. However, the leaker only mentions 12 GB of RAM for the S23 Ultra when there have already been multiple reports of an 8 GB variant.
It’s possible Qwaider is simply breaking down the currently confirmed storage choices for the Galaxy S23 series rather than listing every single variant that Samsung will produce. Offering a 2023 flagship smartphone with just 128 GB storage would not have been a smart business move by Samsung, so the boost to a minimum of 256 GB storage is just one of likely many small but important changes that will be coming to the Galaxy S23 smartphones.
Buy the Samsung Galaxy S22+ on Amazon
⭕️Exclusively & officially????
Good news for Samsung fans
It’s amazing to beGalaxy S23 8Ram + 256G????
Galaxy S23+ 8Ram +256G????
Galaxy S23 Ultra 12R+256G+512G+1TGoodbye 128G
I’ve been waiting for this move for a long time
A very good move from Samsung thanks @technizoconcept pic.twitter.com/7EZbA6tyjK— Ahmed Qwaider (@AhmedQwaider888) January 1, 2023
My interest in technology began after I was presented with an Atari 800XL home computer in the mid-1980s. I especially enjoy writing about technological advances, compelling rumors, and intriguing tech-related leaks. I have a degree in International Relations and Strategic Studies and count my family, reading, writing, and travel as the main passions of my life. I have been with Notebookcheck since 2012.
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB Graphics Card Benchmarks Leak Out, Up To 29% Faster in 3DMark Tests & 53 TFLOPs Compute
The first benchmarks of NVIDIA’s GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB graphics card have leaked online and show over 20% performance gain in 3DMark tests.
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB Graphics Card Beats The RTX 3090 Ti 24 GB In Leaked 3DMark & Gaming Benchmarks
The benchmarks of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB graphics card have leaked over at Chiphell Forums. It is unknown if the graphics card was a Founders Edition variant or an AIB model but the chip was running on an AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D CPU. The graphics card was tested across 3DMark & a few titles. But first, we got to lay our eyes on the AIDA64 GPGPU Benchmark which shows that the card offers up to 53.6 TFLOPs of single-precision performance which is 8% higher than the officially reported figure of 49 TFLOPs. For comparison, the GeForce RTX 3090 Ti produces 40 TFLOPs so this is a 32.5% improvement in single-precision compute.
In terms of synthetic benchmarks, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB scores 13977 points in the 3DMark Time Spy Extreme (Graphics), 17465 points in the 3DMark Fire Strike Ultra (Graphics), and 17607 Points in the 3DMark Port Royal benchmark.
Just for comparison, my heavily overclocked & custom RTX 3090 Ti SUPRIM X scores 11643 points in Time Spy Extreme, 13554 points in Fire Strike Ultra, and 15124 points in Port Royal. If we compare these figures to the RTX 4080 16 GB, we get the following performance:
- RTX 4080 16 GB vs RTX 3090 Ti 24 GB in Time Spy Extreme – 20% Faster
- RTX 4080 16 GB vs RTX 3090 Ti 24 GB in Fire Strike Ultra – 29% Faster
- RTX 4080 16 GB vs RTX 3090 Ti 24 GB in Port Royal (DXR) – 16% Faster
0
4000
8000
12000
16000
20000
24000
The user also shared performance benchmarks of two games, Red Dead Redemption 2 (with and without DLSS) and Shadow of The Tomb Raider (Full High DLSS Quality). The results can be seen in the screenshots below:
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB ‘Official’ Specifications
The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB graphics card is expected to utilize a cut-down AD103-300 GPU configuration with 9,728 cores or 76 SMs enabled of the total 84 units whereas the previous configuration offered 80 SMs or 10,240 cores. While the full GPU comes packed with 64 MB of L2 cache and up to 224 ROPs, the RTX 4080 might end up with 48 MB of L2 cache and lower ROPs too due to its cut-down design. The card is expected to be based on the PG136/139-SKU360 PCB. The graphics card is said to offer a peak clock rate of 2505 MHz.
As for memory specs, the GeForce RTX 4080 is expected to rock 16 GB GDDR6X capacities that are said to be adjusted at 22.5 Gbps speeds across a 256-bit bus interface. This will provide up to 720 GB/s of bandwidth. This is still a tad bit slower than the 760 GB/s bandwidth offered by the RTX 3080 since it comes with a 320-bit interface but a lowly 10 GB capacity. To compensate for the lower bandwidth, NVIDIA could be integrating a next-gen memory compression suite to make up for the 256-bit interface.
- NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB “Official” TBP – 320W
- NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 12 GB “Official” TBP – 350W
The card will have a TBP of 320W which is 30W lower than the TBP of the 12 GB RTX 3080 and much lower than the TBP of the RTX 3090 Ti while offering a big performance jump. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB and RTX 4080 12 GB graphics cards will be launching in November and be priced at $1199 US and $899 US, respectively. Considering if the card does end up around 20-30% faster in games than the RTX 3090 Ti, then it could
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 40 Series Official Specs:
| Graphics Card Name | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 16G | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 12G | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GPU Name | Ada Lovelace AD102-300 | Ada Lovelace AD103-300 | Ada Lovelace AD104-400 | Ampere GA102-225 |
| Process Node | TSMC 4N | TSMC 4N | TSMC 4N | Samsung 8nm |
| Die Size | 608mm2 | 378.6mm2 | 294.5mm2 | 628.4mm2 |
| Transistors | 76 Billion | 45.9 Billion | 35.8 Billion | 28 Billion |
| CUDA Cores | 16384 | 9728 | 7680 | 10240 |
| TMUs / ROPs | 512 / 176 | 320 / 112 | 240 / 80 | 320 / 112 |
| Tensor / RT Cores | 512 / 128 | 304 / 76 | 240 / 60 | 320 / 80 |
| Base Clock | 2230 MHz | 2210 MHz | 2310 MHz | 1365 MHz |
| Boost Clock | 2520 MHz | 2510 MHz | 2610 MHz | 1665 MHz |
| FP32 Compute | 83 TFLOPs | 49 TFLOPs | 40 TFLOPs | 40 TFLOPs |
| RT TFLOPs | 191 TFLOPs | 113 TFLOPs | 82 TFLOPs | 78 TFLOPs |
| Tensor-TOPs | 1321 TOPs | 780 TOPs | 641 TOPs | 320 TOPs |
| Memory Capacity | 24 GB GDDR6X | 16 GB GDDR6X | 12 GB GDDR6X | 12 GB GDDR6X |
| Memory Bus | 384-bit | 256-bit | 192-bit | 384-bit |
| Memory Speed | 21.0 Gbps | 23.0 Gbps | 21.0 Gbps | 19 Gbps |
| Bandwidth | 1008 GB/s | 736 GB/s | 504 GB/s | 912 Gbps |
| TBP | 450W | 320W | 285W | 350W |
| Price (MSRP / FE) | $1599 US | $1199 US | $899 US | $1199 |
| Launch (Availability) | October 2022 | November 2022 | November 2022 | 3rd June 2021 |
Which NVIDIA GeForce RTX 40 series graphics card are you looking forward to the most?Poll Options are limited because JavaScript is disabled in your browser.
News Source: Olrak
Products mentioned in this post
Alleged NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 16GB 3DMark benchmarks have been leaked
NVIDIA RTX 4080 16GB has been supposedly tested in 3DMark
Benchmark results featuring alleged NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 16GB have now been posted on Chiphell forums.
First thing that should be mentioned is that we are not certain how could someone obtain a driver that supports RTX 4080 16GB this soon. This card is not expected to launch until next month and as far as we are aware, there are no drivers for this card yet.
However, the screenshots do show a GPU with a boost clock of 2505 MHz and 76 Compute Units, in this case Streaming Multiprocessors, and the leaker clearly states that this card is RTX 4080. Furthermore, we can see it tops at 53620 GFLOPS, which would be just slightly higher than what NVIDIA promised for RTX 4080 16GB.
NVIDIA RTX 4080 16GB in AIDA64, Source: Chiphell
The results are quite good, in fact, the GPU is already the fastest GPU in a 3DMARK ranking. This alleged RTX 4080 scored 17465 and 13977 Graphics points in FireStrike Extreme and TimeSpy Extreme respectively, which puts it at the very top of the list.
NVIDIA RTX 4080 16GB in 3DMark, Source: Chiphell
| 3DMark Fire Strike Ultra | |
|---|---|
| VideoCardz.com | (4K, DX11) Graphics Score |
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 16GB | |
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti | |
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 | |
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti | |
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 12GB | |
| AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT | |
| AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT | |
| AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT | |
| AMD Radeon RX 6800 | |
| 3DMark Time Spy Extreme | |
|---|---|
| VideoCardz.com | (4K, DX12) Graphics Score |
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 16GB | |
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti | |
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 | |
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti | |
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 12GB | |
| AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT | |
| AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT | |
| AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT | |
| AMD Radeon RX 6800 | |
The leaker also published an Intel XeSS result and Port Royal.
NVIDIA RTX 4080 16GB in 3DMark, Source: Chiphell
| 3DMark Port Royal | |
|---|---|
| VideoCardz.com | (1440p, DX12) Score |
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 16GB | |
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti | |
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 | |
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti | |
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 12GB | |
| AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT | |
| AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT | |
| AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT | |
| AMD Radeon RX 6800 | |
Furthermore, benchmarks from actual games such as Shadow of the Tomb Raider have also been published.
NVIDIA RTX 4080 16GB in Games, Source: Chiphell
NVIDIA announced two RTX 4080 GPUs, the 16GB variant offers more cores and more memory. The one that was allegedly tested features 9728 CUDA cores and AD103 GPU, whereas the 12GB variant has 7680 cores and AD104 GPU. Both models are set to launch at the same time next month, but the release date has not been announced yet.
Source: Chiphell
AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Stock & 5.6 GHz OC CPU Benchmarks Leak Out, On Par With Core i9-12900K In Single-Threaded Tests
More benchmarks of AMD’s Ryzen 5 7600X CPU at stock and overclocked configurations have leaked out over at Bilibili.
AMD Ryzen 5 7600X CPU Overclocked Up To 5.6 GHz, Benchmarked at Both Stock & OC Configurations
The benchmarks mostly show the AMD Ryzen 5 7600X being tested across a range of benchmarks but the leaker has only focused on single-core performance numbers. There’s no mention of what the test system comprised of but we can guess that the leaker was using an X670E motherboard & DDR5 memory with speeds rated at up to DDR5-6000.
AMD Ryzen 5 7600X 6 Core “Zen 4” Desktop CPU
The AMD Ryzen 5 7600X will be the most budget-tier chip of the entire Zen 4 lineup at launch. This will be a 6-core and a 12-thread part that features a high 4.7 GHz base clock and a 5.3 GHz single-core boost frequency. The CPU will also run at a 105W TDP (142W PPT) which is much higher than its 65W predecessor though once again, that’s the sacrifice you’ve to pay to achieve the faster clock speeds. The CPU will carry 38 MB of cache that comes from 32 MB of L3 and 6 MB of L2 on the die. This chip is going to be priced at $299 US and will be offering a 5% performance gain over the Core i9-12900K in gaming.
AMD Ryzen 7000 ‘Raphael’ Desktop CPU Specs (Official):
| CPU Name | Architecture | Process Node | Cores / Threads | Base Clock | Boost Clock (SC Max) | Cache | TDP | Prices (TBD) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AMD Ryzen 9 7950X | Zen 4 | 5nm | 16/32 | 4.5 GHz | 5.7 GHz | 80 MB (64+16) | 170W | $699 US |
| AMD Ryzen 9 7900X | Zen 4 | 5nm | 12/24 | 4.7 GHz | 5.6 GHz | 76 MB (64+12) | 170W | $549 US |
| AMD Ryzen 7 7700X | Zen 4 | 5nm | 8/16 | 4.5 GHz | 5.4 GHz | 40 MB (32+8) | 105W | $399 US |
| AMD Ryzen 5 7600X | Zen 4 | 5nm | 6/12 | 4.7 GHz | 5.3 GHz | 38 MB (32+6) | 105W | $299 US |
First up, we have the performance of the AMD Ryzen 5 7600X in CPU-z where AMD itself showcased a 1% IPC uplift so this is the worst-case showcase for the Zen 4 chip. At stock, the CPU scored 652.8 points, and with an overclock of up to 5.6 GHz, the CPU scored 734.1 points. Next up, we have the Cinebench R23 benchmark where the chip scored 1784 points at stock and 1920 points with a 5.4 GHz overclock. Here, the voltage is shown at 1.296V. That’s a boost of 12.5% with the 5.6 GHz and a boost of 7.5% with the 5.4 GHz overclock.
We also get to see some dual-channel performance benchmarks in the AIDA64 cache and memory benchmark in which the CPU offers around 69.9ns of latency with DDR5-6000 memory and decent gains in memory and cache bandwidth compared to its predecessor. The following charts show the performance stacking up against the competition:
Ryzen 5 7600X (5.4 GHz OC)
Core i9-13900K (5.5 GHz All-Core OC)
Ryzen 5 7600X (5.6 GHz OC)
The leaker states that the AMD Ryzen 5 7600X can achieve frequencies of up to 5.4-5.5 GHz with 1.32V overclocking but requires a decent 360mm AIO cooler. Using this setup and OC config, the CPU can sit at around 92C. He also claims that the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X can hit an overclock frequency of up to 5.4 GHz across all cores and each a score of over 42,000 points which would put it far above the 13900K’s Unlimited Power setting. The CPU was put under a 360mm AIO cooler and resulted in 82C temps with the OC but wasn’t able to pass the AIDA64 stability test under such a configuration.
0
9000
18000
27000
36000
45000
54000
Ryzzen 9 7950X (5.4 GHz OC)
Core i9-13900K (Unlimited Power)
Core i9-13900K (Limited Power)
At stock, both the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X and Intel Core i9-13900K CPUs will score similarly but AMD Zen 4 will have a big advantage when it comes to power efficiency over Intel’s Raptor Lake.
The CPU seems to be right on par with Intel’s Core i9-12900K and for $299 US, that’s fantastic news for gamers. AMD’s Ryzen 7000 chips hit retail on the 27th of September so users can enjoy some huge uplifts in the single and multi-core workloads. The AMD Ryzen 9 7950X & the Ryzen 5 7600X also appeared in the leaked Geekbench 5 benchmarks a few days ago.
News Source: Harukaze5719, Greymon55
Products mentioned in this post
Intel Xeon Platinum 8468 48 Core “Sapphire Rapids” CPU Benchmarks Leak, On Par With AMD’s 64 Core Milan Chips
New benchmarks of the Intel Xeon Platinum 8468 48-Core Sapphire Rapids CPU have leaked out which show competitive performance versus AMD’s Milan.
Intel Xeon Platinum 8468 48-Core “Sapphire Rapids” CPU Trades Blows With AMD’s EPYC 7763 64-Core “Milan” Chips
The benchmark that has been discovered by HXL (@9550pro) shows us an engineering sample of the Intel Xeon Platinum 8468, one of the many Sapphire Rapids-SP CPUs. Based on the specs sheet that leaked earlier, the Xeon Platinum 8468 is going to feature 48 cores and 96 threads while using the 10nm ESF process node and the Golden Cove core architecture. The CPU is expected to feature 105 MB of L3 cache & a 350W TDP. The CPU is listed with 2.1 GHz clocks within Cinebench R23 and 800 MHz within CPU-z which suggests that the clock speeds aren’t close to the retail numbers.
The CPU tested is the 6th Stepping and we know from previous reports that the Sapphire Rapids-SP chips have gone through various steppings to fix various bugs that the chips have encountered so far. It is reported that the CPU was tested within two benchmarks, one being Cinebench R23 & the other being V-Ray. The CPU was tested in a dual-socket configuration with 96 cores & 192 threads in total.
Starting with Cinebench R23, the chip scored 90411 points in multi-core and 1351 points in single-core. The CPU is definitely faster than retail EPYC Milan chips in single-core and comparable in the multi-core tests since the top EPYC 7763 scores around 90000-95000 points in the same test. This means that the EPYC 7763 is at best 8.5% faster in multi-threaded performance, a difference that can easily be overcome by final retail clock speeds. The EPYC chip also includes 33% more cores.
0
19357
38714
58071
77428
96785
116142
Threadripper 5995WX (64 x 1 LN2 OC)
EPYC Genoa ES (96 x 2 GNO)
EPYC 7773X (64 x 2 Milan-X)
Xeon Platinum 8468 ES (48 x 2 SPR-SP)
Xeon Platinum 8280L (28 x 8 CSL-SP)
Xeon Platinum 8480+ ES (56 x 2 SPR-SP)
Xeon Platinum 8480 ES (56 x 2 SPR-SP)
Xeon Platinum 8380 (40 x 2 ICL-SP)
Compared to an early ES EPYC Genoa chip, the Intel Xeon Platinum 8468 CPU with 48-cores and 96 threads or 96 cores and 192 threads in total is around 18% slower but once again, the Genoa chip offers 33% more threads. The full potential of EPYC Genoa 96-core chips is limited to 256 threads since that’s the maximum thread limit.
We also have V-Ray where the Intel Xeon Platinum 8468 48-Core CPUs are listed in a 4-socket config but it was actually running a 2-socket config. The CPU clock speed is rated a bit higher at 3.0 GHz & the score is rated at 85,766 samples. Following is how the performance compares to other server chips:
0
16667
33334
50001
66668
83335
100002
EPYC 7773X (64 x 2 Milan-X)
Threadripper 5995WX (64 x 2 CGL)
Xeon Platinum 8468 ES (48 x 2 SPR-SP)
Xeon Platinum 8380 (40 x 4 ICL-SP)
Intel has moved the Sapphire Rapids-SP Xeon CPU launch to early 2023 so it looks like they will be competing with EPYC Genoa-X & Bergamo CPUs by the time they are widely available to x86 server customers. This kind of performance would have been competitive a few years back against Milan but with Zen 4 on the horizon, things look grim for Intel despite the major uplift over Ice Lake-SP which now seems too little.
Intel Xeon SP Families (Preliminary):
| Family Branding | Skylake-SP | Cascade Lake-SP/AP | Cooper Lake-SP | Ice Lake-SP | Sapphire Rapids | Emerald Rapids | Granite Rapids | Diamond Rapids |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Process Node | 14nm+ | 14nm++ | 14nm++ | 10nm+ | Intel 7 | Intel 7 | Intel 3 | Intel 3? |
| Platform Name | Intel Purley | Intel Purley | Intel Cedar Island | Intel Whitley | Intel Eagle Stream | Intel Eagle Stream | Intel Mountain Stream Intel Birch Stream |
Intel Mountain Stream Intel Birch Stream |
| Core Architecture | Skylake | Cascade Lake | Cascade Lake | Sunny Cove | Golden Cove | Raptor Cove | Redwood Cove? | Lion Cove? |
| IPC Improvement (Vs Prev Gen) | 10% | 0% | 0% | 20% | 19% | 8%? | 35%? | 39%? |
| MCP (Multi-Chip Package) SKUs | No | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | TBD (Possibly Yes) | TBD (Possibly Yes) |
| Socket | LGA 3647 | LGA 3647 | LGA 4189 | LGA 4189 | LGA 4677 | LGA 4677 | TBD | TBD |
| Max Core Count | Up To 28 | Up To 28 | Up To 28 | Up To 40 | Up To 56 | Up To 64? | Up To 120? | Up To 144? |
| Max Thread Count | Up To 56 | Up To 56 | Up To 56 | Up To 80 | Up To 112 | Up To 128? | Up To 240? | Up To 288? |
| Max L3 Cache | 38.5 MB L3 | 38.5 MB L3 | 38.5 MB L3 | 60 MB L3 | 105 MB L3 | 120 MB L3? | 240 MB L3? | 288 MB L3? |
| Vector Engines | AVX-512/FMA2 | AVX-512/FMA2 | AVX-512/FMA2 | AVX-512/FMA2 | AVX-512/FMA2 | AVX-512/FMA2 | AVX-1024/FMA3? | AVX-1024/FMA3? |
| Memory Support | DDR4-2666 6-Channel | DDR4-2933 6-Channel | Up To 6-Channel DDR4-3200 | Up To 8-Channel DDR4-3200 | Up To 8-Channel DDR5-4800 | Up To 8-Channel DDR5-5600? | Up To 12-Channel DDR5-6400? | Up To 12-Channel DDR6-7200? |
| PCIe Gen Support | PCIe 3.0 (48 Lanes) | PCIe 3.0 (48 Lanes) | PCIe 3.0 (48 Lanes) | PCIe 4.0 (64 Lanes) | PCIe 5.0 (80 lanes) | PCIe 5.0 (80 Lanes) | PCIe 6.0 (128 Lanes)? | PCIe 6.0 (128 Lanes)? |
| TDP Range (PL1) | 140W-205W | 165W-205W | 150W-250W | 105-270W | Up To 350W | Up To 375W? | Up To 400W? | Up To 425W? |
| 3D Xpoint Optane DIMM | N/A | Apache Pass | Barlow Pass | Barlow Pass | Crow Pass | Crow Pass? | Donahue Pass? | Donahue Pass? |
| Competition | AMD EPYC Naples 14nm | AMD EPYC Rome 7nm | AMD EPYC Rome 7nm | AMD EPYC Milan 7nm+ | AMD EPYC Genoa ~5nm | AMD EPYC Bergamo | AMD EPYC Turin | AMD EPYC Venice |
| Launch | 2017 | 2018 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023? | 2024? | 2025? |